Slashdot Mirror


WinFS to be available in WinXP

ScooterMcGoo writes "According to a Microsoft Watch blog, WinFS is being back ported for Windows XP. From TFA: WinFS isn't dead, Tom Rizzo, Microsoft's director of product management for SQL Server, recently told Microsoft Watch. In fact, Microsoft is planning to provide an update on the technology at this year's Professional Developers Conference (PDC) in September, he said. Rizzo said that Microsoft is busily back-porting the WinFS file-system technology to Windows XP. It's unclear if Microsoft also is porting WinFS to Windows Server 2003, but such a move would be likely, given that the Redmond software vendor is doing so with Avalon and Indigo."

37 of 428 comments (clear)

  1. Aha, that explains it ... by ggvaidya · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought the Bill-Gates-as-borg icon had a slightly wider smile today ...

  2. Sure... by Quasar1999 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'll believe it when I see it... my sources inside MS (and no, I ain't giving any proof, so believe me or not, I don't give a shit), say that there are very hard deadlines for Longhorn, with features being left out if they don't meet certain benchmarks, etc... so to hear that they are now taking something, and wasting resources back porting it? Especially when they first said it would be dropped from longhorn? I call Bull..

    --

    ---
    Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
    1. Re:Sure... by maeka · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I'll believe it when I see it... my sources inside MS (and no, I ain't giving any proof, so believe me or not, I don't give a shit), say that there are very hard deadlines for Longhorn, with features being left out if they don't meet certain benchmarks, etc... so to hear that they are now taking something, and wasting resources back porting it?


      As the article states: "Microsoft decided to back-port both Avalon and Indigo to older versions of Windows -- Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 -- in order to maintain backward compatibility and help seed the application-development market, officials said. "
      If Microsoft wants to make WinFS a fundamental part of their strategy, they must back port it. Forcing developers to upgrade before they can develop is foolhardy.
    2. Re:Sure... by Swamii · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, there is a hard deadline for Longhorn, and that is a good thing.

      That said, WinFS will not make it into the hard deadline for Longhorn. That said, it will be available freely as a download, and possible as part of Windows Update, for Longhorn and other operating systems including XP and, yes, Win2003, some time after the Longhorn deadline.

      --
      Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit
    3. Re:Sure... by wolfgang_spangler · · Score: 5, Funny
      If Microsoft wants to make WinFS a fundamental part of their strategy, they must back port it. Forcing developers to upgrade before they can develop is foolhardy.


      I think you misspelled "monopoly"
    4. Re:Sure... by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ext3 is ext2 with a journal, thats all.

      If you want to see what filesystems are like when you add database features, look up some BeFS documentation from BeOS. There's a (sadly apparently now out of print) textbook on building filesystems using BeFS as a guide. While it's not really a database (it allows you define arbitrary indexes and allows searching on those indexes, but lacks most other features a database user would be familiar with) using it gives you a pretty good idea of how one that really was a database (with central data storage, relational algebra and set operations, etc.) would work.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    5. Re:Sure... by superjaded · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, no.

      From how I understand it, WinFS will actually be a layer of abstraction above whatever underlying filesystem (FAT32/NTFS) the system is running on. It won't be a new filesystem at all. It holds metadata about each file and makes it easier and faster to find things. Much like the aforementioned Beagle project.

      And ext3's journalling is quite different from what WinFS attempts to accomplish. Journalling basically makes it so, like you say, files aren't lost and you don't have to do a time-consuming fsck whenever the partition is not unmounted cleanly like with ext2.

    6. Re:Sure... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Slightly different - NTFS is more like Ext3 than WinFS is, being that both NTFS and Ext3 are journelled filesystems. WinFS sits ontop of a standard NTFS filesystem, and stores metadata for objects stored on the filesystem. For example, all of your photos currently sit on your filesystem in a flat format - you arrange them in a filesystem tree based on date taken, location, project etc etc and they each have some meta data of their own, such as camera type, resolution and such.

      WinFS will allow you to add more meta data to those images, storing the Location, Date taken etc information right there with the image, rather than in the filesystem tree. This allows you to get rid of folders altogether, and have a situation more similiar to the labels system in Gmail - a photo can now be in several 'folders', eg location, resolution, project, allowing you to group dissimiliar items together without having to maintain seperate copies of an item, or symlinks etc.

      This way you can submit a search saying 'ok, give me all items to do with last years holiday' which could return stuff like all the emails you had with the travel company, all your bookmarks you made when looking for the holiday, the photos you took while on holiday etc.

  3. How about Rieser FS (or JFS or XFS) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Can Windows support any other modern filesystems such as Rieser 4?

    I'd love to be able to use a filesystem that can be seen in a dual-boot environment; that's better than FAT32 or FAT16; but those are really the only choices now.

  4. WinFS by mboverload · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't know about you, but NTFS is fine for me. I mean, jesus, its a file system, not a damn search engine.

    1. Re:WinFS by Ironsides · · Score: 5, Informative

      I mean, jesus, its a file system, not a damn search engine.

      Quote from MS on WinFS:
      One of the monumental problems organizations face today is aggregating information that's stored in disparate formats. Knowledge workers have long wanted to be able to search for content independent of format. WinFS allows the user to perform searches based on the metadata of the stored item, regardless of what type of file it is or which application created it.

      So not only is it a file system, it is also a search engine.

      Source:http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/winfs/

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    2. Re:WinFS by goofyspouse · · Score: 5, Funny

      "So not only is it a file system, it is also a search engine."

      Man: WinFS is a desert topping.
      Woman: No, it's a floor wax.
      Man: Desert topping!
      Woman: Floor wax!
      Announcer: You are both right...WinFS is both a desert topping *and* a floor wax.

  5. WinVapor by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Funny

    WinFS announcements are one of Microsoft's most popular products. Thanks for the upgrade!

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  6. Longhorn by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If everything will be back-ported to XP and Windows 2003, how does Microsoft plan to make any money off Longhorn, which has cost the company a lot in development time and money?

    Do they plan on back-porting the first versions of Avalon, Indigo and WinFS, and then providing feature updates to Longhorn only, forcing customers to update? Or is Longhorn really just XP SP3?

    1. Re:Longhorn by bfizzle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Maybe thats the point...?

      The more news I see about feature of Longhorn it makes me wonder if M$ is pushing more towards the subscription model of their OS. Having users upgrade XP to Longhorn rather then sell Long Horn straight out. Start watching ELUA of these "upgrades" you might find yourself stuck in a subscription service called "Longhorn"

    2. Re:Longhorn by Sheetrock · · Score: 4, Funny
      Expect seamless integration of these features, as well as the best support options, to be available in Longhorn.

      We had Internet, 32-bit color, and multitasking in Windows 3.1, but no one seemed to complain about the jump to Windows 95 (especially because they didn't have to tinker with CONFIG.SYS/AUTOEXEC.BAT to get games working.) Similarly, while new advanced technologies may be available in XP for developers and power users to preview or even use it is no substitute for the successful integration and exploitation of these features at all levels of the operating system.

      --

      Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
      -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




  7. What's left for Longhorn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems to me that every major component that Microsoft has promoted for Longhorn is eventually being backported to Windows XP. What's going to be new in Longhorn?

    1. Re:What's left for Longhorn? by loraksus · · Score: 5, Funny

      You'll find out in 2010.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    2. Re:What's left for Longhorn? by Proaxiom · · Score: 4, Funny
      Parental controls on things like amount of time a user can play a particular game, use an application, or browse the web (while this may seem pointless to most geeks, as a parent I know this will be useful).

      Me too. I feel it is important for my children to figure out how to circumvent protection measures like this, thus adding a little extra education to their computing experience.

      Kind of like: "Of course you can play Mickey Mouse Toddler, as soon as you crack the password-based encryption I put on the executable. And what do I keep telling you about leaving your Legos on the floor?"

  8. Microsoft has hired... by lbmouse · · Score: 5, Funny
  9. Re:And I care why? - MS MArket share, thats why by CdBee · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's important to Microsoft as a way of preventing Google Desktop Search and Copernic from gaining mindshare and installed base before they introduce their final version in Longhorn

    Incidentally, Copernic 1.5 beta now supports Mozilla Thunderbirds email and contacts and Firefox history and bookmarks - and does it well. This is a double threat to Microsoft, as their vision sees WinFS as a factor which ties people to Outlook and IE6/7

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
  10. "Technology" by hey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Could we please stop using the word "technology" when "component" or "chunk o' software" would do fine. It's Microsoft speak.

  11. When is this backport being released?? by mcc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Depending on when this arrives, this could possibly be an attempt to take the wind out of the sails of Apple's Tiger release-- probably to arrive sometime before midyear-- which lists as one of its major selling points a new feature called "spotlight". Spotlight is a system service that has been described as offering similar functionality to WinFS, but does it without filesystem changes. I don't know exactly how accurate this description is, of course, since though Microsoft seems to talk an awful lot about WinFS and talk about its hypothetical technical capabilities, they never seem to give specifics on exactly how it works for the end user and what it means for the end user...

    Of course, the above assumes Microsoft still actually cares about what Apple does, which isn't all that likely.

  12. Standard?? by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think that the most important Question here is ... is microsoft going to provide an specification for the fs?, and, in case they do, will it be licensed in a GPL-compatible way?

    --
    WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
  13. Re:And I care why? by ziggythehamster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    WinFS is not actually a filesystem. It's basically NTFS+ (compare to HFS+). If a computer that only understands NTFS reads the disk, it'll look like an NTFS disk. If WinFS is enabled, the indexes become avaliable. Basically, it's the Indexing Service on steriods. Or, at least, that's how I'm understanding it. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    And if I am right, this will be one feature I'm turning off. The Indexing Service already pisses me off.

  14. Can't wait! by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 4, Funny
    ooooh, o00000h, oooooooh! Can't wait.

    After seeing how completely incompetent and pants-wetting funny awful Microsoft is at file searching with the little doggie, I can't wait to experience having a few more unnecessary, superfluous, extravagant, and bloated layers HELPING me.

  15. Re:And I care why? by evn · · Score: 5, Informative

    Despite the unforutnate name, WinFS is a service that runs above the filesystem. The data is still stored on a plain old NTFS partition(s).

    For traditional file-based data, such as text documents, audio tracks, and video clips, WinFS is the new Windows file system. Typically, you will store the main data of a file, the file stream, as a file on an NTFS volume. However, whenever you call an API that changes or adds items with NTFS file stream parts, WinFS extracts the metadata from the stream and adds the metadata to the WinFS store.

    source: Microsoft's WinFS developer page

    The data is still just as (in)accessible as it's always been. The meta data is locked away in the WinFS store but we haven't been using that all this time so it's not like we're going to be any worse off.

    as for writting NTFS, I suggest you take a look at captive NTFS which lets you read and write your NTFS partitions in Linux with the same confidence that you do in Windows.

  16. In other words.. by loraksus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Longhorn won't come out until 2010 or so, and Microsoft will be able to charge for "Windows 98^K^KXP Special Edition".
    Not a bad idea.
    If you have the ability to put off the release of another OS for years, you can save loads of money on development, but still have a steady income stream from copies bundled with computers (every dell, etc from 2001 to 2006, and those of us who had beta copies of windows 97 all know how the 2006 date will work) and the occasional consumer retail purchase.
    Look, I'm not saying that MS isn't innovating anything, but compared to everyone else, they move at a glacial pace.
    Since there really isn't any competition (and I use this word as "an OS that could hurt significantly MS financially", so please, no flames), they can sit back and release stuff whenever they feel like, but still have a pretty much guaranteed income stream.

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  17. Excuse my ignorance but... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ...what's the point of a search engine built into the filesystem? Surely it's just adding overhead for no reason if you don't need it.

    Yes, I'm a UNIX-type person but keeping files in a logical directory structure along with copious use of find and grep commands seems to be good enough on most of the systems I work on. I even use WinGrep on Windows for that level of text searching...

    The Registry is a database and definitely a weak point of Windows when it comes to resilience. NTFS seems to do a reasonable job of keeping the filesystem intact, why add a risk of introducing resilience problems into the filesystem by linking it to a database? Unless it's just a marketing ploy to sell you an MSSQL license at the same time.

    Whatever anyone says about UNIX/Linux, the concept of keeping operating system tools simple and doing a good job of one specific task has allowed it to earn the stability and resilience reputation. Sure, you've got to spend time shell-scripting to unleash its full power but that's half the fun of it.

    I'd love someone to give me a definitive answer as to why the concept of WinFS is so good - I genuinely don't understand all the hoohah about it.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    1. Re:Excuse my ignorance but... by Swamii · · Score: 4, Insightful

      what's the point of a search engine built into the filesystem? ... keeping files in a logical directory structure along with copious use of find and grep commands seems to be good enough.

      Here is a fundamental basic of what's wrong with Linux:

      Developer: "I use grope, pully, xtract, gunit, and other nonsensical named 3rd party tools AND I organize my files in a logical directory structure, which gives me everything I need!

      User: "Where is my Word Document?"

      --
      Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit
    2. Re:Excuse my ignorance but... by idlake · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Give an option for the metadata to be transmitted separately

      There is no such option in FTP, or in most other protocols.

      XML of course, cuz it's 2005, or tacked onto the end of the file, in some cases, ala id3 tags, or whatever.

      Well, if you "tack it on", it's part of the file.

      Second, corp intranets, which is what this is primarily aimed at, probably aren't doing a whole lot of FTPing of internal documents.

      Corporate intranets are using CMS, document management systems, P2P, instant messaging, E-mail attachments, etc. None of those have provisions for transmitting, storing, or indexing separate metadata forks.

      Third, the existance of FTP and the like haven't stopped Apple's file system, or NTFS itself, from having things like resource streams.

      NTFS has resource streams, but they are rarely used and they are actually kind of a security problem (viruses like to hide there, and even AV products often don't look there).

      Apple's resource streams have led to a decade of incompatibility and usability problems for no appreciable gain in functionality over single-file multi-stream solutions based on standards like ZIP.

      Proponents of hacking up the file system to add all these complicated features have failed to make a sound engineering argument for why the functionality justifies the complexity or why it needs to be in the kernel. And they have failed to do so for several decades (because these ideas are not new). At this point, when Apple and Microsoft are pushing this sort of thing, it looks like they are doing it out of proprietary interests, not out of any engineering considerations.

  18. Logical move by DeepDarkSky · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Getting WinFS out there means they can work out more kinks before release of Longhorn and at the same time provide the "benefits" of WinFS to people earlier. Separating out key pieces of the OS is always good for the still changing OS. Similar to the Linux/UNIX FSes, after all. This will make the transition to Longhorn "smoother".

  19. Re:How about Rieser FS (or JFS or XFS) by wrecked · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not Reiser4, but there are some tools to access Reiser3 from Windows: RFSTool, and YAReG, a graphical frontend for RFSTool.

  20. Re:Rushed? by Schnapple · · Score: 4, Interesting
    One hopes that this has not been rushed out?
    IIRC, this has been in the works for more than a decade. I get what you're saying - one minute it won't make Longhorn, the next it's going to be in XP - but "rushed" isn't the term here.

    This, along with Avalon being ported back to XP and IE7, is interesting - MS is responding to consumer demand for new features instead of doing the usual: forcing people to upgrade operating systems for them.

    One thing though - I would hope that MS allows us ambitious types to activate a new XP installation so that we can try this out on a different machine. Otherwise most people like me will adopt a real "wait and see" attitude when it comes out.

  21. In other words by bonch · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In other words, there isn't a single reason to upgrade to Longhorn.

    1.) .NET? Available for XP.
    2.) Avalon? Available for XP.
    3.) Indigo? Available for XP.

    And now...

    4.) WinFS? Available for XP.

    Apparently, the only thing Longhorn will offer over Windows XP is a Direct3D interface that requires you to upgrade your computer in order to run it.

    Perhaps Longhorn always should have been just a collection of technologies released for existing versions of Windows rather than a whole upgrade. Because I don't see many people upgrading with all of Longhorn's technologies being made available for Windows XP anyway.

  22. link to that book by morcheeba · · Score: 4, Informative

    The book you're talking about is "Practical File System Design with the Be file system".

    Here's the slashdot article on it and here's a pdf of the book direct from the author's site.

    It looks interesting, but it's been on my to-read list for a while.

  23. Re:NTFS Sucks by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All file systems claim they "don't need defragmenting" when they are released. Mostly that means they "don't come with a defragging tool". It's all hype. The only filesystem that really doesn't need defragmenting is one that runs a defragmenter all the time as a background process - which, of course, you can do with NTFS if you really want to.

    I'd bet you're seeing a syptom of the common software installers (and how they deal with compressed files) on Windows vs Linux, not the filesystems.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.