Has Longhorn's "redefinition" pushed DX10 forward?

[KimB]

Well, if it were any other company, I might claim that they'd solve all those problems before shipping....but Microsoft does have a history of producing bloated products with features that cause more problems than they're worth....

 

[Temporary Name]

And much greater opportunity for "file-system" corruption....

No offense, but that's a stereotypical Luddite response. Every increase in complexity and/or virtualization does indeed create new and exciting ways in which the system can fail.

But that is hardly a reason to cling to old technology.

 

[Xmas]

Now everyone needing to troubleshoot WinFS will have to be DBAs. Brilliant! No, no, really.

To troubleshoot NTFS, you have to be... what? Well, you can right-click on a drive and start a disk scan. Don't you think WinFS will have equal tools for fixing corruption?

 

[KimB]

Well, when I got my 160GB hard drive and didn't install the Windows 2000 fix from the Western Digital website, there was no troubleshooting involved. My hard drive just got corrupted, and I lost all my data. Now that I know it's there to download, of course, I can avoid that little problem.

But I think Brit has a point. When it comes to stable releases, Microsoft isn't exactly the best. I don't know if I'd trust them with a new filesystem right away.

 

[BRiT]

But that is hardly a reason to cling to old technology.

I'm all for new technology, but not when the track-record of the implementor is shakey at best and is the heart of the PC. Take a look at the bug-list for their SQL Server/MDAC/ODBC products...

Do you think the average PC user will be able to trouble-shoot the potential new issues WinFS would create? It's bad enough for them as it is now.

I'm just dreading the period of time between the rollout of WinFS and when third party software providers will have their tools (backup, restore, maintainence, tuning) available. That time could be extremely intollerable if having to rely on MS's own tools.