Correct me if I'm wrong...

[Ishcabittle]

When running an application in XP, each open window is a separate copy of the application running, taking up processor cycles, is that correct?

Why wouldn't you have one application populate two windows instead of two copies of the application?

I'm just thinking about this as one of two Firefox windows just got corrupted, one was getting pages, one was not. The corrupted window wasn't frozen, it was reporting "server not found". The other one was fine.

Odd or normal?

 

[The Question]

Normal, although Task Manager can and does sometimes show two windows (one "Running" and one "Not Responding") even if you only have one instance of the application running. No idea why, except that possibly when the application stops responding, it also stops reporting properly to Task Manager, leaving the "ghost" of its previously normal state.

 

[Ishcabittle]

Vista is going to fix that, right? If I remember your beta threads right it's going to be more of a Linux core, right? That type of architecture?

 

[The Question]

Well, the directory structure appears to be a cross between XP and Linux, yes, but I can't say one way or the other about the actual coding, so I don't know. I did have occasion to notice some minor differences in Vista's Taskman, but very minor -- for example, when you look in the Processes tab, "System Idle" is no longer displayed -- this is actually not a good thing, since some malware can hide from the Processes tab and the only way to know if you've got an infestation in such a case is to check the "System Idle" process to see whether it's at less than the customary 97-99% range.