CDCer, the difference between Windows Vista and Mac OS Tiger is that more than 5% of the personal computing community will actually be using Windows Vista. Microsoft is bringing this technology to the people in that community who don't want to pay for overpriced Apple hardware.
By itself, this is impressive, but combine this with WinFS and Web service classes... yeeow, the possibilities are staggering! No wonder they're so excited about this.
One quibble - when Anders was talking about the reason why the "from" clause had to be first, it made a lot of sense, but then I went to the VB 9.0 whitepaper and saw this:
Dim SmallCountries = Select Country _
From Country In Countries _
Where Country.Population < 1000000
For Each Country As Country In SmallCountries
The VB.NET syntax for LINQ looks more like SQL than the C# syntax. However, Anders' point about the C# syntax being better for XML querying still holds and is demonstrated by this VB.NET 9 snippet later in the whitepaper:
Dim CountriesWithCapital As XElement = _
<%= Select <Country Name=(Country.Name)
<Name><%= City.Name %></Name>
<Longitude><%= City.Longitude %></Longtitude>
<Latitude><%= City.Latitude %></Latitude>
From Country In Countries, City In Capitals _
Where Country.Name = City.Country %>
There's a lot of XML cruft before you get to the "from" and "where" of your LINQ code. It's easy to imagine how nasty it could get with a more complicated XML document. The C# syntax clumps all the LINQ syntax at the beginning and leaves the XML cruft for the end.
By the way, note the ASP.NET-like syntax in VB.NET 9!
I believe that the average Windows user has 4 windows open. In fact, I would be willing to bet that most Windows users open their primary window maximized or full screen.
I joke that Microsoft should have named the product "Window" for that reason.
I have only two windows open: this one and the video.
Sep 13, 2005 at 11:03PMIs Office 12 going to be a Vista-only release though? It makes sense to have Office 12 be Vista-compliant when running on Vista, but if they are going to release Office 12 for XP too, it should follow the XP user interface guidelines.
Office 12 looks incredibly slick and is definitely going to appeal to users of previous editions of Office and other similiar office productivity applications. I still can't help but feel like it is going to scare new users though and hope Microsoft does work between now and RTM to simplify the interface for new users.
Fantastic interview, Scoble!
The thing I liked about what Mr. Gates said is that he's not satisfied with how software is today. Many of his criticisms about what is wrong with software are right on. There is so much room for improvement.
Also, for being one of the world's wealthiest and powerful people, he seems amazingly down-to-earth.
Thanks again for getting this interview, Scoble.
It was great to see WinFS in action. Thanks for the video, C9!
IMHO, calling it a "file system" is really doing it a disservice even if ultimately becoming Windows' next file system is its most important near-term future goal.
Yes, I know its current incarnation is as a layer on top of NTFS, but in the future, that may not be the case. From the comments they made about WinFS in the video, they chose NTFS because it was easier to use a robust, mature file system like NTFS to build the "file system" bits of WinFS than to build a new one from scratch.
Likewise, SQL Server 2005 may not be the database engine that drives WinFS in the future; one of Hans Reiser's beefs about WinFS is that it uses a relational model, which he feels isn't appropriate for a filesystem. Personally, I think Reiser's right but for a different reason than he thinks. I'm less concerned about the suitability of the relational model for modeling filesystem data and more concerned about the "impedance mismatch" of object-oriented and relational database models, something that has been a thorn in the side of O/R and OODB models for a very long time. MS has a lot of very bright people in their employ; maybe they'll figure out something.
Anyway, as with NTFS, MS is using SQL Server 2005 because it was easier to use a robust, mature database like SQL Server than to build a new object-relational or object-oriented database from scratch. The flip side is that the next generations of WinFS will have to support legacy artifacts of having its first generation be an NTFS-based, SQL Server-based file system, but I guess they figured they'd rather cross that bridge when they get to it than to release something in the early-mid 2010's.
It'll be interesting to see what the open source guys come up with after WinFS comes out, though I wonder if they will be as hamstrung by their UNIX legacy as Microsoft is by their NT/SQL Server legacies. Reiser's comments about his file system's UNIX dependencies suggests that it will be hampered by that legacy... but not forever. What MS is trying to do with WinFS could be bigger and more powerful than UNIX, NT, and SQL Server.
Let's not forget Google, who's coming at this from their own angle (the power of search; the Internet as the filesystem).