Slashdot Mirror
Looking at Longhorn
ShinyPlasticBag writes "Paul Thurrott has an excellent preview of Longhorn milestone five over at his Supersite for Windows. It looks like this may be Microsoft's equivalent to OS X -- the next version of Windows will have a 3D accelerated desktop and other graphical goodies. In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years."
...Windows 2005 will be Macintosh 1997.
Dude, where's my packet?
git with the program dude.
Here is a mirror.
I Didn't get a chance to fix the links to the images, so Here is the directory with a dump of them.
(And where is the Coward option?)
--sig fault--
I didn't know what it was... hopefully this'll be useful for other people.
From whatis.com
A journaling file system is a fault-resilient file system in which data integrity is ensured because updates to directories and bitmaps are constantly written to a serial log on disk before the original disk log is updated. In the event of a system failure, a full journaling filesystem ensures that the data on the disk has been restored to its pre-crash configuration. It also recovers unsaved data and stores it in the location where it would have gone if the computer had not crashed, making it an important feature for mission-critical applications.
Not all operating systems provide the same journaling technology. Windows NT offers a less robust version of the full system. If your Windows NT system crashes, you may not lose the entire disk volume, but you will likely lose all the data that hadn't yet been written to the disk prior to the crash. By the same token, the default Linux system, ext2fs, does not journal at all. That means, a system crash--although infrequent in a Linux environment--can corrupt an entire disk volume.
However, XFS, a journaling file system from Silicon Graphics, became a part of the open-source community in 1999 and, therefore, has had important implications for Linux developers, who previously lacked such insurance features. Capable of recovering from most unexpected interruptions in less than a second, XFS epitomizes the high-performance journaling filesystem of the future.
The earliest journaling file systems, created in the mid-1980s, included Veritas, Tolerant, and IBM's JFS. With increasing demands being placed on file systems to support terabytes of data, thousands upon thousands of files per directory and 64-bit capability, it is expected that interest will continue to grow in high-performance journaling file systems like XFS.
sig.
Microsoft's equivalent to OS X...will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years."
And OS X users have had for months...
W
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years.
NTFS (Windows 2000, Windows XP, et al.) is a journaling file system, actually.
Do you like German cars?
NTFS has always been a journaling file system..
Hi, I'm schizophrenic - and so am I
In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years
And Windows users have had since... 1994? NTFS is journaling, and was WELL before e2fs was... (any of you old-school Linux users remember pulling the plug or hitting power on your Linux box back in the day and immediately screaming "OH SHIT!" when you realize you probably just corrupted a whole slew of data? I do.)
Isn't the NTFS filesystem, avaliable for Windows NT, 2000 and XP, journaled?
In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years.
The big question is if like NTFS it will be proprietary. Even after years of reverse engineering the NTFS nut still hasnt been cracked, and if FAT32 support is not included then people may be put off from dualbooting longhorn and another OS.
Not that having to run Longhorn on my desktop is a prospect I'm looking forward to, but still:
NTFS has been there for 10 years or so.
And it's jounaling.
Rainer
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
NO, no, no. You've got it all wrong. They mean based on Unix! D'uh...
just kidding, that's what I first thought they meant when I read "Microsoft's equivalent to OSX.
YOU SUCK BALLS!
duh.
Think first...yea, that's the ticket!
-$.02
let it not be said that the "SuperSite for Windows" is a Windows fansite - from the article:
"After turning off Windows Future Storage (WinFS) to speed things up, I was still astonished by how poorly the system performed."
Wow.
Just wait until WINFS comes out, yes you too can have a SQL Database file system. I am not looking forward to longhorn but I might look forward to laughing at it if they dont change the huge size of the Start Menu...
---
Either release it, or don't and let someone else work on it.
Stop pushing back the release date of beta 1 (if it even exists).
I've been waiting for months for the 5DWM!
Can someone tell me why I need a 3d accelerated desktop?
//H, just realized he has another flamebait post on his record. Damn that karma!
Would it be easier for me to navigate my windows if I could move between them as if I played Quake, instead of just clicking on the particular window I wanted?
Would I get more girls if my mailbox spun in cool 3d, instead of just opening?
Would my productivity improve if it took 5 more seconds to open a window just because it had to be animated, instead of just appearing?
Would it be easier for me to read text if all windows were transparent?
Is the human mind better trained to cope with windows if they are rotated 45 degrees along some axis?
I simply don't get the 3d desktop, but then, I prefer stuff that work, instead of stuff that looks good and doesn't work.
I'm too stupid to preview.
There are enough things wrong with Windows that you don't have to go making new ones up.
In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years."
;)
we BeOS geeks have had this even longer.
my pet machine
you better GB2GBS, am I rite?
Apart from this image the new trend of making next generation operating systems which have giant interfaces really worries me. I always felt the advantage of running 1600x1200 (or 3200x1200 in my case) was to have more workspace, not a higher resolution interface. When OSX came out I installed it on my iBooks, then immediately uninstalled it primarily due to it's absolutely intrusive interface (secondarily due to lack of support for the software I was using at that time. My PC recently suffered an HD crash and I couldn't find my Windows 2000 Pro CD so I installed XP (yeah, I tried linux... Redhat to be exact, and the out-of-the-box ceased to function after two reboots), and came across a similar issue... the interface is too big, too audacious, and clamors for attention.
In Vegas the person with the biggest, brightest, flashiest sign will make the most money... but when it comes to OSs small, fast, and unobtrusive is the key, too bad nobody else sees that.
sig.
Back in the days of Windows 98, when rebooting every couple of hours was the norm, it would have made a lot of sense for M$ to introduce a journaling FS, so that users don't lose data all the time. But now that Windows users too have pretty decent uptimes, I wonder if it is such a big deal, since journaling has a performance penalty.
another slow, buggy, crash-infected Longhorn alpha build Before I read the end of that statement I though we were talking about the final build of Longhorn.
Will it come with 3D glasses? (the blue and red ones)
life is a game of musical chairs
I just bought a legit copy of XP!
Note that the so-called preview only discusses what the new Longhorn looks like, not what internals have changed. So take the article pretty literally, since it really only *looks* t Longhorn.
--- Sigmentation Fault - Comments Dumped
Since Solaris 7 (1996/97) has had journaling for awhile as well.
...that there are no drive letters in any of the Explorer screenshots? I'm wondering if this signals an eventual move away from drive letters towards UNC-style paths, or referring to volumes by their labels, in a fashion akin to Mac OS.
Certainly does look like OS X. The login screen looks almost identical to the OS X login screen.
No electrons were harmed creating this post, though some may have been subjected to electrical and/or magnetic fields.
Not to bash Microsoft in general, but the dialog in this screenshot demonstrates incredibly retarded user interface design.
"OK" to terminate the application.
"Cancel" to debug it.
???
And this isn't new either, AFAIK the same dialog has been around since the Windows 9x days.
These sorts of questions apply to all devices, in the end.
Take a look at your car. Do you really think it's design makes it much more aerodynamic, or do you think it's just the same eye-candy?
What about the paint? Paint jobs are pretty silly things, by your logic. They cost money and all they do is act as eye-candy.
What about the hubcaps, the flashing lights on the interior that never serve any real purpose, the leather, the...
The point is: People like things that glitz.
You pull the plug on your linux box and corrupt a "slew of data" and someone else is a "retard".
Move out of your glass house before throwing stones.
sure there are some neat features undernetah. but this mostly looks like just more eye candy. for the average user, there will be nothing of significance, save DRM, that isn't already in XP. really. it looks like a combination of KDE and OS X desktops. but that is microsoft innovation really. "borrow" something two years old, integrate it into your product and call it new.
.NET is all about this. they are trying to change basic software/user paradigms. they defined the first one with the desktop PC, now they are trying to redefine it again. the question is will they be successful? it is just that innovation and new ideas don't typically come from redmond.
microsoft faces some big future challenges and they recognize this.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
3d effect play simmilar roles. the tranparency and shadowing of foregroung and backrgound windows is something you immediatly grasp abd grasp without think about it becuase your brain already knows how po process those clues. like wise throbbing or size changing 3d icons can be subtle ways to grab your attention. Dialog boxes that drop down out of windows again clue you into what window they are refering to.
now done wrong they could also be wizbang distractions. This is of course what has always distinguished say apple products from others. Apple tends to follow a consisten and understated GUI that just directs your eye where it needs to go.
3d effects can clrify what is or is not a button, and even what you are supposed to do with it (twist, rock, slide, press)
no you dont need 3d. heck you dont need a gui. Dos didnt have it even though it did have a graphics mode.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
The Microsoft motto: "we're the leaders, wait for us !"
Don't forget to think different.
It is important to diffentiate NTFS5 (windows 2000, xp) from NTFS prior to 5. As I understand NTFS has been the same from NT 3.1 through NT 3.51, though I could be incorrect about that. It changed when win2k came out, but NTFS was around before that, though not journaling.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I always thought the default linux filesystem nowadays was ext3fs, which is infact journaling.
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
So how much money does Microsoft pay Fisher Price to design there GUI?
No journaling file system guarantees that any unsaved data will be preserved in the event of a system crash. Data that's in RAM in the disk write cache is lost in the event of a crash. That has nothing to do with the file system.
Journaling file systems are transaction based. If a transaction fails partway through (IE the system crashes) the state of the disk is the same as if the transaction had never started, and is thus always consistent.
You would have to be doing something extra weird to risk corrupting an entire ext2 volume in the event of a crash. Also the article doesn't mention that ext3 IS ext2 with a journal added, it's not a totally different file system. In fact an ext3 file system that is cleanly unmounted can be mounted as an ext2 file system, FYI.
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
From the article, underneath a screen shot:
.NET managed code application, but it crashes frequently.
Explorer.exe is now a
Well it's good to know that Windows hasn't changed that much. (yes, I know it's an alpha, but explore.exe crashes have happened to me in every final version of windows that I have used.)
You're only as smart as your brain.
None of the things you mention about cars get in the way of, or slow down driving.
The things humming mentioned get in the way of computing.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
New parental controls let parents determine when and how kids use the computer.
This is one of the things I truly hate about windows : control, control, control !
They drive it so far that a parent (me) has to control how kids use the computer. That's insane. We have 1 iMac at home for our kids (age 10,7 and 5) and they have to figure outTHEMSELVES when and how to use it. If they have a quastion, they can ask away. If they have a fight, i turn off the machine. It took 3 weeks to find a balance, and now they manage perfectly. No control needed.
Control is like a handbrake on kids efforts to solve conflicts. You'de be amazed how intelligent the remarksof a 5year old can be if he is forced to find his own words. Quite often, he's capable of handling his big sister better than I ever could !
When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
When OS X was designed, they had the original Mac Classics and 512Ks in mind. Back then, on the little tiny screen, icons were supposed to take up a certain portion of the screen; however, as screens got bigger, icons stayed the same size. With OS X, they brought back the idea of items (like icons) on the screen taking up a larger amount of space, but it's normally very customizable.
Just like Enlightnment E17? Or like Transluxent? Or just as DirectFB (yeah, I know it's not OpenGL, but who cares?:).
So who is "innovative" now?
:wq
You will never know it. The candy effects, the smooth fonts (little bigger) and other goodies in OSX do really help you when you are actually using the system.
The shadows of windows in OSX help you determine which one is on top of another (give you a depth perception).
Although it may not be directly apparent to an expert user like you, OSX's "giant" interface does help.
Well theres no default Linux fs. Distro's use various and sundry default FSes. Some use Reiser, others Ext3 still others stick with ext2.
Why not fork?
NTFS was a journaling filesystem from the start; even before NT4 came out. It was a journaling filesystem before Reiserfs or EXT3 even had a single line of code written. You can set it up to fully journal the filesystem data as well (it only does metadata by default). It did change with NT 5, but the journaling capabilities still existed in prior versions. More documentation can be found here
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
Only if implimented poorly. Ever think that the 3d Desktop could be *gasp* faster? Because you leave the CPU open to work on your applications, and use your 3D card to process the OS GUI. Granted, we all assume MS will get it wrong...but maybe!
It doen't look too similar to me...
n g
f
Mac OS X:
http://www4.macnn.com/team/osx/osx_consoleLogin.p
Oldschool Mac OS 9 (foreign):
http://www.macopoli.com/Sito/Schede_figg/Login.gi
Now, if the Longhorn login window "shakes its head" when an incorrect login/pass is entered, *that* would be copying.
(If you don't know what I'm talking about, find a Mac and try logging in with a bogus login/pass combination... the login window jitters side to side for a moment as though it's shaking it's head in a "no" fashion...... something straight out of NeXTSTEP/Openstep).
Is that the hardware folks will continue designing, building and selling hardware that is optimized for M$ based systems. We refuseniks (aka Linux Zealots) that choose to opt out of "The Church of Bill Gate$ worship" get to enjoy the displeasures of trying to make this M$ branded hardward work on *our* b0xen...
Ah, the joys of Winmodems and other such goodies. Like video cards, I had loads of fun with a Nvidia card a few months ago, alas, now Nvidia has made the driver easier to install.
I installed a Winmodem on a Linux box for my dad. That was interesting at best.
You folks want M$, fine. But there needs to be a law that forbids the design of hardware that prevents you from using alternative OS's.
The hardware should be generic so it will work with any OS.. This whole Longhorn / Palladium thing stinks. It's not about tust or security, it's about M$ and the governent controlling *YOU*....
You must be the anonymous coward who posted this and hasn't heard of 2D acceleration.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
Hey I like my utilitarian 80's economy car. It's simple, and the simple design appeals to me because it gets the job done without glitzy eye candy getting in the way. It's still well constructed, and someone spent some time thinking things out for the design so it works well.
As opposed to many cars I see now with tons of eye-candy, but I don't think anyone ever considered people would need to actually use these cars. Flashing lights, hard to read and use controls, really hard to read gauges, stupidly designed overly complicated interfaces (BMW iDrive anyone?)
Besides, some things like paint do serve a purpose. Unless you drive a Delorean, you will appreciate the paint every time it rains or snows.
Both of you? Just kidding - I tried BeOS for a while.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
what super-important process was your graphics card doing in your desktop environment to begin with?
i think this is mostly just picking up the slack left by steadily increasing hardware performance. Like, for example, a thousand dollars of computer hardware is massive overkill for what most people use a computer for. Now, its still overkill, just less blatantly and massively.
"Windows Longhorn will offer sweeping changes over its predecessors and be the most significant release of Microsoft's desktop operating system since Windows 95"
Isn't this how they describe EVERY iteration of their desktop OS's?
The article goes on to describe a bunch of features that would make little or no difference to most users.
Regardless of what you think of their technology, you have to be amazed that they can get so many people to pay ever-increasing amounts of money to "upgrade" their systems to the latest OS.
Another analogy is case-modders. Do neon lights make your computer run faster? Same logic. Pretty lights and cool designs make you the coolest kid on the block.
mund freud.
I agree with your sentiments. I liked the good old days when low resolution displays were enough to do normal work, so I could use a higher resolution and get tons more screen real estate.
I have no panels, toolbars, or other bullshit on my desktop. Until I start opening windows it's a pure black screen. If you ever feel like trying Linux again try HackedBox as your WM. :)
:)
If you don't mind me asking how did your RedHat cease to function? Was it a consistant error? Just curious.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Windows has had a hardware accelerated GUI since the introduction of GDI+ in Windows XP. OS X didn't have hardware accelerated Quartz until Jaguar.
I don't suppose anybody's ever heard of fact-checking, though....
I like Mac OS X. I hate how it is a stable and well-organized OS though. Maybe M$ is finally making the perfect OS: The one you will never own! It will own you and your computer! It will require you to prove to Microsoft that you are allowed to install software on your computer! Watch what happens when you put in a DVD or try to play an Mp3! MS will surely make Longhorn a DRM circus.
Correct me if I'm wrong - I've always thought FAT was a journaling file system. Linux has just ventured into that area recently.
Remember when Microsoft was making so much noise about that? Its disingenuous bleat during the antitrust trials aside, I'm still waiting for them to innovate.
That they're now borrowing so heavily from the likes of Mac OS X recalls the days of 1990-1995, when Microsoft was playing catch-up with System 7. Now that was some kind of innovation, I tell ya!
Those who can, do. Those who can't, write technology blogs.
"Graphically, an icon representing your user sits at the center of the carousel, and lines, or spokes, branch out from the center towards your contacts."
Image Here.
Now take a look at this. I'm not saying it's practical, I'm not saying it's good. But it's different and it could be integrated into an OS. This sort of innovation is what Linux should be doing!
Free iPods - now in the UK!
Uh, no. NTFS has always been a journaling file system. That's not what WinFS is.
WinFS is a file system built on top of SQL Server, so it is a database filesystem. To my knowledge only one other OS has ever successfully pulled off a DBFS, and that is OS400. BeOS came close but not completely, although it's metadata loaded query capable database was great. And Linux doesn't come close.
Where's the mass flaming from Mac users about that Mac OS flaws comment?
Sheesh, Slashdot w/out flaming? What next?
This guy is way out there
Ok, so I looked at the pictures. But they seem to be emulating Apple even more.
Gotta laugh at those huge 128x128 icons that were all pixely. I don't see the XP login screen when I'm forced to write x86 assembly in MASM @ school, but they've lost the color in the logo like Apple did a while back in Longhorn (i think).
Other generally silly things..
People call the OS X dock a space killer(I disagree), how about those directory windows? They take like a quarter of the screen for the 'you have 9 items' heh, just to show a picture of some documents? waste of space.
You could always try to ADJUST the sizes of the desktop items... that way they are as intrusive or nonintrusive as you want.
The default settings are NOT the only options!
The article refers to a UI feature called "stacks". From the article:
"But there's more new to My Contacts than just the Carousel view. In My Contacts, you can arrange contacts by Name, Email, Work Email, Personal Email, Home Phone, Work Phone, or Online Status, but you can also utilizing a new feature called Stacks. Because you can't actually work with stacks in 4015, it's unclear what the feature does, but you can stack contacts by the same list of criteria by which you can arrange them, and you can also unstack them. Stacking and unstacking might be related to the Carousel view but, again, that's unclear right now."
Here is a screenshot of the view.
Recently, there was a Slashdot article here about a "piles" feature that Apple had patented in June 2001 that sounds very familiar. Screenshot of piles here looks different, but the concepts appear similar:
"In addition, sources said Panther will finally mark the debut of the much-discussed "piles" GUI design concept, which Apple patented in June 2001. According to the patent, piles comprise collections of documents represented graphically in stacks. Users can browse the "piled" documents dynamically by pointing at them with the cursor; the filing system can then divide a pile into subpiles based on each document's content. At the user's request, the filing system can automatically file away documents into existing piles with similar content."
Adi Gadwale.
I was so overwhelmed by reading all the responses, and, seeing how this is slashdot ... if someone could clear it up for me, I'd be very appreciative. Thanks!
vodka, straight up, thank you!
The info in this story was a lie, NTFS is journaled. It has been for at least 3 years. You were trolled by slashdot.
Macintosh: I made that stuff back in - ..but I already...
Windows:
Now slow, I say, slow down there just a second, boy, and lemme talk a little sense into ya! (If that boy don't stop talkin' he's gonna sunburn his tongue.)
Macintosh:
Windows: Whoa there boy! (Nice kid, but he's about as thick as a whale omelette.) You can't, I say, you can't just take credit for things that ya didn't do! (This boy's about as sharp as a pound o' wet liver.) You can't just keep crowin' on about how young you feel and how hard you work. You just gotta start bein' the best boy you can be and show those folks you can do it just as good as them!
Now go on, I say, go on boy, an' show 'em what you're made of! Now git!
Macintosh: Ah..yeah. Later.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
Paul's mention and picture of classic; is that the way it looks in classic mode? Cause if so it's so rad, and by rad I mean crap.
Where did I say a 3d accelerated desktop is required to accelerate 2d graphics?
:)
And why do you think I've never heard of 2d acceleration? What did I say to imply that?
But to say more on the topic, 3d is a superset of 2d: So 3d acceleration is necessarily also going to be able to handle 2d acceleration, while 2d acceleration cannot necessarily handle 3d acceleration.
Here's a trick: Lets say you have to manage 15 windows. With 3d acceleration you can take advantage of the Z/height buffer to keep track of all of them, since they all live on different levels. Without 3d acceleration, you have to create a data structure and window managment system, which necessarily requires the CPU and memory subsystems to deal with all the windows.
See, if only for that, 3d acceleration trumps 2d acceleration. There are more situations like that too
GPL Deconstructed
I wasn't impressed by the screen shots, and the features seem pretty weak in general, but the one thing I did like was the parental controls. Is there anything like this for Linux? I just implemented a bash script in about 30 seconds that did this. It simply changes the users login shell from /bin/false to /bin/bash between two given periods. Pretty basic, I know, but I really like the idea of parental controls within the OS, limiting time spent and what not.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
Long Horn
Huh huh. Huh huh,
Mmmmmm..... heh heh. Heh heh.
He said Long Horn!
Stick Men
Yeah, and in a particularly cruel twist of fate, the first journaling filesystem supported under Linux was NTFS.
However, in typical Windows fashion, support isn't stable yet, after all these years. =P
That dialog only comes up when there is a debugger installed. Either Longhorn comes with one or the reviewer installed one. A similar dialog box was around in 98 but has long since been changed. You need to catch up about 5 years before spouting off about Windows I think.
uh oh, gbs sprung a leak
In their quest to show as little information as possible into as much screen real-estate as possible, Microsoft has set a new record.
"Oh! I have an idea!" said one Microsoft senior engineer to his underling, "Lets make all the fonts and icons bigger so we can ditch that accessibility control panel and replace it with a "My Yet Another Other Stuff" folder. "Oh yes!" shouted the underling, "and that way we can perhaps hide how painfully slow we make a super-computer crawl."
I'm not saying fancy graphics effects steal precios GPU cycles, I'm saying they steal precious human cycles.
"Woo look at the window animate all over my screen, oh there goes two seconds of my time..."
"Oh this funky transparency is cool, shame I can't read what's in the window, let's spend a minute reconfiguring..."
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
In the field of usability, bigger has been found to be, in general, better. Bigger interfaces are more tolerant to mistakes, are easier to "read" and interpret, can be accessed and used quicker, and are overall more obvious to use. Now, this isn't always the case, and stuff can be made too big, but most of the time this is the case. Pop "fitts law" into google for more info.
...and IN SOVIET RUSSIA, beowulf clusters imagine 1, 2, 3 profit!!!! jokes made out of YOU!!!
The new big feature of the filesystem is not that it's journalling.
They are integrating the filesystem with their SQL engine so that files are easily searchable with the multiple GB hard drives everyone will have by the time 2005 rolls around. The big feature is that it's a database filesystem called WinFS.
I guess the submitters of the article don't even read the articles anymore! Gotta love the quip at the end of the summary--makes him look even more moronic. NTFS has been a journalling file system since its inception. Many years before ext3 reared its ugly head.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Case modding is much more similar to the non-functional aspects of automobiles.
But when the glitz is in the GUI itself, and not the case, the glitz can get in the way.
"Hey, look at this, when I turn the steering wheel it goes all bendy and funky how cool is that **CRASH**..."
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
I'd just like to add to that...
/tmp and /home/public (FTP/SMB area) partitions, and EXT3 on more critical ones.
XFS, while I love it for its performance, journals metadata only. So files won't be lost, but their contents may be. ReiserFS is very similar. EXT3, while much clunkier, does data journaling as well. For these reasons I use XFS on
Jeremy
Hey, soon this SuperSite will provide links to gnu.org Go go go Thurrott...
...between ext2 and ext3? Or, for that matter, jfs?
+$.01+$.01.
Screenshots look better the widgets, esp. important for print media.
filesystems...oh never mind. It's good that they get what will hopefully be a true journalling filesystem. But I'm not really one for eyecandy. Oh well, you can't make everyone happy.
"You tried your best and failed miserably. The lesson is...never try. Heh!" -Homer
Microsoft makes money by selling you updates (that you don't need) and fixes (that you should not pay for). INTEL makes money by selling the hardware that meets the system requirements of the software MS makes. The cycle is repeated every year.
I can understand why there is some increase in interface size, particularly as monitor resolution and size increases.
What I don't understand is this: WHY IS WINDOWS LONGHORN SO UGLY?? All that blue gives me a headache and I can't make heads or tails of the UI.
sig my booty, check my website
"In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years."
4 years from now Slashdot will have a headline about how KDE's 3D accelerated desktop finally reached version 1.
"Derp de derp."
Anyone judging anything in these pre-alpha releases is just looking for something to bash.
"Sufferin' succotash."
As has been pointed out, the "we had journalling a long time ago MS losers" bashing has backfired.
What WOULD be a great innovation for the Windows world is a filesystem which does not suffer from fragmentation. (And this truly has been in the UNIX world for ages).
my
You posted the definition for a journalling filesystem.
That gets "+5" around here?
Someone was karma whoring.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Windows is Dead, Microsoft just ran out ideas and decided to copy from everyone else. One day Linux will be a more highly respected system that the home user can use. Can you say Lindows
but does it have a command line only mode?
This nice article can be a good start for collecting some cool ideas for Linux WM's. I'm using blackbox and although I like its minimalist approach the future of desktop computers is clearly in the 'eye candy and preformance' department. I think even Apple's X interface GUI success shows that. So maybe we should get humble (again) and look in to windows/apple WM's and try to get few good ideas for Linux WM. I think Linux WM is aboslutley behind the Apple/Windows people. Lets face it: all good WM's with bad GUI's will have a serious Windows/Apple competition.
I can work fine in linux as a CLI, but I simply didn't/don't know enough about windows managers to fix the error. It had something to do with the taskbar in whatever Redhat's default WM is crashing, the taskbar would disappear, restart, then immediately crash again, a never ending cycle rendering the WM useless.
sig.
Exactly. Let's not forget that MS has invested heavily in usability testing and that KDE and Gnone have borrowed many of the same features that Windows uses.
Also, people do like to customise their own machines with themes, etc and that we all like to work on a machine that 'feels good'.
The NT line has been using NTFS for over a decade now.
The submitter of the article was simply an idiot looking to mention "Linux" in some way in a Slashdot article summary.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Dude, you should use a RAM-based filesystem for /tmp. You shouldn't rely on /tmp being persistent across a reboot.
I believe (if I'm not mistaken) ramfs is the way to go for /tmp. It's a RAM disk that can push to swap as needed. The reason you want to do this is that most temporary files exist for less than 30 seconds. Thus, there's never any reason to touch the disk for these unless there is simply not enough RAM.
If a RAM-based fs doesn't turn your crank, then just use the one that performs the best for losts of short-lived small to medium-sized files.
--JoeProgram Intellivision!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The style is just a place holder. The final style will be completely different.
Clearly not a chemist. It'd be fun to see how well your purely functional car would do without being painted. Maybe you should try scratching your car's paintjob if you think it's so unimportant.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Well, ext3 has the data=journal option which journals _everything_ including file contents. There is no disk write cache.
About this 'transaction based' stuff... the question is does any user application support transactions? If I run 'rm *.o' in a directory and the system crashes halfway through the rm command, is the state rolled back to what it was before the command started? I doubt it. Each individual unlink() call might count as a transaction, but unlink() is supposed to be atomic anyway.
It would be neat if filesystem transactions were available to applications. For example, take the most obvious way to save a file that is currently open in an editor: truncate the file and write it out again. Without transactions this is horribly unsafe, the system might crash after truncating or there just might not be enough disk space to write the new version. But if you could write code to do:
begin_transaction();
ftruncate(fh, 0);
write(fh, buf, size);
end_transaction();
it would be just fine. (Of course, you'd need to check the return value from end_transaction() to make sure everything went okay... you might even check the individual ftruncate() and write() calls in order to bail out early.)
Similarly, shell commands could be an individual transaction. So if you said 'tar x archive.tar' then it would be guaranteed that either the whole archive unpacks successfully, or the filesystem is untouched. Who knows, this might even make shell scripts a reliable way to write small programs.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
http://www.apple.com/powerbook/index12.html
http://www.averatec.com/notebooks/3120.html
As you see... And the Averatec is lighter and can be purchased for $800 everyday... I got my for $720 from best buy with $250 in mail in rebates.
The only non-issue is the CD burner in the powerbook. That isn't something I desire in a portable.
It's because they want the OS to work with tablet computers that use a stylus type interface. Oversized buttons are a lot easier to interact with when using a stylus.
yes, and you have used this in your code? you should provide sampels of your code using this on an enterprise scale. oh, wait, you're a .NET "hacker." so once again your microsoft MSDN unproven fud is spewed as a simple mirror of fluff on the MSDN. pure, anectdotal, basles,s experienceless FUD, lies, half-truths.
you are a liar, a fraud, sham, someone put you in that box, to die. hehhe. oh man this guy is timeless.
Actually, as far as I know, only RedHat uses ext3 as a default FS.
Most others use ReiserFS. And with good reason too. In just about every test I've read, ext3 is slower than reiser, and I think it also has scalibility issues.
I'm talking about WinFS, which will be using technology from the Yukon engine, which will indeed be included in Longhorn. You can already see the search dialog gearing up for when this will happen in a future milestone release.
They are integrating database capabilities into the filesystem. See those "Library" folders in the screenshots? Those are just filters that search for pictures and so forth. Picture Library lists all the pictures on your hard drive. The filesystem allows for detailed metadata searches.
Has anyone read anything about Longhorn? I thought everyone knew about this. Apparently not.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Recently, there was a Slashdot article [slashdot.org] here about a "piles" feature that Apple had patented in June 2001 that sounds very familiar. Screenshot of piles [mac.com] here looks different, but the concepts appear similar:
:-) (double click an end point when you want to follow a link)
It doesn't much look like Apple's "Piles" but more like PARC's Hyperbolic Tree, of 1994. This bit of software was spun off into a company named Inxight. Navigate their website using a Hyperbolic Tree. (good to see they eat their own dog food.)
If M$ finds a good use for Hyperbolic Tree navigation in Longhorn, more power to them. I have played with it off and on since 1998 and have found that without a mega-huge (as in 1600*1200+) resolution screen, you can't get much out of it.
...an unintuitive interface, ...Microsoft really are trying to create their own OSX!
:)
limited customisation,
frequent minor upgrades that make no difference,
application preferences that you can't control,
lots of unexplained OS options,
poor documentation,
display settings that aren't preserved when you open new folders,
useless graphical transition effects,
transparency that causes massive slowdown,
one crashing application managing to take down your system,
slow start-up times,
still no built in compatibility with non-native file systems...
For those people that think I'm trolling, I'm not -- I really do have all these problems with OSX. OSX may be intuitive if you've used a Mac OS before but it sure as hell isn't for anyone else (in my experience).
If only Broadcom released Airport drivers for Linux, I could dump OSX once and for all
Manta
Yes, NTFS is a journaling filesystem.
The poster made might not be aware of this.
1.) This is pre-alpha. You're an idiot if you're judging it as the next version of Windows.
.NET.
2.) They're moving away from Win32 and going to
3.) Hardware-acceleration.
4.) WinFS, a database filesystem which uses the upcoming Yukon SQL engine.
5.) Various other little features, such as the ability to add and remove RAM without rebooting (Windows Server 2003 currently only allows adding) and changes to the way hardware is listed and handled by the user.
Of course, Slashbots will call it all "eye candy" and ignore the feature changes. Simply because it's Microsoft.
"Sufferin' succotash."
my code is under NDA, sorry.
Did anyone else notice that a slideshow option is in almost every longhorn screenshot?
...actually, those big riceboy rear wings do get in the way of going fast. But the stickers, blue led window washers, etc., I suppose, counteract that.
It has been reported that the big huge wing on Lamborghini Countach/Diablos is good for sucking off a good 10-20 MPH from their top-end speed.
I think the 3D acellerated desktop is nice from a "let's offload the graphic chores off the CPU" point of view, and I definitely look forward to the added capabilities that'd be involved like smooth rescaling etc, but I am a little concerned that MS is overlooking an under-utilized aspect of the UI. Sound.
.wav file that's playing.
Now, spare me the "No no, computers should be quiet" lectures because I'm not proposing making the noisy or obnoxious. Rather, I'd like for MS to provide more sound options to add. For example, it'd be cool if progress bars could alter the pitch of a
It may not be immediately obvious to people why anybody'd propose this, to them I say "think about the information your unblinking ear could receive." A lot of us listen to music while using our computer, right? Well why not provide some extra cues as to what your machine's doing?
I like to multi-task. I do 3D stuff and find my computer chewing up CPU cycles for minutes at a time. While it's doing that, I fool around on Slashdot or IM or whatever else is entertaining. Sometimes, though, I don't realize when it's done. I just keep an eye on task manager. It'd be nice if I could set up progress bars to generate a tone or drum beat that changes as the process gets closer to finished. I'd like to be able to have scrollbars provide clicking noises to let me know how far they've moved, that way when I use the wheel to move I can have an audio cue to let me know that.
If I put more time into brainstorming ideas, I'm sure I could cook up a lot of useful things to cue sound effects off to. Sadly, though, I don't always have access to them. I'm a little bummed about that. Adding sounds to Opera to let me know things like when a page is opened has given me a lot of insight into what the machine's doing under my active window.
Now, again, before everybody tells me how annoying that'd be, consider that every video game you play has a lot of sound effects, and your computer has a volume control. I'd like MS to explore more audio related UI experiences so I have more to play with. That doesn't necessarily mean I want everybody's computer to sound like R2-D2.
"Derp de derp."
OK, the first four I think I understand. If someone could tell me what a thread, an event, or any of those other synchronization objects look like I'd appreciate it.
keep up the good work.
When I tested Longhorn a couple of months ago with M2 (i think it was), shortly after booting I noticed that it was consuming 306 out of the 320 megabytes of RAM in my computer. With no programs running besides whatever happened to load on startup with the default configuration.
I don't care how good or bad the shell is if I am only left with 14 megabytes of RAM to run my programs after booting.
Ever heard of a little called GDI+?
"Sufferin' succotash."
under NDA. hahahahah. so you can say anything your want "from experience" then hide behind an NDA? you sound more like a fucking BEAUROCRAT than a fucking programmer FUD machine regurgitating microsoft zealot liar fud fraud dumber doll.
BEAUROCRAT. Mundie Ballmer ball licking fucking lout liar FUD machine.
This is becoming off-topic but there are reasons not to use ReiserFS, i.e. it's not supported by Ghost or DriveImage, it's not as mature, and as mentioned elsewhere, it doesn't do data journalling.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
tmpfs is actually even better. I resizes itself as need, so it only takes up as much memory as is needed.
Spencer Ogden
Uh, right, that would be why half my ext3 partitions have 20%+ fragmentation (as reported by fsck), and no way to get rid of it.
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
Why do you call it intrusive?
The dock can be:
1) Resized.
2) Set to "auto-hide."
3) Removed entirely.
Assuming that all of your windows/linux programs have menus, you can just move all of them up to the top of the display and that's what the menu bar is. Only it's more useful than that because it can also show the time, weather, battery power, date, volume...
Just wondering what your specific problem with it was...
Justin
The EULA in Windows Longhorn will pretty much be "All your base are belong to us".
That's just wrong on several levels.
First of all, the file system is not consistent after a crash: journaling file systems need to replay the journal in order to make it consistent. This is no different in principle from non-journaling file systems (which, traditionally, also have incorporated various features to permit recovery), it just happens to be faster.
Second, I/O APIs usually do not define a notion of "transaction" at the file system level, and even if they do, there aren't a whole lot of guarantees you can make that are particularly useful. In fact, journaling file systems and transaction-based file systems really are very different things. A journaling file system can be used to implement a transaction-based file system, but it can also be used just to implement fast recovery.
Third, for performance reasons, very few journaling file systems journal file content; they only worry about meta-data. And NTFS falls back a step further by making particularly weak guarantees. For example, if I create files "a", "b", and "c" in that sequence, with three separate programs, after a crash, any combination of those files may be present, and their content may be arbitrarily messed up.
So does ramfs. The difference between tmpfs and ramfs is that tmpfs is swappable, whereas ramfs is pinned in RAM. tmpfs is definititely the preferred choice for /tmp.
My ex girlfriend used to call me Long Horn.
I have prior art.
--
This sig intentionally left blank
what
Journaling file systems are, what, a couple of decades old? Microsoft didn't invent them. Apple didn't invent them. The real question is: what took either of them so long to incorporate them?
Actually, from what I remember, ReiserFS is far more mature and stable than ext3. Ext3 is the johnny come lately to the journaling scene, and it's still got a lot of kinks.
And the point about DriveImage/Ghost may not be true, as they actually just read the partition at a very low level.
I couldn't care less about the "look and feel" of the latest windows desktop. It amazes me how they can take their device manager, and change it so that every component ends with the word "class", and expect us to be amazed and enthralled. Windows is basically beginning to look like the world's worst Linux distro.
But its from Microsoft. This is not an anti MS rant but when MS do some thing it always terns out crap!!!!
I have Mac OS X and it is quite annoying when the applications on the dock bounced when opening (I turned it off). I can only imagine what will happen when Longhorn comes out and some dude over at Scumco
Spyware company realizes he can take advantage of all the 3d accelerated goodness. Imagine having spyware programs causing offers for viagra and porn sites to coming flying across the screen and tons of stuff bouncing around. It would annoy me beyond belief. Just to recap Spyware and 3d accelerated desktops just don't mix.
"Guns don't kill people, bullets do."
My statement about ext3 being more mature than ReiserFS is based on the fact that ext3 is a journal add-on to the now very mature ext2; that is it's an evolution of an older filesystem, not the revolution that is ReiserFS.
DriveImage / Ghost: the web pages for these apps state support for only ext2; indeed one of them Ghost, I think) says specifically ReiserFS is NOT supported.
Anyway, OT.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
In one of the captions: "The taskbar, Start Menu, and sidebar are almost infinitely configurable. " Where infinity is approximately equal to four. -- The Gecko of Mysteries
Snarfle.
NTFS is a journaling file system, and Longhorn has a more advanced journaling file system that Linux can't not match. The new file system will classify files for you, from word document to mp3 files. You only need to type in keywords like "Picture taken in Feburary by John" it will show up a list of picture taken in Feburary by the name John. It is too powerful that Linux is still way behind.
If you're interested in backing up Reiser partitions, check out PartImage. It does a fair few different file systems, and is GPL.
..to defrag drives (including NTFS). Right-click on the drive icon, hit the "tools" tab. Press the "defragment" button.
Yes, it isn't as fully-featured as the one you can buy in the store - but the companies that make those (+ the virus scanners & backup utilities) for the Microsoft markets have always been somewhat parasitic in their overvaluing their products to Joe End User.
The very best way to defrag a drive is to copy the data to another drive, delete it from the first drive, then copy the data back.
i thought the most obvious way to save a file in a text editor was
1)rename existing file to file~
2)write buffer to new file with original name
thats what most unix editors do, and it seems to work pretty well
Need a Catering Connection
...Apple won't preview OS X 10.3 until June, and won't release it until September-- so Microsoft has nothing to copy yet.
Could be very useful, thanks!
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
OK, it looks nice - but after a while eye candy gets boring. This is simply to attract people into buying it (they think it looks nice - so it will perform better)(!). Obviously you can bet DRM will be hidden inside. The eye candy is the bait.
Do you understand Longhorn is pre-aplha? Obviously not.
A few points:
(1) Though I'm sure MS will fuck it up, just because you have 3D acceleration on the desktop doesn't mean you need to have 2D acceleration.
(2) 3D acceleration would be useful because it would allow you to offlay some things from the CPU to the GPU that are normally put on the CPU when you just use 2D acceleration to accelerate a desktop.
(3) Xfree86 should work on this. It would be a useful feature to have for any WM that takes advantage of it.
(4) This is not an excuse to make an eye-candy laden desktop like MacOSX. We do not need genie-effects or rotating windows, or any animations. They are all useless and serve no purpose, other than for impressive press-conferences. At best, these animations are useful for a very novice user who does not know what happens to windows when you minimize them, or shade them. They are of no use to anyone who's used to OS for more than a few minutes.
I'm still trying to find a way to eliminate the quick animation in WindowMaker's pop-up menus (if you stick a menu so that it's title-bar is just at the bottom of the screen, it becomes like an Apple universal menu, and u can get the rest of it by moving hte mouse to the screen's extremity. Unfortunately, when it pops up, that is animated. Blah.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
i thought the most obvious way to save a file in a text editor was...
No, the most obvious way to save a file in a text editor is to come up with a new and completely different method for each program. What's the fun of being a programmer if you don't get to invent your own way to do stuff?
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
You can change the size of the Dock, turn off (or change the amount of) magnification. You can make the desktop icons, and any icons in folders and so on almost any size you want.
Just because by default the icons and Dock are quite big doesn't mean you should just ditch it.
You can go from 128x128 down to 16x16 I think, and a huge range of sizes in between.
Also, the icons resize dynamically, even on my humble 600Mhz iBook so you can find a happy medium without having to change, click apply, change, click apply (or in the case of windows, change, click apply, reboot twice etc etc).
Ok, it was tmpfs that I was thinking of. You definitely want /tmp to be swappable.
--JoeProgram Intellivision!
Bear in mind that Microsoft (and Apple) are essentially in the business of making interfaces for people too dumb to handle anything that lets you access the system more directly. As a result their UI designers go to town with the big easy to click buttons and bright primary colours strongly reminiscent of fisher price toys.
If you want a Window manager that just organises things nicley and otherwise gets the f^ck out of your way then one of the *box (blackbox, fluxbox etc) ones is probably for you. Even if Linux is not to your taste then I have seen a screen shot of BlackBox running on Windows 98 here.
I find that using Fluxbox (on top of Linux) gives me about as much space with a 1280x1024 display as most people seem to get on a 1600x1200 display.
Beep beep.
_My sister comes and sits down in front of MacOSX, and she's like, "wtf do these colored butons -- green, yellow, red -- mean?_ Yes, because there certainly isn't any real-life metaphor for a set of circles that are red, yellow and green. Intuitive means that it's easy for someone who has never used a computer before, not for someone who has used Windows all thier life (by your definition, "intuitive" means "the same way Windows does it").
"Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
This is not true. ext3 and ext2 have the same disk representation but they don't share code, at all. The fact that ext2 is mature doesn't really help ext3. People think ext3 is just ext2 with a few hacks to add journalling but it's actually a block level implementation of a journaling filesystem that just happens to use the same disk layout as ext2 for convenience. Your statement is sort of like saying that the NTFS code in Linux is mature because Windows has had NTFS for a few years now.
Pedro Côrte-Real.
Hmmm. NTFS has had journaling since it came out. Which was 1994ish or so. Slashdot isn't the same anymore, so many technical issues mentioned now are inacurate. And last time I checked most of us Linux folks got it from the normal distros about a year ago.
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/4015_15 1.png
Seriously, the colors are cool but strong colors effect productivity. Light hues or grays which the standard Windows desktop is modeled after is actually designed to make you productive. Just ask any physcologist or go to any modern school. Dark gui's however do excite emotions which Microsoft wants so people buy more of their products. Amazing!
I wonder how modifiable the gui is.
http://saveie6.com/
Given I haven't claimed any real benefits, I'm not sure there's anything to disagree with either. Unless you're talking about the original writeup?
But if you want to talk about benefits, here are some:
10% to 15% more CPU available to the user, instead of being eaten up by the graphics; graphics will necessarily become more complex as we get bigger desktops and displays, since there's more information to display, and more techniques to display them in useful manners, so offloading this to the GPU means less 'stolen' from the CPU
An example of this would be using color, graphics, and motion to present information, rather than strictly black and white text. In this manner the user is spared information overload because instead the computer is performing work to do so.
A list of 100 files in a folder is hard to quickly scan if they are in text form only. One solution is to use color coding, such that protected read only files are a shade of grey, while system files that can only be accessed by root or super-users are red, program files are orange, and user files are blue. Then you've got icons sitting next to each file so that, at a glance, you can differentiate the photos from the documents from the movies. Heck, you might even have the movies with animated filmstrip icons, while music has animated waveforms...
You see what I mean? Each time we apply more complicated UI, it eats up CPU, and using the GPU to handle most of this means we have more CPU.
GPL Deconstructed
I'm a 3D Computer Graphic Artist and i must say i'm not thrilled by the fact that the UI from Longhorn will be rendered with DirectX.
I use 3D applications like Maya, Softimage and 3DS Max.
Meaning if the interfaces of those apps are going to be rendered using the GPU's computational power, in exchange i will have to work slower in the 3D viewports.
The 3D viewports are accelarated by either directX, openGL which use the GPU extensively.
As an artist i feel this is going to hurt my workflow.
Sure i will be able to render faster in the end, maybe just 1% faster.
But i'll bet i'm going to have to suffer a loss of 30% in workflow speed in the viewports, because of this system.
2D or 3D, it doesn't matter, it uses the graphics/video card which is the holy grail to all 3D and 2D artists.
I'll bet matte painters in photoshop/painter will suffer tremendous loss of brush rendering speed that is based on 2D acceleration.
I'm holding my breath, a fancy UI does not weigh up against performance and workflow in my field.
Professionals just want raw performance and do not care about these stupid effects if it harms the framerate in their viewports or brush rendering speed.
When you work at canvas resolutions of 8000*5000 you are going to feel this performance hit.
When you work with high-end high poly 3D scenes....you are going to feel this performance hit.
i noticed this guy caused a lot of problems here lately, some guy or some number of people seem rather upset.
i probably have the most right to be angry with Haken, as he has stolen my intellectual property verbatim on several occasions.
uh yeah? well, how about defragging them then?
Also, perhaps another blocksize would help too.
my
So, when you save a picture, do you have to fill out a questionaire? I can picture it now:
.jpg extention. This must be a picture. If you're not comfortable with extentions, I can hide these for you in the future. Please take a moment to fill out this questionaire in order to save your file.
Clippy: I see that you're trying to save a file. I see that this file has a
1. Is this a photo? yes no
2. Did you take this photo? yes no
3. If you didn't take this photo, do you have the legal right to save this file to your hard-drive? yes no
4. If you didn't take this photo, please type in the Name and Social Security Number of whoever did take this photo. (No information is being sent to Microsoft at this time).:
5. If you're ready to save this, please click Yes. If not, please click No. If you'd like some time to think about it, click Later. If you'd like more information about Microsoft's revolutionary new file system, click Help.
OK. Please stand by as the information about this file is verified with Microsoft (note: you need an internet connection to proceed. Click Set Up My Internet Now to commit to a 12-month subscription to Microsoft Windows (formerly MSN) and to activate access to your hard-drive.). Once we've verified your legal right to save this file to your hard-drive, you'll be given a short (5-7 minute) questionaire to provide further details about this file to make finding it easier the next time you plan to view it with Microsoft Photo Monkey. Thank you for choosing Microsoft!
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
Notice how he quotes Microsoft Trustworthy Computing(palidum) like it's some kind of great feature? Im personally a little scared that this is deffinetly slated for release in longhorn. We need to start warning our relatives and friends about this kind of crap or it's going to make it in for sure. If that crap gets put into the hardware too we're done for and we can kiss our freely configurable computers and software goodbye.
Jartan
In the short period of 2 years since the initial release of Mac OS X, Apple has produced 2 major and numerous minor upgrades with significant performance improvement and lots of new features, in addition to shipping an impressive array of innovative hardwares (iPod, Xserve, Xserve RAID, LCD iMac, 17" PowerBook with slot-loading DVD burner, FireWire 800, BlueTooth, 54 mbps 802.11g AirPort Extreme, Gigabit Ethernet) and highly sophisticated software tools such as iLife, iSync, iCal, Keynote, Safari, Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Shake, Logic, WebObjects, FileMaker Pro, AppleWorks, Rendezvous, QuickTime 6, iTunes Music Store, and so on.
But what has the biggest software company done in the same time frame? Surprisingly, very few. Other than the countless security patches plus a Win XP Service Pack and Windows 2003 Server, the only things that come from Redmond are hypes.
Longhorn is officially a 2005 product with very few features to brag about, and may well be delayed to 2006 or later if the track record of MS is anything to go by.
It's just incredible that a small hardware company like Apple has somehow developed a bigger and better software portofolio than the most powerful company in the world , and frankly embarrassing when considering that MS is 60 times bigger than Apple.
Hah, the author is going to WinHEC in 2003. I've been living there since 1990.
Am I the only one who thinks there's nothing lower on the food chain than a Windows fanatic? Like the guy on that webpage, or the creepy wind-bags in PC Magazine? As a Linux Geek, at least I have a clue as to how and why things work; rather than a boner from the latest cute icons and wallpapers.
Cripes.
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
Jonah Hex
Horror & SciFi Erotic Nudes
It's open to debate which one's more stupid, though.
hahaha, once again linux users proud of a feature even os/2 had before them.
pigfukr
Oh. I get it now. You just have the order wrong:
That makes perfect sense now.[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
Take a look at your car. Do you really think it's design makes it much more aerodynamic, or do you think it's just the same eye-candy?
I think it's a little of both.
What about the paint?
On my car, it helps protect the metal under it.
What about the hubcaps
To protect the hub, lugs?
I don't have any flashing lights on the interior that never serve any real purpose, so I don't know about those.
that is the most freakishly huge taskbar I have ever seen!
dear sweet lord.
-
Actually, I'm not. I've never posted here AC-style. I'm willing to back up my opinions. I _have_ heard of 2D acceleration. Simply put, you can't make the damn thing move as fast or look as good with only 2D composition.
the next versions of windows will give Linux a run for its money in speed and stability.. yes stability. The new corporate mandate about security will be giving other OS's a run for there money as well. ;)
For the first time, Windows has a reason to do this. Large corporate partners have said, tighten up or we are out.
That doesn't mean Linux will loose people that believe in Open Source, unfortunatly, we are in the minority.
I don't like to be The Harbinger of Doom(tm) and I hope somebody wil write a killer app for linux. I just don't see it happening. Oh well, I've always wanted to be a MAC user anyways...
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
like:
... most developers are content with those features. Until developpers of toyish things like SuperKaramba, and things like hacking advanced graphic features into XFree (which you need to be 45 years old to do in order to understand X and be allowed to commit code) are as important and paid as well as as apache developers and kernel hackers, the new OSS Unices (commericial Unix being mostly dead on the desktop) will be as ugly as the old ones. Yes I am in the camp that says OS/X is NOT Unix and it is NOT "a BSD" (it uses BSD userland that's about it). The engineering workstation market used to be Unix terrirtory but those days are long gone.
* a convenient login widget
* easy to use admin tools for login access
* more convenient and innovative UI metaphors
Instead open source continously copies a 2-3 year out of date commercial UI. OS/X and Longhorn beat Linux hands down on the desktop - even if they didn't have applications the UI and much of the underlying technology is better for consumer use.
Now, granted, BSD and Linux will blow OS/X and Longhorn out of the water on serving static webpages, running MySQL, Zope and sending e-mail
And re: on GUI elements of desktop dominance no one seems to consider advanced storage and filesystem features like ACL, EA, indexing and database features, etc. as all that important. ReiserFS might enable this sort of this 10 years in the future but it doesn't provide it at the user level.
Well.. as usual, new things look great.
However, I don't think that MS will fix fundamental problems with Windows.
"Seems to work. Broken often..."
And.. as for the UI, it looks pretty, but takes too much screen space.
have a 3d BSOD!!
In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years. Um... what happened to NTFS? Seems to me that that's a journaling filesystem and has been used in several releases of Windows... all if not most of the NT line and XP, I believe.
oderint dum metuant - Caligula ("Let them hate us, so long as they fear us")
What about the paint? Paint jobs are pretty silly things, by your logic. They cost money and all they do is act as eye-candy.
If it wasn't for paint, your car would rust through in a month.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"...wait for us! - to catch up with MacOS".
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The only metaphor that holds is red, you dolt. How does green imply 'maximize'? Maybe for go, but that's a streth. And how does yellow imply minimize? Come on. That's fucking bullshit.
/\. Gee, kind of implies "up down" as in, "make large, make small".
I can see it as a good thing in parallel to the symbols, but simply not having the symbols and just having red, yellow, and green makes no sense.
X is a good metaphor for close. X, as in EXIT. X, as in what you put on things you no longer want. What do you do when you have a large diagram that you want to get rid of? You put an X through it.
WindowMaker's triangle for minimize is also a good metaphor. Triangle, implying change in size -- diminuendo. It even is oriented inthe right direction (larger on the left, smaller on the right) to imply going from large to small. Unfortunately, a tweak is required to get this. Also, unfortunately, the default in wmaker implies window-shading more than minimization.
The most logical way to do it would be as follows:
Close: X
Maximize: Crescendo triangle (smaller on left, larger on right...this, reading left to right, implies getting larger).
Minimize: Diminuendo triangle (larger on left, smaller on right...thus, reading left to right, implied getting smaller).
Shade: none needed. Double-click on title-bar.
Ah, yes, if you wanted to be really smart, you'd put close on the far right side (compliance with MSS is to some degree a good thing), and the maximize and minimize buttons on the far left side, facing eachother, so as to produce an up-down hill, with maximize on the far left and minimize directly to the left of it. The effect would be as follows:
Now, if you want to talk about color-coding, the only color that makes logical sense would be red for close. You can color-code the rest, and it would be useful -- people learn color-coded things better -- but not logical, nor would it provide any immediate help.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
it not so much about making the interface bigger, it's about trying to move away from the fact that one pixel is no longer a definite size. How do you see a font that is 10 pixels high on a 300dpi screen?
Basically, Apple and MS are trying to make everything a vector so that the entire interface can be scaled in real-time to whatever size you want. The higher the resoultion of the screen, the sharper the text is, without making it so small you can't read it.
It would be cool but would cause a lot of issues with concurrency and locking.
Makes me remember how I miss BFS. That was a kick-ass FS.
I spend hours a week searching for the best looking backgrounds. I change my WindowManagers more times than my underwear, and I can say Longhorn is just eye candy. At least OSX has a new and improved backend (BSD). And what is M$ going to do? If it's anything like their defragging utility, they'll take out X, say you don't need it. Company Y will make Tons by selling X. X will be released with Longhorn2,it will suck. Company Y will make more $$$, and then get bought out by M$ in a couple of years.
I thought the most obvious way to save a file was:
Rik
Damn it..
Vehicle Stars used car search is my current project
1)rename existing file to file~
2)write buffer to new file with original name
thats what most unix editors do, and it seems to work pretty well
If they do, I am pretty sorry for Unix. If this is what IBM brought to Linux, I am sorry for Linux too.
A better way to save file is
1) write buffer to new temp file
2) flush this file to disk, so the data is not lost
3) rename temp file to original file
This way in case of crash original file will either contain old content or new content, but you can't end with situation when it does not exist at all (unlike your algorithms).
MSDOS: 20+ years without remote hole in the default install
(1) This UI is crap. Flashy and distracting.
(2) Check out MS' media-player thing on the 'dock'? Can we say "appicon"?
Really, where is all this innovation MS is talking about?
That spider-web like file-system navigation? Nothing new. There were 3D versions of stuff like that back in 1994 with Jurassic Park.
The problem MS and Apple face is that there really isn't anything much more to do. WindowManagers are already pretty much ok. Maybe a few tweaks here and there would fix minor flaws. However, nothing particularly major need be done. It's sort of like the design for the trashcan (real-life). When was the last innovation in trash-cans?
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
Face it, it doesn't matter that you know Windows. It sucks. Unless you want to suck too you better move on....
This absolutely is different in principle from non-journaled filesystems. A journaled filesystem can just wind backward to the last consistent state. A non-journaled filesystem may have no consistent state and may have to recreate one by fsck'ing the whole disk. An instructive example: when you delete a file, it removed the file's directory entry and puts the files blocks back on the free list. If your computer crashes during this time, one of those operations may happen without the other: your file exists, but its blocks have been marked for reuse, or the file is gone but the blocks still can't be reused. Only an fsck-walk of every file can discover this, which is what takes so damn long when booting non-journaled filesystems after a crash. With a journal, either neither or both of the operations would have committed, leaving you in a consistent state very quickly.
Put another way: a non-journaled filesystem must be checked after a crash. A journaled filesystem only needs to have any partial operations played or rewound; everything not mentioned in the journal is guaranteed to be consistent. You can still, of course, lose any dirty buffers in the block cache.
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
the original mac os's titlebar buttons were just stupid. a little square for close? that's ridiculous. and as for a menu that has open programs, that is very hard for anyone to understand and use often like everyone needs.
M$ mounts still look pathetic. Another poster says you still have the dreaded c:, despite the ability to use other drives as directories. I doubt you can set up a 50 MB root partition and have all go well from there, so intelligent disk management has not yet arived in Redmond. Nor has easy management arived. I count four non obvious interface level navigations and seven mouse click to change a mount. Editing /etc/fstab is trivial by compairison. They still have "My Documents" type stuff like "My Music", undoubtably placed someplace obtuse like "c:/windblows/users/defaultpeon/desktop/my documents/". File navagation? Some things never change.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I know many FreeBSD developers that can say the same as you "i am under NDA", but have non NDA code samples all over the place.
I find it very hard to believe a serious programmer has no significant open code.
Judging from your inability to get technical, I would surmse you are a sham and incapable of programming kernels, libraries and compilers or complicated parsers.
This way in case of crash original file will either contain old content or new content, but you can't end with situation when it does not exist at all (unlike your algorithms).
Your method will destroy symlinks. Once you rename the temp file to the new file, if the new file was a symlink, well now it's not anymore. It's a regular file, and the original is now orphaned. Worse, it may have been a symlink to allow several users to share it transparently (I've done that with Kab), and now you have users using different copies again, and not even knowing it.
No, I don't have a better solution. :)
Like what I said? You might like my music
"In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years."
I am a linux geek since the days of slackware 4, and I didn't have a jounaling file system until two years ago using ext3. Was there an earlier production level jfs that I didn't know about??
Look here for one of several knowledgeable accounts of the history behind Microsoft's TCP/IP stack that are floating around the web.
Please be more careful before you declare that something has been proven.
Those are all very culturally-limited metaphors; it's a very high priority that the design be as international as possible; if you have to modify even your basic window contols, localized documentation and support is going to be a nightmare. It's certainly a high priority that the metaphors at least hold up for Japan and other huge markets. _X is a good metaphor for close. X, as in EXIT._ Only in certain langauges _Maximize: Crescendo triangle (smaller on left, larger on right...this, reading left to right, implies getting larger)._ Only in RTL scripts The traffic light metaphor is very widespread; the basic association between Red->Stop->Close and Green->Go->Expand, and association that works without language, is very clever. I'm not saying it's perfect, but among people I've taught to use computers on OS X vs, XP, they seem to get it a little faster with the colors, because once you understand the metaphor, you can figure out that yellow will be an intermediate state and feel free to experiment with it, whereas XP uses symbols that require individual explanation (XP's maximize icon certanly makes less sense than OS X's + icon: it shows you a picture of a window, without explaining what will happen to the window). Now, the up/down triangles (as opposed to left/right ones that only make sense in cultures with RTL scripts) are a good idea, and lots of themes for all of the OSes use that; it's just not relevant to a OS X v. XP argument. My point was simply that the OS X system is equally if not more _intuitive_, and what you were talking about was the fact that it is merely _different from Windows_, which made it difficult for someone used to Windows to use.
"Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
If a graphics card that supports 3d rendering is specialized to you, then maybe you need to get caught up on some stuff.
they just don't understand windows is a BSOD-arama have to reboot every single time You know it's fact People use Windows because they don't know any better.
That and FUD.
They are brainwashed and unaware
They are brainwashed and unaware
They are brainwashed and unaware
They are brainwashed and unaware
They are brainwashed and unaware
They are brainwashed and unaware
They are brainwashed and unaware
They are brainwashed and unaware
Ahh, I know that problem. Usually not to hard to fix if you read the error messages (to stderr - not in the graphical box) but that means having to know how to do so and of course knowing what the errors mean. I'm not overly a fan of either Gnome or KDE's desktop enviroments. In a lot of ways I think they are getting worse with maturity rather than better.
If you want a very simple WM try BlackBox or it's even simpler child HackedBox. Being much simpler than Gnome or KDE they also have far fewer problems. Not exactly user-friendly but my none-geek sister figured out how to use it in under five minutes so it isn't that horrible. I had to compile HackedBox myself but it wasn't difficult. I still use Gnome/KDE apps - just not their desktop or window managers.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
I absolutely love Windows 2000 Pro, I've never had a problem with it... but it seems that the further along we get I like their OS's less and less. XP sucks, Longhorn seems to build on that so my switch to Linux is innevitable I just hope Adobe (yes, yes... the gimp, I know... I don't like it as much) and Macromedia wise up before I have to make the jump. :)
sig.
Because a changing tone would interfere with your music?
You should chat with Carnage4life. He claims to be a MS intern and mentioned some time ago that somewhere in MS they were working on a UI spec that included 4.1 surround sound and audio cues. My responce is that their working environment is very different than the average workspace.
The vast majority of my work environments have involved shared workspace; be it divided offices or cube farms. The trend seems to be going towards additional methods of shared workspace rather than the other way.
Heck - even at home there tend to be 2 or 3 desktops being used at any given time. Granted, my household isn't average. Additional pops and whirs might make more sense in one's own room, dorm, home office, etc.
But in the majority of environments, sound becomes a distraction. For me, I use music as a way to zone in on what I'm doing (headphones go on, volume goes up, and someone has to wave at my rear-view monitor mirror to get my attention - or send email). I wouldn't want additional audio cueus interfering with my music or turning my office in to a soundtrack from Star Trek's Origional Series.
it be less confusing to call it Windows XP 2 ?
When anger rises, think of the consequences.
Confucius (551 BC - 479 BC)
Do NOT click that link. Domain name says it all.
I'm careful about encouraging people to switch. I love using Linux but I know it's not a solution to every problem (yet).
:)
If there are things you feel are missing in Linux I suggest joining some Linux user groups and asking questions. Maybe a program for that function does exist. If not you can help seed it's existence by giving some of us programmers the idea to work on it. Think about donating a little cash to these programmers when you can afford it. If you send $50 on a commercial program donate $5 to a opensource project working on an alternative. If there is a successful opensource product that competes with your commercial program and runs on Linux it'll be motivation to port that commercial program to Linux. You'll then have choices. Choices are good for you as a consumer. I call that the anti-monopoly tax. Donate 1/10th of your software buying money to opensource projects.
Be sure to tell those companies how you feel. Really that is the only way to get commecial interest in Linux. There has to be a large enough user base interested in their products or they simply can't afford to support Linux.
Switching your OS isn't an easy choice. It's like moving to a new city. Those comfortable old friends will be gone and you'll make new friends. Some of the new friends will be great but you'll still miss your old friends now and then. You won't know your way around for a while and you'll have to learn how to get places again. How well your move works out for you depends a lot on the choices you make. Give yourself time to adapt to your move.
Think of Windows as Las Vegas and Linux as New Orleans. Vegas is bright and flashy. You have plenty of games in Vegas and it's easy to find nude women. Vegas tends to cost a lot. New Orleans looks and feels old and can seem a place full of voodoo. You have a rich culture to explore. It's still pretty easy to find nude women but not as easy as in Vegas. New Orleans can be expensive but is easier to enjoy on the cheap if that's what you want. Both places can be great but which you like better depends on your personality.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Can someone explain to me why every Longhorn preview includes a funny little analog clock? They're not actually keeping that in the OS, are they? They realize how rediculous it is, don't they?
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/4015_15 1.png
Microsoft still needs lessons in GUI design.
Don't waste 2 lines in a dialog box describing what buttons do. Push cancel to debug? Since when does cancel mean debug? Instead, have the buttons say "Terminate" and "Debug," eh? And is it me (I only glanced), but is there a clock in the task bar and another one in the right bar thing (which is a little big IMO). I think one clock would do...
Granted it's pre-alpha, but these screenshots make Longhorn look like it should have been released about 2 years ago (the screenshot showing how icons can't be resized without getting pixelated). OS X icons are 128x128 and look great even resized to be bigger. And yet Longhorn won't be out until 2005 did I read?
Editor = Michael - check
Factual errors in summary - check (NTFS is a Journaling FS)
Thence, we have another pathetic trol^H^h^h^h^h^editor posting shit. * sigh *
Some people here have pointed out
that this '3d' effects desktop will not
cause a performance hit because it
will use the GPU that is currently under-
utilised.
This is clearly wrong. If anyone of you
is thinking that you are NOT using VGA
acceleration then please try running the
XFB server on the framebuffer device.
All current desktop environments do use
the 2d acceleration including things
like BitBlockTransfer (Blitting) and
resizing and drawing polygons/lines
etc.
By definition a 3d environment will
require more resources, especially
memory and CPU overhead to keep
track of 3d properties. Even if
texture mapping is somehow faster
than blitting still the 3d algorithms
are generally way heavier than 2d
primitives.
Anyway, I strongly favour the idea of
better GUI but frankly everything has
a certain cost and 3d GUI is definitely
not cheap in CPU/GPU/memory terms.
P.
:gb2fyad:
3d accelerated desktop ? much fun... but does longhorn have any "must have" features like an inproved default word program or at least a new version of that patiance game. why am i only reading about "look and feel" and not about the "great new progs"?
And you don't think anyone's ever crashed his car while paying attention to another, more glitzy car on the road instead of the stuff ahead of him?
Hmm us oldies would remeber VMS , sounds like MS has just caught up to the late 80's , or is it that some dec guys did alot of the ground work for NT Don't you just love geeks that can only point and click a mouse and use that as a basis of select a technology
I had a pet once
I've been playing around with the a little today. What I've done is still a little rudimentary, it's mostly something I've wanted to try to do for a while. It's basically just a collapsible tree echoing the structure of the XML.
Playing. Yes, some people play with computers. But others get paid to use them. Apparently this isn't true of you.
Rudimentary. Yes, your programming is self-admitted rudimentary. It is sloppy, inefficient, and of course, rudimentary.
"Try to do for a while". It's funny that it takes you a while to do rudimentary things.
Basically. Basic. Probably your language of choice, so the Freudian-slippage is probably unconscious, and exposing your sexual lust of things inefficient. Your inefficacy is well illustrated by your mannerisms in speech and your rudimentary, basic code you hacked together while playing with your computer.
If you read that post to yourself, you sound like a fucking bumbling idiot. Childish fetal fuck-wad know-nothing Elmer FUD whitepaper-toting do-nothing fucking grease-ball fat sexless unemployed can't-afford-anything drain-on-society live-with-parents piece of shit liar cunt-caskety fuck mediocritomaton group-thinking fucking bot.
Yes, you're right, the business with renaming the existing file to a backup filename and then writing a new one is not safe. It could happen that you rename /etc/passwd to /etc/passwd~ but then there is no disk space to write the new version.
However, what you propose is technically not changing the contents of the existing 'file' but making a new file which happens to be linked as the same pathname. Whether this really matters, I don't know for sure - it would break if you were writing to a named pipe, for example, but that is pretty unusual for an application. It would also break with symlinks, and destroy hard links (if you do 'ln a b' then save a new copy of 'a', your renaming scheme would make 'a' and 'b' point to different files).
But it might be the least bad option to do it this way because the most important thing is to guarantee that data is not lost. Niceties about filenames versus files and different kinds of links can be ignored if necessary.
Still, with a transactional filesystem the code could be a lot simpler: begin transaction, write the new file contents, end transaction.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
You're right, locking could be a real pain with such a transactional filesystem. For read-only access I think it would be okay, you could use multi-version concurrency control like Oracle and Postgres. But for multiple programs that want to open some files read-write...
Still is this any worse than using advisory locking, which the programs should be doing anyway?
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
The real question is: what took either of them so long to incorporate them?
Apple announced they were coming out with a major storage solution, XServe Raid and people noticed they didn't have a reliable filesystem and kindly asked them to go away until they had one. So, they tacked one on to HFS+, just like linux did with ext2/ext3, which seems to work just fine.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
It looks to me that MS resort to its old trick of copying Apple again. Can anyone see anything new here? It's just too bad for those Windows victims that they have to wait 2 or more years for something that has been available on Mac OS X since last summer. The screen shots clearly shows that MS has a long way to go before reaching the level of refinement of Mac OS X. For instance, the scaled icons look like a POS
> but it seems that the further along we get I like their OS's less and less.
:)
Two words: classic `theme'. I use it all the time if I've to use an XP box, and I have a feeling it'll be there even in the final Longhorn builds, if only so that the Windows system team can keep their own sanity
Btw, it's pretty easy to customize Classic look-n-feel and get back the Windows 95 shell (in Windows 2000, I could even switch off Active Desktop using TweakUI, I'm sure this'll work for XP as well).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's quite obvious that windows was developed for the end user in mind and might lead the market for many years to come in the PC market.
On the other hand Linux was built for the developer in mind and strangely enough still leads the market in the server area...Don't you recall the recent slashdot article that quoted the microsoft exec saying that windows 2003 is still playing catch up with the thing linux has had since it's arrival?
Different users in mind. Different leads in different markets
Well, as long as we're talking about usability, might as well go the full way. Having experience with OS9, OSX, Win9x/2k/XP, and WindowMaker, I can talk about the flaws and virtues of each.
/\ for maximize, \/ for minimize.
[btw, while we're talking about useability, please put quotes in separate paragraphs with "quotaion" marks around them, or italicize them in separate paragraphs]
X is a good metaphor for close. X, as in EXIT...Only in certain languages
Well, X is also what you put through something you want to discard. Written something you don't want to pay attentio nto anymore? put an X through it. Same thing with figures. It would also be useful to color-code it red.
Now, the up/down triangles (as opposed to left/right ones that only make sense in cultures with RTL scripts) are a good idea
An interesting point. However, how many significant cultures read text right to left? Most read things left to right. But, up and down triangles probably is a better metaphor.
Now, some other usability points.
The 5 most easily clickable regions on the screen: the four corners and where the mouse is. Win9x makes no use of them what-so-ever, putting the start-menu literally pixels away from the corner of the screen. I think XP does the same stupid thing. Talk about snatching defeat from the hands of victory.
MacOS9/X puts the universal menu at the top of the screen, which is a good thing. Make it easier to get to. However, right now, I'm on an OS9 desktop. The Apple menu is placed just a little bit off the far left corner, so going to the far left corner and clicking doesn't bring it up. Again, snatching defeat from the hands of victory.
In WindowMaker, however, the situation is different. For one thing, every important menu -- the application menu, the root menu, the window-list menu, and the workspace menu -- can be brought up right at the mouse's current position by a key/mouse combination. However, this doesn't help the new user. Another nice feature is that you can stick these menus at the bottom of the screen, so they "fly up" when the mouse goes to the far corner of the screen. I have my root menu at the far left bottom corner. The only disadvantage is that it takes up a little bit of screen-space. Unfortunately, this isn't the way things come by default.
Now, back to close/minimize/maximize buttons. MS has done a stupid thing by placing the close button right next to the maximize and minimize buttons. In windows, it is very easy to accidentally close a window when you meant to minimize or maxmize it.. Apple originally had it right in placing close on one side of a window and shade/resize on the other. However, it appears that they reverted to retardation in OSX by placing them all right next to eachother again. WindowMaker, however, still has it right -- with the close icon by itself on the right side of the screen, not next to the minimize button (thus, no accidents happen). Unfortuantely, there is no maximize button in WindowMaker (you have to right click on the title bar and click Maximize). Why they refused to have this option is beyond me.
Now, on to something that Apple actually has right, kind of. Lets look at the scroll-bar thing on windows.
By default, in MacOS9/X and WindowMaker, both up and down icons are togther on the bottom of the scrollbar. This has it's advantages -- they're next to eachother, and you can alternate between one and the other quickly. However, it does not make spatial sense -- shouldn't up be on the top?
In Windows, up and down are separated, up at the top, down at the bottom. This makes spatial sense, but also slows down the user -- if you want to alt between up and down, you have to move the mouse all that way.
OSX, however, has a solution. Unfortunately, it isn't the default. Group them together both at the top and bottom of the scrollbar. Makes much more sense.
OSX has done some other stupid things, as well. The metaphorical grips on
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
When ext3 was created it was a fork form the ext2 code base ... so the above is mainly just misinformed /. crap. It's like saying OpenBSD doesn't share code with NetBSD.
Yes, it's true, that the implementation that had to be changed for the journalling code in ext3 didn't get moved back to ext2 ... but that was so that ext2 didn't have any kind of changes (from an engineering POV any change is bad).
Indeed all "new" ext2 features seem to be going into the ext3 driver only. The ext2 driver is just being kept for ultra stability.
ustr: Managed string API with ave. 44% overhead over strdup(), for 0-20B
Hmm...
On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 02:02:50PM +0800, Ñî ×ÀÍ wrote:
> Will stephen's defrag run in a ext3 partion correctly?
> What about the performance?
I just got this question 4 times --- once would have been enough!
The old defrag should work if you have a 1k blocksize (which most
partitions will NOT have), as far as I know. If the defrag is
interrupted for any reason, however, your filesystem will be toast.
Cheers,
Stephen
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
"The very best way to defrag a drive is to copy the data to another drive, delete it from the first drive, then copy the data back."
cool idea mr. pisspott. now give me 360gb empty harddisk space for temporary storage and I'll do just that. lacking sufficient money to do that, i'll just settle for in-place defragmenting. after all, with ntfs, i can watch my pr0n undisturbed while wa^h^hdefragmenting w/o interference with the defragger.
Always nice to see Windows following in the footsteps of Macintosh...senseless resource consuming eyecandy over practical functionality. Woo.
Local Google on MyComputer will be the future. I'm convinced of it.
Given how much people's data has grown, I think Longhorn's SQL based filesystem is really an important development, one that will turn out to be incredibly useful.
I'd like to see something that could offer equivalent utility under Linux.
So I wonder how combinations such as ReiserFS and glimpse would or could fill this niche?
"Provided by the management for your protection."
I wasn't able to google up a link but I remember an interview with Stephen Tweedie were he stressed the fact that ext3 was a block level implementation of a journaling filesystem that used the ext2 on-disk structure for convenience.
I checked the first revisions of ext3 and it indeed forked from ext2. I didn't know that and apologise for the mis-information.
My point still stands though. Ext3 is not just ext2 with a journal hacked on top, it's a major change to ext2 and the stability of one doesn't reflect on the other.
Pedro Côrte-Real.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
By 2005 will there be anything interesting on the net thats accessable without MS site certificate warnings? Will IE be truly removable?
Will MS finally admit that a real OS does not need to be protected from viruses? Will they take the risk of being sued by Symantec again, and put their customers first? Will they finally admit that an integrated dot net is junkware? Can you stand the suspense? Will they hire Bruce Springstein and Kate Smiths virtual ghost to publicise the launch of Long&horny, draped in American flags?
Tune in for next weeks episode in the ongoing saga of Dot Net and Dominatrix, featuring Little Billy and his Long&horny Crew, and a cast of thousands of mostly lawyers!
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
Try running tune2fs -j /dev/yourext2filesystem.
Moments later you have a journal added to your filesystem. Remount it as ext3 and the journal is being used.
This is not a "major change" and it's not a "hack"; it's an elegant retrofit of journalling to a non-journaled filesystem.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
A combination of its Pseries server which uses 32 Power 4++ processors running AIX and DB2, has knocked spots off HP's Itanium 2 Superdome using Windows Server 2003, and only using half the processors.
The firm said that TPC-C benchmarks showed that its machine delivered 680,613.12 transactions a minute at a cost of $11.13/tpmC, and that's knocked the Superdome off its number one perch.
The firm said HP had taken 18 months to catch up to its performance using its Power chips, and that lead only lasted a few weeks.
It took a further dig at HP and Intel. Adalio Sanchez, general manager of the Eserver division, said: "We don't just assemble boxes with third party components"
IBM eServer pSeries 690 Turbo 7040-681
680,613
11.13 US $
11/08/03
IBM DB2 UDB 8.1
IBM AIX 5L V5.2
BEA Tuxedo 8.0
05/09/03
Know-it-all Haken: DEBUNKED.