It's not just because I'm tired of the bovine references and the "shorthorn" jokes. No, the problem is that the future version of Windows formerly known as Longhorn in many ways won't resemble the Longhorn that Microsoft described last fall at its Professional Developers Conference.
Back then, the centerpiece of Longhorn--and the source of much of the excitement and anticipation surrounding its release--was a revolutionary new storage and file system called WinFS. Microsoft said WinFS would finally allow us mere mortals to easily find answers to simple questions using plain old English (or Chinese, Italian, German or what have you) terms.
In a way, WinFS would finally unchain us from the goofy, outmoded constraints put in place years ago by DOS. No longer would it be up to you and me to remember whether we saved a restaurant review in e-mail, a Word document or a bookmarked Web page. The software would do the heavy lifting for us.
You might not remember the details of the Cairo saga, or recognize the parallels with Microsoft's current dilemma with Longhorn. Here's a quick recap:
Back in 1992, Jim Allchin, the Microsoft executive in charge of Windows development, announces that the company is beginning work on Cairo, which will include a new "object file system" for storing document files, spreadsheets, multimedia files and other information in a unified way. The goal is to enable searching not only by file name, but by also file content. Cairo is due in 1994.
In 1994, after two years of relentless hype, Microsoft announces that Cairo's debut will "slip" into 1996. The company later moves Cairo's debut to 1997. Then catching up to Netscape and the Internet boom becomes Microsoft's top priority, and work on Cairo is "reassessed." In 1996, Bill Gates says Cairo's storage system is a vision, not a product, leading none other than Rick Sherlund--the Goldman Sachs analyst who helped Microsoft to go public--to say that Cairo has "lost its definition."
Fast-forward to 2002: Allchin tells CNET News.com editors that the old unified file system concept is alive and well and is planned as a major component of the next version of Windows, code-named Longhorn. Allchin doesn't set a date for Longhorn's debut, but analysts speculate it will arrive in 2004.
In February 2004, Allchin says that some of the programmers working on Longhorn have been reassigned to work on Windows XP Service Pack 2, a much-needed security revamp, and that as a result, some of Longhorn's features have been cut. In May, a Microsoft executive says WinFS will be included in Longhorn, but that "some of the functionality of WinFS and some of the scenarios may be limited in terms of what it can do."
Finally, last month, Microsoft said WinFS will not be included in Longhorn at all, but will instead ship as a test release sometime in 2006. Gates--recognized as the driving force behind the universal storage idea--then updates News.com on the technology. WinFs--"I'd be the first to say--is very ambitious," he says.
Why can't Microsoft--the world's largest software company, with thousands of talented programmers and billions of dollars in the bank--bring the unified storage concept to life?
There are lots of reasons. Legacy support, for starters. WinFS needs to work flawlessly with previous generations of Microsoft's applications, custom-built software and third-party tools or it will never get off the ground. That's hard, time-consuming work.
Microsoft was also simultaneously building new development tools and redesigning the Windows programming interface. That's in addition to finishing Windows XP SP2 and an update to Windows Server 2003. Something had to give.
So what does that leave in Longhorn? Plenty. A new graphics system called Avalon, a new communications and Web services subsystem called Indigo, and plenty of other new features that we learn about almost daily.
But the grand vision of a unified and simplified search tool for Windows once again has been delayed.
There is one major difference this time around. In the 1990s, none of Microsoft's competitors could really take advantage of Cairo's downfall. Not so this time.
Next year, Apple plans to launch new search tools as part of the Tiger release of OS X. And the Linux camp isn't far behind: Novell says it's retooling its iFolder software to give its SuSE Linux unified search capabilities.
The capabilities of these various schemes vary, and details are sketchy. But clearly, Microsoft--which popularized the idea of unified search--will likely lose the race to market with actual product. Now the challenge for the company is to convince customers that Longhorn--or whatever you think we should call it--is still worth waiting for.
Biography
Mike Ricciuti is CNET News.com's Cambridge, Mass., executive editor and bureau chief.
files by title, content, date, application and other parameters,
separately or in combination right now. No waiting.
Looks like ol' Bill is behind the power curve again.
It just might be that the basic concept of Windows is so
burdened with legacy requirements that MS really has no chance
to develop Longhorn as more than a PR release.
check out http://www.namesys.com/whitepaper.html
folks have already proven beyond any doubt that they have no
idea about time) Windows will have a new display system.
Meanwhile, back on OS X, we have already enjoyed a new display
system for two years. Its called Quartz, which is Display PDF.
Ever noticed how a PDF document can be enlarged and enlarged,
and is always crisp, with no jaggies? Same thing on the Mac
screen. Of course, anything you see on the screen can be a PDF
document, too. Very handy. Saves huge amounts of time.
Oh, yeah. We have already had an update to Quartz: Quartz
Extreme. Does the word FAST have any meaning for you? This is
available right now, today, on any Mac you buy. No waiting two
more years.
Of course, you also get the advanced Mac OS X searching utility,
Exposé, and the Mac Finder to get you to your files. It is not
Spotlight which we will get next year (sounds like Windows may
never get anything like this), but the combo sure beats Windows
solutions. More speed.
Why not add a Mac to your computing arsenal today?
Warning: Macs are habit forming.
Mike
the story it linked to, and I never did find any "New Features". I
found lots of promises. I found lots of "You have no idea how
good this will be because we haven't shared yet".
No features, though.
May I suggest that if you want innovation, you chose the
company that is famous for it: Apple.
For information on smoothly adding a Mac to your computing
arsenal, go here: < http://www.apple.com/switch/ >.
Warning: Macs are habit forming.
Mike
cut from OS design. Because Longhorn has never made it to
commercial release everything new includes nothing that has
been promised. So, in reality, anything that appears in Lonhorn
will be "new" by default even if 95% of what was promised in the
early 1990's is conspicuously missing.
Avalon uses an SGML-like XML based markup language. The ability to do user interfaces such as XAML in a markup language, rather than in code, is a significant advance for developers. For the end user? Perhaps not so big a deal. For developers? The importance cannot be understated.
faster than Acrobat, not to mention the ability to create PDF files
from any application as an option in the print dialog box makes
OSX a superior solution for sharing documents and images.
As far as the underlying graphics engine, Apple's Quartz broke
new ground by harnessing the GPU to draw the interface, while
providing advanced capabilities such as transparency.
OSX "Tiger" (due out a full year and a half ahead of Longhorn)
will introduce "Core Video" to join "Core Audio" as a tool to allow
programmers and developers to take advantage of OSX's
powerful graphics engine.
capabilities is that Apple has a working product while Avalon
does not exist as a commercial product.
Do you have a product now?
Are you making money for it now?
Do you have a business model now?
---
It's a promise that does not exist. Smoke and mirrors
want to see something really interesting. I find
myself more keenly watching whats going on with
the LG project than anything else thats desktop
related. But, thats just me.
32-bit compatibility in 2005. When will Microsoft deliver its 64-
bit OS?
Internet Explorer, and ri produce a functional 64-bit OS what
gives you the confidence that MS stock will maintain its value?
How do you anticipate the developers of Unix and Linux OS's to
change in the next 5 years, especially considerig 64-bit
development is already being promoted by non-MS companies?
Unless MS can produce more than promises, excuses, and delays
MS will be considered an archaic rather than progessive
company. That will not help maintain stock value.
to insults because they are incapable of forming an objective,
cogent argument and are unable to answer direct questions.
BECAUSE Mac Apple Linux Unix JAVA Novell etc are the Good guys. BUT :
In 80's there were Amigas - Ataris - Singlair QL - CUBE (!!! display postcript if you know). Black boxes with specific capabilities and hardware.
Then there was GOOD MS with VERY BAD first generation windows.
Every two or three years people had to upgrade or buy a new PC , To be able to run bad OS like win95 - 98 - me 2000 and so. Spend money to have Direct X graphics faster CPU's / GPU's, better Sound Cards more RAM HD etc..
BUT: who drove this "NEED for SPEED" race. BAD Microsoft, which OS created needs and hardware vendors followed.
So there were two history road paths:
1. Stay in black boxes (which Amiga is my 80's love), and donnot PAY the upgrade to 2004 path
2. Pay the way (as eventually happened) and Have MAC users with ATI video cards laugh at MS's TODAY GDI interface, LINUX guys huppy with the mainframe desktops capable of running their OS, and SUN with JAVA having Plenty of processing power to run their p-code (!!!) compiled object oriented crap.
Without 80s-90s evolution today's world (IT and non IT) be completely different (better or worst).
Before looking at your favorite MAC OS transparencies and blame MS, think that some people payed for this evolution and these are not the mere 5% or 7% of MAC Users !!!.
Today we have GOOD WINDOWS from a BAD COMPANY. In Greece we say: "One hand helps the other and both clean the face"
Good luck with LINUXMACJAVANOVELLWINDOWS story and sorry for spell mistakes.
Windows then Longhorn would not be nearly 10 years late, XP
could be euthanized, Internet Explorer dismissed, and MS would
have the braggin' rights to the most used and advanced OS.
The fact remains that MS has issued only promises and press
releases, and excuses and obfuscation will not sustain any
organization. People want products that work, are delivered on
time, and are affordable. MS is continually falling behind the
technological curve and every day each Windows user is slipping
into technological obsolescence.
OS X and Linux will be the foundation for the next generation of
OS's. MS is only left to offer Windows users Service Packs for
bloated and outmoded programming. So, if you prefer
anachronism to progression continue to use Windows.
- mircosoft
- by November 25, 2004 9:36 PM PST
- mircosoft or mob boss
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- slow pc's high components
- by alek_nedic May 18, 2007 5:31 AM PDT
- http://www.analogstereo.com/vacuum/miele_s183.htm
- Like this
-
(50 Comments)what kind of company know that there product is not right and yet still sell it?
they use us the end user to get most if not all the bugs out so bill gates, wont have to pay xtra over time to get rid of them.
wake up world go linux show bill gates who gets millions of bucks a day what we want! not what he tells us we need. when we make a stand we will all be more happy. slow pc's high components the list is never ending.
when will he bring out a OS that wont have any bugs, mind you there will allways be bugs in any os these days. software is like water one drop leads to a river of faulty software, as long as these people keep pushing there gear on us end users, it will never end. stand up for the right to free software and better speeds on the internet. long live cable and fiber optic cause we sure in hell need it.