Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Lifts Curtain on Indigo Software
daria42 writes "Microsoft has released an early version of Indigo on the Microsoft Developer Network. Indigo is a new communications system intended to let Windows programs more easily connect to other software. Indigo was one of the three original "pillars" of Longhorn, however under the new plan it will be re-tooled to work with Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, in addition to Longhorn."
After Microsoft back ports everything from Longhorn to XP, will the $499 upgrade from XP to Longhorn be like 95 to 98? Just some bug fixes and a free browser?
it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
That was an old SGI workstation IIRC
(You may google for it, if you please)
I see 57005 people
Is it me or nothing MS is pitching in Longhorn sounds that exciting? A new version of COM+, wow how exciting!
For ONCE, I want a newer version of Windows to be faster and smaller than the previous version and more stable as well.
I've got a great idea. Now that all the DCOM holes have been plugged (either at the OS, or at the firewall, or both), let's pick a new port number that'll be open and listening to the world by default, and on which all the OS components will have to rely.
For bonus points, I'll justify this by saying that it makes something that sounds really cool on paper if you're a CTO, but is actually the first line from the functional spec for "A platform for writing remote exploits" to anybody with even a millineuron of cynicism left in their brain.
Why didn't they just call it Purple People Eater and get the whole "scary" thing over with?
Will Prince's 1999 be the theme song for this technology or will they choose Purple Rain?
Will they get the Indigo Girls to do a version of Galileo that goes "how long til they get the software right?"
My name is Indigo Montoya -- you killed my father, prepare to die!
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
They are not going to give these away for free. You will have to pay to get these products for XP. Either way. I think Longhorn will be much better in the sense that you will finally have an OS that is both awesome looking yet more functional. The whole deal with using CSS type files to control interfaces for example is the most attractive thing for me from longhorn, besides the fact that I can finally shut up some mac fanatics who take about the mac being "prettier" (although XP came quite a way in making things look better).
Not proprietary, but well patented.
EG:
"RSA WS-Security: SOAP Message Security Patent License Agreement Instructions
RSA Security has identified four patents ("the RSA Patents") we believe could be relevant to implementing certain operational modes of the OASIS WS-Security: SOAP Message Security specifications. To obtain a reciprocal royalty free license to the RSA Patents to make, use and sell products conforming to the OASIS WS-Security: SOAP Message Security specifications, a customer or partner must sign the attached Patent License Agreement."
I imagine there are more of these out there..
Bye!
"By making Avalon and Indigo work on older machines, Microsoft hopes more developers will want to write software that takes advantage of the new technologies" I guess .Net isn't selling fast enough.
The smartest man in the whole, wide world really don't know that much. - Mose Allison
This, Avalon, and WinFS are all jokeworthy now, but at least one of these if not all of them will see decent implementation in GNU/Linux three to five years after they're being used in Longhorn, at which point Microsoft will have the replacement ready for release.
It might even have a better interface than Apple, spawning a whole new series of Longhorn themes for X-Windows.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
This is inter-application communication. It's not going to "keep people trapped inside the windoze[sic] paradigm", as most applications won't even NEED this functionality. Don't like it? Use another operating system, but don't become a mindless Microsoft-bashing moron.
No more having to write terrible wrappers and using command lines invisibly to manipulate external programs. I hope everybody takes advantage of this, this was one of the main reasons that I turned to python to simplify things. Maybe I'll switch back from scripting to programming if it turns out to be easy and useful.
Maybe people will stop switching to scripting languages.
"Indigo will replace the five different programming methods that Microsoft has today for sending messages between two programs in a distributed system, said Ari Bixhorn, the lead product manager for Web services strategy at Microsoft." Hmm....Thats going to upset a lot of people who use those methods. There gonna be a lot of porting work to be done....
Nah, just kidding. That will never happen.
(B) + (D) + (B) + (D) = (K) + (&)
Wouldn't this just be Microsofts (proprietary) implementation of CORBA?
At once I felt trapped into a time warp ; I swear I read the same sentence when NT 4 was announced (plus or minus a few cosmetic details). Same old BS, at the time it was already a cold marketing ploy, nowdays, it's smelling like a rotten corpse.
Good lucking blocking HTTP.
Micro$oft employees always on duty, it seems. How about the usual "embrace and extend" tactics used by M$ ?
... how Indigo is treated these days.
From the colour of the year, the 6th chakra or a hype system to M$ software.
Sheesh.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
Indigo is a new communications system intended to let Worms and Script Kiddies more easily connect to other software.
Indego, in they go!
I'm really glad to hear this. DDE, I mean, COM, I mean, I mean, OLE, I mean, DCOM, oh no wait, ActiveX, er, COM+, uh, LOL, um, Indigo! will be really great.
Everything in Longhorn will be based on the .NET framework and sandboxed, with the Win32 API scrapped. Longhorn's ability to run the Win32 API will be through a compatibility layer, similar to the DOS compatibility layer in XP. However, WinXP's ability to run Indigo and Avalon, the two pillars of Longhorn, will be done through a forward compatibility layer.
Fortunately, they're doing everything clean this time with XML and SOAP, with an open API, as opposed to binary-only files, arcane RPC calls, and endless piles of undocumented, insanely messy code dating back until the early 90s. There actually might be some interoperability this time around -- Longhorn SAMBA certainly won't be nearly as hard to code and reverse engineer, especially with Mono in hand.
More details: http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/understanding/p illars/default.aspx
- - - - - Fear not the reaper, but my shiny white teeth.
I'm a signature virus. Please copy me to your signature so I can replicate.
Indigo Screen of Death !!!!
With the way they're promoting Longhorn, you could swear it was a religion. Next, they'll declare a jihad on Linux.
I'm going to have to agree with the parent poster. I work at MS, and just recently saw a pretty thorough ppt on Longhorn features, a lot of which didn't depend on the pillars. It took an hour just to talk about all the security revamps in the kernel. Unfortunately, its all 'MS confidential' for now... The first Beta should be out during the summer, lets reserve our judgements of Longhorn until then.
What happened to COM+? DCOM? SOAP? All the other moving targets for distributed app integration?
--
make install -not war
You obviously don't get it. This is WAY better than TCP/IP. For one thing, IT'S WAY BIGGER. For another thing, IT'S WAY MORE COMPLEX. Third, IT BELONGS TO MICROSOFT. Fourth, IT'S NOT STANDARD Fifth, YOU HAVE TO USE WINDOWS FOR IT TO WORK. Sixth, well, you get the point... Just like TCP/IP... What were you thinking???
A most overlooked advantage to owning a computer is if they foul up there's no law against wacking them around a bit.
The .NET Framework is a layer on top of the Win32 API. How exactly are they going to scrap the Win32 API and use .NET?
I try to as well, but I'm pretty sure neither of us succeed. Why? Because far too many protocol designers think their protocol is "special" and "more important" so they implement a fallback to tunnelling over HTTP (port 80, even over a proxy).
Unless you have a *very* smart transparent HTTP proxy, there go a lot of your RPC blocks. SOAP seems particularly vile in this respect.
2003 was made as the server companion for XP. Now, maybe i missed something because a lot of what has been said in this thread has gone way over my head but I was always under the impression that Server 2003 and XP were akin to Windows 2000 and 2000 Advanced Server?
Well you don't need a motor vehicle to go from LA to NY, but it would sure make it easier, right?
You mean iexplore.exe?
Warning Windows have detected that some critical files have been replaced. Windows will now replace them with back up copies.
All your user-interface are belong to us.
although XP came quite a way in making things look better
Hey, I have fond memories of Fisher Price products from my youth as well. But when I sit down at a computer, I don't want flashbacks to using a Speak n Spell (unless I run it as an emulator (Yeah, I know, TI made it, not Fisher Price, but you get the idea).
It really, truly horrifies me that people actually like XP's interface. As the first thing I (and every single competant computer user I know, without exception, N>40) do when setting up an XP box, I disable the themes service. Poof, no more craptastic prettified round window edges taking up valuable screen real-estate.
I've used various versions of MacOS. It's not that great.
For centuries, Indigo used to be a very valuable dye; the exclusive looking deep blue color was a sign of wealth. Of course that "exclusivity" went down the toilet when they developed synthetic indigo in 1905 and everyone with a new pair of blue jeans could have some of that exclusivity.
It sounds like a good name for a Microsoft product.
No, actually you're wrong. While I love .NET, it basically is a set of wrappers around Win32 at this time. Even in Longhorn, last I checked.
The eventual goal is to write them from scratch -- for real, and eliminate the dependency on Win32.
We don't see as many Microsoft stories on msn.com as we do here.
Slashdot: News for microsoft, stuff that microsofts...
Ah, so the disease is the cure! Brilliant!
-- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
From what I heard, they are NOT scrapping the Win32 API. And .NET will continue to be a bolt on...
Now about the Open API, not so sure on that...
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
I agree with you that XP came a long way in terms of a functional UI, but there's still some pretty bad problems. Namely, there's a lot of examples of what Kai Krauss calls "Boeing Cockpit Syndrome" where you have a window with just too much stuff in it (preference windows, etc).
Those first leaked screenshots of longhorn (the only ones I've seen) seem to take it to the next level with more buttons along the top of the explorer windows, more widgets in the start bar and hella more crap on that sidebar thingie. Longhorn, seems to me, is going to be a UI nightmare.
Also, using CSS for a userinterface is good, but I don't think it's THAT good for a whole system. It'd be fine for designing WinAmp skins, or the like, though. Hell, I think it'd be best for that.
I'd be willing to bet that M$'s CSS has some micro$pecific enhancements that aren't supported in anything except M$ products.
...spike
Ewwwwww, coconut...
Actually, its probobly more like the change between Classic MacOS and OSX.
Its a totally new windows API with the old API being supported only through backwards compatibility layers (I assume its basicly something like WINE but better and able to use bits of the windows source code where needed)
One of the main causes of security problems in Windows is the ease in which Windows programs can interact with the operating system and each other on a low-level without the interference of proper security restrictions. Nothing about this "new" communications system leads me to believe it will be any different.
Windows will never be secure until and unless Microsoft changes its design philosophy to something a little more paranoid, and a lot less "let's all be friends".
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
frameworks.. sandboxing.. scrapping legacy API's.. documented code.. interoperability.. So basically, what you're saying is that MS has finally realized that the Java folks had it right all along. (:
Fortunately, they're doing everything clean this time with XML and SOAP
Truly distributed applications using XML/SOAP for RPC tend to be horribly slow. The development community has largely rejected distributed architectures because they simply aren't the right tools for the job in most cases. What's left is basically "B2B" functionality.. but this is readily available via Web Services today using Java. IMO, the future belongs to more heavily server-sided applications (think rich-web, standards compliance, etc.) due to reduced administrative costs and simplified security. The ultimate would be, for instance, a bunch of diskless Linux workstations with little more than a highly evolved web browser. Sure, XML in one form or fashion will be used to communicate between heavy servers and thin rich-web clients, but that doesn't make the applications distributed. And it sure doesn't require a whole bunch of complicated RPC and DCOM layers running on top of a heavyweight client-side framework that is interwoven all through your desktop shell. Indeed, MS would like the "PC desktop" to remain relevant even though the industry is now trying to pull in the opposite direction. In the end, we have this super-complex framework that basically talks XML and produces a shiny native Windows-only interface (Avalon.. which got most of its ideas from XUL). I'll stick with Java, Linux, and Mozilla for now, thanks.
Prettier? I don't think most Mac users care that it's pretty; they care that it works better.
"C:\WINNT> copy firefox.exe explorer.exe"
This doesn't work on XP. Explorer.exe is automatically restored when you mess with it. Of course, it'll be assumed that this is because Microsoft is enforcing a monopoly instead of it simply being a security feature.
"Derp de derp."
He's a witch! Burn him!
However, on a somewhat more serious note...
"It took an hour just to talk about all the security revamps in the kernel. Unfortunately, its all 'MS confidential' for now... "
... I think you have a real future working on a rumormill blog. You're supposed to post this stuff as an AC, though. :)
In theory you're right, in actual reality you're completely wrong. A massive portion of the .NET Framework is actual a thin veneer over Win32 calls (ildasm - this isn't rocket science). The .NET Framework pulled it into a much easier, and more organized structure, but the bulk of the code is actually Win32.
.NET interface, as will some of the new higher level services like Avalon and Indigo.
The post several generations before was actually talking the standard smoke and mirrors of distance "it's all gonna change!" bullshit. Longhorn is basically taking Windows XP, with largely the same kernel and underlying subsystems, and of course all of the Win32 API, and adding a new managed shell. Let's remember that explorer.exe is just an application. This new shell will have a first-class
A PPT? Do they stop you from saying presentation just in case it is mistaken for the Impress format? lol.
Haha, yeah. I have to admit my post is kind of lame. 'oooh they talked about... uhm... stuff!! top secret! r0xx0r'.
:)
But seriously, I was really worried that LH didn't really offer much until I actually was able to sit down and peer into what is going into the system. It's not a 95 to 98 jump, but a 98 to NT. Should be interesting when the official beta comes out, 'sall I'm saying!
Never plan around one technology, or in this case, one programming methods for distributed communication.
As we all saw the slow crumbling and demise of each Microsoft protocols falling to disuse due to the wrath of Virus-writers, trojan-puller, malware-pharming.
To roll out a new technology and then place all your products' planning around this untested-in-the-wild technology, has been proven to be exceedingly risky.
I wish them the best of luck.
I haven't tried this myself but wouldn't changing the shell value to point to firefox in the registry have the intended effect?
e.g.
HKLM\SOFTWARE\MICROSOFT\WINDOWS NT\CURRENT VERSION\WINLOGON
Shell = Your_Firefox_Installation_Directory\firefox.exe
It's the Canadian version of Amazon.com.
... who hears the voice of a pseudo-scientific Monty Python narrator as I read this? "Indigo was one of the three original "pillars" of Longhorn, however under the new plan it will be re-tooled to work with Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, in addition to Longhorn, which will, in fact, never ship."
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Didn't someone earlier today comment on how Windows XP still runs programs from 1981?
There ain't no way Microsoft is going to scrap the Win32 API anytime in our lifetimes. They cannot. Their lifeline of revenue depends upon it.
Is anyone else getting a funny feeling that just maybe Longhorn will never make it out the door?
I'm wondering if by the time the market is ripe for Longhorn (ie, enough of us can justify the more expensive hardware it needs that it stands a chance of competing in the market), there will be too many of us who will be migrating core pieces of our daily work to thin client models that run on established internet protocols. As that migration starts to pick up steam, it is going to become increasingly important that all our file formats comply with accepted international standards. I seriously doubt that Longhorn could be revised to meet those criteria.
I'm wondering whether Longhorn is going to be like one of those twelve cylinder straight block touring cars that came out of Detroit in the late 1920s. Fantastic engineering, luxorious coachwork and super powerful, but way too much engine for anybody's needs and dang hard to park when there is twenty feet between the front bumper and the windshield. You don't hear much about those cars; their engineering was good but their marketing plan didn't connect with reality.
I'm wondering whether the Dynamic Marketing Duo of Gates and Allen have recognized this, and are gutting Longhorn's feature set to realize at least some profit from a failed effort.
Actually, you really should know what you are talking about before you make bold statements. Avalon - NOT the shiny new interface, is the new display subsystem. It handles the layout of windows forms and such. It also has NO knowledge of XML. XAML - A declarative programming language based off of XML. It allows you to instantiate objects using XML. Such as - would instantiate a Hello object and set its Color to blue. Aero - The new shiny interface system. This is actually what makes things pretty and is built off of DirectX. This also has no knowledge of XML or XAML. But this is slashdot, so I should expect geeks to talk out of there arse before knowing what they are talking about! :-)
"Ideas without action are worthless."
Actually, WRONG. You can download them now. As you have been able to download .NET for free for the past 5 years, along with VB for the past 10 years, and much more.
"Ideas without action are worthless."
of course, i could just log in as administrator and do it and it would stick, right?
i mean, the operating system wouldn't prevent me, as machine owner and admin, from doing something i wanted to do, would it?
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Everything in Longhorn will be based on the .NET framework and sandboxed, with the Win32 API scrapped.
You're a damn fool if you believe that. Or at least, if you believe that and that Longhorn will be released this decade.
#!/
is it possible to replace the window manager on a windows box? i recently held my nose and tried litestep on a win2k machine, and though it was kind of nice, i still had to put up with the windows window manager.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
. Longhorn's ability to run the Win32 API will be through a compatibility layer, similar to the DOS compatibility layer in XP. However, WinXP's ability to run Indigo and Avalon, the two pillars of Longhorn, will be done through a forward compatibility layer.
You don't know what you're talking about. The Win32 API will be there and accessed in exactly the same way. There is no 'win32' compatibility layer like the DOS layer. The
Actually, you can replace the shell in XP. I messed around with GeoShell for a while. It's actually pretty nice.
GeoShell
I can only assume that the people that understand how XML, Web Services, Service Oriented Architecture, Enterprise Application Integration effect large corporations have remained silent.
The people that have replied have stated clearly that they don't know what Web Services are, have never worked with XML, and don't understand how EAI has changed the way businesses do things.
Indigo is an extraordinary technology that will very likely be copied by IBM for Java (IBM and Microsoft both partnered on all of the WS-* standards) and will usher in a whole new era of interoperability for the business world.
If you're even the slightest bit curious about what this is all about I suggest the following reading material:
http://www.ws-standards.com/
http://community.java.net/java-ws-xml/
http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/understanding/p illars/Indigo/default.aspx
WinFX Indigo Docs
http://pluralsight.com/blogs/tewald/default.aspx I'm sure there is a lot more.
http://chicagodave.wordpress.com
Even when parts of the Longhorn shell was being built on managed code (which is no longer the case), there was no "compatibility layer" for Win32. Longhorn will still have all of the Win32 goodness.
The relationship bewteen Longhorn and managed code will be the same as the relationship between XP and managed code.
Trust me...
A speech...
Truly distributed applications using XML/SOAP for RPC tend to be horribly slow.
You are thinking of the old hardware, back when computers only ran at 2.0 GHz and had only 1 GB of RAM.
You're going to need a hardware upgrade for Longhorn.
There's a reason it is called Longhorn. Because you're really, really going to get screwed this time with all of the DRM.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
Yes, but things have changed. Joel explains: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.htm
I'd rather be lucky than good.
And Gene Ray explains that you are educated stupid:
www.timecube.com
This started out as practically a greenfield project within MS with a brand new team at least five years ago. It's being done by incredibly competent people, and they have done a huge amount of work on interoperability issues- that whole raft of WS standards represents solutions to a whole range of issues that no else is really confronting. And I'm not saying they've solved them in an ideal way but as long as no one else puts anything out there that is less proprietary, they will jump out in front here. Remember how they eventually "got" the Internet?
Those of us who love F/OSS and Linux need to be less dismissive and more frightened.
MS is fragmented and balkanized internally but there are pockets of real capability. Web Services have not achieved anywhere near the level of adoption they could/should have by now (to all you trolls: the few dozen desultory SOAP projects at your company prove my point, not disprove it). And that's because of lack of "security," which boils down to lack of widely supported standards. We gotta be more proactive about this, and not make the same mistakes we are making in regard to Avalon.
Dude! You forgot some kind of postmodern mental masturbation! At least, that's what it is so far as I can figure it out. It's not "Time Cube", but it sure is confusing.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
How is this different from XML-RPC?
You can embed XML-RPC into almost any program in any language in very few lines of code. It's easy to work with, well established, open, and cross-platform. It functions typically over http but can easily be adapted to your choice of transfer method.
Why should I use Microsoft's new offering instead of XML-RPC?
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Dr. Spock Wrote the guide to baby and child care that was so popular in the 50s and 60s. Mr. Spock is the Science Officer on the Enterprise.
Don't worry, even synthetic indigo's are being replaced.
p0lar is the new blue.
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
I don't know why but OSS doesn't seem to have the balls to get it together and write something truly innovative.
Things like ReiserFS were only possible when OSS moved from 'free' to commercially funded free, firefox also seems to have quite a bit of funding, and has been going for years.
Most of the other components are still in the dark ages of unix, X Windows has only just got clipping, it took them years to implement DRI, the kernel has only been thread safe for the past year or two etc....
Why can't we grab the bull by the horns and write tomorrows software instead of yesterdays?
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
So everything that makes up Longhorn is being backported to XP. Does anyone else get the impression we will never see Longhorn arrive? Someone at M$ has decided that Longhorn will be either a failure or too late, and they're now salvaging the parts worth salvaging. I can just about hear a voice saying "it's dead, Bill".
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
mod the last 2 up they're absolutely right - the winapi is staying. I asked the question at channel 9 recently, and got the response that it's hard enough changing one winapi function, let alone ditching the whole lot.
Nothing costs nothing
How exactly does one do that to a Wyse-50?
Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"The page cannot be found"
Having read the article, it does not convince me that Microsoft will release a version of Windows that obsoletes all current Windows software.
No....Longhorn is one the restaurants in Seattle somewhere near the Whistler ski slopes. Most of the names are very local to Seattle and make sense to the people in the area.
If a company uses DRM to place unacceptable restrictions on what I purchase I'll simply not buy it. It's really that simple. And I'm sure a lot of other people will do the same. All the DRM will do is stop people from using it in a way which the companies don't "like". Which is fine by me as the choice to buy or not to buy is always going to be mine to make.
We've been through a past generation of this whole "copy protection" nonsense.
In case you were not born yet, let me summarize...
If a company uses DRM to place unacceptable restrictions on what I purchase I'll simply not buy it. It's really that simple. And I'm sure a lot of other people will do the same.
I strongly disagree.
Most people will just roll over and take it. Fair use disappears.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
As someone who pays for the software they run (when commercial) and also pays for the smattering of media they consume, could you please explain exactly how DRM is going to screw me over?
Also, considering that I write and sell commercial software, is a decent, working implementation DRM going to do anything but stop people from stealing (whoops, i mean infringing) from me?
Hey, I'm in the same boat. Developer. Consume very little media. Don't run ANY pirated software. I use only SuSE at home for almost six years now, and NO windows. And I don't mean that I have a secret Windows boot partition or Wine on the side.
Now that I've qualified myself as not a blatant software pirate....
As for media, DRM takes away fair use. If I buy a disk, I should have the right to make a copy for my car, or play it on my mp3 player.
As for software, the computer is MINE. Not THEIRS. It is MINE. I control it. The possibilities of someone else being able to "trust" the software running in my computer are scary. Automatically deleting e-mail. Copy and Paste content that can change over time. All kinds of possible abuses in the future.
In short: the copyright people need to get over it and adapt. The world has changed. We now live in a time where it costs almost zero to shuffle bits quickly to any part of the planet.
I am cynical enough to believe that DRM will eventually enable some future generation of tyrants to create locked down networks that only accept "trusted" clients. Censored and/or monitored communications, etc. Basically, "they" don't want the kind of uncontrolled communication that the Internet has brought to the masses.
You may think this sounds crazy, but just go back to your high school World History class and review.
The world was a different place in 1948. So why then would George Orwell write a book like 1984? When Aldus Huxley wrote Brave New World, the world of the time was quite different. What was the same was: people. Like the oracle said: what do men with power want?
DRM is about more than "piracy".
Hey, if you want to pay cartel-imposed prices for media that you cannot copy or legitimately use in multiple locations, or on the hardware/software of your choice -- be my guest. It is your right to pay high prices for low quality and restrictions.
Please don't suggest that everyone else should go along with it. DRM is going to screw everyone. Maybe not in the first year it is released. You are entitled to roll over and take it if you prefer. I'm not going to try to convince you not to fall in love with DRM. Go ahead. I don't like DRM, and I have a right not to like it. And rational reasons.
You wanted an explanation, there it is.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
I tried litestep, (and geoshell,) but I have stuck with bblean ever since I've tried it. Litestep was too much of a pain to customize, and geoshell was too unstable. http://bb4win.sourceforge.net/bblean/
Redundancy is good And also good.
Right now you can download the .NET Framework at www.microsoft.com/dotnet for free. This includes the VB compiler.
"Ideas without action are worthless."
Well I am more then competant and I personally like the way that XP looks.. That drab grey is ok for my Audio workstation or my Servers but personally I like a little color and eye candy.. but then again maybe I am just new school, I have only been a "computer geek" for the last 15 years..
Hmm, I wonder if COM will still work in Longhorn. I use it a LOT to automate Word and Excel via Python. I would hate to have to redo all that work if we ever upgrade.
Avalon is supposedly one of three "pillars" of Longhorn according to MS literature. Presumably this name encompasses the other related components so it can be used generically. If that's not the case, they need to work on the clarity of their marketing materials. Regardless, I am aware of the internal distinctions of what each component does. But that doesn't change my original stated opinion -- that Longhorn / .NET in reality is going to be about WS-enabled heavyweight client-sided applications that only run on Windows. Duh.. I mean.. if it was anything else, MS would be giving up their monopoly! They don't want a world full of web-standards driven applications where Desktop and Server platforms don't matter anymore.
Because I've tried to gain a detailed understanding of how it works, and found it far, far too complex. I strongly suspect that nothing that complex will succeed in delivering security.
Xenu loves you!