Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Tom's Hardware Looks At WinFS

Posted by timothy on from the straight-to-the-nsa dept.

Alizarin Erythrosin writes "Tom's Hardware Guide has an article about the new WinFS file system. The article talks first about some of the problems and advantages with FAT[16|32] and NTFS, then talks briefly about WinFS. Here is the summary: 'Microsoft is breaking new ground with Longhorn, successor to XP. The upcoming WinFS file system will be the first to be context-dependent, and promises to make long search times and wasted memory a thing of the past. Today, THG compares it to FAT and NTFS.' Personally, I still have reservations about using a relational database to keep track of files. Unless they can keep the overhead to a minimum, I can't see it being as efficient as a file system should be."

15 of 809 comments (clear)

  1. SCO by Michael+Crutcher · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wasn't this supposed to be an SCO story? We're falling behind our quota today.

  2. Windows Explorer by Scoria · · Score: 3, Funny

    The upcoming WinFS file system will be the first to be context-dependent, and promises to make long search times and wasted memory a thing of the past.

    Well, yes; we must preserve those system resources for the most recent incarnation of explorer.exe.

    --
    Do you like German cars?
  3. always the expert by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Personally, I still have reservations about using a relational database to keep track of files. Unless they can keep the overhead to a minimum, I can't see it being as efficient as a file system should be."

    And, of course, this author is qualified to pass judgements like the one listed above. Please.

    Exactly how efficient should a file system be, genius?

    From the article:

    "The folder structure shown in the Windows Explorer is thus reduced to a virtual map. Directory structures provide some guidance but do not say where data is actually stored, how the system organizes files or the nature of any data pointers stored with them."

    In my miserably unprofessional opinion, obfuscation of the allocation tables in favor of virtual maps that are more user defined or, bettter yet, dynamic, learned content organizations are what the file system should be.

    But I already qualified my opinions with the statement... "I don't have any idea what I'm talking about".

  4. Re:Again? by timeOday · · Score: 2, Funny
    I have spent years explaining to relatives that the same file name in 2 places is 2 different files.
    man ln :)
  5. Re:other FSs are out there by Hes+Nikke · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sorta like running XP in 2K mode

    you can get WindowsXP to run in 2 KibiBytes of ram?!

    or

    Sorta like running XP in 2K mode

    not that that's a bad thing....

    --
    Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
  6. Re:I can almost guarantee you.... by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny
    I'll even get a paperclip to help me manage my files!!!

    How about Clippy? "I see you're looking for your work files. You're fscked."

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  7. Re:This article is bullshit by more+fool+you · · Score: 5, Funny

    Welcome to the marketing revolution. A 6-page ad, made mostly of smaller ads. Why do I suddenly have the urge to purchase Longhorn & more memory?

  8. Re:Good idea, but ONLY much further out... by Nucleon500 · · Score: 2, Funny
    FS is finally able to use it's relational roots to distribute filesystems over multiple processors in an cluster or over a network. Such a system would support atomic, distributed file updates by threads of processes on differing processors (including HyperThreaded procs). Imagine a virtual filesystem that can span your whole-house network, with a single file system image

    Oh, you mean like the Parallel Virtual File System, right?

    ...in WINDOWS.

    Oh, sorry.

    --
    Litigious bastards
  9. Be proud mate. by hayden · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's every slashdotters dream to get a "Score:5 Troll" post.

    --
    Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
  10. Backards(w) by pyrrho · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think we'd be better off replacing the relational database with a file system.

    Just a joke SQLiers, just a little joke. I know they are indispensible. Really. I believe you.

    --

    -pyrrho

  11. Microsoft Marketing 101 by stox · · Score: 4, Funny

    3 years before release: Product will do everything for everyone.

    2 years before release: Product will do everything for the majority of users.

    1 year before release: Product will do many things for many users.

    Release: Well it does something.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
  12. Re:WinFS is on top of NTFS by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Funny
    WinFS is not a file system

    Microsoft has reached new lows in ripping off ideas from the free software world: They've started using recursive acronyms for names. Where is it going to stop?

  13. Yipee! by Realistic_Dragon · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does this mean that finally the Windows file transfer counter will give sensible answers? Right now the only thing you can be sure of is that whatever it says, it's going to be something else.

    --
    Beep beep.
  14. Reservations? by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2, Funny

    Personally, I still have reservations about using a relational database to keep track of files.

    A hugely conservative Slashdot reader? No way!

  15. Great for Porn collecting by zapp · · Score: 2, Funny

    Finally, I can stop naming my folders like:
    cute brunette
    cute brunette in dress
    hot blonde with guy 1
    hot blonde with guy 2
    hot blonde with dildo 1 ...

    Now I can attach meta data like
    hair color,
    props (clothing, toys, surroundings),
    # partners,
    partner gender(s),
    whatever else... you get the idea ;)

    --
    no comment