backtop


Print 78 comment(s) - last by AndreasM.. on Jun 27 at 6:29 AM

New build brings enhancements to UAP and WinFS gets the boot

In its continuing efforts to improve its next generation operating system, Microsoft has released another interim build of Windows Vista to testers. Build 5456 is a rather large jump from Windows Vista Beta 2 (Build 5384.4) and offers a number of improvements which are sure to be welcomed by users. NeoSmart Blog reports:

Some of the new features include a revamped Aero/DWM subsystem, and a completely overhauled and significantly less obtrusive UAP for all those that couldn’t stand the previous one. From what we have been told by Microsoft, the Time Zone bug that plagued all most all previous builds of Windows Vista has been fixed and works great now, and quite a few fixes in the Regional Settings and IME are now implemented. And for the first time since Windows 3.0 Microsoft has finally announced that new mouse cursors will be made available for Windows - something they promised to do in XP with “Watercolors” but failed to deliver for internal reasons!

Of all of the improvements made to this build, the less intrusive User Access Protection (UAP) has to be on the biggest pluses. Vista's UAP scheme has been catching a lot of flak and Microsoft has seen it fit to gradually make the system less and less obnoxious.

Vista beta testers can download the new build immediately from the Windows Connect website. The rest of you folks will just have to wait until Microsoft releases another public build.

In other Vista news comes word that Microsoft has decided to drop its plans to offer Windows Future Storage (WinFS) as a future update to the operating system -- WinFS Beta 2 has been also cancelled. WinFS was the name for the new file system that was supposed to debut with the shipping version of Windows Vista. Over the course of Vista's long gestation period, WinFS was dropped from the feature count then later brought back to life when it was announced that the file system would be available at a later date as a system upgrade for Vista.

WinFS, which is based on Microsoft SQL Server technology, was supposed to do away with traditional file/folder hierarchy. From Betanews:

For example, no longer would documents need to be stored in My Documents or images in My Pictures; instead, Windows would simply display the files associated with a particular request on demand. In addition, WinFS could store structured data such as contacts, calendars and more.

As for the future of WinFS and other Windows technologies, lead programmer Quentin Clark goes on to air out his thoughts on his blog:

Of course, there are other aspects of the WinFS vision that we are continuing to incubate – areas not quite as mature as the work we are now targeting for Katmai and ADO.NET.   Since WinFS is no longer being delivered as a standalone software component, people will wonder what that means with respect to the Windows platform.  Just as Vista pushed forward on many aspects of the search and organize themes of the Longhorn WinFS effort, Windows will continue to adopt work as it's ready.  We will continue working the innovations, and as things mature they will find their way into the right product experiences – Windows and otherwise.  Having so much ready for SQL Server and ADO.NET is a big impact on the platform, and more will come.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Let Apple release it...
By stmok on 6/26/2006 6:53:01 AM , Rating: 0
quote:
by INeedCache on June 26, 2006 at 1:26 AM

I'd like to see any of you do any better with so many hackers after your software. Some of you crow about how secure OSX and Linux are. I say I doubt it, it's just that they aren't significant enough to warrant a barrage like Windows gets. I think MS does a pretty good job. MS naysayers don't have to use Windows, and they should find another hobby as their whining act has grown tiresome.


Another moron who puts his clueless 2 cents into it. *sigh*

(1) Hackers are people who break things to learn about them. They report security issues companies and open-source projects who are responsible for those products. They set up Honeypots/nets to study attacks and compromises. These are the good guys.

Crackers are the ones who break and compromise things for ego and profit. These are the bad guys.

Its sad to see that you can't tell the difference. Just goes to show, you don't have a clue.

(2) More bad guys take on Windows, because its easier to hack and crack. The "I'm attacked more, because I'm popular" is a very lame and cliched excuse, thought up by someone who was sponsored by Microsoft. It does NOT solve the security problems that Microsoft solutions face. Think about why they're easier to take down. Have you wondered why Microsoft still clings onto insecure nick-nacks like ActiveX?

Just compare MS based Internet web solutions to the most popular one, Apache. Apache currently holds 2/3rds of the Internet market. MS's IIS holds just over 20%...And yet, MS's solution are attacked more often.

Remember the Sony rootkit issue? Have a think about why this only applied to MS Windows solutions. If you try to sneak this nonsense into Linux, people will find out in a heartbeat and scream bloody murder. Companies can't hide crap into open-source solutions like they can with Windows.


You've just proved that you have NEVER used OSX or Linux before. So how can you comment on them? Ever heard of the quote: "Don't judge a book by its cover"? Well, you've just done that. You've made some uninformed comment.

The concept behind MS's UAC, now UAP, have been in Unix for the last 30yrs! Linux and OSX have been using this approach since their beginnings. Think about it. Linux was born in 1991. Its now 2006, and MS has finally bothered with such an approach. Yeah, Micrsoft has done a good job...A good job at selling half-baked crap to get as much of the marketshare. At the cost of stability, reliability, and security. (even reputation). Have you realised that security companies rub their hands with glee, when Microsoft solutions are used?

And what about those servers, retail router/firewalls, etc that use Linux? You do realise that Google.com is Linux powered don't you? What about those Linksys, ASUS, etc routers that uses Linux?

What about the US Navy switching to Linux-based solutions for their AEGIS air defence ships? If Windows is that reliable and secure, wouldn't the US Navy consider that over Linux? Seriously, would you trust a Microsoft solution defending your country? Would you bet your life on it?

How about you actually do some reading around the web, before posting up nonsense. Unless you've used all three solutions you've talked about, I really have no respect for your uninformed opinion.


RE: Let Apple release it...
By Zstream on 6/26/2006 8:26:09 AM , Rating: 3
Yes the person does have a point, Microsoft products are used in abundance and always will be. The reason why Asus and Linksys use Linux is the main reason "FREE" not security. The same goes for the Navy, they can add security or other fix's without waiting for Microsoft to implement the patch. If you believe that Linux is more secure then you are just as ignorant as the Microsoft fanboi's.


RE: Let Apple release it...
By SilthDraeth on 6/26/2006 8:32:56 AM , Rating: 4
stmok "Another moron who puts his clueless 2 cents into it. *sigh*

(1) Hackers are people who break things to learn about them. They report security issues companies and open-source projects who are responsible for those products. They set up Honeypots/nets to study attacks and compromises. These are the good guys.

Crackers are the ones who break and compromise things for ego and profit. These are the bad guys.

Its sad to see that you can't tell the difference. Just goes to show, you don't have a clue."

Basically you described a white hat hacker, as well as a black hat hacker.

Cracking is synonymous with hacking. One term or the other does not necessitate, or imply any sort of moral standard.

On the other hand, claiming that you are a "white hat", or "black hat" hacker would imply that you view yourself as having moral stand on hacking/cracking. White hats generaly hack for companies etc, for finding and securing software. Black hats are not inherently evil either, they may perform the exact same roles as a white hat, but they do it for personal reasons, instead of a corporation, or they may be trying to compromise another system for whatever reason.

As for the rest of your statment, please ensure that you know the difference between fact, and opinion, espescially when ranting, and raving about someone elses opinion.

As for me, I use Windows, because, I like to buy my software, and put the CD in, and click install and it works. If it doesn't work then the software company will not recieve very many sales, and their product will fail.

I haven't tried OSX, but I have used linux, and yes I could manage to get my video card drivers working...albeit without 3D support. I could install a few different programs using tarballs, but even then it wasn't a sure fire thing. Of course linux is open source, and you have dozens of different distro's, while essentially the same, they all have different a different GUI, and often need different tarballs, because the installation procedures differ between one linux distro and another.

With Windows I can be lazy, and still be secure. And in my opinion it is superior to linux, not because its closed source, but because the programs that run on windows are required to work relatively well, or the forces of capitalism will drive consumers to purchase another product that does work.


RE: Let Apple release it...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/26/2006 9:30:19 AM , Rating: 1
> "Black hats are not inherently evil either,"

So stealing and vandalism isn't inherently evil? Those are the motivating factors in 999 out of a thousand cracking attempts.


RE: Let Apple release it...
By SilthDraeth on 6/26/2006 11:08:08 PM , Rating: 2
"So stealing and vandalism isn't inherently evil? Those are the motivating factors in 999 out of a thousand cracking attempts. "

Notice, I said "or they may be trying to compromise another system for whatever reason."

I am pretty sure that would qualify my statement as being more accurate, than saying all black hats are bad, all white hats are good.

All inclusive, in relation to human nature, and motivations behind actions, almost always turn out to be false.

Noted that you did say 999/1000, which having no way to actually prove your statement, and avoiding using an all inclusive, all you did was agree with my by trying to disagree.

Thank you for the support.


RE: Let Apple release it...
By INeedCache on 6/26/2006 9:30:28 AM , Rating: 3
Moron, huh. Just another one of those clueless name-callers. I don't know enough about you to call you a moron, but you are smug, pompous, hypocritical, and childish. Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition, defines hacker as "a person who illegally gains access to and sometimes tampers with information in a computer system." So go play semantics somewhere else. I have used OSX and Linux before, and still presently use Linux. How uninformed you are, not to mention presumptuous. How many security updates to Firefox since its popularity increased? Lame and cliched better describes you. As for ranting and raving with my uninformed opinions, isn't that what you just did? Hypocritical comes to mind. You want to come off as so intelligent, yet you start off by calling me a moron. I believe childish about gets that one. Why would you suppose anyone would have any respect for your uninformed opinions? Why don't you actually think about what your writing before sending it off. For every entity using Linux, I can find at least 50 using Windows-based servers. You can, too, just check the web. But I guess they are just morons, too. Get a hobby.


RE: Let Apple release it...
By TomZ on 6/26/2006 12:57:48 PM , Rating: 3
There is a small, but vocal group that likes "all things non-Microsoft." While I can accept the views of that group, I do not agree with it.

People make a false argument that Microsoft broke the law and forced us to all buy Windows. That is pure bullshit. We all choose to buy Windows (unless it was purchased for you by your employer, in such case, your employer make the decision). The reason Windows has 95% of desktop market share is that people like it and choose to run it. Why is that? Because the majority of devices and apps run on Windows.

Finally, the argument that Linux and OSX is more secure is stupid and moot. The point is not whether Linux and OSX are more secure (although I believe they are not). The point is that the vast majority of users do not just want "any" more secure OS - they want a more secure Windows. Do you understand that?

So do your viral marketing thing and keep telling us how great Linux and OSX are, but it will continue to fall on deaf ears for those of us who well-informed users that are satisfied with Windows.


"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki