Re: Microsoft Cans WinFS Filesystem Permanently

In article <49su92lbhtc86g6rmgla9ikd1f1p19g6r3@xxxxxxx>,
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:02:16 -0400, ZnU <znu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> chose to
bless us with the following wisdom:

In article <84nu92dijhaniu6rccapfudtsbr7l7h862@xxxxxxx>,
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 15:56:58 -0400, ZnU <znu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> chose to
bless us with the following wisdom:

In article <aeds92ts804hohtbdp696ttpibksla019i@xxxxxxx>,
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 22:51:31 -0700, "John" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> chose
to bless us with the following wisdom:

According to Betanews Microsoft has cancelled further development of
the
WinFS filesytem. Microsoft appears incapable of designing anything
new.
They even have problems copying from others. It must be an easy job
working
for Microsoft. Thousands working on Windows and so little output
produced.


Once again we John's honesty level has to look up to see Snit's.
"Clark says there has been a shift in "packaging strategy," and
Microsoft's recent push to establish SQL Server as a data platform
played a major role deciding the future of WinFS. The work done on the
new file system will now ship as part of other Microsoft development
products."

So they killed it because they thought it would draw sales away from
another product. But of course John couldn't say that. That would be
being honest. John simply can't do that.

Unlike John, I will provide the link for the article.
http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_Axes_WinFS_Cancels_Beta_2/1151
208
143

You're buying the Microsoft spin hook, line, and sinker.

And you're buying the anti-Microsoft hook, line and sinker. Do you
have anything beyond 'I don't like Microsoft so everything they say is
a lie and needs to be reinterpreted to make Microsoft look as bad as
possible to get to the 'truth'' to reinforce your claim?

Well, yes, it's quoted below, but you ignored it.

All I see is your reinterpreting things to make Microsoft look as bad
as possible. Do you have anything substantive to back up this
conjecture?

It's funny that I know more about Microsoft's plans that you do. Anyway,
try the Wikipedia article (which has already been updated with the
recent news):

"WinFS, short for Windows Future Storage, is the codename for a data
storage and management system based on relational databases. It was
being developed by Microsoft between 2003 and 2006 for use as an
advanced storage subsystem for the Microsoft Windows operating system,
but has since been cancelled as a separate product, with some of the
technologies that were developed being moved into future versions of
ADO.NET and Microsoft SQL Server."

IOW, it was going to be a new Windows subsystem -- like Aero -- but now
it's not.

Just in case you think maybe whoever updated the Wikipedia article is
also a Microsoft hater:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/04/01/WinFS/

"SUMMARY: 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. The next version of the Windows operating system, code-named
"Longhorn," boasts a new storage subsystem that makes that task easier.
That subsystem, code-named "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. This article covers the
basic architecture of WinFS and explains how to use the WinFS managed
API."

This is no longer an accurate description of WinFS. WinFS will not be
integrated with Vista (nee Longhorn) and regular users will not be able
to use it to search for metadata attached to files.

Enterprise applications built on SQL Server may still be able to take
advantage of some of this, though it's unclear exactly what features
might make it into SQL Server or how they'd really differ from what it
already provides. Also, note that this is not the first time this has
happened. From the Wikipedia article:

"The development of WinFS is an extension to a feature which was
initially planned in the early 1990s. Dubbed Object File System, it was
supposed to be included as part of Cairo. OFS was supposed to have
powerful data aggregation features. But the Cairo project was shelved,
and with it OFS. However, later during the development of COM, a storage
system, called Storage+, based on then-upcoming SQL Server 8.0, was
planned, which was slated to offer similar aggregation features. This,
too, never materialized, and a similar technology, Relational File
System, was conceived to be launched with SQL Server 2000, but as SQL
Server 2000 ended up being a minor upgrade to SQL Server 7.0, RFS was
not implemented. But the concept was not scrapped. It just morphed into
WinFS. WinFS was initially planned for inclusion in Windows Vista, and
build 4051 of Windows Vista, then called "Longhorn", given to developers
at the Microsoft Professional Developers Conference in 2003, included
WinFS, but it suffered from significant performance issues. In August
2004, Microsoft announced that WinFS would not ship with Windows Vista;
it would instead be available as a downloadable update after Vista's
release."

And now WinFS, as such, isn't shipping at all. Until they decide to
announce it again with a new name, of course. I mean, it's only had four
so far.

WinFS was going to be a fundamental technology that was supposed to
substantially change the way the Windows operating system worked for
everyone from regular consumers up through large enterprise customers,
by replacing (or at least supplementing) the hierarchical file system
with a database-like file system.

Now some of the technology is being integrated into Microsoft's database
server app, where a few enterprise developers might eventually build
something on top of it, but where it's unlikely to ever make much of a
difference to a substantial number of end-users.

This is not a shift in "packaging strategy". Or, rather, it is, but it's
one brought about by necessity, because Microsoft has realized it can't
overcome the hurtles of actually moving Windows to a DB-like file system.

--
"Those who enter the country illegally violate the law."
-- George W. Bush in Tucson, Ariz., Nov. 28, 2005
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: are ado questions allowed here?
    ... Microsoft re MDAC ... This article describes the past, present, and future of Microsoft data ... * OLE DB (including SQL Server OLE DB Provider, ... will be available on the 64-bit Windows operating system. ...
    (comp.databases.ms-access)
  • RE: RefreshLink error - 3078
    ... this was tested on Windows XP w/ SP2 installed. ... because the DSN is incorrectly configured/installed. ... and it sure enough had showed the data I had in my SQL server ... Microsoft Online Partner Support ...
    (microsoft.public.access.conversion)
  • Re: Microsoft Cans WinFS Filesystem Permanently
    ... WinFS filesytem. ... Microsoft appears incapable of designing anything ... "WinFS, short for Windows Future Storage, is the codename for a data ... Dubbed Object File System, it was ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Microsoft Cans WinFS Filesystem Permanently
    ... WinFS filesytem. ... Microsoft appears incapable of designing anything ... "WinFS, short for Windows Future Storage, is the codename for a data ... Enterprise applications built on SQL Server may still be able to take ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Slow booting xp home.
    ... Thirty seconds to boot Windows? ... I read somewhere that Microsoft suggest 30s boot up on xp home, I have seen videos on youtube of 8s boot up on xp, I'd be delighted with 30s and happy just to get below a minute. ... Installing and Registering Visual Studio Express Editions Smart Device ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain)