They promised they will have it. Sometimes. Maybe. They also promised the same for WinFS. And after all they dropped this feature since it never made it in time and reasonable quality. The only problem is: 9 womans will not give you a child in one month. Same goes here. It takes years to create such filesystems designs. And it takes a bunch of highly skilled guys. MS seems to be boring and outdated corpotation. Such persons will hit administrative walls soon. Then they will leave for better places as they need to have some fun from their work and it's clearly not about MS. So I guess MS would have some troubles to actually deliver ReFS and make it anyhow competetive. They did almost nothing for ~20 years. Other developed better designs. So they want to catch up and outperform these in a instant? No way, they could only compete in marketing bullshit at the moment. After all they were greedy and IFS SDK has been always problematic to get and use since MS wanted to control everything themselves. Including which FS goes where. This haves some price: there are almost no devs familiar with IFS and creating filesystems for windows. So this part of windows now become their competetive disadvantage. That's what I call shooting own legs...
Isn't ReFS already released as part of Windows Server 2012?
Isn't ReFS already released as part of Windows Server 2012?
Hmm... re-checked and yeah, they did (I haven't seen server 2012 so far). And as far as I can see they used more or less modern technologies, so it looks like I was over-pessimistic about their abilities (based on other software they release). Though I can see it does not supports sparse files and disk quotas, as well as compression, etc (hey, they already had it for NTFS?). Something that you could expect in 2012, eh? Strange guys, but okay, rant is invalid at the moment.
gtfo out of here you russian piece of shit, nobody wants you here.
I didn't like this article because
1. updating fails in numerous OS's, from linux to mac, updating a OS is always risky
2. He should have at least tried it before giving opinions, the fact that he didn't reveals BIAS
My impressions of windows 8 is that it's a schizophrenic system, an aborted hybrid fetus that is not suited neither for desktop nor for tablet use.
I see some review were people try to do normal stuff like shutting the system or adjusting the settings and it's absolutely mind bogling how ms released such a thing.
This reminds me of an XBOX sysem where you navigate with a Dpad, you always have difficulty changing stuff and it seems they designed the system so simply shit like playing games or downloading demos is real simple BUT getting to system preferences or changing things is real difficult
windows8 will prove a lost golden opportunity for linux because linux ONCE AGAIN failed to get his shit together
Microsoft continues its "underwhelming" progress, if you can call it that
As a former Windows users, converted over to the Linux side, I can concur that the direction Windows is going into is and always been wrong, and towards destruction. Win8 is the embodiment of all that is wrong with the OS: for one, they are trying to combine their mobile and desktop market, which as of right now isn't the way to go, and isn't going to pit them at the top of the evolutionary chain. A lot of their userbase is older folks who aren't as tech savvy as the younger generation, and will not understand this new OS. Not to mention that they will not only have to relearn how to use it, but also contend with the touch abilities, which I'm sure most of you can agree with, that our parents just can't grasp.
First and foremost, Microsoft has rushed the product out, that to this day, is still having the same touch issues as all the other demos that they have presented. As seen in this video, http://www.osnews.com/story/26327/Wi...uch-unfriendly. Every single time the Win8 was shown, there was some kind of an error, and now the excuse we get from the official showing of the product that just came out is that it's "not entirely optimized for a touch experience." What the hell is Win8 doing on a tablet then?! It seems ludicrous to me to showcase a product that's meant to be a [sorry excuse of a] market takeover on a mobile device. Am I the only one who sees the irony of that statement? There is also a problem in the catching for the Office team in Microsoft, because they are the only reason that Win8 will have a desktop mode. Also, unlike their tablet, all of the settings are generally changed in the same screen as the rest of the OS, not having to flip over and use "desktop mode" to change display settings.
Overall, Microsoft is too greedy and too afraid that they are rushing out unfinished product. Considering the amount of money that they churn out, there is no excuse.
I don't know which one is sadder! Your racism, or your grammar!
For me it's not sad, it's rage-inducing. Someone needs to start moderating their forums, I think. Also, I have a release preview of Win8 installed, which I've basically used only for the few games I have on steam that won't work under WINE. It works okay as long as you can avoid the "Modern" interface. (The interface formerly known as Metro). There was some kind of lawsuit involved over the name.
Link to bugreport in VirtualBox bugtracker probably?
it was probably caused by a slow HDD (!!), after I moved the image to a faster HDD it installed so I don't know why I should report it to VirtualBox and not MS...
Originally Posted by Da9nd2ri3dge
Basically i would always do clean win installs and never upgrade. That's usally lost time to do so.
That's my experience too, but either they should support it and it should work or they should remove the ability to do in-place upgrade. There's a feature, this feature does not work as advertised, ergo it's a bug.
I regularly upgrade Debian servers and Ubuntu desktops between releases and there never was a time I was left with unbootable system, sometimes some daemon didn't work because the config file syntax changed but it was at most an hour or two of work to make it 100% functional again. Let alone my Archlinux install that I upgraded from 32bit to 64bit, moved between 3 different computers and the last 5 or 6 years of updates I installed while I've used it, again I never had to do restore from backups because the upgrade went FUBAR.
As such, I'd say the situation in the Linux and Windows camp is radically different.