Microsoft Axes WinFS, Cancels Beta 2

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

June 25, 2006, 12:02 AM

The lead program manager for WinFS, Quentin Clark, has announced that his product is no more -- at least in its current form. Just one week after a slew of WinFS sessions at TechEd, Microsoft has decided not to continue development on the new file system, canceling the expected Beta 2 release.

Although the status of WinFS has already changed a number of times, it seems Microsoft has finally given up on once-lofty plans to completely re-architect the way Windows stores files. The idea of WinFS, or Windows File Store, was to create a "sea of data" that abolishes the need for the standard file and folder hierarchy.

For example, no longer would documents need to be stored in My Documents or images in My Pictures; instead, Windows would simply display the files associated with a particular request on demand. In addition, WinFS could store structured data such as contacts, calendars and more.

The technology, which is based upon Microsoft's SQL Server platform, was originally slated to ship in Windows Vista, but the feature was cut in 2004. The changed prompted many industry watchers to speculate that WinFS was dead, a victim of delays plaguing the new operating system.

But Microsoft very publicly brought WinFS back to life last August, releasing Beta 1 ahead of PDC 2005 and announcing plans to launch the file system technology as a separate download after the debut of Windows Vista. WinFS was integrated into the WinFX Runtime Components and back-ported to Windows XP.

Five sessions covering WinFS were held at TechEd 2006 in Boston last week, and Beta 2 was expected to arrive this month. "We finally can realize a world that simplifies the persistence, manipulation and retrieval of data, giving us an opportunity to create unique new applications based on those new capabilities," WinFS program manager Shan Sinha said last month.

However, the product's resurrection was short-lived. 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.

Support for unstructured data in WinFS and auto-administraton functionality (known as the "Guardian") to make sure the technology always works will be integrated into the next SQL Server, code-named Katmai. Code from the WinFS API will also find its way into the next version of ADO.NET for Orcas, the next release of Visual Studio.

"This really is a big deal – productizing these innovations into the mainline data products makes a big contribution toward the Data Platform Vision we have been talking about. Doing this also gives us the right data platform for further innovations," explained Clark in a blog posting. "Be encouraged that we are able to get the underlying feature work into Orcas and Katmai."

Clark was vague on what the end of WinFS means for future Windows releases, only saying that Microsoft will implement new features as they mature. He notes that search and organization innovations that helped shape WinFS are now a part of Windows Vista, at least conceptually.

"Having so much ready for SQL Server and ADO.NET is a big impact on the platform, and more will come," he said.

Add a Comment (176 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By GS5

posted Jun 27, 2006 - 2:03 AM

What's the point of Vista now??? They keep axing all the cool stuff that would have made Vista a great OS. By the time they're done stripping it, it'll just be Windows XP SP3 with a shiny new theme. M$ should just take another 2 to 3 years and finish the damn thing. They are clearly rushing something that is not ready to be released to the consumers.

Score: 0

By trevithick

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 10:35 PM

There goes about the only thing to look forward to in Vista.

Score: 0

By zridling

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 5:34 PM

I think I'll wait for Vista's successor and hold out for the post-2007 version of Microsoft Office (when they fix that silly HUGE ribbon), which is one more reason I can take my time and wait to upgrade. Sorry Microsoft, but you've taken away so many features in Vista, that me — Mr. User — has yet to be convinced that I either need or want it. And does Office 2007 do anything new that I can't do with Office 2003? Same reasoning for it. Instead, I'll spend that software upgrade money on new hardware in '07.

Score: 0

By xprizex

edited Jun 27, 2006 - 2:57 AM

I'm not a fan of M$ Office but 2007 is great, I been using it for the last couple of weeks. It took a little time to get used to the new interface but all in all it's a nice update. And I'm actually becoming quite fond of the ribbon. heheh:-)

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 10:24 PM

The ribbon is absolutely ingenius, and it has already made me more productive in Office... I'm irritated they haven't implemented it better in Outlook and OneNote.

It's not going away, so you might as well get used to it for a while. That said, it has nothing to do with Vista OR WinFS.

Score: 0

By ruemere

posted Jun 27, 2006 - 6:30 AM

The ribbon is pretty uninteresting. Slower than ordinary menu, does not offer access to more advanced operations, still does not display key shortcuts.

Good for newbies, rather bland if you need to do some work more complicated than writing a memo.

Regards,
Ruemere

Score: 0

By weblackey

edited Jun 27, 2006 - 2:52 PM

Ah, but it does display key shortcuts. Hold down the Alt key for like 1 or 2 seconds. You'll see little letters appear over the items. Start typing the letters to use the features on the ribbon. You can go all the way to individual feature options.

Score: 0

By schristie11

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:34 PM

How is it possable so many people here have missed the news?

Vista will bring with is Direct X 10.

Microsoft will not allow DX-10 to install on XP or any other operating system.

All new games for windows will require DX-10.
All new Hardware for windows with require DX-10
All new VIDEO CARDS for windows will require DX-10.

is it now clear why you will ALL upgrade to some version of VISTA in the next 24 months?

Does anyone here check facts before posting random opinions?

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 10:22 PM

WTF does this have to do with WinFS? Nothing?

That's what I thought... why are so many people wasting time responding directly to DirectX concerns.

Score: 0

By roj

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 7:52 PM

That would bother me if:

1) I was a gamer fanboi. I'm not.
2) I was fixated on having the latest and greatest hardware. I'm not.
3) I needed a brand spanking new gaming video card. I don't.

Endgame.

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 2:36 PM

Microsoft will allow it to install on XP when they realize nobody buys Vista.

LOL.

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 3:50 PM

You are truely naive if you think no one will buy vista, just because the techies hate vista, doesnt mean the home users arent going to buy it. Home users are microsoft's biggest cash cows

Score: 0

By roj

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 7:50 PM

...and stupid enough to buy garbage from Dell, HP and a host of leeching OEMs who sell proprietary garbage but will be only too happy to bundle Vista with that garbage as they indulge in the frenzy of hardware buying that the new OS will precipitate.

Lot's of stupid people / people who don't know any better out there - just look around you.

And yes, they're MS' cash cow - the OEM's too.

Score: 0

By CMSTech

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 3:58 PM

You are correct that it will get out there, after Vista is released it will be the default OS installed on all the PCs sold that can support any version of it.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:07 PM

*Microsoft will not allow DX-10 to install on XP or any other operating system.

All new games for windows will require DX-10.
All new Hardware for windows with require DX-10
All new VIDEO CARDS for windows will require DX-10.*

Either you are listening to way too much hype, or you don't understand technology. Ever heard of backwards compatible?

There is NO way games will require DX10 ONLY. DirectX must be compatible with current hardware, even NEW games. All NEW hardware thus will ALSO be backwards compliant, this is a feature of the driver/software NOT the hardware. We aren't REQUIRED to EVER move to a NEW OS, games will retain support for their CURRENT customers, they will not alienate them.

So no, your 24 month timeline is inaccurate. Did you just learn about computers last month or something?

I know lots of people playing games from ALL OS genres, going back to some still being on Windows 98.. so much for your loser theory huh?

Even thou the current DirectX is out.. are they REQUIRED to use it? NO!

Score: 0

By sqfanatic

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 3:28 PM

My opinion has never been stated in regards to this. I have only been reporting the stated intentions of Microsoft. Go read it yourself.

Microsoft intends and expects to have a LACK of backwards compatability on DX8 and older hardware. Games will likely suffer the same incompatabilities which depend on DX8 and older.

Microsoft said there would be some DX9 compatability but the hardware would suffer a loss of preformance using DX9. Microsoft also stated 32 bit processors would have a preformance loss with VISTA.
The OS is native DX-10 and also native 64 bit. They state the VISTA "recomended platform specs" are 64 bit processor and DX-10 Videocard with 256 meg ram and 1gig of RAM (motherboard) memory.

This is fact. Go look it up.
You can even call me names, but it's not substanciating your "opinion" against the facts Microsoft and others have published. Betanews even had a report on it a week or two ago. They stated everything I have on these posts, including what you called "my opinion". I was jsut restating their facts and conclusions.

Score: 0

By The Man

posted Jun 27, 2006 - 10:57 AM

so why would a gamer want vista?

you're saying it won't support dx8, and will have compatability problems with dx9.

unless you're willing to shell out for a dx10 card, why would a gamer switch?

it's not like the game manufacturers are going to stop making games compatible with dx8 and dx9.

"DX-10 Videocard "
lol
vapourware for the moment

Score: 0

By CMSTech

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:50 PM

I find it hard to believe that everything in the next 24 months will *require* DX10.

I am sure game makers know that not everyone will upgrade and will support DX10 (maybe even with advanced features with DX10) however they would be shooting themselves in the foot if the game didn't work with DX9 as well.

Score: 0

By schristie11

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 1:05 PM

CMSTech,
i do not mean to sound confrontational..

but, please research the validity of my statements. you will find they are the facts.
i have even seen video cards at the stores with stickers on them stating they are DX10 compatable. the manufactorers of hardware and software have known it was coming for a while.

i am not saying, nothing will support dx9. but i am saying the future is dx10 and newer, and they will only be allowed to run on Vista.

if you want the new game next summer to run fast and fluidly so you can enjoy it, you will likely need a dx10 video card, and vista.

how many HOT! NEW! DX8 games are still being made? none.
you are required to install dx9 to play anygame released in 2006 for sure, and may 2005.

To say this trend will not continue in the next 24 months, is like saying that no one will ever need to upgrade their video cards becasue the software and games "can be made" to use existing technology to accomplish the same vidual improvements. History has shown the trend, and it will continue.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:02 PM

Its not related to Vista, so your comments are irrelevant. So the fact that your comments are valid, which is doubtful, doesn't relate to this article.

WinFS may have BEEN a feature in Vista, but its pulled anyway, so its a moot point.

DX10-DX9 has nothing to with Vista or WinFS, so it isn't in-line with this subject, now is it?

Score: 0

By TheProfessional

posted Jul 2, 2006 - 2:08 AM

You are an idiot rijp. You probably have, never will, or could get la*d in your sad l*fe. Shut up. You people annoy me and others. Go home and suck on your mom's nipples you baby.

Score: 0

By schristie11

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 1:09 PM

rijp ,
my comments are in line with the discussion, even tho other people have taken the discussion in a different direction then what this article started as.

aparently you need a new file system in your head. seems you cant process or find relational data. try installing google desktop on your brain, your local Dr. can help.

and since Vista and DirectX 10 are a match required by Microsoft, i can not see how you believe they are totally unrelated to each other.

if DX10 was available for windows xp, i am sure that Microsoft would not get all the $ from every PC gamer in the country who wants to play the new Half Life 2 addon. People would stay with XP and keep their cash. But, that is not the fact of the matter. The fact is DX10 requires Vista, hence the relationship of my points.

Score: 0

By CMSTech

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:10 PM

LOL

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:20 PM

I like how you attempt agreement with someone, so you can rally support for your cause, and you think they even care..

Just how pathetic is your life?

Score: 0

By CMSTech

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:54 PM

LOL

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:08 PM

I like your dumb a** comments, almost as much as I admire your inability on the use of proper case. What's the matter, they didn't teach you english 101 in the juvenille detention center?

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Jul 10, 2006 - 6:37 PM

It's sound, not sond.

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 2:37 PM

You are an idiot .....ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaa.....

Ha ha ha ha ha!

Score: 0

By CMSTech

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:12 PM

Like your opinion is any more important that anyone else's on here....

Again with the insults and putdowns...

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:21 PM

Well do something about it, all you keep doing is replying to my comments. You don't like it, I can find some other forums you can belong to. YOU are the one complaining. Evidently its not as bad as you contest.

Score: 0

By CMSTech

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:55 PM

*Evidently its not as bad as you contest.*

Others just aren't vocal about it. They dislike it just as much.

Score: 0

By The Man

edited Jun 27, 2006 - 11:40 AM

nah,
he just uses too much space sometimes, my scroll wheel is wearing out
:-p

Score: 0

By CMSTech

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:00 PM

oh, I agree that some games will require DX10. And they should, with some of the games that are coming out now, trying to support DX6 and DX9 would be impossible so it is better to develop for DX9 alone.

I was disagreeing with your statement that *all* games will require DX10.

Probly only the high-high end ones will.

I can't wait to play them..:)

Score: 0

By schristie11

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:06 PM

CMSTech,

you are right, not every game at BestBuy that is "new" in 2007 will require DX10.
Just the games worth playing.

Score: 0

By CMSTech

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:10 PM

100% Agreed!

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 12:11 PM

Hahahahahahahaha.

They suck.

I think Bill is leaving because he can see what's coming.

Server 2003 and Windows XP SP2 are so good already that there is no reason for anyone to buy or run Vista or the new server product. Same thing with Exchange 2007. Why do I need it? Exchange 2003 is running great.

Vista will only sell when people buy new PC's and it will be mediocre at best.

There simply is not enough "new/better" stuff to go out and get Vista.

This whole thing is funny. :D

LOL.

Score: 0

By woodgray

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 12:57 PM

It has nothing to do with XP or Vista. There are several high end packages out there that already provide functionality similar to WinFS (Documentum for one). Making WinFS essentially a freebee by being included in there OS would stop a huge money stream from the commercial market, document management etc., that they could become part of by making WinFS part of SQL server. They will introduce new products over the next year or two based on all the feed back from the beta testers that will give them new products they can sell in the commercial market. The OS market is now to slow and stable for them to make money or grow with. This is purely a marketing ploy not a technical challenge that can’t be delivered.

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 2:33 PM

We already know that goofball.

Would everyone quit telling everyone else that it's not part of Windows Vista. We freaking know that.

Blah blah blah blah blah

All I'm saying is that Microsoft letting it go is a joke.

LOL.

Might as well bring back Microsoft Bob.

Score: 0

By schristie11

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:35 PM

Bill is leaving because he's getting OLD!

have you seen a photo of him lately?

he looks 70 years old.

if he was active president of MS and he died, it would crater the stock price.

if he retires now, when he dies it will have very little impace on the companies stock.

Score: 0

By rijp

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 12:53 PM

Dude you are just a moron. Don't even specualte as to what will happen to Microsoft when he leaves. CEO's leave all the time, and they stocks don't crater. Bill Gates hasn't even taken an active participation in MS operations for about 5 years now.. It's no big deal. Bill Gates isn't the company, he started it, but he has like 10,000 people working for him, I am pretty sure they will be fine.

Why do you have to make it sound like the end of the world.

Did you ever consider the fact the Bill Gates wants to leave because he has a family, numb nutz? Maybe he wants time to enjoy his money?

Before the dot bombs, CEO's coming/going actually INCREASED stock prices, because it was normal for them to take technology and improve upon existing companies.. that's how we get better products. Keep the business perspective to the pro's, and you can keep smoking the bong. It's the only thing you will ever be good at.

Score: 0

By CMSTech

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:04 PM

I love how you try to have intelligent discussions when you start out calling someone a name.

Just because you don't subscribe to someone's opinion or point of view doesn't make them an "idiot", "moron", etc.

What does it hurt to state your point or counter-point without the insults? The only one that it makes look bad is you and no one takes you seriously when you do it.

I bet you received a "A+" in debate class...:)

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:18 PM

I didnt' go to debate class it was a waste of my time. They didn't want to debate REAL issues, only issues that they could control.

As for my comments, I get people's attention. So what it leads a paragraph or is inclusive, and since you like my discussions so much, why do you even bother to reply? Evidently my comments serve a purpose, don't they? you recognize them, good or bad, but they stand out.

Thanks for proving my point.

I can leave out the insults, but its not as much fun, when I can't antagonize people. It doesn't make me look bad, because YOU are replying to me and making mention of it.. Its like the people that do bad things, if they are so bad, why are they remembered? You remember them because you have a morbid fascination, and you immortalize them by saying their name. Evidently they weren't so bad after all.

As for taking me serious, I don't care. your comments as well as those of others are about as useful to everyone else, as reading how to's from the "books for dummies" manuals. They are only midly amusing, and I set the record straight, I dont' care if you believe me or want to be more civil or not. I could care less.

So spare me your pathetic attempts at installing nominal behavior. It wont' do any good, so why do you persist? I care less about your stupid comments as much as you perceive my comments are accepted.

I REALLY don't care. It's not my endeavor to become your friend anyway. You have an opinion, so do I. You don't like my opinions or comments, well la di da. You continue to post non-sense, I am going to refute it. Understand, jackass?

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Jul 10, 2006 - 6:49 PM

Hello, Jack. Please don't turn around.

Are you trying to say that only good things get remembered?

Setting the record straight? How? You have to know what you're talking about first.

If you could care less, then doesn't that mean you care somewhat?

Just so you know, wont' is spelled won't and didnt' is spelled didn't and midly is spelled mildly. There's more, yet I do not expect you to have enough self-respect to learn spelling or capitalization.

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 2:39 PM

Wow you sure spend a lot of time here typing huge paragraphs.

Do you actually do anything else?

Blah blah blah blah debate team....

Blah blah blah blah endeavor...

Blah blah blah blah...non-sense...

Whatever buckwheat.

Score: 0

By CMSTech

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 2:46 PM

"...It wont' do any good..."

Agreed.

"..You continue to post non-sense, I am going to refute it..."

I am just doing the same.

Score: 0

By Aires

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 11:29 AM

I only have one thing to say about the backtrack on WinFS - lmfao!

I still have yet to be sold on the idea of Vista because I don't what the important differences are from XP and Vista. I can't see any reason from what I've read that I will upgrade to Vista because I basically think Vista is the new emporer's clothes.

Score: 0

By schristie11

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 12:51 PM

read the last post i made on this topic near top of page: there is a VERY important reason you and others WILL upgrade to Vista, eventually.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:06 PM

Why do you people think this has ANYTHING to do with Vista? you can get, or could, with XP. WinFS is a new DRIVER/SERVICE. It was installable in XP/2003 server. They were GOING to release WITH Vista, but the 2 aren't related.

Score: 0

By Aires

edited Jun 27, 2006 - 9:09 AM

Probably because the above news article says - "The technology (WinFS), which is based upon Microsoft's SQL Server platform, was originally slated to ship in Windows Vista, but the feature was cut in 2004" - and I don't expect to have to cross-check, reference and confirm the damn news stories I read!!

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:13 PM

Relax homeboy.

We all know it is a FS and not something to do with Windows Vista.

It was going to be relased with Windows Vista and then it was pulled. Now it's pulled from everything.

Quit trying to school everyone. We don't care what it is anymore we just know people and things from MS are dropping like flies.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:56 PM

Whatever, redneck. Was the comment directed at you? Since when do you champion other people? What, was there a hillbilly rah rah meeting or something?

I guess you won't miss Vista at all, since it doesn't take much more than a dos machine to run a tractor, eh sport?

I am not your "homeboy" quit trying to use coloquial euphemisms to make yourself sound cool, ok Jethro?

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 2:35 PM

Hahahaha.

You suck!

You're just upset because you can no longer run around saying "It's not part of Vista".....blah blah.

We know that already homo.

Score: 0

By CMSTech

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 12:52 PM

amen

Score: 0

By roj

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 11:24 AM

This is typical MS and hasn't changed since the NT 3.1 beta. It's called biting off more than one can chew and then having to pull stuff out and pull stuff out and pull stuff out... (or in this case seriously revamp it)

Comment to MS:

These are not the days of OS/Who. You're not in serious competition with anyone any more, mostly because there aren't any real competitors available. You can afford to take your time and get it right. Let it cook on a slow flame instead of trying to sear it and then charring the steak.

Score: 0

By rijp

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 12:05 PM

Um.. no. They were attempting to try something new, this isn't about them experimenting with a NEW OS implementation, its just a file system. They PUSH the envelope for ideas, but they weren't required to make this happen, it was an idea, nothing more.

They weren't even cooking on the grill, they had a steak, they thought hey, can we do something different with this? Like microwave it? Nah, it won't taste good, and it won't look good.. OH, ok, well just throw it on the grill the old fashioned way, who wants a beer?!?

Score: 0

By roj

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 7:35 PM

Then you've missed the point. This is a significant departure form their previous file system efforts and is ambitious in the extreme - it's not "just a file system." That's like calling the H-Bomb "just a large firecracker".

MS has a long history of underestimating the time necessary for complex projects and then re-adjusting expectations and feature sets along with revising the timeline for delivery.

This is just one more.

You need to understand the ramifications of what they were trying to do before commenting.

"just a file system" indeed...

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 10:28 AM

Finally common sense prevails! It wouldn't have worked anyway. NTFS is perfect, its optimal, it has built in error checking, it supports very large drives.. what more can you ask for?

That other FS seemed really awkward, and it will take YEARS before we even think about switching..

Score: 0

By roj

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 7:38 PM

When did you start pretending to be an OS architect? Your simplistic view of the situation is quite comical.

Please lad, at least understand what's going on before openly betraying your ignorance - it's embarassing.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 2:06 PM

Perfect? Ya.....

If you like defragging your damn HDD nightly.

Score: 0

By roj

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 7:40 PM

ALL file systems require defragging.

Period.

I don't care if it's on the mainframe or the PC.

Any claims to the contrary are a complete lie (MS got caught at it and the Linux weenies love to claim this fallacy too).

WinFS couldn't change that.

Score: 0

By 4421

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 9:13 AM

I don't understand why Microsoft doesn't adopt ReiserFS. On *nix plattform it is perfect.

SQL based FS, looks like a data repository programming idea from the business department anno 1994. Where are the AI and Object Oriented features...

Hmm wait, think of a filessystem from google, an unique filessystem which replaces google desktop.

Score: 0

By zxocuteboy

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 10:00 PM

GOODBYE

Score: 0

By the artist

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 9:54 PM

oh, everybody praise PC Rat, he is my next god. Look! He speaks in third person! Cool! He must be so special, wise and powerful!

Score: 0

By the artist

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 10:00 PM

anyway, he makes for some good points here and there.

Score: 0

By Paradise-FH-

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 11:37 PM

must have gotten lost in translation.

if we could block by commenter he'd be on my list multiple times. useless dribble.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 10:28 AM

*if we could block by commenter he'd be on my list multiple times. useless dribble.*

Would that list include me as well?

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 2:06 PM

You are amusing....most of the time.

He is repetative and predictable.

;)

...just sayin'.

Score: 0

By Sabz

edited Jun 25, 2006 - 8:35 PM

are there clowns here?

Score: 0

By Pixelsmack

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 4:55 PM

I've been running Beta2 now for a bit. I don't like it. But I know lots of games are going to require it. So it puts me in a bad spot being a gamer.

Thing is, when Win2K Beta came out, I liked it, when XP beta came out, I liked it. Oh well.

Score: 0

By roj

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 7:42 PM

I don't like it either - that's why I'm seriously stating to look at alternatives.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:08 PM

What does this have to do with WinFS? WinFS is not a Vista feature, it was a SEPARATE program. TESTED outside of Vista.

WinFS has nothing to do with Vista.

Score: 0

By CMSTech

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 12:53 PM

Did he say it did? He was just commenting on Vista.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:58 PM

Yeah, so what does it have to Vista? Nothing, so shut the hell up.

Score: 0

By metazoan

edited Jun 27, 2006 - 5:54 AM

I think the word 'Vista' is a trigger point for him to get angry.
Let's change Vista, to 'Burger' now and cool down this snarly upturn.

Score: 0

By CMSTech

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 2:49 PM

LOL, wow someone really *does* need anger management classes...:)

Score: 0

By PC Rat

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 10:21 AM

...

Five years after WinXP, and Microsoft ~still~
does not have it's act together regarding a
successor OS !

...

The Computer Rodent

...

Score: 0

By Metshrine

edited Jun 25, 2006 - 11:06 AM

Well, being that this has nothing to do with vista ASIDE from the fact that it was ORIGINALLY slated to ship with it, but was removed prior to the beta cycle, I fail to see what this has to do with the article?

The Successor OS is in beta phase, this was removed prior to the beta phase, so please, explain your comments relevance to this article.

Score: 0

By ladylust

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 1:38 PM

There is nothing to explain its just another excuse for someone to bash Microsoft. Most Microsoft Bashers fear the OS. Id put Vista up against the look, feel and use of any Mac OS.

Score: 0

By PC Rat

edited Jun 25, 2006 - 3:49 PM

...

"Most Microsoft Bashers fear
the OS. Id put Vista up against
the look, feel and use of any
Mac OS"

...

That's the kind of criticism-as-heresy mentality
indictive of Mac Snobs !

The difference between Windows Guys (like the
PC Rodent) and Apple Fanatics is that we ~can~
criticize our own favorite OS without being
"Microsoft Bashers".

...

The Computer Rodent

...

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 5:29 PM

Does talking in third person make you feel cool? How about stopping that and answering my question, what does your original post have to do with this article?

Score: 0

By PC Rat

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 8:48 PM

...

"Does talking in
third person make
you feel cool?"

...

Been doing it for so many years, it don't make
your favorite rodent feel anything in particular.

But, thank you for asking.

...

The Computer Rodent

...

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 9:22 PM

So, how about a reply to my question? Or do you only post when you can see an oppurtunity to flame microsoft or someone else? I've been waiting since my first reply

Score: 0

By PC Rat

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 11:08 PM

...

"So, how about a
reply to my question?"

...

Had your question not be prefaced by a flame,
Bro. Rat might have given you a reply.

...

The Computer Rodent

...

Score: 0

By Metshrine

edited Jun 25, 2006 - 11:56 PM

Yes, I guess you could consider that a flame. But being that you are obviously looking to be flamed by posting a bash against microsoft that has nothing to do with the article, what did you expect? So, how about a reply since your post had nothing to do with the article? Or is the PC Rat too good to answer when confronted?

Score: 0

By PC Rat

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 11:49 AM

...

"So, how about a reply
since your post had
nothing to do with the
article? Or is the
PC Rat too good to
answer when confronted?"

...

Not "too good to answer".

But why respond to a question you've ~already~
presumed the answer to ?

You wrote: "posting a bash against microsoft
that has nothing to do with the article".

Your question presupposes it's own answer !

Why, then, would your fav rodent treat it as a
sincere question ?

...

The Computer Rodent

...

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 1:58 PM

I make no presumptions. You are the one assuming since you assume I've made an answer about the question already. I wouldnt keep asking for an answer if I made a decision in my mind about what that answer was

Score: 0

By sqfanatic

edited Jun 26, 2006 - 12:26 PM

i've heard mac users speak in the third person indefinitely, until a microsoft user gets fedup with it and hits them in the head with a 2x4.

that's about the time the brain damage kicks in and they decide the mac os really is "perfect". at least it is perfect for the mentally challenged.

Score: 0

By spongy-poo

edited Jun 25, 2006 - 3:43 PM

Well, I hate to say it, but bashing Microsoft is getting easier all the time. And, it is getting harder to justify upgrading from XP. I mean, it's starting to look like an eye-candy upgrade, save some security improvements that I can take care of with third-party programs and good computing practices. I used Beta 2 for a couple of weeks and it's more of an irritation than an improvement. Before you say it, yeah, I know it's a beta, but it's not an encouraging one.

Score: 0

By The-One

edited Jun 25, 2006 - 5:02 PM

Man, I hate sounding like a MS fanboy, but I have to defend Vista a bit here. One of its main features IS eye candy, but the security features are long overdue and worth every dime.

I can't own this OS soon enough, so I can stop having to logon with full rights to do simple tasks, like installing a game. :)

Score: 0

By spongy-poo

edited Jun 25, 2006 - 5:21 PM

Yeah, but that convenience will only work for you if they fix the over-active and irritating user account control. As for the eye-candy, I suppose some will be impressed, but I'm not one of them.

Score: 0

By Kramy

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 3:11 PM

I wouldn't do that, but I'd throw it up against XP and attempt to give people a reason to upgrade. :P

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 2:12 PM

Maybe when it's complete. Beta2 is slow and clunky.

Score: 0

By Fidelio

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 3:28 PM

Well, maybe that's why is is BETA and not a release product yet, don't you think?

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 3:58 PM

I thought I was implying that..

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:09 PM

You know some days, it doesn't even pay to get out of bed...

Score: 0

By The Man

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 4:52 PM

me too

Score: 0

By ds0934

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 8:19 AM

Nice idea, but not ready for widespread use. As for indexed file systems (logical vs physical), an OS must impose some sort of arbitrary hierarchy or it ends up with a fragmentation problem. Chunks or not, you have to provide a structure underneath, even if you superimpose a logical hierarchy above that (indexing). Most of searching depends on heuristics in some respect or another, whether it's obvious or implied, still there. Oh well, more coffee will be needed before they get that one working properly. As for Vista, I just wish they would have left the Explorer shell alone! Add some things to it, but don't outright rearrange/replace it! I hate that.

Score: 0

By goyoq

edited Jun 25, 2006 - 7:55 AM

The current version of indexing service in vista betas suck big time. Unreliable, unstable and the indexing itself slow as hell. If you have a few hard-drives it'll index for a week... dramatically slows down your computer and still can't find all the files.

Score: 0

By Mark Gillespie

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 7:47 AM

WinFS was the major feature I was looking forward to in Vista, now it's totally dead :-(

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:10 PM

You didnt' have to wait for Vista to get the feature. It was a SEPARATE program available to XP/Server.

And what is wrong with NTFS? You must the ONLY person on the planet looking forward to it..

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 2:04 PM

Far from it. I was looking forward to it as well.

*shrug*

Guess it all depends on where one's priorities lie.

Score: 0

By The Man

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 9:48 AM

same here,
WinFS seemed to be one of the best selling points of Vista when they first announced it.
oh well
makes me wonder how much time MS really dedicated to Vista, compared to their other endeavors.

Score: 0

By PC Rat

edited Jun 25, 2006 - 10:56 AM

...

Hope everybody ~really~ likes transparent windows !

...

The Computer Rodent

...

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:12 PM

ever hear of Windows blinds? I have ALL the same features of Vista, that's why I don't feel the need to even TRY Vista..

I have to agree with other user comments, Vista does seem like nothing more than Eye Candy.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 2:03 PM

Really?

In Vista, as you move the window, the light / refractions on it remain pretty much in place, as though coming from a non-mobile area.

AFAIK, such a feature is only available with WindowFX from Stardock.

...so now we're up to two products. With resource usage that pars Vista Beta 2.

Can WB skin *every* window? No? Funny. Vista can.

I hate talking about UI improvements, but they're there, and they don't require 3rd party programs.

The bigger stuff, 2k3 kernel, memory heaps, security and audio seem to get *zero* attention around here.

But I suppose I can't expect most folks around here to be able to get beyond the,

"ooh...shiny"

stage that cats and 2 year olds seem to be permentantly in.

Score: 0

By CMSTech

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 2:57 PM

ooo....shiny!

Score: 0

By wincement

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 10:26 AM

I don't know about you, but I find opaque windows to be a pain.

My mom used to always have me clean them until they became as transparent as possible.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 10:30 AM

Really? I prefer pitch black myself...

Score: 0

By Joco

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 8:49 PM

No I don't. Neither I'll never buy any book or newspaper on transparent paper. At work, we always use electronic documents. We no longer print transparents. It's weird that transparent windows could attract people. I find these very confusing.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jun 26, 2006 - 12:14 PM

Maybe because you don't understand how to use them. Translucent is more accurant, than transparent.. It is partially visible, so you can see objects behind them, like the start menu or a process viewer. As you are using products with transluscence, you can "see" what's happening behind the window so you don't constantly move objects around the screen.. to view what's going on. I can bring up a start menu, and its only 50% opaque, and my startmenu is partially visible and I can see objects behind it.. kinda like a silohuette.

Score: 0

By Kramy

posted Jun 25, 2006 - 3:09 PM

Oh man...I don't know what it was about the way you put that, but it really cracked me up. xD

Score: 0

By PC Rat