Microsoft Axes WinFS, Cancels Beta 2

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.

Advertisement

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.

172 Responses to Microsoft Axes WinFS, Cancels Beta 2

  1. The-One says:

    Oh well, just give us a pretty new interface and make it more secure.

    Fewer bugs would be nice as well :-) However...I doubt that.

    • ravemanson says:

      Yeah, and twice the amount of resource hogging and thousands of new annoyances. Sometimes i wonder how the world would be if Microsoft was nuked worldwide; would people finally turn their heads to other OS' and from the expectations of M$?

      I think both we and they (M$) are wasting our time.

      • xyzcb1 says:

        nice bashing. i am sure customer will move away from MS products if competitors actually come up with something better and easier to use. but at this moment, there is none. don't try to throw me about the mac osx and linux crap. don't tell me osx is perfect when they already released 6 sp. i don't even want to bother with linux, its not even a true desktop. most people don't know how to operate it. that mean it's not ready for the mass.

      • The Man says:

        i'll stick to my Lindows, thank you very much!

        :-p

      • ladylust says:

        Lindows - about all you can is play boring games and surf the web - I have a lindows box - its .. "ok".

      • fewt says:

        some people only need to play boring games and surf the web.

        For them Lindows is overkill..

      • rijp says:

        If this was any other post by someone else, I would take this as innocent..

        But this is a very clever SLAM!

      • fewt says:

        nope, not this time. ;-)

      • The Man says:

        um,
        i WAS kidding
        :-)

      • Kramy says:

        Check out this linux: http://kororaa.org/static.php?page=static060318-181203

        It is about the ONLY distro I would consider using, and here's why:

        A) It's built ontop of Gentoo, one of the most customizable linux distros, which can be heavily optimized for your computer.
        B) The liveCD had a very easy to customize taskbar.
        C) It supports full-screen windows unlike OSX!

        Overall I found the interface very intuitive and easy to use. Compare that with Damn Small Linux, and it's miles ahead in potential for people's Desktop PC's.

      • rijp says:

        how the hell did this go from WinFS beta dropped, to Vista security improvements, to Vista eye candy comparison, to Beta comments, to Linux?

        Why do you Linux people ALWAYs have to push your product, is it because you can't get anyone to byte off on it? Leave us the hell alone with this crap. Even when the article doesn't concern Linux, you people have to put your 1.5 cents in. Its SPAM! Knock it off.

      • Kramy says:

        I don't use linux.

      • rijp says:

        Not to mention, every linux user out there I ask one very simple question, which I never get an answer to:

        Can your mother / father use/install Linux? Grandmother?

        Lin(S)ux user- well er.. umm.. Well I can instal it.. and um.. some ..

        Bottom line is, just exactly as you spelled it out, its not ready for the masses. I agree.

      • tirpider says:

        I don't relly think the "geek" is the intended target audience for the windows platform, regardless of what their marketeers say.

        It would seem that the biggest chunk of money they get would be from licensing and just casual home pc users.

        Mom keeping a small list of recipies, dad doing his taxes and junior doing his homework on the pron sites.. they don't give one hoot about Linux's obscutity, or Mac's piousness. Their benifit is that they get to keep up with the Jones' and do seemingly important tasks on their machine.

        point - click - presto

        For them to produce anything that would hose the revenu generating potential of that market would be foolish.

        I'm dissapointed at the end of that project. I was looking forward to seeing data stored in a new way. But it seems there is no profit in paradigm shifts.

    • Fidelio says:

      One thing I see here is lots of comparisons between XP and Vista... it seems you have not done any research. Just for your information, Vista is not based on XP code, but on Windows Server 2003 SP1 code, which is much more secure and robust, and has fewer bugs than XP.

      So, do you homework befre complaining :)

      • The-One says:

        True, the code may have been from a more robust OS, but they are adding a large number of features to security and the UI. This simple fact alone suggests there will be new bugs that wouldn't even exist in any variant of XP.

        I still plan on buying it at launch. The bugs in XP were never that bad to me, even at its launch :-)

      • Fidelio says:

        I got XP as soon as it was released and never have had any issues. Just keep it updated and you'll should be fine.

      • kungfubeer says:

        I have been testing Vista since first released in 2003, I'm beginning to feel its another ME.

        I had the lastest Beta from M$ installed and removed within the same day.

        I will not be in any hurry to move my production PC's to Vista, an I am a Windows guy! (MCSE)

      • The-One says:

        Hmmm... comparing Vista to ME is not very good at all for Vista :). MS still has a lot of time to update this beast, but I still am in favor of the security features.

        I'm gonna run the public beta soon and give it a spin.

      • kungfubeer says:

        "Vista is not based on XP code, but on Windows Server 2003 SP1 code"

        If you had started using "Longhorn" when I did, then you would know that Vista's API is XP Pro! 2003 SP1 release date was March 2005. Vista ("Longhorn") code was copied from Windows XP Professional in 2003.

        I'm not saying that there is no Server 2003 code in the OS, but to say this is untrue, then it is you who have not done the research.

      • PC_Tool says:

        When it was released means squat, dude. You don't think they already had 2003 SP1 code in production?

      • kungfubeer says:

        If they had the SP1 code in production in 2003, then they would not have had to release SP1 code into production in 2005. Why do you think they have service packs? It is to fix the code that is already in production. They do not have the restriction on beta's.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Ok.

        Short example:

        They were (up until now) working on WinFS. Which was to be *part* of SP1 for Vista....

        ....starting to make sense?

        Features and fixes they *know* won't be ready by release are often worked on along side the OS development and scheduled for release in the first SP.

        [i]They do not have the restriction on beta's.[/i]

        Yet everyone expects Vista Beta 2 to be flawless and quick. Amazing....

      • kungfubeer says:

        Ok, I understand your points, and I agree with a small portion of them.

        Explain to me why in the longhorn days, the loading screen was a knock off of XP (only it said longhorn) and once you logged into the machine, you were presented with Windows XP on the start menu, and winver showed it as Windows XP. Again, I am not arguing that there have been code changes, but they did not rewrite the code from scratch to build this OS..

      • PC_Tool says:

        Never said they re-wrote *anything* from scratch. I can only imagine how long it would have taken had they done that...

        As for the XP shiznit, I don't know what to tell ya. I was not part of the early alphas. (Was it even alpha at that point?)

        I would assume they switched at some point, from XP to 2k3 code once they realized what they needed to focus on. (Security being a major one). So you may have actually been right previously. They probably were not using 2k3 code initially. It would definately explain part of the delay.

      • rijp says:

        Dude, maybe you haven't done your research either. XP, Server 2003, Vista, are all part of the NEW code. They are ALL based on the same platform, why do you think there is a new driver initiave, and they share many of the same drivers.. ?

        Server isn't all that different from XP, besides, you are comparing apples and oranges, its like comparing a 6 cylinder with an 8, not to say Server is faster than XP (because its not) its just for a different breed of OS vehicle. A 6 or 8 can both be Vtech engines, but obviously there's going to be differences.

        XP and Server compare with respect to speed, reliability.. this is the MAIN reason why Vista is slow to come out, XP is PERFECT. Vista doesn't NEED to come out. WE are fine with XP.

  2. photonboy says:

    A great explanation at Wikipedia (just type in "winfs."

    The bottom line for me is as long as I can easily browse and use my files and everything is secure I don't care how they do it.

    I'm using Vista Beta 2 and I'm pleased with how it works. To be honest, even as a "computer geek" I still couldn't be bothered to read through and understand WinFS. Once we got NTFS all my headaches were solved.

    • felipe_alfaro says:

      Although Vista is visually pleasant, I had to abandon it since most of the applications I use (like NoMachine's NX Client, Cygwin and VMWare Server) either don't work, or do work erratically.

      Also, Vista feels sluggish on a Pentium IV 2GHz with 2GB of RAM, whereas my main operating system (Ubuntu) is more than twice as fast on the same hardware, even when using a true 3D OpenGL-based desktop (Novell's Xgl).

      My sensation is that Vista is far behind current offerings, like Mac OS X and Ubuntu when it comes to security and functionality. Windows has a lot more applications, but a plain Windows installation is kind of useless: no DVD burning, no DVD playing, no built-in PDF support, no office software, no decent firewall, no decent graphics manipulation software, etc.

      • oufc_gav says:

        "Windows has a lot more applications, but a plain Windows installation is kind of useless: no DVD burning, no DVD playing, no built-in PDF support, no office software, no decent firewall, no decent graphics manipulation software, etc."

        Well, that it because everyone sues their a** whenever they bundle anything in Windows screaming monopoly. They would put it in if they could, but MS have a different set of rules applied to them...

      • The Man says:

        not true,

        winXP can burn cd's natively (nobody's complained about that feature), i don't think it would be a long shot to make it burn dvd's too.
        same for playing dvd's. it play's cd's.
        on the other hand, pdf support was an issue.
        of well, 2 outta 3 wouldn't be bad

      • Kramy says:

        But Windows XP's native CD burning is POS that doesn't work with tons of burners, and only does certain CD types too. That's why programs like [url=http://www.imgburn.com/]ImgBurn[/url] have popped up. They're more reliable and have a different feature set.

      • The Man says:

        soooo...

        windows, in including these functions, created incentive for others to improve on it.

        what was your point again?

      • Kramy says:

        MS implemented the functions after other companies perfected them, but in a half-assed way that resulted in new companies perfecting them again, but instead releasing the software free.

        Think I got that fairly close to the point...

      • rijp says:

        umm..no. Microsoft includes rudamentary features of products so that you can see how they will function, before the pro versions are released..

        So no the features didn't start showing up after the product's were released, they include them with the OS so people don't have to wait for "retail" versions..

      • Kramy says:

        ??? I have no idea what you're talking about.

        1) Company like Nero comes along and makes fully featured burning program.
        2) Microsoft implements crappy burning with lots of problems.
        3) New companies and freelance programmers come along and attempt to make fully featured burning programs, and release them for free.

        Did that simplify it a bit?

      • PC_Tool says:

        As for 2, Windows XP used the same burning engine as Roxio 7, I believe.

        Their support for how you could *use* it sucked, and I've never been a big fan of Roxio, but...

      • rijp says:

        WTF! You are DEAD wrong. The ONLY thing the CD burning built-in w/ Windows lacks is a pretty interface. It was designed by Roxio for pete's sake. Its a simple version of an otherwise average software company, but it works FINE for me. The fact that it doesnt' work with a bunch of burners, is pure BS. First of all in Windows they use a common driver to interface with the CD/RW/DVD-R drives. If you can "see" the device in Windows, then EVERY program can access it and use its features.

        In fact, I don't even HAVE a burning software on my computer, because they are ALL bloated, I need to copy MP3, make images of ISO, and I an burn music with Media Player.. They all work GREAT for me, maybe you are doing something funky..

        different features and more reliable.. I doubt it, they only include a wrapper to let you "mess" with settings, which is unneccessary..

        You only THINK it's lacking because you can't fuddle with the speed or buffer size.. If you get the right TweakUI components, the built-in XP burning has the same accessibility. You dismiss it, because to you, a built in program is like notepad, and it can't compare to word, but in this case, you would be WRONG!

      • Kramy says:

        Word is bloated. Notepad is featureless. Wordpad has too many dependancies. Metapad is nice.

        I'm glad it's working fine for you, but it does have limits. I seem to recall a few problems with bootable CDs. XP's built-in burner lacks ripping, so...not fully featured.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Heh...ImgBurn.

        Yummy stuff, man.

        I use that for just about everything. (I *do* use the lame 'speedyCD' software that came with my wife's PC to make my image-files, though.

        ;P

        You wouldn't happen to know of a proggy that supports image-file creation in various formats, would you? (CD, DVD, Audio-CD, etc...)

      • wincement says:

        [I]You wouldn't happen to know of a proggy that supports image-file creation in various formats, would you? (CD, DVD, Audio-CD, etc...)[/I]

        I'm pretty sure DeepBurner can do what you want.

        The free version just has a "Buy Pro" button at the top right that you can ignore. If you can live with that, it's a pretty good program.

      • Fidelio says:

        I will challenge that... do you really expect a BETA software to run all your applications perfectly? There is a reason why it is BETA, and has not being released yet.

        On the other side, Vista has DVD burning, DVD playing, a very good firewall, anti-spyware and decent graphics manipulation software (have you downloaded Expression Graphic Designer yet)?

      • cap737 says:

        No, he's saying that after a plain windows installation they are lacking such features as a full DVD player, decent DVD burning support, PDF support (w/o third-party software), a decent firewall and so on. I'm not sure about the office software or graphics manipulation software on initial installs you need to install that separately. I have to agree that with Mac OS you get all that from the installation disk plus the quartz graphics without having to have a 256mb video card.

        You are right that in the Beta of Vista you won't be able to run all your applications until the vendors provide updates and patches but look at what Apple did. When 10.0 came out they provided Classic support to let customers use the OS 9 software that wasn't ported to OS X. It had bugs but worked decently. Then they improved it further with updates and then the next major upgrades until vendors, like MS Mac Office and Adobe, could provide native OS X versions of their software. Now they have intel versions of10.4 that have Rosetta to translate PowerPC versions of OS X applications to run under the intel version of tiger. It's decent and helps if you have a lot of RAM but at least when they made the switch they made sure that they had a way for their customers to keep using their own software until the vendors put out Universal applications. At least Apple thought about their customers and provided something solid before pushing out a final product even during the beta stages.

      • PC_Tool says:

        [i]they are lacking such features as a full DVD player, decent DVD burning support, PDF support [/i]

        lmao...

        And I bet you're one of those same twits that whines about how much of a Monopoly they are. You scream *MORE FEATURES* and then when they ad them, you scream *ANTI TRUST*.

        You guys kill me...

      • cap737 says:

        Dude, I'm just quoting what the guy said. I'm not here to bash MS, Apple or Linux. I'm just here to give my opinion like other people and not bash people who can make a valid point unlike you who stereotypes people for what OS they like. I guess you are just a tool.

  3. darkxiii_ndp says:

    File System will remain NTFS. WinFS like a database that make index, metadata for our files, etc... In fact, Files store in tree folders. That make hard to organizing, find.

    A example may be tag in mp3. In library in WMP display tags. You can find by artist, author, song name,...

    May be one day WinFS make every body dont know what is folder. :D

    Too bad, seem we must wait a while for WinFS.

    • Fidelio says:

      Well, all those things (file indexing, metadata for files, mp3/wma tags, picture tags, etc.) are already available in Vista.

  4. yokozuna says:

    Ok.

    What will remain in Vista? According to everything I hear Vista will be a little bit more than WinXP SP2 + WindowBlinds. A bit too little for 5 years of work (I heard about Longhorn in 2001).

    • ladylust says:

      Hell no, Windows Vista is WAY different then Windows XP. Of course it has a face lift but its probably the most amazing OS I have ever used. I have Beta 2, and I cant take my eyes off it - its stunning.

      • fewt says:

        Do you work for Microsoft? It looks like crap (hopefully they add a professional GUI design to it like they did when they released XP.)

      • spongy-poo says:

        You're starting to sound like a desperate employee. I don't care what it looks like, since I can change that in a multitude of ways. I care how it works and so far, it don't.

      • ingram091 says:

        I'm not surprised on WinFS the consumer response to it was SOO bad it only makes since that its being shelved for blackcomb Or I should say Vienna now huh? in any case Vista is being groomed as a stepping stone OS so I'm sure we will see something of it again in the future.

        I have Vista Beta 2 also ... Being used on a Pent 4 HT 3.8 ghz with 1gb of Ram and 256 Mb on vid card, which I bought in January from DELL. Guess what? It works but SLOW AS ALL HELL!!! VISTA is a RESOURCE HOG in its current build. The only way to get it to work well is to, BIG SURPRISE, turn off the features that make it VISTA looking. Meaning Aero glass, XP like bubble everything, and fades and transitions.. bla bla bla... (same thing with XP really too for that matter) Till its back to basic windows 2000 concept design. Then of course its a dream OS again. But then what the hell did you pay $300 - $400 for? I ask you???

        Unless there is a SIGNIFICANT performance increase in Vista before release its just another Windows ME disaster waiting to happen... I mean if you install Vista Ultimate and Office 2007 Professional that alone takes up a good 30GB right there. And you have not even got to the Restore points Space and redundant download crap yet, let alone YOUR files and programs.

        My advice. If you have something that works for you now and your happy with your system. Wait till you need to purchase a new machine to even bother with Windows Vista in any of the 5 versions to be released... IF you wait till your ready to buy a machine that was specifically designed for the Vista platform you will be vastly more impressed. You don't necessarily know what I mean but anything under a rating of 2 will be a huge disappointment for Vista users...

        Other then the SIGNIFICANT security update that is Windows Vista, (The ONLY fantastic thing about it) its basically a waste of money unless you get a new machine at the same time. Just my humble opinion.

        Ingram.

      • PC_Tool says:

        BETA.

        Look it up.

      • rijp says:

        *being groomed as a stepping stone OS*

        Every OS is a stepping stone. Its called "progress" of innovation. What is your point?

        *I have Vista Beta 2 also ... Being used on a Pent 4 HT 3.8 ghz with 1gb of Ram and 256 Mb on vid card, which I bought in January from DELL. Guess what? It works but SLOW AS ALL HELL!!! VISTA is a RESOURCE HOG in its current build. The only way to get it to work well is to, BIG SURPRISE, turn off the features that make it VISTA looking*

        Yeah, XP has the same features, so what? I can turn on bubbles and looks, but to streamline the performance you turn those off. You are forgetting one very important aspect, XP has had time to get vendors involved with updated drivers and tweaks that are properly fixed, its umm.. BETA!! So its bound to be slow, buggy, doesn't work well, even on your system. BTW, I would bet some money that you have a BUNCH of stuff in your startup group and services you aren't using.. THAT's why its slow, you can blame put the blame on the OS, when the user installs a million OTHER products that the OS has to manage.

        *Unless there is a SIGNIFICANT performance increase in Vista before release its just another Windows ME disaster waiting to happen... I mean if you install Vista Ultimate and Office 2007 Professional that alone takes up a good 30GB right there. And you have not even got to the Restore points Space and redundant download crap yet, let alone YOUR files and programs.*

        I turn Restore point off. Don't use it. There is no replacement for doing your own backups. 30 gig? Come on man, your machine should have come with at least 120 maybe even a 250 gig drive, and you are bitching about a lousy 30 gig? Give me a break. Buy another SATA drive, for what 100 bucks? Ever heard of raid? You sound like a real NEWB!

        *My advice. If you have something that works for you now and your happy with your system. Wait till you need to purchase a new machine to even bother with Windows Vista in any of the 5 versions to be released... IF you wait till your ready to buy a machine that was specifically designed for the Vista platform you will be vastly more impressed. You don't necessarily know what I mean but anything under a rating of 2 will be a huge disappointment for Vista users...*

        There is no "magic" machine to get to run Vista. That little "designed for Vista" is a gimmick, nothing more. There are no "special" features to get it to work better with Vista, those are called "drivers". When Vista is released and when its finalized, it will be fine. In the mean time, some beta features are bloated to include "tracking features", so it can make a dump file to tell why a program crashed. After Beta is complete, they will be trimmed. Evidently this is your first beta, because you are acting like this is all new. did your daddy by you this computer for christmas? Is this your first REAL machine?

        *Other then the SIGNIFICANT security update that is Windows Vista, (The ONLY fantastic thing about it) its basically a waste of money unless you get a new machine at the same time. Just my humble opinion.*

        Those "security updates" are ALSO due to be release for XP, SP 3. So what? Vista will be pre-installed on new machines, its part of their license agreement..

      • ingram091 says:

        Holy Smokes!! I know its Beta that's the point. I don't use top of the line crap on BETA stuff. I use TEST EQUIPMENT. But I was demonstrating that even "really good" test systems are inadequate for the most part.

        I have worked in the IT industry since the mid 90s, and in truth the best OS I personally use on the majority of my systems is still Windows 2000 with Windows Server 2003. XP, Vista, are OK and work, but I can do 100% of productive work on Windows 2000 that I want to and not have problem 1, so Why would I bother wasting my money? Sure XP is nice for laptops and such tahat are adiquite to the XP extras like mediacenter and such, But I sure as heck don't want all that crap on a work machine anyway.

        Of course in the corporate world I have pretty much the same attitude as Microsoft does, As they still to this day Allow Windows 2000 to be run on the same licence as Windows XP and treat it as the same OS in such cases. So what?

        I was just saying that the current Vista Build 5456 is SLOW and uses about 3 times the space that windows 2000 OR XP does with Office 2003 on the same equipment. It's better then the previous build, which is proof that they are listening to the beta testers on some of the performance issues and addressing them. That's the point of a beta, I know that and so does every other beta tester that uses this site regularly. Don't get your panties in a bunch when someone posts a truthful assessment of something as it stands at the moment...

        Anyone that works at Microsoft will tell you that the ONLY reason Vista is being released "right now" is for an increase in revenue to the company to continue their R&D on Vienna. Vienna is a 100% new OS. the old 2000 style Kernel and NTFS file system is gone in that model, But it has very little BACKWARD compatibility to XP, so they needed an interim OS "VISTA" to allow for the consumers to accept the coming changes in stages. Vienna is to Windows XP what Windows 98 and more specifically 2000 was to Windows 3.11.

        Vista is more like Windows 2000 to Windows XP SP2. Its a good step but not really THAT big a deal EXCEPT for the added security features that SHOULD have been in it from the beginning.

        And no I have nothing on my HKCU or HKLM or Startups in Vista except for the Beta for CA Antivirus for Windows Vista. And that is not the performance hog... It was doing this well ahead of that installation. I have aero glass off and all features set to best performance. Windows 2000 still out performs it every time on the exact same equipment build.

        SP3 ??? lol Don't get me started on that crap. It should be here RIGHT NOW as we speak, but MS is sitting on it to give Vista a better marketing campaign and a security improvement over XP.

      • PC_Tool says:

        [i]I have aero glass off and all features set to best performance. Windows 2000 still out performs it every time on the exact same equipment build.[/i]

        You claim to know it is beta, and then make comments such as the above.

        Comparing the speed of a Beta OS to a mature OS is, well, pointless. It's a 'Duh' thang. I don't think *anyone* here could reasonably expect otherwise. It's not even a good benchmark to see how far along they are. Beta drivers affect it's performance greatly right now, not to mention their own code not being optimized for performance at this point.

        RC1 would be a *much* better time to make such comparisons.

      • rijp says:

        Its not that much different, yes it has a face lift. So since you use it, and you are actually supporting his argument by simply saying:

        *most amazing OS I have ever used. I have Beta 2, and I cant take my eyes off it - its stunning*

        Seems to coincide with the "windows blinds" comment, so you tell us what features you find so "amazing". I have seen a few people using and, and thus far "amazing" isn't even CLOSE to their experience with Beta 2.

  5. felipe_alfaro says:

    Saying "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" is a sweet and edulcorated way of saying they are currently unable to deliver what the promised.

    If you want true storage abstraction, you can rely on Spotlight in Mac OS X, Google Desktop for Windows or Beagle for Linux.

  6. Mark Gillespie says:

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

    • The Man says:

      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.

      • PC Rat says:

        ...

        Hope everybody ~really~ likes transparent windows !

        ...

        The Computer Rodent

        ...

      • Kramy says:

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

      • PC Rat says:

        ...

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

        ...

        The serious part is that we've waited (so far)
        five years just to get transparent windows and
        some security enhancements !

        [ And, no, the PC Rat uses neither Mac or Linux.
        But just because he's a Windows user don't mean
        he can't criticize Microsoft when warranted. ]

        ...

        The Computer Rodent

        ...

      • Metshrine says:

        Even when it includes an inappropriate bash that has zero relevance to an article ;-) Seems the PC Rat cant wait to bash MS even when it doesnt fit in.

      • rijp says:

        Since you have admitted that you don't use MAC or Linux, its obvious you are using Windows as nothing more than an email/web browser, there are MANY add-ons that other companies make for Windows which enhance performance, appearance, and stability, not to mention fix it programs..

        So you can't criticize Microsoft for NOT having these features, they were never meant to be a part of the original scheme. OTHER companies can make an addition from time to time..

        Microsoft Adopted the Windows Blinds feature, because its so popular, but evidently not by anyone on Betanews.

      • Joco says:

        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.

      • rijp says:

        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.

      • wincement says:

        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.

      • rijp says:

        Really? I prefer pitch black myself...

      • rijp says:

        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.

      • PC_Tool says:

        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.

      • CMSTech says:

        ooo....shiny!

        :)

    • rijp says:

      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..

      • PC_Tool says:

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

        *shrug*

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

  7. goyoq says:

    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.

  8. ds0934 says:

    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.

  9. PC Rat says:

    ...

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

    ...

    The Computer Rodent

    ...

    • Metshrine says:

      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.

      • ladylust says:

        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.

      • fewt says:

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

      • Fidelio says:

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

      • fewt says:

        I thought I was implying that..

      • The Man says:

        me too

      • rijp says:

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

      • Kramy says:

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

      • spongy-poo says:

        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.

      • The-One says:

        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. :)

      • spongy-poo says:

        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.

      • PC Rat says:

        ...

        "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

        ...

      • Metshrine says:

        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?

      • PC Rat says:

        ...

        "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

        ...

      • Metshrine says:

        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

      • PC Rat says:

        ...

        "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

        ...

      • Metshrine says:

        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?

      • PC Rat says:

        ...

        "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

        ...

      • sqfanatic says:

        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.

      • Metshrine says:

        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

  10. Pixelsmack says:

    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.

    • rijp says:

      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.

    • roj says:

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

  11. Sabz says:

    are there clowns here?

  12. the artist says:

    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!

    • the artist says:

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

      • Paradise-FH- says:

        must have gotten lost in translation.

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

      • rijp says:

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

        Would that list include me as well?

      • PC_Tool says:

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

        He is repetative and predictable.

        ;)

        ...just sayin'.

  13. zxocuteboy says:

    GOODBYE

  14. 4421 says:

    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.

  15. rijp says:

    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..

    • PC_Tool says:

      Perfect? Ya.....

      If you like defragging your damn HDD nightly.

      • roj says:

        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.

    • roj says:

      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.

  16. roj says:

    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.

    • rijp says:

      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?!?

      • roj says:

        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...

  17. Aires says:

    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.

    • rijp says:

      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.

      • Joe Dirt says:

        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.

        :D

      • CMSTech says:

        amen

      • rijp says:

        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?

      • Joe Dirt says:

        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.

      • Aires says:

        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!!

    • schristie11 says:

      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.

  18. Joe Dirt says:

    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.

    • schristie11 says:

      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.

      • rijp says:

        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.

      • CMSTech says:

        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...:)

      • rijp says:

        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?

      • CMSTech says:

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

        Agreed.

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

        I am just doing the same.

      • Joe Dirt says:

        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.

    • woodgray says:

      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.

      • Joe Dirt says:

        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.

  19. schristie11 says:

    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?

    • CMSTech says:

      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.

      • schristie11 says:

        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.

      • CMSTech says:

        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..:)

      • schristie11 says:

        CMSTech,

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

        :)

      • CMSTech says:

        100% Agreed!

      • rijp says:

        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?

      • schristie11 says:

        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.

      • rijp says:

        I like your dumb ass 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?

      • CMSTech says:

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

        Again with the insults and putdowns...

      • rijp says:

        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.

      • CMSTech says:

        *Evidently its not as bad as you contest.*

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

      • The Man says:

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

      • Joe Dirt says:

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

        Ha ha ha ha ha!

      • CMSTech says:

        LOL

      • rijp says:

        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?

      • CMSTech says:

        LOL

      • TheProfessional says:

        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.

    • rijp says:

      *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!

      • sqfanatic says:

        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.

      • The Man says:

        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

    • Joe Dirt says:

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

      LOL.

      • Metshrine says:

        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

      • CMSTech says:

        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.

      • roj says:

        ...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.

    • roj says:

      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.

    • GoodThings2Life says:

      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.

  20. zridling says:

    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 [i]new[/i] 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.

    • GoodThings2Life says:

      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.

      • ruemere says:

        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

      • weblackey says:

        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.

    • xprizex says:

      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:-)

  21. trevithick says:

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

  22. GS5 says:

    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.

  23. lapytsh says:

    Very hard time for Microsoft since few months ! What are you doing ?

    See you

    http://www.lapytsh.com

  24. wincement says:

    Let me be the first to say:

    ...what?

© 1998-2020 BetaNews, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy - Cookie Policy.