Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

noka · Jul 10, 2004, 06:52 AM

Soooo.... wow, that didn't take long at all... What was it? ... a week and a half and M$ is already biting Tiger.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/biztech...eut/index.html

Hmmm... where have I seen that before.

All said and done... It feels good to be at the top, using the best.

We all know M$ is working their hardest to be "innovative" and "cutting edge".... they're in business to make money, and they do it well. I have a lot of respect for them for being the best they can, it's called success..... BUT... I hate seeing ideas *blatantly* ripped off... makes me question the corporate world to no end. Where are the ethics and original, creative ideas, M$!?!?! (this is a rhetorical question.... er, post, i guess

).

(dur. is there a thread for drunk people on this forum?

)

Synotic · Jul 10, 2004, 08:08 AM

I know that Microsoft has been developing their own search technology as a competitor to Google for a while. Whether it included personal computer searching or not, I don't know but it wouldn't surprise because they develop windows and the article mentioned Google already developing technology for the same purpose. That being said, didn't Apple steal the search idea from Longhorn?

Group51 · Jul 10, 2004, 08:46 AM

No, iTunes.

But really:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeOS_File_System

...wasn't it?

jaiqua · Jul 10, 2004, 08:52 AM

WinFS is a far deeper technology than Spotlight, and MS demonstrated it a long time before Tiger made its appearance. Most of these technologies have been around for ages in various forms. No-one is really copying anyone though, except maybe in implementation.

That being said, Longhorn's search functions are pretty amazing. Apple now introducing a metadata-like FS is just them keeping up.

christor · Jul 10, 2004, 09:12 AM

"Apple now introducing a metadata-like FS is just them keeping up."

Demonstrating a database file system and shipping it are two different things. Apple has released a preview for developers that includes a working implementation and will ship the technology early next year. That's hardly just keeping up. Just because one company demos technologies several years in advance of release while the other doesn't means little. As to the depth of the tech, who knows what's in store for 10.5, the probably head-to-head longhorn competitor, and who knows what technology will actually ship in longhorn. (Funny how each os x release is compared to longhorn.)

Wiskedjak · Jul 10, 2004, 09:35 AM

Originally posted by noka:
Soooo.... wow, that didn't take long at all... What was it? ... a week and a half and M$ is already biting Tiger.

All said and done... It feels good to be at the top, using the best.

We all know M$ is working their hardest to be "innovative" and "cutting edge".... they're in business to make money, and they do it well. I have a lot of respect for them for being the best they can, it's called success..... BUT... I hate seeing ideas *blatantly* ripped off... makes me question the corporate world to no end. Where are the ethics and original, creative ideas, M$!?!?! (this is a rhetorical question.... er, post, i guess ).

(dur. is there a thread for drunk people on this forum? )

ummm ... M$ has been working on Longhorn and talking about it's features for years before Steve mentioned some Tiger features last week. If anything, Apple is copying M$ here and claiming that M$ is copying them. Those attack posters at WWDC suggest Apple is feeling on the defensive, rather than the offensive ... even though Longhorn is still some three years away.

Spheric Harlot · Jul 10, 2004, 10:28 AM

It's kind of silly to argue this, really, but a couple of points:

Apple isn't catching up to Longhorn with this metadata system. You cannot "catch up" to something that isn't going to ship for two or three years - maybe.

The BeFS guy has been working for Apple for something like two years now.

Person Man · Jul 10, 2004, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Those attack posters at WWDC suggest Apple is feeling on the defensive, rather than the offensive ... even though Longhorn is still some three years away.

They ARE feeling defensive, because everyone is STILL comparing EACH new release of Mac OS X to Longhorn (which hasn't even shipped yet). They should be comparing current OS X releases to the currently released XP. They can compare OS X 10.4 to Longhorn all they want for now, as both operating systems have not yet been publicly released, but even that comparison won't be as valid as the comparison of whatever version of OS X is publically released/available at the time Longhorn is released. THEN you will have a "more valid" comparison. But by that time, people will be comparing the current OS X version with whatever NEXT version of Windows Microsoft has planned for years before it even comes out.

kman42 · Jul 10, 2004, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by jaiqua:
WinFS is a far deeper technology than Spotlight,

Can you explain what that means? I know that WinFS will be a relational database, but what does that really give the user that Spotlight doesn't?

Also, Spotlight technology can be used within applications as demonstrated by it's use in Mail, Address Book, Finder, and Preferences. Does a database-filesystem provide that?

kman

mishap · Jul 10, 2004, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by Person Man:
They ARE feeling defensive, because everyone is STILL comparing EACH new release of Mac OS X to Longhorn (which hasn't even shipped yet). They should be comparing current OS X releases to the currently released XP. They can compare OS X 10.4 to Longhorn all they want for now, as both operating systems have not yet been publicly released, but even that comparison won't be as valid as the comparison of whatever version of OS X is publically released/available at the time Longhorn is released. THEN you will have a "more valid" comparison. But by that time, people will be comparing the current OS X version with whatever NEXT version of Windows Microsoft has planned for years before it even comes out.

Isn't it great that everyone compares it to longhorn--just shows how far ahead we are. I'll be enjoying Panther and Tiger for a long time before the same features hit Windows.

I wouldnt get bent about it, i would be happy.

Horsepoo!!! · Jul 10, 2004, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by kman42:
Can you explain what that means? I know that WinFS will be a relational database, but what does that really give the user that Spotlight doesn't?

Also, Spotlight technology can be used within applications as demonstrated by it's use in Mail, Address Book, Finder, and Preferences. Does a database-filesystem provide that?

kman

I'm also intrigued about WinFS being a 'deeper technology'.

How will Longhorn's search engine cope with storage devices that have a different file system than WinFS. Will these storage devices have to be indexed? Will people be able to upgrade their current file system to the new filesystem safely? Will this new relational-DB filesystem store data beyond metadata such as actual file content? Or will this have to be indexed too?

If files that aren't on a WinFS storage device have to be indexed or file content indexed...why bother with the relational-DB file system?

ginoledesma · Jul 11, 2004, 12:57 AM

Originally posted by Horsepoo!!!:
I'm also intrigued about WinFS being a 'deeper technology'.

How will Longhorn's search engine cope with storage devices that have a different file system than WinFS. Will these storage devices have to be indexed? Will people be able to upgrade their current file system to the new filesystem safely? Will this new relational-DB filesystem store data beyond metadata such as actual file content? Or will this have to be indexed too?

If files that aren't on a WinFS storage device have to be indexed or file content indexed...why bother with the relational-DB file system?

I still have my reservations about WinFS, though I admit it is "cool" and appeals to the techie inside us. The migration from FAT32->NTFS seems much simpler since it doesn't really impact (much) applications and all compared to the migration to WinFS. The question on external storage devices is also a curious one, especially since not all systems will be using Longhorn yet (not unless MS offers an update to their older OSs to support basic read/write to it).

At first glance (without reading too much into the tech), I think WinFS may prove to be theoretically faster since the filesystem is a relational database to begin with, rather than database-backed or a database running on top of an existing FS.

Synotic · Jul 11, 2004, 02:53 AM

Originally posted by Horsepoo!!!:
If files that aren't on a WinFS storage device have to be indexed or file content indexed...why bother with the relational-DB file system?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, all databases use indexing. How else would you find anything in a large database without it being deathly slow?

BZ · Jul 11, 2004, 08:58 AM

This is Microsoft's game and they have been doing it for years.

1) Announce a new product and feature set YEARS before it is due
2) Scare people into buying any competitive product that is shipping NOW because of the new product that will ship in years.
3) Profit.

It is fine to compare two OS's that are NOT shipping (Tiger vs Longhorn) but we all know that Apple will be onto 10.5 (either shipped or about to ship) before Longhorn comes out.

Feature competition is great, but if you had to bet on who is going to ship an OS when they said they were, Apple is your company.

BZ

Millennium · Jul 11, 2004, 11:02 AM

Originally posted by Synotic:
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, all databases use indexing. How else would you find anything in a large database without it being deathly slow?

This is correct. Good DBAs use all sorts of tricks to avoid scanning through full database tables, and indexing is one of the most common of these.

There are zealots who will tell you that the relational model is the One True Storage Format. Don't believe them; the relational model is a good tool, and it can indeed store pretty much any kind of data, but a screwdriver can be used to pound nails if you're really determined. It's a good tool, but not always the best tool. Nothing is.

MPMoriarty · Jul 11, 2004, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by ginoledesma:
I still have my reservations about WinFS, though I admit it is "cool" and appeals to the techie inside us. The migration from FAT32->NTFS seems much simpler since it doesn't really impact (much) applications and all compared to the migration to WinFS. The question on external storage devices is also a curious one, especially since not all systems will be using Longhorn yet (not unless MS offers an update to their older OSs to support basic read/write to it).

At first glance (without reading too much into the tech), I think WinFS may prove to be theoretically faster since the filesystem is a relational database to begin with, rather than database-backed or a database running on top of an existing FS.

I thought WinFS was in actuality a relational database layer that runs on top of NTFS, not an actual new file system that Longhorn is going to be using to replace NTFS.

Mike

Brass · Jul 11, 2004, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by jaiqua:
Apple now introducing a metadata-like FS is just them keeping up.

Apple is NOT introducing a new File System for spotlight. Spotlight works just fine on the same old HFS+ file system we're all using already. No reformatting required. Spotlight (presumably) uses a database which resides on HFS+ (or whatever) the same as any other database or any other files you might have on your disk.

Superchicken · Jul 11, 2004, 08:44 PM

My bet is, Apple or M$ decided to start developing this a while back. Apple wanted to go with some interim steps, moving search from sherlock to the finder, then to system wide. Microsoft wants to make a bigger jump from their little find utility to WinFS. But essentially both techs seem to be doing the same thing! Now unless one is faster than the other (which since they'll both use indexing if M$ is smart it appears isn't likely) the only point of contention between the usability of the two. My bet sadly is that if all it is is asking questions and stuff Microsoft might have access to more computer stupid people than Apple (IE the majority of their user base) so they may make it more user friendly.

But who cares who did it first, people have been searching their HDs forever, and BeOS had this sorta thing long before either company. It's good that Microsoft is getting into search, it means that the rest of the world is getting a good experience. It's awesome that Apple is moving into search because that means we get a better looking good experience. And it's good that eventually Linux will move in this direction so there will be less complaining at Slashdot... now why is PalmSource behind the curve?

MPMoriarty · Jul 11, 2004, 09:21 PM

What I think is going to be interesting is how developers integrate this into their apps.

And once they do, these new metadata tags developers use are then picked up by the MAIN SpotLight system and accessible via the system-wide search utility.

Brass · Jul 11, 2004, 09:43 PM

I wonder how much HD space the Spotlight database is going to consume. If it's indexing every word in every document, it could be rather huge. Time will tell.

i_wolf · 12:34 AM

WinFS is a database layer that sits above the file system. it works with the filesystem, but it is not the filesystem itself. It is similar to the way spotlight works. In Tiger, Apple looked for an open standards, lightweight fast database engine to handle the metadata.
They went with SQL lite.... not breaking NDA it is widely out in the open already. This is fantastic, as it uses SQL .... easy and friendly for developers. As a database it is proven and constantly under development due to its open source heritage. It is very lightweight and extremely fast. Similar in principle to WinFS it sits above the HFS file system and stores the meta data. WinFS is not due to ship with Longhorn according to reports this year. Incidentally Apple was really clever and made spotlight extensible and made mysql available to any other application to use as a datastore.
To my mind Apple has the advantage on this one on a number of fronts, speed, reliability and the openness of the technology.

hmurchison2001 · Jul 12, 2004, 12:03 AM

Actually it's SQLite not mysql. But the comments remain true.

i_wolf · 12:35 AM

more info about winfs if you are interested... note the diagram and that winfs resides as a layer above NTFS, similar to the way SQL Lite sits above HFS+

actually what I am very interested in is whether Tiger will retain the ability for a user to choose to install UFS. Having installed Tiger myself I didn't see that option. If the option is present I wonder if spotlight technology will work with UFS

edit: i edited MySQL lite to SQL lite... the brain aint workin the best at 4am!

Brass · Jul 12, 2004, 12:50 AM

Originally posted by i_wolf:
more info about winfs if you are interested... note the diagram and that winfs resides as a layer above NTFS, similar to the way SQL Lite sits above HFS+

actually what I am very interested in is whether Tiger will retain the ability for a user to choose to install UFS. Having installed Tiger myself I didn't see that option. If the option is present I wonder if spotlight technology will work with UFS

edit: i edited MySQL lite to SQL lite... the brain aint workin the best at 4am!

As the previous poster mentioned, its "SQLite". Apple does not use any form of MySQL in Tiger. MySQL and SQLite are completely different products. MySQL is a client/server based database system. SQLite is an embedded database engine (ie, it is a C library to be used in other applications/programs). MySQL is under the GPL. SQLite is under the BSD License.

For more info...
MySQL
SQLite

Edit: Actually, I believe that Apple probably does bundle MySQL with the server version of the OS, but that is for a completely different purpose.

i_wolf · Jul 12, 2004, 09:05 AM

yeh I know its SQLlite, I just typo'd is all!!

Its a bit like when you are working with FreeBSD all day and you go into the NetBSD forums and start referring to NetBSD as FBSD etc..
But thanks guys for correcting me. Serious error that would mislead lots of people

MasonMcD · Jul 12, 2004, 11:26 AM

Originally posted by Brass:
MySQL is under the GPL. SQLite is under the BSD License.

For more info...
MySQL
SQLite

Actually, there is no license for SQLite, not even BSD:

SQLite is in the public domain. No claim of ownership is made to any part of the code. You can do anything you want with it.

http://www.sqlite.org/copyright.html

dfiler · Jul 12, 2004, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by i_wolf:
WinFS is not due to ship with Longhorn according to reports this year.

Yep. It's also important to note that MS has hyped and then never delivered new file systems in the past.

Not only that... keep in mind that NTFS is multiforked. However, MS has never made use of the functionality. Until we're closer to an actual release, Longhorn smells a lot like Copeland to me.

K++ · Jul 12, 2004, 04:26 PM

Originally posted by jaiqua:
Apple now introducing a metadata-like FS is just them keeping up.

<sarcasm>Yes, it's not like HFS+ didn't already have this since it's creation.</sarcasm>

Brass · Jul 12, 2004, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by MasonMcD:
Actually, there is no license for SQLite, not even BSD:

SQLite is in the public domain. No claim of ownership is made to any part of the code. You can do anything you want with it.

http://www.sqlite.org/copyright.html

Yes, my mistake. But that is almost the same thing as the BSD license (ie, both are exceptionally open and liberal, unlike the GPL).