Windows Longhorn
Jeff Krimmel
I just got finished reading this article:
http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-5067243.html?tag=fd_lede2_hed
and it brought to mind a few thoughts I had pondered a while back. I made
the full switch to Linux about six months ago or so, and I am pretty much
the only one out of my close friends that has done so. It's been pretty
fun, because I have spent a lot of time developing my own documentation
(writing installation guides, documents about how to do the same things in
Linux that you would do in Windows, etc.) with great input from friends of
mine that are rather intimate with Windows.
Anyway, two of my friends in particular are holding out on switching over
to Linux until they get a good, long look at Windows Longhorn. At least
for the two of them, Longhorn is a sort of make-or-break bet for Windows,
because if things stayed as is with XP, then they would switch over to
Linux today.
I am curious how much anyone around here has heard about the specifics of
Longhorn (granted, there's not much out there about it, but I'm just
curious). I am not a software guru by any stretch of the imagination, but
I hear some rather fundamental file structure changes are in the works,
and that a growing buzz seems to be tickling the fancy of several of the
hardcore Windows-user friends of mine.
So, what's the beef with Longhorn, and is there a potential for it to take
some of the steam out of the Linux desktop movement?
Jeff
Erik Funkenbusch
> So, what's the beef with Longhorn, and is there a potential for it to take
> some of the steam out of the Linux desktop movement?
Well, the new database oriented file system will offer, among other
things, near instantaneous file searching. So, rather than having to
search your whole drive, or index your drive on a nightly basis to have
a static database to make file searches go faster, it can do a live
database query on the files metadata.
So, suppose you want a word document addressed to a particular client,
longhorn will return a near instantaneous list of files that match the
criteria you speciy.
Jeff Krimmel
I know very little about how a "database oriented file system" varies from
a traditional file system, so pardon my relative ignorance. What
advantages does the database orientation offer (besides faster search
speeds)? Does it reduce all of the library file hassle that a traditional
file system encounters, or are there more striking differences than this?
Thanks,
Jeff
Roy Culley
Me Myself <postm...@127.0.0.1> writes:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 06:34:57 +0000, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>> things, near instantaneous file searching. So, rather than having to
>> search your whole drive, or index your drive on a nightly basis to have
>> a static database to make file searches go faster, it can do a live
>> database query on the files metadata.
>
> file system at all; it's just a database running on top of NTFS. The
> operating system just puts everything in the database.
The Register had an article about it a while ago with their usual
flippant headline:
Microsoft sidelines Longhorn database caper
paul cooke
> So, what's the beef with Longhorn, and is there a potential for it to
> take some of the steam out of the Linux desktop movement?
the beef will be with the EULA that it comes with... expect to have to
sign away all consumer rights in order to use it. Expect to find _all_
patches and updates forced onto you and if you don't accept them, expect
Longhorn to stop working. It will most likely check in regularly with
Microsoft to verify your installation and licence status everytime you go
online and you will have to have a connection to the internet for it to
work as well. Do not be surprised if you have to pay a subscription charge
to use it either.
Remember, Longhorn is Microsoft's last chance at proving they can get
security right from the get go... But by the time it comes out, others
will be so pissed off with the existing product that they'll have already
switched to Linux in order to get work done without having to down tools
every couple of days or so to install critical updates/patches or recover
from the latest virus du jour. Remember, a virus sig file never comes out
before the virus hits... it's always after someone's been hit.
Expect the FUD machine to keep rolling along to try and stop people from
switching to Linux. Because once someone has switched to linux it's very
rare that they come back to microsoft.
Longhorn is currently in the vapourware phase at the moment. Lots of
pretty screenshots of mockups coming out, lots of press about it as well.
--
Has your ms-windows computer been turned into a SPAM server???
<http://www.computerweekly.com/Article123378.htm>
Michael Vondung
wrote:
>http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/30670.html
"Longhorn will drop support for FAT and FAT32 file systems" -- and the
UNIX-like operating systems will probably still "support" them (as in:
mount them). Curious.
Sinister Midget
> Greetings all,
>
> I just got finished reading this article:
>
> http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-5067243.html?tag=fd_lede2_hed
<SNIPPERS>
> So, what's the beef with Longhorn, and is there a potential for it to take
> some of the steam out of the Linux desktop movement?
>
> Jeff
No comment on the specifics from me. I don't know any. I don't care
either.
Howsomever:
1. WinDoze 95 was the "killer" of all Winders. It was crap.
2. Win*DOH*s 98 was the "killer" of all WinDOS. It was crap. It turns
out to be less crap than many later offerings, however.
3. NT was going to be a better unix than UNIX. It was crap.
4. ME was going to be the "killer". It ended up being the killed. Even
MICROS~1 hated it.
5. 2K was going to be the "killer". It ended up being the best (so far)
of the NT line, though it's still crap. Hardly a killer, unless you
mean it's a killer of eX-Pee. Sort of falls into the Winduhs 98
category: pretty popular with some, especially some that have tried
eX-Pee.
6. eX-Pee was going to be the greatest of all time. The only one I
never used was ME (though I ran it up a couple of times). But of all I
tried, eX-Pee was among the worst except in crashing. Both 95and 98
still hold that distinction.
Longhorn is going to be the best one in the whole of existence. When it
comes out, eX-Pee will become crap. It doesn't matter what the facts
are, the marketing machine will make sure we all know how much better
it is than everything else out there. This is consistent with past
history of $MONOPOLY products. Also consistent for the most part is
that newer releases spiral further downward than the things they
replaced (98 & 2K being exceptions). So the odds are in favor of it not
living up to the hyperbole being spread by the Billy Marketeers.
That's OK. They count on a few of things to make it successful anyway:
1. It will cost more than it should, so people will hesitate to give it
up right away. This gives them time to gear up the marketing machine to
start making the case for the lemmings to hold on a little longer
because $NEW_RELEASE is on the horizon again. Lemmings, being true to
their nature, will not realize that the same platitudes were expressed
for $CURRENT_RELEASE and $PREVIOUS_RELEASE, excepting a few buzzwords.
2. In addition to paying too much for the "OS", people will be forced
to upgrade some hardware and software to work with the latest fare. Now
it isn't a matter of losing a little money if they switch. It's now a
matter of losing an investment.* Most of the lemmings are notoriously
bad at maths.
3. MICROS~1 doesn't have to work super hard at keeping the lemmings in
line. They just plant the seed of fear and doubt, and the lemmings take
it from there.
4. There are an awful lot of braindead losers in the industry that fear
seeing MICROS~1 marginalized. The reasons vary, but the main ones are
laziness, and fear of having to go to work. $MONOPOLY welcomes these
people with open arms. They are much better pawns at using marketspeak
because they aren't directly tied to the borg. They'll write articles
about how hard it is to use linux, and how it's going to cost a fortune
in retraining to teach people how to point and click differently than
they're used to doing. They'll install linux for 5 minutes, then write
all about how it's "not quite there yet" because they weren't able to
figure out where the Winders button was on the bar at the bottom. These
people are leaders to the lemmings. The lemmings come to them for
encouragement. When lemmings get $LATEST_CRAP and it seems to be worse
than the last release, they receive assurances from the "experts" in
the field that they're imagining it all because the "truth" is that the
current stuff is lightyears ahead of the stuff they threw out that let
them do things faster and didn't cost as much. The lemmings like these
people and call them "gurus" which, in lemming-speak, means "Gods". And
the lemmings believe them because they write articles with a lot of
technical terms like "hinting" and "vmm" and "TCO, articles that get
published, sometimes on their own personal web pages. And some of them
show up on TV and talk about important technical things, like how much
more it would cost to change the OS than the current $387 BILLION for
the worm some 8-year-old released on a pr0n page a couple of weeks ago,
and how getting your machine remote-controlled to attack national
security targets is just an everyday, here forever part of owning a
computer.
Despite #3, some are waking up to find that it's no longer worth using
crappy, buggy, unstable and insecure software. Then they discover they
don't have to remain lemmings forever. Then they start looking for
alternatives. Those numbers are growing, and it's scaring the bejesus
out of Micro-Soft.
* I managed to convince more than one person that this was the very
reason they _should_ switch, in spite of having spent a small fortune
on trying to stay even. One guy was a harder sell than the others. He
had over $2,000 in software just to work with 2K. I pointed out,
repeatedly, that he'd have to spend $2,000 on the next one, and another
$2,000 on the one after and on and on. But, he also had the opportunity
to get off that treadmill, toss the current $2,000 out the window, and
not have to spend the others in the future. He was finally convinced.
He's never regretted it.
--
The three Rs of Microsoft support: Retry, Reboot, Reinstall.
Stephen Howe
> things, near instantaneous file searching. So, rather than having to
> search your whole drive, or index your drive on a nightly basis to have
> a static database to make file searches go faster, it can do a live
> database query on the files metadata.
>
> So, suppose you want a word document addressed to a particular client,
> longhorn will return a near instantaneous list of files that match the
> criteria you speciy.
And what is the overhead of that Eric? What size does the metadata take?
Stephen Howe
D. C. Sessions
> And what is the overhead of that Eric? What size does the metadata take?
What impact does it have on file write times?
If the operating system isn't just saving the bits but also
parsing the file (and for lots and lots of file types, too)
for stuff like street addresses, then one suspects that at
least a few additional cycles will be needed.
--
| Microsoft: "A reputation for releasing inferior software will make |
| it more difficult for a software vendor to induce customers to pay |
| for new products or new versions of existing products." |
end
Erik Funkenbusch
What do you mean by "library file hassle"? Are you referring to version
dependancies? If so, then that's not really a function of the file system.
Erik Funkenbusch
Considering nobody has yet seen it outside of Microsoft, we'll have to
wait to see.
Erik Funkenbusch
> In <3f4b5950$0$253$ed9e...@reading.news.pipex.net>, Stephen Howe wrote:
>
>
>>And what is the overhead of that Eric? What size does the metadata take?
>
> What impact does it have on file write times?
>
> If the operating system isn't just saving the bits but also
> parsing the file (and for lots and lots of file types, too)
> for stuff like street addresses, then one suspects that at
> least a few additional cycles will be needed.
Well, that can happen asynchronously, so it shouldn't effect write times
if done correctly. Yes, it will likely have some overhead, but by 2005
we should have 5 or 6 Ghz machines.
Mr. Berserker
> things, near instantaneous file searching. So, rather than having to
> search your whole drive, or index your drive on a nightly basis to have
> a static database to make file searches go faster, it can do a live
> database query on the files metadata.
Really, just the sort of thing that belongs in a filesystem! I'll
stick with slocate.
>
> So, suppose you want a word document addressed to a particular client,
> longhorn will return a near instantaneous list of files that match the
> criteria you speciy.
Why not organise your documents? Moreover, what if this list turns up
real big?
chrisv
<er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>Well, that can happen asynchronously, so it shouldn't effect write times
>if done correctly. Yes, it will likely have some overhead, but by 2005
>we should have 5 or 6 Ghz machines.
Which Micro$oft will bring to a crawl with their bloatware.
The Renegade Toaster
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 01:24:10 -0500, Jeff Krimmel wrote:
>
> > So, what's the beef with Longhorn, and is there a potential for it to
> > take some of the steam out of the Linux desktop movement?
>
> the beef will be with the EULA that it comes with... expect to have to
> sign away all consumer rights in order to use it. Expect to find _all_
> patches and updates forced onto you and if you don't accept them, expect
> Longhorn to stop working. It will most likely check in regularly with
> Microsoft to verify your installation and licence status everytime you go
> online and you will have to have a connection to the internet for it to
> work as well. Do not be surprised if you have to pay a subscription charge
> to use it either.
And let's not forget the new freedom longhorn will offer to Microsoft
and any other copyright holder. Now, with the right encryption keys,
anyone can access your hard drive and delete any pertinant files,
thanks to the most intrusive digital rights management software EVER
concieved of!
Yes, it's true, now the RIAA can get into your personal computer, and
delete or disable your entire MP3 collection at will! Personal
monitoring with Longhorn is also made incredibly easy. Every computer
has it's own signature, which will be broadcast through the browser,
making tracking your buying habits that much easier.
But the best part about the DRM is that it makes compatibility with
Linux, or even current versions of Windows completely impossible! You
either use longhorn, or you cannot communicate with any longhorn
systems!
This is such an innovation, that new hardware needed to be designed,
making your current system USELESS! Woo hoo. Man this is a make or
break deal for Microsoft. The big assumption is that consumers will
tolerate this level or DRM, when they have been shocked and revolted
by less invasive systems in the past. Although, I see more break than
make. It's a series of really bad ideas piled on top of each other,
and I don't think customers are going to take it.
Windows Longhorn is based on technology that is so invasive, it would
make George Orwell blush. Beware!
Peter Jensen
>>> Well, the new database oriented file system will offer ...
[Snip - list of features]
>> And what is the overhead of that Eric? What size does the metadata
>> take?
>
> Considering nobody has yet seen it outside of Microsoft, we'll have to
> wait to see.
Ah, I see. Vaporware. Where *have* we seen that before ...
--
PeKaJe
All I kin say is when you finds yo'self wanderin' in a peach orchard, ya
don't go lookin' for rutabagas. -- Kingfish
Peter Hayes
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 01:24:10 -0500, mad_sci...@hotmail.com
> blathered and smoked:
>
>> Greetings all,
>>
>> I just got finished reading this article:
>>
>> http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-5067243.html?tag=fd_lede2_hed
>
> <SNIPPERS>
>
>> So, what's the beef with Longhorn, and is there a potential for it to take
>> some of the steam out of the Linux desktop movement?
>>
>> Jeff
>
> No comment on the specifics from me. I don't know any. I don't care
> either.
>
> Howsomever:
>
> 1. WinDoze 95 was the "killer" of all Winders. It was crap.
>
> 2. Win*DOH*s 98 was the "killer" of all WinDOS. It was crap. It turns
> out to be less crap than many later offerings, however.
>
> 3. NT was going to be a better unix than UNIX. It was crap.
>
> 4. ME was going to be the "killer". It ended up being the killed. Even
> MICROS~1 hated it.
>
> 5. 2K was going to be the "killer". It ended up being the best (so far)
> of the NT line, though it's still crap. Hardly a killer, unless you
> mean it's a killer of eX-Pee. Sort of falls into the Winduhs 98
> category: pretty popular with some, especially some that have tried
> eX-Pee.
Yeup '98 and '2000 were the best of the bunch.
<...>
> 2. In addition to paying too much for the "OS", people will be forced
> to upgrade some hardware and software to work with the latest fare. Now
> it isn't a matter of losing a little money if they switch. It's now a
> matter of losing an investment.* Most of the lemmings are notoriously
> bad at maths.
Don't forget - Longhorn will be released at the same time as Intel/AMD
release Palladium systems, thereby fulfilling Microsoft's "Trustworthy
Computing" - until said 8 year old cracks it.
> 3. MICROS~1 doesn't have to work super hard at keeping the lemmings in
> line. They just plant the seed of fear and doubt, and the lemmings take
> it from there.
I was in PC World today, looking (only looking...) at the 17" Toshiba
laptop [1] and the sales dork started selling. I said I was also looking
at the 17" Apple PowerBook. The way he trashed Apple, and puffed up
Microsoft was unbelievable - even more so when there was a pile of Apple
kit in the next aisle.
> Despite #3, some are waking up to find that it's no longer worth using
> crappy, buggy, unstable and insecure software. Then they discover they
> don't have to remain lemmings forever. Then they start looking for
> alternatives. Those numbers are growing, and it's scaring the bejesus
> out of Micro-Soft.
It's a race between Microsoft bringing out what they fervently hope will
be a decent OS and everybody and their dog switching to Linux/OSX.
[1] - The Tosh looked nice, until I put the lid down, it was a ghastly
reddish or ochre colour. Shudder...
--
Peter
Jeff Krimmel
[...]
>> I know very little about how a "database oriented file system" varies from
>> a traditional file system, so pardon my relative ignorance. What
>> advantages does the database orientation offer (besides faster search
>> speeds)? Does it reduce all of the library file hassle that a traditional
>> file system encounters, or are there more striking differences than this?
>
> What do you mean by "library file hassle"? Are you referring to version
> dependancies? If so, then that's not really a function of the file system.
I suppose this is a good representation of how little I know about "file
systems" proper. My question is, does a database oriented file system
fundamentally alter a directory structure as it exists in current file
systems? Does a such a file system remove the inevitable complications
(maybe that I have only experienced personally) that are introduced with
remoted located library files needed to run certain applications?
Jeff
Sinister Midget
I refuse to go anywhere near Best Buy any more. They sold their souls
to MICROS~1, and that was bad enough. I figured I could work around
their ignorance by simply ignoring them. What did them in was how they
handle rebates. They lost me over that one.
I still suspect they weren't long anyway. The next to last time I was
in one the drone kept trying to sell me a desktop that I didn't want
because, he claimed, it had feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeechures I
couldn't live without, all due to the vastly superior eX-Pee being
installed. Every time I mentioned linux he lost his composure for a
moment, then began the dance routine again.
I wasn't even looking at desktops. I was looking at NICs on the other
side of the aisle.
>> Despite #3, some are waking up to find that it's no longer worth using
>> crappy, buggy, unstable and insecure software. Then they discover they
>> don't have to remain lemmings forever. Then they start looking for
>> alternatives. Those numbers are growing, and it's scaring the bejesus
>> out of Micro-Soft.
>
> It's a race between Microsoft bringing out what they fervently hope will
> be a decent OS and everybody and their dog switching to Linux/OSX.
They'll lose in that race. They can't hire enough competent programmers
and put them to working under competent team leaders to do it quickly
enough. Last week was too late. Next year is their end.
> [1] - The Tosh looked nice, until I put the lid down, it was a ghastly
> reddish or ochre colour. Shudder...
I like MACs. Not enough to part with the kind of money they require.
But if I find a good deal on one, and said one doesn't look like
something that's supposed to have flowers planted in it.....
--
I use linux because I've used Windows.
Simon Cooke
One might ask the same about ext2's 'fragment-free' file allocation
strategy.
Simon
carli...@yahoo.com
The audience breaks out in wild applause. Carlos Grau stands up and
leads the crowd in a standing ovation.
Hear hear! A virtuoso performance. Masterful. A chef d'ouvre.
Bravo.
The truth has been spoken.
Jim Richardson
Hash: SHA1
And unlike "longhorn", we actually have something we can measure :)
something more than vapour.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/S7qsd90bcYOAWPYRAnkFAKDvZy15R07CZ2h+cPrduH25EWRUuQCfdrDz
wS7IlZxVpLcRWoFCrg3HEI8=
=ZWMG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because eventually, you grow up enough to be trusted with a fork()
Peter Hayes
Oh dear...
So organisations will need another round of hardware investment to run
Longhorn? Extrapolate that to 2010 and we'll be needing Crays to run
Microsoft's offering (assuming there's still a Microsoft), and that's just
to type a letter and send an e-mail.
Isn't this getting awfully out of proportion?
--
Peter
Peter Hayes
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 18:04:55 +0100, pe...@NOSPAM.demon.co.uk blathered
> and smoked:
<...>
>> I was in PC World today, looking (only looking...) at the 17" Toshiba
>> laptop [1] and the sales dork started selling. I said I was also looking
>> at the 17" Apple PowerBook. The way he trashed Apple, and puffed up
>> Microsoft was unbelievable - even more so when there was a pile of Apple
>> kit in the next aisle.
>
> I refuse to go anywhere near Best Buy any more. They sold their souls
> to MICROS~1, and that was bad enough. I figured I could work around
> their ignorance by simply ignoring them. What did them in was how they
> handle rebates. They lost me over that one.
PC World is one of the few UK computer stores that'll take back small
items of hardware you might decide you didn't really want after all.
> I still suspect they weren't long anyway. The next to last time I was
> in one the drone kept trying to sell me a desktop that I didn't want
> because, he claimed, it had feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeechures I
> couldn't live without, all due to the vastly superior eX-Pee being
> installed. Every time I mentioned linux he lost his composure for a
> moment, then began the dance routine again.
I didn't dare even mention Linux, his evident hatred of Apple was
offputting enough.
> I wasn't even looking at desktops. I was looking at NICs on the other
> side of the aisle.
>
>>> Despite #3, some are waking up to find that it's no longer worth using
>>> crappy, buggy, unstable and insecure software. Then they discover they
>>> don't have to remain lemmings forever. Then they start looking for
>>> alternatives. Those numbers are growing, and it's scaring the bejesus
>>> out of Micro-Soft.
>>
>> It's a race between Microsoft bringing out what they fervently hope will
>> be a decent OS and everybody and their dog switching to Linux/OSX.
>
> They'll lose in that race. They can't hire enough competent programmers
> and put them to working under competent team leaders to do it quickly
> enough. Last week was too late. Next year is their end.
How many Blasters or SoBigs does it take before the penny drops?
>> [1] - The Tosh looked nice, until I put the lid down, it was a ghastly
>> reddish or ochre colour. Shudder...
>
> I like MACs. Not enough to part with the kind of money they require.
> But if I find a good deal on one, and said one doesn't look like
> something that's supposed to have flowers planted in it.....
A white Apple on a steel grey background is ok.
PC World couldn't even set up the Tosh properly - they'd the resolution
set too low so the display looked rough. Setting it correctly made a world
of difference.
--
Peter
Terry
and this is what they wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 01:24:10 -0500, mad_sci...@hotmail.com blathered and smoked:
>
>> Greetings all,
>>
>> I just got finished reading this article:
>>
>> http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-5067243.html?tag=fd_lede2_hed
>
><SNIPPERS>
>
>> So, what's the beef with Longhorn, and is there a potential for it to take
>> some of the steam out of the Linux desktop movement?
>>
>> Jeff
>
> No comment on the specifics from me. I don't know any. I don't care
> either.
>
> Howsomever:
<snip awesome post by Sinister>
>
> --
> The three Rs of Microsoft support: Retry, Reboot, Reinstall.
Sinister I only have three words to say here ...
Awesome post Sinister!
--
Kind Regards from Terry
My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2
New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/
** Linux Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
Sinister Midget
> Sinister Midget threw some tea leaves on the floor
> and this is what they wrote:
<SNIP>
>> No comment on the specifics from me. I don't know any. I don't care
>> either.
>>
>> Howsomever:
>
><snip awesome post by Sinister>
>
>>
>> --
>> The three Rs of Microsoft support: Retry, Reboot, Reinstall.
>
>
> Sinister I only have three words to say here ...
>
> Awesome post Sinister!
Thank you!
--
Microsoft: The company that made email dangerous. And web surfing. And
midi files. And MP3s.
john bailo
To me, that is not a 'database oriented filesystem'.
That is a database, which stores file attributes, or 'info fields'
from a document.
To see a true Database File System, go back and look at
the PRIME OS. Every operation from file creation, was
part of the Relational Language. At the command prompt,
you could execute SQL commands, built-in.
I used PRIME OS while taking a course in Relational Algebra
at Drexel in Philly. I remember it very well because it made
such perfect sense.
The vision of a true dbms oriented file system was the vision espoused
back in the IAYF days. It didn't happen. Yet, surprisingly Jim
Allchin kept his job and moved up a few notches. Oh, to be rewarded
so handsomely for failure.
Erik Funkenbusch
Well, WinFS is really more of metadata handling system. The OS could
certainly be written to search for such libraries throughout a connected
network. Distributed File System is a way to merge a large number of
networked storage systems into a single namespace, and I would bet WinFS
will use it as well.
Erik Funkenbusch
What is it with you anyways? One minute you're a babbling moron, the
next you're a rocket scientist?
Peter
<sini...@200motelsNOSPAM.com> wrote:
>>> The three Rs of Microsoft support: Retry, Reboot, Reinstall.
>>
>>
I heard another one - plug and pray.
Simon Cooke
> Sinister I only have three words to say here ...
>
> Awesome post Sinister!
And lo, Terry Porter takes on his position as Cheerleader to the trolls of
the group.
Do you have pom poms?
Simon
Simon Cooke
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 18:24:20 GMT,
> Simon Cooke <simon...@eaSPAMMAGErthNOSPAMlink.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 14:00:18 +0100, Stephen Howe wrote:
>>
>>>> Well, the new database oriented file system will offer, among other
>>>> things, near instantaneous file searching. So, rather than having to
>>>> search your whole drive, or index your drive on a nightly basis to have
>>>> a static database to make file searches go faster, it can do a live
>>>> database query on the files metadata.
>>>>
>>>> So, suppose you want a word document addressed to a particular client,
>>>> longhorn will return a near instantaneous list of files that match the
>>>> criteria you speciy.
>>>
>>> And what is the overhead of that Eric? What size does the metadata take?
>>
>> One might ask the same about ext2's 'fragment-free' file allocation
>> strategy.
>>
>> Simon
>
> And unlike "longhorn", we actually have something we can measure :)
> something more than vapour.
Alphas are out there... Betas are expected in October.
Peter Köhlmann
And the "Real Thing" will be replaced by the next Pre-Alpha...
--
Who the fuck is General Failure, and why is he reading my harddisk?
Jim Richardson
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 01:40:43 GMT,
Simon Cooke <simon...@eaSPAMMAGErthNOSPAMlink.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 12:53:16 -0700, Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 18:24:20 GMT,
>> Simon Cooke <simon...@eaSPAMMAGErthNOSPAMlink.net> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 14:00:18 +0100, Stephen Howe wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Well, the new database oriented file system will offer, among other
>>>>> things, near instantaneous file searching. So, rather than having to
>>>>> search your whole drive, or index your drive on a nightly basis to have
>>>>> a static database to make file searches go faster, it can do a live
>>>>> database query on the files metadata.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, suppose you want a word document addressed to a particular client,
>>>>> longhorn will return a near instantaneous list of files that match the
>>>>> criteria you speciy.
>>>>
>>>> And what is the overhead of that Eric? What size does the metadata take?
>>>
>>> One might ask the same about ext2's 'fragment-free' file allocation
>>> strategy.
>>>
>>> Simon
>>
>> And unlike "longhorn", we actually have something we can measure :)
>> something more than vapour.
>
> Alphas are out there... Betas are expected in October.
And yet Erik seemed to think that only MICROS~1 had seen Longhorn. Was
he in error? or is it still vapour?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/TBVpd90bcYOAWPYRAiv+AKCsyp6CTu1ygmy86/eR38C7Ek1zOACgk6LT
bi0CtdirMnrCNql6KB4fLdQ=
=xwLA
GreyCloud
I'd rather not.
Wayne Throop
: This gives them time to gear up the marketing machine to start making
: the case for the lemmings to hold on a little longer because
: $NEW_RELEASE is on the horizon again. Lemmings, being true to their
: nature, will not realize that the same platitudes were expressed for
: $CURRENT_RELEASE and $PREVIOUS_RELEASE, excepting a few buzzwords.
Interesting point. Having recently gone through the install process for
both 98 and XP, I find the above quite accurate. It was amazing that
the "new features" XP was most touting were also touted as things that
98 was best at. As in (roughly) "FAT32 filesystem will be much more
stable and workable" in 98, but "NT filesystem will be much more stable
and workable" in XP. Similar blurbs about various media apps,
menu organization, control panel, "wizards", etc, etc, etc.
As I say, installing them both in a short period of time
is definitely a "deja vu all over again" experience.
On the other hand, XP does seem more stable (crashes less
often, and requiring more provocation to do so), even though
not as zippy a feel to it.
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Peter Hayes
> Erik Funkenbusch <er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote in message
> news:<lcD2b.199657$It4....@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>...
>> Jeff Krimmel wrote:
>>
>> > So, what's the beef with Longhorn, and is there a potential for it to
>> > take some of the steam out of the Linux desktop movement?
>>
>> Well, the new database oriented file system will offer, among other
>> things, near instantaneous file searching. So, rather than having to
>> search your whole drive, or index your drive on a nightly basis to have
>> a static database to make file searches go faster, it can do a live
>> database query on the files metadata.
>>
>> So, suppose you want a word document addressed to a particular client,
>> longhorn will return a near instantaneous list of files that match the
>> criteria you speciy.
>
> To me, that is not a 'database oriented filesystem'.
>
> That is a database, which stores file attributes, or 'info fields'
> from a document.
>
> To see a true Database File System, go back and look at
> the PRIME OS. Every operation from file creation, was
> part of the Relational Language. At the command prompt,
> you could execute SQL commands, built-in.
Didn't BeOS have a filesystem something like that - you could have a 100k
file with apparantly zero content, all the data was in the attributes.
> I used PRIME OS while taking a course in Relational Algebra
> at Drexel in Philly. I remember it very well because it made
> such perfect sense.
>
> The vision of a true dbms oriented file system was the vision espoused
> back in the IAYF days. It didn't happen. Yet, surprisingly Jim
> Allchin kept his job and moved up a few notches. Oh, to be rewarded
> so handsomely for failure.
--
Peter
chrisv
<pe...@NOSPAM.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> Well, that can happen asynchronously, so it shouldn't effect write times
>> if done correctly. Yes, it will likely have some overhead, but by 2005
>> we should have 5 or 6 Ghz machines.
>
>Oh dear...
>
>So organisations will need another round of hardware investment to run
>Longhorn? Extrapolate that to 2010 and we'll be needing Crays to run
>Microsoft's offering (assuming there's still a Microsoft), and that's just
>to type a letter and send an e-mail.
Well, you gotta keep that revenue stream going, you know. "You can't
continue to use your old tool, which seems to do the job just fine.
You need this shiny new tool, with 3D technology!"
Jeff Krimmel
I agree with you here. When I used Windows XP, I never found it to be
un-usably unstable or slow and lethargic. I suppose my multitude of
reasons to switch to Linux were much more subtle than this.
Jeff
Peter Hayes
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 18:04:55 +0100, pe...@NOSPAM.demon.co.uk blathered and smoked:
<...>
>> I was in PC World today, looking (only looking...) at the 17" Toshiba
>> laptop [1] and the sales dork started selling. I said I was also looking
>> at the 17" Apple PowerBook. The way he trashed Apple, and puffed up
>> Microsoft was unbelievable - even more so when there was a pile of Apple
>> kit in the next aisle.
>
> I refuse to go anywhere near Best Buy any more. They sold their souls
> to MICROS~1, and that was bad enough. I figured I could work around
> their ignorance by simply ignoring them. What did them in was how they
> handle rebates. They lost me over that one.
PC World is one of the few UK computer stores that'll take back small
items of hardware you might decide you didn't really want after all.
> I still suspect they weren't long anyway. The next to last time I was
> in one the drone kept trying to sell me a desktop that I didn't want
> because, he claimed, it had feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeechures I
> couldn't live without, all due to the vastly superior eX-Pee being
> installed. Every time I mentioned linux he lost his composure for a
> moment, then began the dance routine again.
I didn't dare even mention Linux, his evident hatred of Apple was
offputting enough.
> I wasn't even looking at desktops. I was looking at NICs on the other
> side of the aisle.
>
>>> Despite #3, some are waking up to find that it's no longer worth using
>>> crappy, buggy, unstable and insecure software. Then they discover they
>>> don't have to remain lemmings forever. Then they start looking for
>>> alternatives. Those numbers are growing, and it's scaring the bejesus
>>> out of Micro-Soft.
>>
>> It's a race between Microsoft bringing out what they fervently hope will
>> be a decent OS and everybody and their dog switching to Linux/OSX.
>
> They'll lose in that race. They can't hire enough competent programmers
> and put them to working under competent team leaders to do it quickly
> enough. Last week was too late. Next year is their end.
How many Blasters or SoBigs does it take before the penny drops?
>> [1] - The Tosh looked nice, until I put the lid down, it was a ghastly
>> reddish or ochre colour. Shudder...
>
> I like MACs. Not enough to part with the kind of money they require.
> But if I find a good deal on one, and said one doesn't look like
> something that's supposed to have flowers planted in it.....
A white Apple on a steel grey background is ok.