| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
WinFS to be dropped from Longhorn Server release? | |
|
||
| Time: 16:04 EST/21:04 GMT | News Source: CNET | Posted By: Ed Bennett | ||
|
Microsoft's long-planned new file system is likely still many years away from being a part of the company's server operating system. The software maker has already decided that WinFS will ship separately from Longhorn--the new desktop version of Windows that is due in 2006. On Friday, Windows Server Chief Bob Muglia said WinFS will also not be a part of the server version of Longhorn that ships in 2007. "WinFS is not in the Longhorn client," he said in an interview. "It is also not in Longhorn Server." It is not even clear if Microsoft will include it with the Longhorn update that will follow a couple of years later. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 168 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:50:35 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 11888 (64.230.10.242) at 12/10/2004 4:18:12 PM |
| I have a theory. I think that they're all playing grab-ass at Microsoft all day instead of doing work. Or having money fights. Or a little of both. |
| #2 By 3653 (68.52.181.4) at 12/10/2004 4:53:31 PM |
|
Mr. Dee - "place our bets on is OS X, they seem to be making progress"
If patching 14 security flaws in a week is progress, then you are correct. |
| #3 By 11888 (64.230.10.242) at 12/10/2004 5:16:06 PM |
|
I agree, that is progress. So are right, progress is being made.
Adding 14 security holes would be the opposite of progress. This post was edited by MrRoper on Friday, December 10, 2004 at 17:16. |
| #4 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 12/10/2004 5:17:38 PM |
|
misters,
what are you guys smoking? i know you are disappointed, but to be honest ms really doesn’t care that you are disappointed. ms is in the business of selling software. if the next release of the windows operating system is not a compelling upgrade then you will not buy it. if you don’t buy the software then ms cares. a specific feature is unimportant unless it means you don’t want to buy longhorn. the user votes with his wallet. ms is a multi-billion dollar corporation not a free-ware project |
| #5 By 10022 (24.169.18.136) at 12/10/2004 6:51:07 PM |
|
WinFS never really made much sense as a must have for Longhorn Desktop as a stand alone feature. Longhorn Server (/client) is diffrent, but I still dont see it as must have, although as we go more "all-digital" that may change.
Right now most companies are not really using the full power of the software that Microsoft is currently shipping (either they havent upgraded or they have 2000/2003 but dont fully implement it). WinFS seems to be overkill for all but the most adavanced consumers. I dont see why partial functionality (at least percieved functionality) cant be achieved by tieing in DFS, NTFS, that technology that RIS uses to avoid having duplicate files on a drive that I cant remember the name of right now, and some more intelligent applications that are aware of all this. Making use of whats already there with a better search tool than whats currently is included with Windows will go along way if applications help by filling out some of thoses extended attributes for you (and then dont lose them along the way!!) |
| #6 By 7797 (68.142.9.161) at 12/10/2004 7:32:47 PM |
|
"a specific feature is unimportant unless it means you don’t want to buy longhorn. "
What you said is all nice and good, but Microsoft has a way of "forcing" upgrades down their customer's throats even if they dont really want them! |
| #7 By 7797 (68.142.9.161) at 12/10/2004 7:35:01 PM |
| I think we might see WinFS type functionality first in Linux now that Reiser4 is stable! |
| #8 By 8556 (12.217.111.74) at 12/11/2004 12:12:58 AM |
| I'd like to see the next Windows file system, whatever it will be called, to be less prone to instant file fragmentation during use. Certainly there must be some logic that can be applied to how files are written back to a hard drive that will maintain long term performance instead of degrading it. NTFS and FAT32 that we get today from Microsoft as file systems is, relatively speaking, no better than the FAT crap we got from them 20 years ago. They really need to do MUCH better. What I saw of WinFS was not an improvement in usability. WinFS in Longhorn “alphas” weren’t even very creative with SQL overlaid on NTFS. We need better performance than anything Microsoft has put out to date. Please don’t claim that fragmented files don’t slow performance. If that was the case we wouldn’t have defragmenters or bootvis. |
| #9 By 7797 (68.142.9.161) at 12/11/2004 8:55:43 AM |
|
Halcyon I know what WinFS is aiming to do and I know what Reiser4 is. I never claimed that Reiser4 by itself IS what WinFS is aiming to be. Reiser4's architecture is the foundation of a solid filesystem that can be extended with plugins to achieve among other things stuff that WinFS is trying to do. So my statement stands.
I think we might see WinFS type functionality first in Linux now that Reiser4 is stable! |
| #10 By 37 (206.176.203.93) at 12/11/2004 2:39:06 PM |
|
"What you said is all nice and good, but Microsoft has a way of "forcing" upgrades down their customer's throats even if they dont really want them! "
Not possible. |
| #11 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 12/11/2004 3:32:43 PM |
|
Well, it's disappointing to be sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves here. None of us really know what all this will mean just yet.
It's apparent that no one even has a good handle on what WinFS exactly is at the moment (tgnb's comments as a good example). Bob Muglia in the article says that it's not a relational database, but something he's claiming the world has not yet seen. Hot air? Maybe so, but if we take them at their word--which is really all we have at this point anyhow--then most of the comments comparing WinFS to anything else are premature at best. bobsireno... NTFS is hardly the same as "the FAT crap we got from them 20 years ago." And if you've got a filesystem idea that can make defragmenters a thing of the past, then tell us all about it. |
| #12 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 12/11/2004 4:51:34 PM |
| That's the drawing board, not a final product. Even Bob Muglia says in the article, "In terms of something major like WinFS, we still need to figure it out." Yes, the concepts they're going for are there, but we don't know what exactly WinFS will be just yet. |
| #13 By 1124 (24.93.24.63) at 12/12/2004 6:00:11 AM |
|
OK, so what's the big deal? A software company delays something for another year. I am still waiting for Duke Nukem Forever :)
Plus, the reason for the delay is so that people who don't want to upgrade to Longhorn can have some of it's main features on XP. |
| #14 By 1845 (67.169.248.36) at 12/12/2004 3:02:47 PM |
| AR - well, not exactly. XP's Avalon does not have the new driver model that Longhorn has. It won't have the glitch free media playback. It won't have a new IE or IIS. It won't (I think) support NGSCB. Longhorn isn't as exciting as it was a year ago, but there's still a lot slated for it that won't be part of XP. |
| #15 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 12/12/2004 3:29:15 PM |
| I agree with BobSmith; first at all it is unclear what improvements or new features LH will have; I heard rumors of a new centralized communication center (?) and other stuff, second my understanding is that although some of the new features will be back-ported to XP the performances will not be the same. Also, but this is just my opinion based on what Muglia said, it seems that MS is re-thinking the whole concept of what we call WinFS: it was supposed to be built on top of NTFS but maybe now they have changed the approach and going with something completely different. We will see. Finally whatever LH will be I will buy because it is based on Win2003 server code, there will be a 64bit edition and the future development will be on 64LH version an not on 64XP one. |
| #16 By 1401 (69.40.48.240) at 12/12/2004 5:06:12 PM |
| No Fritzly - they abandoned LH based on Server 2003 and went back to code based on XP SP2... |
| #17 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 12/12/2004 7:20:18 PM |
|
Thanks Mr. Dee; btw what do you mean with "Integrated calendaring"? I know about the "presence awareness" because, although not implemented yet, the link it was present in the "Refresh' release of LH.
The fact they abandoned Win2003 code is indeed a disappointment. |
| #18 By 1845 (67.169.248.36) at 12/12/2004 7:24:30 PM |
|
Halcyon - on XP? No. DVDs are relatively smooth, but they definately are not glitch free, especially if you are doing something (or many somethings) other than just watching the DVD. LH promises to let you do this with several vids at once, while do other stuff too, with glitch free playback. As I understand, this ties back to the new driver model and I'd imagine new rendering features of Avalon. This has not been promised for XP's Avalon.
As Fritzly said, perf is also an issue. The perf promised from Avalon - offloading compositing to GPUs (if available) - is also not promised on XP's Avalon. Of the three Aero tiers, the first two are possible on XP the third is not. chris - that sounds like hair splitting to me. Server 2k3 SP1 and XP SP2 have a lot in common. If the code is based on Server 2k3, presumably, it'll be post SP1, which means it's pretty similar to XP SP2. If you consider that XP SP2 inherited some of its goodness from Server 2k3 RTM, then it seems like a very fine distinction to say it is based on one and not the other. That said, as long as it is solid and stable, I don't care which it's based on. |
| #19 By 1845 (67.169.248.36) at 12/12/2004 7:25:40 PM |
| Fritzly - the only calendaring I'm aware of was related to WinFS, same for contacts. I wonder if those tidbits will still be in LH w/o WinFS. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 168 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:50:36 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
