Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 13:19:18 +0200, Peter KÃhlmann wrote:
>
>> Right. One works. The other is vaporware
>
> One takes the easy approach, the other doesn't.
>
Nope. The other is vaporware. Non-existant
It does not take any approach. Non-existant software by default doesn't
>> Yes. "Easily". It was just an afternoons work to do WinFS. So easy in
>> fact that MS could not do it
>
> Easily means less work than engineering a new solution.
>
Well, show us the "new solution"
Right, there is none
>>> By detaching the datastore from the filesystem itself, it's more
>>> portable. Reiser, on ther other hand can only work with ReiserFS
>>> locally.
>>
>> Still, Reiser got something your masters "masterpiece" (in dropped
>> features) has not. And probably never will have. After all, this was
>> promised before Win95 appeared.
>
> If Microsoft had taken the approach of embedding the metadata in the
> filesystem (something that NTFS can already do very easy with alternate
> file streams) this would have been simple. That wasn't what Microsoft
> wanted to do, though.
>
Well, given that the incompetent horde of programmers at MS have not come up
with anything useable at all, they should have perhaps taken the "simple
approach".
But I guess even that was beyond their capabilities
> WinFS went way beyond simple metadata.
>
> And, for the record, nobody seems to want Reiser4 anyways, probably
> because
> it's too invasive in the filesystem for most peoples tastes. For example,
> what happens when you copy a file from a ReiserFS partition to a
> non-reiser
> partition? What happens when you copy it to an NFS share and then back
> again? Right. you lose all your metadata.
This has what to do with WinFS being dead exactly?
There still is a working FS, even if you have to FUD now extra-time, and a
non-existant one.
--
Warning: You have moved the mouse.
Windows will reboot now to make the change permanent
|
|
