digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Where did you want to go yesterday?

linux-watch.com — Microsoft has revealed that it's working on a "significant" new feature of Windows Vista, the Restart Manager, that will let you update the operating system or applications without having to reboot the entire machine! Hello! We've been able to do this in Linux/Unix-land since, well, the 80s.

Who dugg this? Made popular Dec 9, 2005

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

91 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • DiggingItt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Of course, all updates to the Restart Manager will require a restart. ;-)
  • geekboy2000, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Sure, Linux might not need to re-start, but after running Red Hat Linux exclusively for over a year (and going back to Windows), I can tell you that while you might not have to re-start, you:

    1) Are generally at the mercy of a global community of people writing code, who may or may not be organized enough to ensure consistency of look and feel, installation, etc.
    2) Wrestle with building from source and dealing with umpteen dependencies and libraries, unless you happen to find a package that meets your needs. Many do, but often I found the "latest and greatest" needed to be built from source.
    3) Drivers that generally never fully utilize the capability of the hardware like Windows drivers do, unless of course, you want to spend lots of time diddling.

    In short, I'd rather spend a minute or two re-booting, than half my life getting apps on my machine, when I could already have been using them in Windows.
  • mooninite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Everyone, please google "kexec" for the Linux kernel. You can now reboot the kernel, without having to reboot the machine.
  • System84, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2With every new "Windows Vista feature" I move closer and closer to using linux for everything but games.
  • neverender, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4i still dont understand why people digg topics just to bash them.
    so you dont like windows. who cares. cry about something else already.
  • nukey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Don't have to restart to update unix/linux? Unless you are updating the kernel..."

    When was the last time you updated your Windows kernel ?

    Ah well, whatever, but a while ago I wanted to updated a 2003 server via Windows Update.
    First "something" was wrong and something needed to be corrected.
    Reboot
    Then Windows Installer needed to be installed, or something
    Reboot
    Then Windows Update needed to be re-installed or whatever
    Reboot

    DJeez, a 5min thingie became about a half our job. Windows lower in TCO. yeah right.
  • txgeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"but honestly - who goes around saying "Man, you know I have to reboot my computer after updates with Windows - that's it, I'm switching to Linux."

    The Systems Administrator who on during his monthly maintenance has to apply the new service pack or security update to 1/4 of his servers, about 1000 systems, and has to deal with the fallout of restarting all of them and making sure everything came back up and started correctly. This probably sounds trivial to someone who has never had to do it. But go sit in on one of them, see what a nightmare it is even when everything goes right.
  • clinko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+280s? Not in Linux...

    "The Linux kernel is a free software Unix-like operating system kernel that was begun by Linus Torvalds in 1991"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel


  • LiThiuMElectro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Don't have to restart to update UNIX/Linux? Unless you are updating the kernel..."

    yeah but, under windows when you are updating like Internet explorer you need to restart that is just useless and stupid.

    i don't use Linux personally but i knew that you don't have to boot when install/update something. it's about time that windows start to think about doing this. Shame on them for not considering this important before. shame on me to not using Linux.
  • mancat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Windows has apparently supported a soft restart like this since windows 95 but it is hardly ever used. Only once in my whole life have I seen Windows do it and it was a few years ago when I first installed XP and updated some software. It went out of the desktop and showed a strange blue screen (not a bsod) that said windows was restarting and then it went back into the desktop."

    This is what you will see when the GUI subsystem is being restarted. In the case where a number of core system services need to be restarted, a "traditional" reboot is needed.

    The truth of the matter is that for most Windows patches, all that is required is to restart the patched service. This is often easy enough, unless it's a core service that many other services depend upon, such as the RPC service. A reboot is still the only way to make absolutely sure that all software currently executing on the system is the same as the local disk copy that was just patched.

    As for applications asking you to reboot, yes, often that is not required.
  • sumvans, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is totally microshaft crap... they have been promising this since 9x and never delivered... i dont think they will follow through on this.
  • ever, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Linux doesn't have anything to do with this. It's cool to not to have to reboot Linux all the time but the article is about Windows - not about how Linux r00lz. There are still a lot applications that require Windows. In my case audio and graphics stuff. Sick 'n' tired of the never-ending Windows flaming by Linux geeks. It IS a great OS, yes, but Windows is necessary sometimes. Keep on the subject, leave the Linux boasting elsewhere :). This is good news. Digg.
  • BuckyTheCat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm a bit confused. I do not often have to reboot my computer after updates - this has never, I repeat *never*, been a big issue. It'll be nice to not have to, but honestly - who goes around saying "Man, you know I have to reboot my computer after updates with Windows - that's it, I'm switching to Linux."
  • mailman-zero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Linux: because rebooting is for installing new hardware.

    I've always liked that one. The more I think about this restart manager idea the more I am reminded of friends with memory leaks in their software (and probably the OS itself as well). These people tell me they need to reboot once a week or so to keep things running smoothly. I don't use Windows, so I don't really know, but doesn't that situation make this restart manager relatively useless?
  • JeffD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'll let you in on a little secret. Whenever a program tells you it has to restart the computer after installing before it will work... hit cancel. 99% of the time the program works perfectly well without the restart. The only thing I hate is those windows updates witch automatically restart your computer, you can delay them 15 minutes, but theres no way (that I have found) to stop it from contiunally prompting you evrey 15 minutes without actually restarting.
  • oringo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Don't have to restart to update unix/linux? Unless you are updating the kernel...
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've read several posts from folks who complain that they still have to reboot Linux after a kernel update. Well, of course you do. The kernel isn't a service or an application. It's the core of the OS. You have to restart the kernel to use it; i.e. a reboot.
    In contrast, the beef with windows is that you have to restart it after ANY update, and after many application installs. So the allusion that Linux is no different from Windows in this regard can only be ignorance or spin.

    So.
    To update the Linux kernel you're required to reboot in order to use it.
    To update a Windows kernel, you have to buy and install an entirely new version of the OS. Which would you rather do?
  • lnxaddct, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Of course you need to reboot on a new kernel install. Anyone who is commenting on that is ignorant and only making it blatantly obvious. This article is in reference to system updates, services and things like that. The kernel is the lowest level, the kernel rarely needs to be updated but when it does, you need to reboot, that's mostly a fault of the hardware rather than the kernel. If any of you have ever coded a kernel, you'd understand why this is a necessity, everyone else... you don't understand. This restart manager has nothing to do with kernels, its about things running on top of the kernel.
  • h2d2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This was on slashdot what... two weeks ago? Anyway, as mentioned before, the Restart manager is more advance than your usual *nix mechanism since it actually halts or waits until the libraries are no longer in use before updating them. In *nix, libraries are overwritten without any knowledge of their current status, which some times can cause problems...
  • Dash-2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ the submitter:
    "We've been able to do this in Linux/Unix-land since, well, the 80s."

    So your saying they shouldnt put it in Vista? They are seeing what needs to be done and doing it. Thats good, not bad.
  • txgeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1--"Linux/Unix-land since, well, the 80s"

    - "80s? Not in Linux..."

    No, but Unix has been around since 1969.


    "ugh... since when can you install a new linux/bsd kernel w/o rebooting?"

    Since User Mode Linux was released?
  • mgreenwald, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think the passion behind the whole Linux vs. Windows thing is the mediocrity of windows and peoples willingness to accept it for being superior and original simply because it is easy to use. I think that most of the linux ‘fans’ are really angry that Microsoft can duplicate a feature that has existed in Linux since whenever and then pass it off as an original idea that will have a profound effect on the industry. Even tiny features like the “Open current Directory in command line.” Plug-in on the power toys for XP website. I think that right now Apple has the best version of Linux in regards to user friendliness and also all around usefulness although Ubuntu Linux is really catching up. I think a major problem with the experimentation with linux is people creating ‘proto linux’ which is linux to run all of their Microsoft and Windows software this is a mistake and it will obviously in most cases without knowledge of Linux end up with the user returning to windows. This is especially true with gaming on linux. In my opinion no software is perfect and no single OS can solve all of your problems fully so its best for everyone to just be cordial and polite twords one another and not use ad hominem attacks and be so heated about something that isn’t very important. Certainly something that is as impersonal as software. Software agnosticism, practice it daily.
  • pkmugg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's about time. I would have a great system up time if I didn't have to restart to apply updates.
  • gluon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2This article is proof that those who know the least have the most to say.
  • ToadPedestal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Sucks dude. Your argument for moving to Linux gets weaker by the day." -neurokaotix

    Not quite. Vista has loads and loads of features that will greatly enhance the argument for a move to something else.

    Especially when they start for software as a service instead of a license. Trust me, if there were not alternatives, you'd be paying by the month or year to use Windows.

    What they really need to do is drop support and provide free upgrades from Windows ME to Windows 2000 or XP. Windows 95 and 98SE actually still have a place in obscure equipment, but one of my biggest gripes about Microsoft is that they would actually release something as horrible as Windows ME, let alone charging people to upgrade away from it. There should have been a class action lawsuits against it(maybe there were).
  • AtomicTheory, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Lame story, no digg

    voted LAME
  • chiizu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I thought Vista was going to boot in a few seconds, "like a television or other appliance." So... would that just not be the same for rebooting or did they already scrap that and introduce this instead.
  • WackyT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Of course you need to reboot on a new kernel install. Anyone who is commenting on that is ignorant and only making it blatantly obvious. This article is in reference to system updates, services and things like that."

    "...that will let you update the operating system ..."

    Isn't the kernel a part of the operating system?
  • thereisnospoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The restart part refers to specific service(s) and not the whole operating system. It allows only the affected service(s) to restart thus rebooting is not required (at least not as often).
  • crapiolio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Microsoft is trying to fool little kids again?
  • txgeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I could swear that I heard the sales pitch for this in 1994, at a WinTECH event, describing the new features of Windows 95. Then again when 2000 was released. And XP as well, suprisingly enough. I'm still waiting and suspect I will continue to wait long after Vista has been released.
  • adizzy615, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So the article forgets to mention that if the computer does restart, the manager will save the user's state and reboot back to state it was before the restart, including all unsaved documents, etc.
  • Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ linsys

    A fanboy is generally someone who has such a blind devotion to something, they aren't open-minded enough to see alternatives..kind of like religious zealots and people such as yourself.

    While I see good sides to both *nix platforms and win platforms, I'm not such a zealot for any, that I have to bash one to make the other look good.

    You asked for proof of a "single windows server running 40+ CPUs"...

    http://members.microsoft.com/CustomerEvidence/Search/EvidenceDetails.aspx?EvidenceID=1999&LanguageID=1

    While not quite the 40+ cpu's you were looking for (it's 32 Intel Xeon processors on one box and 32 Intel Itanium Processors on the other one), Microsoft Windows Server 2003 x64 Datacenter Edition supports up to 64 processors and 1 TB of ram.

    As far as uptime...I've seen some Novell boxes with over 5 years of uptime...so 2 years is nothing to brag about....

    Incidentally, you claim "I don't even know what this means" with regard to fanboy, but you use the same word in a sentence further down to call people "windows fanboys". Either you don't know what it means, or you do.
  • WackyT, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"This article is proof that those who know the least have the most to say."

    Yup. They are referred to as fanboyz. They only have enough knowledge of what they are a fan of to be truely annoying, and make a complete ass of themselves and their kool aid drinking horde.
  • PoisonCandyGram, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I installed linux on my gamecube and now I can update it without rebooting.
  • nailz420, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Dupe
  • ucg1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2A story about Windows doesn't belong in the "linux/unix" topic. I don't give two ***** about Windows.
  • Wang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Care to explain System84? Is this a negative feature for you?
  • CatfishJones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://www.digg.com/search?search=Restart+Manager&submit=Submit
  • barbobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://www.xmission.com/~ebiederm/files/kexec/README
  • generalleoff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Windows has apparently supported a soft restart like this since windows 95 but it is hardly ever used. Only once in my whole life have I seen Windows do it and it was a few years ago when I first installed XP and updated some software. It went out of the desktop and showed a strange blue screen (not a bsod) that said windows was restarting and then it went back into the desktop.

    XP is full of seldom used seldom seen functions like that. Like I bet most people are unaware XP has a cool Secret of Mana style ring menu for user switching.
  • spiderland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Agreed. Linux was not around in the 80s:

    http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.minix/msg/2194d253268b0a1b
  • capajc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yeah, you can do it in Linux...but then you're stuck using Linux. Which is fine if you already know it or have lots of time to learn it, but if neither is true then this story is good news.

    Wish there were fewer OS bigots in the world.
  • wilsonics, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ah, many an hour gone by in WinNT4 days, Are you sure you want to save that document....Restart Required. You practically had to restart every 10 minutes with that damn thing. It required a reboot to change IP addresses....well, it required a reboot to do everything and anything.
  • Johnnie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Might be just me but I see 3 MS servers in the top 10.
  • nmyers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is actually great news for production servers. Sometimes even 5 minutes of downtime can be frustrating.
  • Jay730, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0They said the same thing with XP....
  • motorbikematt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Good Jorb CatFishJones!

    I knew I saw this LAST WEEK!
  • glitchbit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0its not rocket science that Linux makes for a better server, but unless it is a web server I don't think it matter greatly to most companies, everyone goes home some time and it's easy enough to schedule a restart.

    However windows does not have to restart nearly as much as it used to, seriously 99% of everything I install does not require a restart and even the things that do normally do just find after ending explorer.exe and restarting it and if that doesn't work just restart the service. And most of the time all major components should be installed on your server before you go live, and rarely will you need to restart to enable additional features beyond restarting your services and explorer.exe.
  • Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ linsys

    Here is the link to Novell uptime that I quoted above..

    http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/trench/241.html

    and I stand corrected...one server has over 6 years of uptime.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 91 of 91 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.