MinWin: Is it or isn’t it part of Windows 7?

If there's one thing Microsoft is doing poorly right now, it's communicating about Windows 7. That's somewhat ironic given the company's announced goal last week of communicating about Windows 7. Mary Jo Foley and I discussed this problem on Windows Weekly this past week (I'll post the episode momentarily) but she examines it further in an interesting blog post today:

Confusion over exactly what MinWin is — Is it a concept? a new operating system kernel? a floor wax? a dessert topping?) — and how/whether it will be part of Windows 7 is still rampant.

The official word from Microsoft’s Windows Engineering Chief Steven Sinofsky seems to be that MinWin — the slimmed-down Windows core many expected to be at the heart of Windows 7 — is not going to be part of Windows 7.

It would be nice if Microsoft’s Windows client team would just come out with a clear statement as to what MinWin is and how it will figure with Windows 7. But it seems it’s not time to communicate that message yet… at least not according to the official (non)disclosure schedule.

My two cents for whatever it's worth is that there are two main issues here.

1. This confusion is all Microsoft's fault and they still haven't cleared things up explicitly. It was Microsoft that first revealed the existence of MinWin during a presentation last fall (Foley references this presentation in the article linked above), noting that MinWin was using "the Windows 7 source code base." And it is Microsoft that is mis-communicating what MinWin is and isn't. If, for example, MinWin isn't going to be part of Windows 7, then why would Microsoft distinguished engineer Marc Russinovich go to the trouble of allowing me to interview him at length about this technology? (Here's the resulting article.) There's been an awful lot of talk here and elsewhere about a technology that most likely is not really a feature of Windows 7.

2. None of it matters anyway since MinWin will not be part of Windows 7. It's unclear to me what the point of all this is, really. As ZD blogger Ed Bott accurately noted two months ago, the evidence suggests MinWin isn't part of Windows 7 anyway:

It’s a research project, not a product plan. They started with the Windows 7 source code base and fiddled with it to see how small they could make it and still have it run something. It might turn into a product someday, but it’s certainly not going to be in Windows 7.

The immediate goal isn’t to trim Windows 7 to something that will fit on the head of a pin. Just remove some optional components and make the whole thing smaller and more modular than Vista, just as Server 2008 is smaller and more modular than Server 2003.

Not to beat a dead horse, but that's exactly what I wrote in my original article about MinWin, way back in October 2007:

The Windows 7 version of MinWin is enhanced over the work Microsoft did with Vista and Windows 2008, but suggesting that it's completely different is disingenuous. Microsoft may argue otherwise, and certainly Russinovich has the insider's view, but the names are the same, the goals are the same, and the descriptions and functions are almost identical. I'm not saying they're exactly the same, but my guess as an outside looking in is that the MinWin work in Windows 7 is a continuation of work that started in the Longhorn project.

What this all boils down to, really, is semantics. Microsoft began work on something called MinWin several years ago. The goal was to isolate the core of Windows from its non-constituent sub-components so that the Windows OS could be componentized. That work can be seen today in Vista's image-based installation scheme and in Windows Server 2008's Server Core. And it appears to be evolving for Windows 7. From what I can see, the story hasn't changed at all.

To conclude this messy affair, I'll just say this: The inclusion or lack of inclusion of MinWin in Windows 7 won't change anything for end users, so the argument is moot. Microsoft isn't go to offer you a way to configure a tiny 10 MB version of Windows 7 that will run on a USB key. And you're not going to get an all-inclusive menu of Windows components you can remove at will. Windows 7 will be a refined version of Windows Vista. And that's fine. Just communicate that, already, Microsoft.

Whew. :)

Discuss this Article 8

JamesNT
on Jun 2, 2008
Waethorn
on Jun 2, 2008
"Windows 7 will be a refined version of Windows Vista. And that's fine. Just communicate that, already, Microsoft." ....um....but isn't that what you've been echoing all along anyway, Paul, despite Microsoft's PR flubs of late? "["MinWin"] can be seen today in Vista's image-based installation scheme and in Windows Server 2008's Server Core. And it appears to be evolving for Windows 7. From what I can see, the story hasn't changed at all." Exactly! Windows 7's kernel is just another evolutionary step to further componentize Windows, as it's been done in Windows Vista prior to that, and as it's been done in Windows XP Embedded even further back. Something like this can't be done in wholly revolutionary progression, unless they're willing to start over from scratch. And let's face it: legacy compatibility will ultimately prevent that, unless they perfectly adapt virtualization technology to the role.
dovella
on Jun 2, 2008
Excuse me my English I think WIndows 7 is more SIlverlight in desktop and effect wonodows , application Seadragon for zoom document, PDF, WOrd Excell etc. Photo Zoom (microsoft) in Windows live photo and more more new function!!
dstrack
on Jun 2, 2008
Confusing Yes. Not to mention Qualcomm babbling about WinMo 7 devices... both cell phone/PDAs and Sub-Notebooks...
cesjr
on Jun 2, 2008
Windows 7 at this point is more a marketing need that anything else. Vista has flubbed badly in the eyes of the public. It's a dog that won't run at this point. It's hurting the PC market and MS's reputation. So MS has no choice but to work out the kinks, slap a new label on it, and go back to market. I can't really blame them for this.
subzerohitman721
on Jun 3, 2008
"Windows 7 at this point is more a marketing need that anything else. Vista has flubbed badly in the eyes of the public. It's a dog that won't run at this point. It's hurting the PC market and MS's reputation. So MS has no choice but to work out the kinks, slap a new label on it, and go back to market. I can't really blame them for this." I completely disagree with this statement. Vista has sold approximately over 140,000,000 licences. Many major corporations here and abroad are starting to actively upgrade to Vista because of the increased security and stability. Recent highlights of Vista's security include the UAC's ability to defend against rootkits, a 6, 12, and 18 month vunerability reports that state that Vista has outperformed every other OSes with the lowest incidents of vunerabilities, and that MS responds much quicker to zero day incidents. Many of these companies usually wait until after Service Pack 1 and when their new physical year budgets allow them to upgrade. It also allows for IT guys to figure out Vista for their environments. Late this year and all of next year, expect Vista to roll out big time in the corporate arena followed by the consumer. If anything, its the increasing incidents of vunerabilities in the last 18 months of Apple's OS-X and the Linux variants that are bad for the market's reputation. Apple refuses to patch a "Carpet Bomb" vunerability in Safari which shows the utter incompetence of Apple. Mozilla's Firefox 3 RC 1 has been reported with 10 high priority bugs. http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,146257-pg,1/article.html Microsoft is taking the lead in creating a work around and creating a patch to protect the Windows users. Microsoft has turned security into its strength by being proactive in security matters. I don't know about you, but I am glad that MS has made security the rule and not the exception. I think many Microsoft haters use anything to bash the company or its products. The fact is that Vista works just fine. Infact as I have stated before, my notebook runs on Vista SP1 and I'm blogging with it 95 percent of the time. It boots, loads, runs, and yes it doesn't crash. Those who were intelligent enough to figure out Vista's quirks, have reaped the rewards of having the most secure OS at this point in time. So let me paraphrase myself one more time and say this.... Is Paul, Waeth, and myself the only 3 individuals on the planet who can run Vista with no quirks? Seriously, we must be Super Enthusiasts or one with the Force to get our stuff to work so well.... Or other bloggers abilities in running OSes must be that exaggerated. Lets get off the Vista sucks bandwagon. Versus OS-X, we can do just about everything Leopard does and a few things Leopard doesn't have. Such as DVR functionality built into Media Center, frequently less vunerabilities per period, and a tighter security defense against rootkits. Lets not forget that PC users also spend much less on less safe, less functional, and overpriced hardware too.
Dude1313
on Jun 3, 2008
I find it ironic as well. All the lead up to what is eyed candied XP SP3 (oh wait they released that too?) and now all the Windows zealots are clamoring for Windows 7 as THE ONE TRUE OS that everyone is waiting for... Paul's video from 2003 with the rock music, the catchy tag lines of "working smarter and harder" etc, etc... Simply proves that the cognitive dissonance of using Windows is every bit as fanyboyish as those they like to rail against. Still waiting for all the promises of Vista to materialize.... Whoops. That didn't work? Better start talking up Windows 7. Typical vaporware tactic from the tried and true MS arsenal. Meanwhile the tech wags on the Windows side continue to sweep Windows Me Version 2, errr Vista under the rug and switch to the new Prime Directive: Start talking about Windows 7. And like the Borg they emulate so much, the drones acknowledge the signal from the Collective and do as ordered. Waethorn and all the other windows fanboys who have been drinking as much Kool Aid as anyone can post insanely long lists about how Vista isn't a flop, how it cures cancer and is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Then the next tactic will be at pointing out how Apple does "X" who "X" is insanely overpriced and how Apple doesn't matter. Doesn't change one simple fact: the general public can't stand it. All the rants will do is to strawman away from my points on Vista. And no, this isn't about Apple, its about MS. And right now Vista's biggest threat is Windows XP... And now standby for the following rants: 1) Why are you here? 2) Apple is evil and every bit a monopoly as MS. 3) Bill Gates is the greatest human being the world has ever seen. 4) 95% market share! 95% market share! 95% market share! 5) Did I miss anything? I'm sure the Windows fanboys will be along shortly.
subzerohitman721
on Jun 5, 2008
@timiteh... Completely agree with you. I am a strong proponent of adding more computer literacy classes in schools. Especially in middle/junior high and high schools where kids can be taught to build PC's, taught command line, Computer History, and learn multiple UI's. I think this would be more affective than commericals that bash a good product. Of course, Apple would be a major component of those classes. The history, founders, evolutionary/revolutionary, faults, and criticisms would be included. Same for MS criticisms and evolutionary/revolutionary parts.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use