Version 0.2 and you expect them to have the complete implementation of all planned 1.0 features? It's natural in an early version to have your application resemble what inspired it.
If they have the complete functionality of a completed application by version 0.2 I think they're doing pretty well...
Well, the examples were my own idea, I was only imagining what was possible. I don't know if they'll actually implement this. I wonder what has been implemented in OS X Tiger?
Perhaps some OSS solution will come along and implement some of these ideas... But I'm afraid a lot of developers don't exactly understand the capabilities that will be put into the next OS X and Windows vesrions and aren't even concentrating on this type of thing.
It'll be really interesting to see how they solve that problem.
Each application that supports WinFS will act as an API to access their own application's files and deliver the requested content. It will work something like how piping in Linux works, but using XML to define the data as well.
It might be possible to build rich applications out of existing applications. MS are trying to build something comparable to "OSS doesn't reinvent the wheel"
The search portion of WinFS will just work by going through the XML data. You will be able to narrow your searches for specific content, search various content for different things.
Searching by specifying a resized cropped bitmap and finding the original picture is an example, or finding pieces of the picture in other pictures. Searching by specifying audio clips is another possibility. Of course all the other meta data in files already present will also be searchable. (Search for music: by artist, title, length, etc).
But they didn't have to integrate it with the legacy Windows code base. Apple did OS X more or less from scratch. Windows never had a foundation for this type of thing.
Avalon is not the new DirectX, it is the new GDI. It will replace the Windows interface rendering system, accelerating it and providing new features with 3D, and providing XAML to all applications. Here is a reference.
If MS ship WinFS with major bugs in it, it'll hurt them badly, especially if their new products rely on the presence of WinFS. (People won't stop using Windows, they'll just use NTFS instead.)
WinFS is NOT a file system. It is a way of describing and sharing meta data so applications can use ANY data format used on the hard drive that is supported by installed applications.
NTFS is still used, WinFS runs on top, providing the meta data. WinFS has absolutely nothing to do with data being corrupted on the hard drive. In fact, it will perhaps prevent this, as data will be accessed through the program that created it, so the chances of corruption will be that much lower (as opposed to a 3rd party application trying to manipulate a proprietary format).
WinFS is a way for applications to share data through defacto XML schema. Like the Windows clipboard allows data to be pasted from any application to any other application (in theory), WinFS is supposed to do the same, so any application can request any data through any other application, and it will process it. Sort of like piping in Linux "everything as a file", only they will have hooks for everything not just stdin stdout. I also assume they will tie in NGSCB/Palladium authentication into this. Here is a link explaining this in more detail.
The goal is to make their hard disk search easier, handling all types of data. Another goal is to be like open source, by giving proprietary software more reason not to re-invent the wheel, because they can access the data through another application. They will use meta data to define everything so any application can use any data.
The problem is that 3rd parties all have to agree on a standard, and no doubt patents will be involved, licensing, preventing applications from working well with one another to gain an edge, viruses will have a MUCH easier time doing silly things with your data (this could make distributed data mining a reality if a worm spreads enough), who knows if it will work in practice as well as it should in theory.
This is why WinFS doesn't replace NTFS but cooperates with it, it's a layer of meta data. Needless to say MS have a huge task on their hands.
How did it get from this to "First of all, the United States and Western Europe will suffer from the attack, Gostev was quoted by the agency as saying."?
In order to promote Sender ID, Microsoft is pleased to offer its necessary Sender ID patent
rights on a royalty-free basis but only to those who are also willing to make their Sender ID
patents available on a reciprocal royalty-free basis.
So everyone shares their patents with MS, but not with each other, MS gets all patent rights, and everyone else has to fend for themselves? Where is the strategic advantage for everyone to jump on board exactly?
While DVDs may not support HD resolution, displaying them in progressive scan on a quality projector makes this negligable. People have to sit far away from the projector and be able to read what's on the screen, if your text doesn't look good in 720x480 they're probably not going to be able to read it anyway.
Rendering and outputting to video could have the same effect, and instead you burn your presentation to a DVD and use the DVD remote to navigate and cue your presentation. DVDs can already loop video, have basic overlay functions (that you might not even need), and can be used as a presentation medium. After the meeting you can hand out DVDs to interested clients.
Any basic OS comes with these tools already. Why do I need an online version? So I can't access my important programs and data unless I'm online? That's not really the "advantage" I'm looking for in an application.
Gates will probably lose his job, but AFAIK Open Source is allowing more people to create jobs, if you get the foundation out of the way then you can concentrate on running a competitive business. If you have many start-ups trying to compete and getting shot down, that doesn't really help.
I've found that when you run FireFox, and run it again, it asks for a new profile since the default profile is already in use. This is annoying because I usually just want to run a new instance of the application using the same profile. This also makes it more difficult to pass parameters from other applications.
Use this script to run FireFox if you want to open new windows by clicking on the same shortcut, or use applications to launch new URLs in a new FireFox window or tab.
if ($running == 0) { system("$path/$app"); exit; } else { if ($version < 0.9) { system("$path/$app -remote openURL('$home,new-$method')"); } if ($version >= 0.9) { system("$path/$app -a $app -remote openURL'($home,new-$method)'"); } exit; }
This is stuff to prevent the lameness filter. 1 2 3, 4567. I akfe efowpofpe loigher pohreopwd. feawpofkap apgo eajihte ip peawof pk pgk op sdpfkpks tgperw ypyr epwefewf fewkowp!!! opewkfw phrgepag eaow faewpfj apgpao gkoe ag pakgpsp df flew pig kbnjigeowjaojg.
I've found that when you run FireFox, and run it again, it asks for a new profile since the default profile is already in use. This is annoying because I usually just want to run a new instance of the application using the same profile. This also makes it more difficult to pass parameters from other applications.
Use this script to run FireFox if you want to open new windows by clicking on the same shortcut, or use applications to launch new URLs in a new FireFox window or tab.
Actually this patent is on an action that is performed depending on the duration of the button click. But then, this is just patenting stuff like the "Fire" button of Metal Gear Solid 2.
If you press the button for a short i.e. "Normal" amount of time, the gun will fire.
If you press the button for a longer time, your finger will "ease" off the trigger, NOT firing the gun.
This gives you the option of cancelling a gun shot, or firing a gunshot.
This is exactly what MS has patented. You could also define the PS2 as a limited resource computing device, since you can't upgrade it.
Slashdot Mirror
If they have the complete functionality of a completed application by version 0.2 I think they're doing pretty well...
I guess the Jetsons were really ahead of their time in figuring that their vehicles could fold up into a suitcase?
It used to amuse me, now it annoys me.
What a great analogy. That's exactly how I feel about watching people fall out of trees!
Perhaps some OSS solution will come along and implement some of these ideas... But I'm afraid a lot of developers don't exactly understand the capabilities that will be put into the next OS X and Windows vesrions and aren't even concentrating on this type of thing.
Each application that supports WinFS will act as an API to access their own application's files and deliver the requested content. It will work something like how piping in Linux works, but using XML to define the data as well.
It might be possible to build rich applications out of existing applications. MS are trying to build something comparable to "OSS doesn't reinvent the wheel"
The search portion of WinFS will just work by going through the XML data. You will be able to narrow your searches for specific content, search various content for different things.
Searching by specifying a resized cropped bitmap and finding the original picture is an example, or finding pieces of the picture in other pictures. Searching by specifying audio clips is another possibility. Of course all the other meta data in files already present will also be searchable. (Search for music: by artist, title, length, etc).
Looks like Apple had been planning the Aqua interface long before any of us realized...
But they didn't have to integrate it with the legacy Windows code base. Apple did OS X more or less from scratch. Windows never had a foundation for this type of thing.
Avalon is not the new DirectX, it is the new GDI. It will replace the Windows interface rendering system, accelerating it and providing new features with 3D, and providing XAML to all applications. Here is a reference.
WinFS is NOT a file system. It is a way of describing and sharing meta data so applications can use ANY data format used on the hard drive that is supported by installed applications.
NTFS is still used, WinFS runs on top, providing the meta data. WinFS has absolutely nothing to do with data being corrupted on the hard drive. In fact, it will perhaps prevent this, as data will be accessed through the program that created it, so the chances of corruption will be that much lower (as opposed to a 3rd party application trying to manipulate a proprietary format).
The goal is to make their hard disk search easier, handling all types of data. Another goal is to be like open source, by giving proprietary software more reason not to re-invent the wheel, because they can access the data through another application. They will use meta data to define everything so any application can use any data.
The problem is that 3rd parties all have to agree on a standard, and no doubt patents will be involved, licensing, preventing applications from working well with one another to gain an edge, viruses will have a MUCH easier time doing silly things with your data (this could make distributed data mining a reality if a worm spreads enough), who knows if it will work in practice as well as it should in theory.
This is why WinFS doesn't replace NTFS but cooperates with it, it's a layer of meta data. Needless to say MS have a huge task on their hands.
How did it get from this to "First of all, the United States and Western Europe will suffer from the attack, Gostev was quoted by the agency as saying."?
So everyone shares their patents with MS, but not with each other, MS gets all patent rights, and everyone else has to fend for themselves? Where is the strategic advantage for everyone to jump on board exactly?
While DVDs may not support HD resolution, displaying them in progressive scan on a quality projector makes this negligable. People have to sit far away from the projector and be able to read what's on the screen, if your text doesn't look good in 720x480 they're probably not going to be able to read it anyway.
Another solution is to get an HDTV projector? Is that possible?
Rendering and outputting to video could have the same effect, and instead you burn your presentation to a DVD and use the DVD remote to navigate and cue your presentation. DVDs can already loop video, have basic overlay functions (that you might not even need), and can be used as a presentation medium. After the meeting you can hand out DVDs to interested clients.
Any basic OS comes with these tools already. Why do I need an online version? So I can't access my important programs and data unless I'm online? That's not really the "advantage" I'm looking for in an application.
But Novell had already released it all under the GPL themselves, how could SCOX undo this even if they bought Novell?
It gives a whole new meaning to "Illegal instruction."
because all of the patents to do so were tied up between various companies that didn't want to cooperate with each other.
No they don't. But now they will.
Gates will probably lose his job, but AFAIK Open Source is allowing more people to create jobs, if you get the foundation out of the way then you can concentrate on running a competitive business. If you have many start-ups trying to compete and getting shot down, that doesn't really help.
Too similar to freedom fries, might come across a little crazy...
And when Microsoft buys them out, we're back to square one?
Actually this patent is on an action that is performed depending on the duration of the button click. But then, this is just patenting stuff like the "Fire" button of Metal Gear Solid 2. If you press the button for a short i.e. "Normal" amount of time, the gun will fire. If you press the button for a longer time, your finger will "ease" off the trigger, NOT firing the gun. This gives you the option of cancelling a gun shot, or firing a gunshot. This is exactly what MS has patented. You could also define the PS2 as a limited resource computing device, since you can't upgrade it.