Audio & Video
Business Center
Cameras
Cell Phones & PDAs
Communications
Components & Upgrading
Desktop PCs
DVD & Hard Drives
Gaming Hardware & Software
HDTV
Laptops
Macs & iPods
Monitors
Printers
Spyware & Security
The PCW Test Center
Windows Vista & XP
Resource Centers
Asus Notebook Center
Intel Technology Center
CDW Solution Center
Lenovo Laptop Showcase
Try It Free
White Paper Library
Webcast Library
Most Popular Products
Most Popular Downloads
Monday, June 26, 2006 9:58 PM PT Posted by Harry McCracken
Microsoft's WinFS: Dead Again (Sigh)
A Windows whose file system is a powerful, object-oriented database that can wrangle content of all kinds with aplomb? It's one of the best ideas that Microsoft ever came up with--and maybe the most vaporous. And it died again this week when a posting at a Microsoft blog said that WinFS won't appear in a beta 2 version...or, actually, at all as the Windows Vista add-on it was most recently going to be. (Instead, aspects of its technologies will get rolled into other Microsoft products like SQL Server and ADO.NET, says the blog.)So Microsoft's object-oriented file system has died--again. Back when Windows Vista was known as Longhorn, WinFS was going to be one of its key features, but it got thrown overboard along the way. Just like it got thrown overboard years ago when it was known as OFS and was supposed to be a feature in the Windows NT upgrade that was code-named Cairo. (Here's a 1994 Byte article that mentions that version, via ZDNet.)
In any of its variants, Microsoft's object-oriented approach to file systems was a big, ambitious idea that the company hyped relentlessly until it figured out, again and again, that it couldn't deliver. And though it was somewhat vague, there was obviously huge potential in the idea of a platform that had a deep understanding of all the types of data we work with, and made it all effortlessly searchable.
Here's Bill Gates talking up WinFS in a 2003 speech, before developers who were clearly salivating to get their hands on it:
"WinFS--this is unified storage. Some of you here have heard me talk about unified storage for more than a decade. The idea of taking the XML flexibility, database technology, getting it into the file system: that's been a Holy Grail for me for quite some time. And here it is. Thank goodness we have got the powerful systems to be able to do this thing. Thank goodness we have the evolution around XML and user interface capabilities, so that this can all come together."
(Note that Gates spoke of WinFS in the present tense, and said it was here already; he went on to introduce a demo of the technology at work in Longhorn, one which the speech transcript says was repeatedly interrupted by applause. One wonders how Microsoft was able to mount such an impressive demo if the company later decided that it couldn't get WinFS to work after all. And how Gates feels about the fact that his holy grail feels a lot further away than his retirement is.)
WinFS could have made Windows Vista into a breakthrough. But without WinFS, Vista--judging from beta 2, at least--will have extremely ordinary search and media-management features, ones which don't do a whole lot that can't be accomplished for free right now, courtesy of third-party downloads. And Apple's OS X 10.4, while it certainly doesn't do all the things that WinFS aimed to accomplish from a file system standpoint, comes closer than Vista will.
In a sense, though, WinFS was obsolete before it ever appeared...er, didn't appear. The whole idea of next-generation file systems being about a particular operating system from a particular company sounds a little quaint--the truly life-changing breakthroughs will happen when the whole darn Internet is an object-oriented file system, and it doesn't much matter where your data lives or what type of device you want to use it on.
WinFS wouldn't have provided that. But it would have been fun to be able to judge it for ourselves in the form that Microsoft has been touting for so long.
Archives
View posts from:
PC World's Marketplace
PC World's Free Whitepapers
QUICK LINKS:
cheap laptops
cell phones
laser printers
HDTV reviews
LCD TV Plasmas
digital cameras
laptop reviews
security antivirus
windows vista reviews
digital camera reviews
inexpensive desktop
LCD wide screen monitors
tech news tech blogs community & forums laptop prices software reviews downloads
tech news tech blogs community & forums laptop prices software reviews downloads
What point is there in upgrading now? We are beta testing Vista and aside from the eye candy, it does not seem that special. I am also beta testing Office 2007. That seems worth it so far.
Are you beta testing Office 2007 on Vista? I wouldn't be surprised if the more handy features of Office 2007 only work when you run it on Vista :) Other than that, i don't see much point in upgrading to Vista either. I think MS axed WinFS because they realized they would not be able to compete with Google Desktop since a deal was made to have it pre-installed on Dell computers. Now, i think Google Desktop sucks and that WinFS would have been a far greater product, but due to the delays, MS's WinFS would not be able to out-saturate the market when Google Desktop is already there. Sadly, MS has chickened out of a real, worth-while fight. Instead, they choose to compete in the Web arena...go figure.
I think you grossly underestimate of personal storage space. I can imagine many companies and interests that would not be served by storing data on the internet. For example, take just about any school that holds its students' personal information. That information could never be stored in the "oo driven internet filing system", without changes in legislation. There is still plenty of life left in personal storage mediums, and I hope that Microsoft, Apple and the Linux community continue to investigate the matter.
How do we know that there won't be an addon later on for Vista that would lets reformat and put in a WinFS drive. Moreover I think windows should be moving towards a generic support enviornment as far as drive formats are concerned. There are some drive formats that linux can read that would be far ahead of even WinFS that are being funded by the NSF and DOD. This kind of innovation could cut down on latency, do away with long searches and free up server specific programs to do more useful things as well as cut down on the devlopment time spent on optimization. Honestly even today I would have to go with Linux, Apache, Php/MySql if I was serious about setting up a server within a short time.
I just got back from attending a TechNet Event, and the speaker mentioned that WinFS is currently being developed for Vienna, not Vista.
Personally, I like to organize my files in a hierarchal style according to the best way my brian works. I don't want to have to go to a search box to try and find a document. Not to mention how much of a system's resources this would probably end up using (indexing, anyone?).
At this point, I would rather see them dump Vista and start with a fresh Unix-based JFS filesystem. Hell, OSX is even looking better at this point since file-extensions seem to be 90% of the problems with Windows.
Other than the fact that it's even more hardware dependent than ever, Why would anyone pay out the wazoo to have a prettier looking XP?
Beagle search on SUSE 10.1 is impressive. Using the Reiser4 file system, you get stability and quick searches due to the quick response time that file system provides.
I have to say that here in china, My Company is working on a revolutionary file sytem, based on new ideas and *Nix, that will create an OS that will revolutionise the industry within 5 years. Mark My Words-
Lin Xao Chin-Ini
Lin Xao I have just marked your words. You better be right! There is still ample room for new enterprise in this arena. I will be checking your word out in about 5 years.
I pretty much agree with JRS and Top. Vista, with each passing week, is seeming less and less worth what will probably be stupid people's pricing.
The eye candy is indeed nice, but Windows is supposed to be an OPERATING system, not a VISUALS system, and they are carving out all the innovative operating components, leaving just a little more than a fancified, expensive, Microsoft version of Window Blinds!
I find that I can secure Windows with good third-party apps and a healthy dose of good sense and savvy, I can get excellent search with any number of free apps, and I can tweak Windows XP and do some hardware things and get all I need for performance, so I can't justify the price. I don't know what the ultimate pricing will be, but I have heard a rumor that made me stop worrying about it; it's way too high for serious consideration.
Oh, and Gary, I agree with you about SUSE 10.1, but you are selling your oranges in an apple orchard here: Linux won't run Cakewalk, or FLStudio, or Premier, or Madden, or Dreamweaver, or Visual Studio or GroupMail, or Ultra Recall, or...ad infinitum.
The point is, I use SUSE, and love it, but it cannot replace Windows until I can move my work to it without having to worry about data conversions and having to relearn new programs to replace those I have been using for seven or eight or ten or more years.
For the record, this is in no way a 'Microsoft idea'. By any other name, what you describe is a filesystem that contains "metadata".
BeOS had a metadata filesystem long ago. Apple has metadata in its filesystem as of OS X 10.4. Linux has had a metadata filesystem project for some time.
More info here :
http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/Metadata
Ignorant journalists really bug me.
I'm currently beta testing both Vista and Office 2007 together, and while I have yet to extensively test how they interact, it is obvious to me that with WinFS, the two could truly have been a tremendous power together. While Vista is really a pretty pretty operating system, and I love interacting/working with it, I agree that Microsoft has continually stripped features, and while I think the final release will be a NICE operating system, I'm truly saddened that it won't be the GREAT operating system it could have been.
I am a long time wondows user from back in the 3.0 days and I made the switch last year to OS X due to what you see mentioned constantly in these remarks " I can get or use a THIRD PARTY APP to do this or that" or " I can make Wondows do this or that if I tweak it here or there". Once I added up the total cost to get a new windows machine up to doing some real work the price is almost twice what a full size G5 Quad tower costs. This does not even take into account a Core Duo Mac Mini which is probably the most cost effective machine ever produced.
Windows has proven to me to be very cheap to aquire the hardware and the software leaves alot to be desired for usability.
Linux is great if your a programmer or have no personal life and can devote yourself to making it work with most of your hardware some of the time.
OS X works out of the box from my experience over the last year and I spend 99% of my time getting things accomplised vs poking around the os or software trying to make it work.
"Beagle search on SUSE 10.1 is impressive. Using the Reiser4 file system"
SuSE 10.1 doesn't include support Reiser4 by default. Of course you can patch your kernel to support it, but if you're going to do that, you're probably running Debian rather than SuSE anyway...
SuSE 10.0 had Reiser4 included but SuSE removed it for 10.1. God only knows why!