"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
news:O%23kISLAlGHA.3816@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> The difference is probably greater because it takes fewer lines of code to
> do the same things in Visual Studio (or you can think of the API's as
> being more powerful) today than it did in earlier editions.
Yes, code obfuscating was greatly enhenced with C# and managed code
Ok 10,000,000 new lines of code... after 5 years with 40,000 programers?
Thats 50 lines of code per programer per year... sound managable
Stephan
>
> "SAM-R" <SAM-R@news.postalias> wrote in message
> news:eTfilu%23kGHA.3936@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Also there is something like 50,000,000 lines of code in Vista. That's
>> 10,000,000 more lines of code that XP had.
>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
>> news:uZtvWA8kGHA.2052@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> This question keeps appearing in this and other ng's. I found the
>>> following to be a very apt description of why bugswatting in Vista is so
>>> tough:
>>>
>>> "Compared to the initial release of Windows XP, the sheer amount of
>>> different hardware to be supported, as well as the almost infinite
>>> combinations of hardware is proving to be quite a challenge for
>>> Microsoft as well as the hardware vendors. One of the biggest hurdles to
>>> be faced lies in the fact that it is impossible to find bugs, when
>>> certain hardware does not work...."
>>>
>>> I took it from PROneTworks Vista Newsletter Vol. 1, Issue 55, just
>>> released.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>