| 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 |
 |
Windows Vista: What's missing? | |
|
||
| Time: 10:33 EST/15:33 GMT | News Source: ZDNet | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
There’s been plenty written (with plenty more to come) about the features that are set to be included in Windows Vista. But what about features that won’t be in the next version of Windows? I’m not talking about features that have been cut from Vista during the development process, such as WinFS. I mean features that are currently part of Windows XP that won’t be included in Vista. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 157 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:29:06 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 1401 (69.27.196.125) at 10/17/2006 1:21:48 PM |
| In a nutshell - just about everything... |
| #2 By 61 (71.251.77.56) at 10/17/2006 2:35:59 PM |
| chris, did you even read the article? |
| #3 By 8556 (12.217.111.92) at 10/17/2006 2:44:58 PM |
|
What the article says is missing generally isn't needed, with the exception of WinFS. WinFS could have made Windows more like the superbly efficient PICK system. Too bad. At least Defrag companies won't feel compelled to whine to the EU about WinFS (if done properly) potentially hurting their business.
Who cares about pinball? |
| #4 By 24029 (192.85.50.2) at 10/17/2006 2:55:24 PM |
|
Well, this is more a feature of IE7 than Vista, but I am unable to find out how to enable specially formatted URLs... like telnet://my.server.com
While I agree that no one should use telnet anymore, there is no way to specify a default application for an ssh URL, ssh://my.server.com. For Admins with lots of servers, having HTML pages with clickable links sure made life easier.... |
| #5 By 61 (71.251.77.56) at 10/17/2006 3:04:23 PM |
| Pinball rocks! |
| #6 By 61 (71.251.77.56) at 10/17/2006 3:04:31 PM |
|
This post was edited by CPUGuy on Tuesday, October 17, 2006 at 15:05. |
| #7 By 23275 (68.17.42.38) at 10/17/2006 3:36:14 PM |
|
This is a silly article - I can't conclude that a dern thing is missing - given that so much more is in Vista than anyone has addressed well enough. Skipping apps like "pinball" that were there as HID/User teaching tools... please consider:
WinFS was envisioned as a lot more than what the pundits held out - and most of what it was to be, "is" and "is" better than what the same pundits wrote and spoke about. Just a couple of examples. As designed, it [WinFS], "is" many things, but begins with filling a gap that existed between the application layer and .NET. A massive gap that developer tools under WinFS was and will bridge [under different names with more evolved implementations]. Traditionally, a dev had to fill this gap and that effort came at huge costs in time, money and frankly, pain joined with boring work. While I hate the word, "middleware" comes to mind, where a collection of tools was built by Microsoft and many others that support devs opposite RAD tools, OOPs persistence and thousands of other methods, and classes, etc... A much larger and more powerful environment came out of WinFS - I guess most now refer to it under a very broad heading of, Data Access and Storage dev...., but that does not come close to describing it in ways that most people can easily catch on to or see their own needs and solutions in. It really comes down to the next evolution of data access - how apps logic accesses data and how devs leverage that to produce killer apps of all types. If you want to get into it at one level [at least], please consider checking out the ADO.NET vNext Entity Data Model Designer Prototype, CTP - here, http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=74bda7b2-9ca9-4eea-a33f-31942ddc9dbe&displaylang=en If you're a business owner - definately pay attention and find devs working this aspect of what Vista will support - because so many of you have so many different business interests, or you at least have to wear a lot of hats and change them on the fly. Across that diversity, a good dev can build you a "Decision Control Panel" that leverages all this and at the same time provide an easy to use, and deadly powerful console that collects, analyzes and reports "finalized business product" - or information you can use to make decisions, or conduct more effective interventions. Software so good and so powerful, it is software you do not have to use - it pushes finished results to the user and allows them to interact with its visual and linear properties. All that came out of WinFS - that is in Vista, makes that both possible and affordable. |
| #8 By 17996 (131.107.0.105) at 10/17/2006 4:00:23 PM |
| #4: Apps can register themselves as the shell handler for various protocols. For example, in the registry, look at HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\mailto. In your case, ssh:, your ssh application would need to be designed so that it gets the URL passed to it as a command line argument and knows how to parse it. |
| #9 By 8556 (12.217.111.92) at 10/17/2006 4:07:00 PM |
| CPUGuy: My bad. |
| #10 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 10/17/2006 4:18:32 PM |
| lketchum--I wonder, though, if they dropped the ball from a PR standpoint. While few people understood what WinFS really was, they at least identified the name "WinFS" and understood that it was a new storage technology. Plus, they saw a lot of articles and press about it--which were likewise mostly uninformed, but at least most folks recognized that it seemed to be a big deal. I think it would have been far better for them to keep the momentum they had gained with the WinFS "brand" (if you want to call it that), rather than to drop it and give the impression that they gave up on new storage technology with it. As is usual with their naming, "ADO.NET vNext Entity Data Model Designer" just doesn't get the same kind of attention. |
| #11 By 23275 (68.17.42.38) at 10/17/2006 4:52:26 PM |
|
#10, Very valid points. You're right, ADO.NET vNext Entity Data Model Designer is quite the pill - it's worse, it's only one small part of what "WinFS" [evolved] "is."
I have a take on it - but it is a SWAG, at best... I reasoned that there were "stated" and "implied" features - a term used to describe both tools and what their use results in. I think that "Strorage and Search of Stored Objects" is what people looking at WinFS came away with. I also think that like a real and true marketing brand like ActiveX became for MS's implementation of COM [as if RMI was not and is not also done in many other equally porous ways.... Java RMI, anyone... anyone?], they did not want to risk having all that is in WinFS becoming lumped in and trounced in similar ways. So dumping that name freed up the many technologies to be used on their own - and let's face it, how many people among Windows users actually get into data models and how they are accessed via applications? So what is left? Well, the people who work with these things know the truth - which is that where we are is way ahead of and better than where people thought we were [going]. For the rest, I really think Microsoft wanted to let their own applications, which I think will increase in both number and diversity [small teams building and marketing people centric solutions just as many of us do], stand on their own WinFS driven merits - just as I suspect they anticipate ours will. I say this, because there is intense dilution which takes place if buyers conclude that all software is easy to build - because of such strong Microsoft tools, etc... Again, just a huge SWAG here. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 157 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:29:06 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
