Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The port of the Windows 95 Start Menu was not all it seemed

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 56 posts

Re: The port of the Windows 95 Start Menu was not all it seemed

#31

Post by rollcat »

mjevans wrote: post #22
M95D wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, no. I belive it is first a conflict of policy: the USER needs to have more privileges than SYSTEM in order to suspend execution of all (including system's) processes. WinNT is a multi-user OS. Nobody would allow the user to DDoS the system, even when that user has direct access to the reset button. A second problem is that WinNT probably can't even open the Task Manager if some system processes are sus…

I miss the magic SysRq key... Xorg / graphical systems blocked it decades ago, I've forgotten how to invoke it without looking it up, though I do remember REISUB. The security perspective of the SysRq commands is: a human is on a hard-wired console. If they want they can pull the power or press buttons on the outside of the PC that aren't on the keyboard. It's probably OK to obey some small list of actions that are u…

Yep that's my line of thinking, if you have physical access it's game over for security anyway (evil maid etc). Whether the kernel recognizes SysRq or CAD or whatever else is a matter of a patch, X11 or Wayland can't intercept (that's the entire point of having a very very low level kernel routine for that).

The funky part would be the user space integration, the kernel would probably have to selectively resume a couple key processes or take over the display with its own/embedded one. Sounds like too brittle and/or extra bloat.

I never thought I'd consider Windows 95 technically superior in some area, but holy hell that system ran in 4mb of memory and did one (even if only one) thing right.

Re: The port of the Windows 95 Start Menu was not all it seemed

#32

Post by withinrafael »

h4ck_th3_pl4n3t wrote: post #29
withinrafael wrote: post #17

The reality is Dave Plummer was called out again after incorrectly claiming Start Menu drew text sideways, that he built the entire menu, etc and was forced to backpedal when presented with evidence to the contrary. (He even revised the YouTube video title from I Built Start[...] to I Worked On Start [..., 1].) Once a scammer, always a scammer, it seems. [1] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fr4Q6CF0E_8

You do realize that in corporations such as Microsoft, multiple people work on the same code, and code gets rewritten all the time, right? Dave Plummer cannot know about any changes after he left the company. You seem to be not aware of that. Also I don't know about you, but I don't know shit about the code I wrote two weeks ago. How do you expect someone to remember all details about code he wrote more than 25 years…

Am very aware how Microsoft works, been involved with them my entire life, wrote a few books, etc! I agree with you though. That's why I don't record YouTube videos asserting what happened 25 years ago.

Re: The port of the Windows 95 Start Menu was not all it seemed

#33

Post by withinrafael »

robertlagrant wrote: post #28
withinrafael wrote: post #17

The reality is Dave Plummer was called out again after incorrectly claiming Start Menu drew text sideways, that he built the entire menu, etc and was forced to backpedal when presented with evidence to the contrary. (He even revised the YouTube video title from I Built Start[...] to I Worked On Start [..., 1].) Once a scammer, always a scammer, it seems. [1] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fr4Q6CF0E_8

He addresses this in the pinned comment: > UPDATE: This only shipped in the NTSUR release, as far as I can now tell. I've confirmed with team members that I'm not crazy, I did write and we did ship the code I describe in this episode, but it was ultimately replaced circa NT4 with bitmaps! I don't know what's true, but it seems odd to not mention that.

Not sure what release he's referring to (NTSUR isn't the name of a release). But I find it interesting he decides to only do his homework after the video/discussion.

Re: The port of the Windows 95 Start Menu was not all it seemed

#34

Post by kenny11 »

withinrafael wrote: post #33
robertlagrant wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He addresses this in the pinned comment: > UPDATE: This only shipped in the NTSUR release, as far as I can now tell. I've confirmed with team members that I'm not crazy, I did write and we did ship the code I describe in this episode, but it was ultimately replaced circa NT4 with bitmaps! I don't know what's true, but it seems odd to not mention that.

Not sure what release he's referring to (NTSUR isn't the name of a release). But I find it interesting he decides to only do his homework after the video/discussion.

I think that's referring to the NT "Shell Update Release" which was an early beta of the Windows 95-style start menu that you could install on Windows NT 3.51.

Re: The port of the Windows 95 Start Menu was not all it seemed

#36

Post by hi-v-rocknroll »

M95D wrote: post #26
raverbashing wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I had to bet the reasons why would be that the 9x kernel was extremely frail and if you want to have any chance of Task Manager actually running it had to run from the start

That can't be the reason. If the kernel crashes (or a driver, 'cause it's all the same in Win9x), then there's an instant BSOD, so there won't be any Task Manager, even if it's already loaded in memory. I belive that's the way thing were done in those days. In Win95 the Start Menu was also in memory, with the entire menu tree, progam names, icons, and everything. It would open instantly. In Win98 they changed that. I…

Chicago onwards was glorified Windows 3.0 386 enhanced mode, Cougar. The fundamental problems Win 9x has is it was buggier and didn't have the isolation assurances NT had. The main things Win 9x solved were the resource leaks of Win 3x and gradually increased relative stability. Whistler/Asteroid were the ways forward based on NT. (Pour one out for Neptune/Odyssey.)

Re: The port of the Windows 95 Start Menu was not all it seemed

#37

Post by h4ck_th3_pl4n3t »

withinrafael wrote: post #32
h4ck_th3_pl4n3t wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize that in corporations such as Microsoft, multiple people work on the same code, and code gets rewritten all the time, right? Dave Plummer cannot know about any changes after he left the company. You seem to be not aware of that. Also I don't know about you, but I don't know shit about the code I wrote two weeks ago. How do you expect someone to remember all details about code he wrote more than 25 years…

Am very aware how Microsoft works, been involved with them my entire life, wrote a few books, etc! I agree with you though. That's why I don't record YouTube videos asserting what happened 25 years ago.

Yet you still decided to accuse somebody of malicious intent and of being a scammer.

That's not how a wise person should act online.

(that you seem to imply to be by using your published books as an argument, as if that would validate any accusatory statements)

Re: The port of the Windows 95 Start Menu was not all it seemed

#38

Post by gosub100 »

eknkc wrote: post #11

I’ve seen a couple videos of Dave Plummer and they were fun. Gave some insight to internals of Windows etc. I even followed him on YT back then. But lately it feels like I see him all the time and there is something off with the guy. Can’t name what it is. Feels like he’s trying to milk whatever fame he got around the nerd circles as much as possible.

He's got autism, which he has discussed openly on camera and I think wrote about in his book.

Re: The port of the Windows 95 Start Menu was not all it seemed

#39

Post by gertop »

h4ck_th3_pl4n3t wrote: post #37
withinrafael wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am very aware how Microsoft works, been involved with them my entire life, wrote a few books, etc! I agree with you though. That's why I don't record YouTube videos asserting what happened 25 years ago.

Yet you still decided to accuse somebody of malicious intent and of being a scammer. That's not how a wise person should act online. (that you seem to imply to be by using your published books as an argument, as if that would validate any accusatory statements)

> Yet you still decided to accuse somebody of malicious intent and of being a scammer.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=1GeF9AjlqP8

He is a scammer and was convicted for it.

Re: The port of the Windows 95 Start Menu was not all it seemed

#40

Post by gertop »

gosub100 wrote: post #38
eknkc wrote: post #11

I’ve seen a couple videos of Dave Plummer and they were fun. Gave some insight to internals of Windows etc. I even followed him on YT back then. But lately it feels like I see him all the time and there is something off with the guy. Can’t name what it is. Feels like he’s trying to milk whatever fame he got around the nerd circles as much as possible.

He's got autism, which he has discussed openly on camera and I think wrote about in his book.

I don't think that's what OP was talking about.

For the first year or so of his rise Dave finished each videos by "I'm only in this for the subs and likes" and had monetization turned off.

Now he ends with "I'm mostly in it for the subs and likes" and has monetization turned on.

He's also removed his claim that all profits from his book and channel go to autism research.

Nothing wrong with making money from your work but it does show a change of focus.

Post reply on HN