Slashdot Mirror
WinFS Gets the Axe
commander salamander writes "Over at the WinFS Team Blog, Quentin Clark states that Microsoft no longer plans to ship WinFS as a standalone software component. Instead, portions of the underlying technology will be included with the next release of SQL Server (codename Katmai) and ADO.NET. Does this spell the end for the true relational storage paradigm that Microsoft has been promising since Windows 95?"
That way we'd see how insecure and overly complex and over engineered it was. alas that sweet joy will be no longer.
Nice use of the classic "There is some code in a source tree somewhere that does that."
Do you have MS stock invested? If not, rather than defending MS just dip your hand in the wallet and get a Mac... that's an upgrade.
Or you could wait... of course... CNGRTLNS.W95
Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
Sorry dude you sound like a bogan
All the windows features arent revolutionary as you suggest.
For the interest of this i will not mention MAC or Linux at all here as this is about XP compared to Vista
Most are either found in windows XP already of MS has ported to XP (aero for example)
This may surprise you but 64bit support isnt totally new to microsoft.
XP X64 does exist even some copies of Windows for Itanic still exist.
But Vista will still be around for Pentium 4 and Centrino (32bit versions)
Windows 95 didnt work on 8bit processors any more fully 16bit
486 or above
Direct X 10 isnt revoltionary but evolutionary upgrade t the series
The wifi Model should have been there in the first place
if they bother it can easily be implemented in XP, using a simple database
Every thing else you mentioned a cosmetic front ends to existing features.
are you seriously telling me "Performance Statistcits" page is an advancement?
Your argueing the tremedous features this is irrelevant since you disabled all these apparent advancements
Did you even ever use Windows 3.11 or even windows 95 for that matter?
Windows 3.1 to 95 was massive averhaul of the filesystem kernel driver subsystems
and target audience
USB Support Direct X rendering , powerful WDM driver support offering extended multimedia potential (tv card, hardware 3d acceleration)
The changes i see in vista are like 95 - 98 heavy interface feature improvement additions, speed and
compatibiliyy improvements
WinFS was to be the only revolutionary feature of Windows but its gone
It was supposed to obsolete Indexing services such as Beagle Linux and Spotlight in MacOSX and Indexing (Windows 2k XP)
So what they are competitors they implement what they feel the need.
PS i'm furious at microsoft i wanted to see a Windows XPSE(consumer friendly Windows 2003 qualifies)
instead of the excessively overly late upgrade, i install Windows XP at least twice a week at work and security wise it is terrible, i need an upgrade now, to base our Network upgrade cycle.
We were promissed the world and we are going to end up with Windows XPSE anyway.
No Vista isnot comparable to WinME it had nothing at all to seperate itself from 98SE
How about Media Center, DVD Maker? You know, all the iTools from the Apple world and then some.
Regardless of what you seem to think the underlying security model for Vista is drastically different. How about application ACLs? How about 100% policy driven customization? What about the new indexing features? What about the memory management? How about bitlocker? How about a new stack and a completely new firewall which might actually remove the need for a 3rd party firewall. Sure, you can add most of this stuff into XP but it won't all be neatly packaged and more importantly neatly monitored and reported.
As for the DVD its 3.4gigs which already shows you haven't even actually checked out a freely available OS. Furthermore that 3.4gigs includes 6 different versions of Vista which have varying applications from low-end home use to the Ultimate edition which has everything. I hate the naming and I hate the complexity with all the versions but its not nearly what you think it is.
Make no mistake, this is a huge change, at least as big as the change from Windows 3.1 to 95. It's more than 6 years in the making. Are you really that blinded by hatred of Microsoft that you think 6 years and thousands of programmers have accomplished nothing?
Wow, this was rated insightful? Slashdots mod system is pathetic.
There is no mystery to Vista like you seem to think there is. The OS is out there and available to use. It IS that different no matter how much you think it isn't.
As for the then some I'm referring to Media Center which is an application unlike anything I've ever seen for OS X. Not saying similar software doesn't exist for the OS but it certainly doesn't come from Apple. This is ironic since its the very first item I mentioned and you chose not to recognize it. That's fine.
As for six years ago Microsoft started the trend to a more secure foundation and a drastic change in philosophy. Yes, it took a long time to develop steam but it did happen and it takes large companies a long time to change their stride.
You're statements conflict with each-other. First there is the "Longhorn Reset" meaning Vista has been developed over the last two years which is still a lot of development time and then you say its using an old code base? Which is it? It seems to me like everyone looks at the interface to Vista and says okay, it looks like OS X and then assume nothing has changed on the back end. It smacks of pure ignorance, you need to actually try the product before you start bashing it. It is quite obvious that you have only read about it. Most of the features existed in XP that OS X had and XP still interoperates with other networks a hell of a lot better than a standard OS X rig. NFS and SMB are both terrible on OS X but SMB at least has been consistently reliable on Windows and with Vista of course NFS also works great.
Now, did I mention the Aero interface at all in my post? Did you see me mention anything about the interface at all? Is your point so weak you can't even refer to my post? Do you even realize that Aero has a negligable performance impact on a computer? Do you even care that the OS does self diagnostic and self optimization? How about real working self healing? How about granular reporting out of the box? All stuff OS X or any modern Linunx distro does not do. All this stuff is possible on other platforms but it never comes from one source. You're argument should be about that being right or wrong rather than attacking what you clearly have no understanding of.