ie8 fix

Apple announces ZFS on Snow Leopard

By | June 19, 2008, 11:24pm PDT

Summary: Finally, a modern file system on a consumer OS As if Grand Central weren’t enough bad news for Microsoft, now they have ZFS to contend with. Building a reliable, high-performance file system takes years and Microsoft doesn’t have years to respond. The formal announcement is for Snow Leopard server, which is how Apple introduces new file [...]

Finally, a modern file system on a consumer OS
As if Grand Central weren’t enough bad news for Microsoft, now they have ZFS to contend with. Building a reliable, high-performance file system takes years and Microsoft doesn’t have years to respond.

The formal announcement is for Snow Leopard server, which is how Apple introduces new file systems. HFS+ first arrived on a server version as well.

Who cares?
Anyone who stores data should.

Microsoft’s NTFS is 20 year old technology borrowed from DEC. Fine for small disks and puny CPUs. Not so great for today’s data intensive systems and applications.

Silent data corruption is common - only you don’t know it - because the corruption shows up as other problems, like missing DLLs.

ZFS: open source from Sun
ZFS is the first desktop file system with true end-to-end data integrity. Thanks to sophisticated tree-based checksums it detects and corrects silent data corruption anywhere in the data path: disks, cables, interfaces and more.

The checksums are stored with the parent block, so the file system always knows that the child block is both uncorrupted and the correct block. That’s just one of the errors that NTFS and most other commodity file systems - including the Mac’s HFS+ - are prone too.

Sun’s ZFS engineering team started working on ZFS 7 years ago as a clean-sheet design. It combines file system and volume management functionality. Instead of managing individual disks, you manage a pool of blocks. ZFS takes care of the details.

Turning up the heat on Microsoft
For all of Microsoft’s fine talk about innovation they don’t do squat unless someone else does it first. Remember IE 6? ZFS is a modern and innovative file system that solves some difficult data storage and integrity problems. Like these:

No more Disk Warrior
Data corruption on PCs and Macs is a sad and stupid fact of life. Power failures, flaky RAM, poor grounding, (slowly) failing hard drives, driver glitches, phantom writes and more conspire to rot your data.

ZFS eliminates that. All blocks are checksummed and the checksum is stored in a parent block. ZFS always knows if the block is correct and/or corrupt. Every block has a parent block (with one obvious exception that gets special treatment), so the entire data store is self-validating. You’ll never have to wonder if all your data is correct again. It is.

No RAID cards or controllers
ZFS implements very fast RAID that fixes the performance knock-off against software RAID. In ZFS all writes are the fastest kind: full stripe writes. And the RAID is running on the fastest processor in your system (your Mac), rather than some 3-5 year old microcontroller.

Just add drives to your system and you have a fast RAID system. With Serial Attach SCSI and SATA drives you’ll pay for the drives (cheap and getting cheaper), cables and enclosures.

No more volumes
Every time you add a disk to your Mac you see another disk icon on the desktop. If you want to RAID some disks you use Disk Utility (or something) to create the volume. Slow, error-prone, confusing.

ZFS eliminates the whole volume concept. Add a disk or five to your system and it joins your storage pool. More capacity. Not more management.

Backup made easy
ZFS does something called snapshot copy, which creates a copy of all your data at whatever point in time you want. Copy the snapshot up to a disk, tape or NAS box and you are backed up.

Create a snapshot on every write if you want, so if your database barfs you can go back to just before it choked.

But that’s not all!
For in-depth treatment of ZFS see here and here. Includes links to more technical info and benchmarks.

The Storage Bits take
It would be nice if Microsoft were driving innovation and reliability, but - like General Motors - they prefer to rest of their laurels. And like General Motors, they are facing a long and painful decline if they don’t get their act together.

GM says they are proud that 1 in 4 cars sold in America are GM - but the number used to be 3 out of 5. Microsoft is rightfully proud of their 90% market share. But that share can change - as it has for IE - and they have nowhere to go but down.

As users we benefit from the competition. Kudos to Apple for bringing the latest technology to consumers.

Comments welcome, of course. For more background on data corruption issues check out 50 ways to lose your data, How data gets lost and How Microsoft puts your data at risk.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Robin Harris has been messing with computers for over 30 years and selling and marketing data storage for over 20 in companies large and small.

Disclosure

Robin Harris

Robin Harris is a president of TechnoQWAN, a consulting and analyst firm in northern Arizona. He also writes StorageMojo.com, a blog which accepts advertising from companies in the storage industry, and has a 25 year history with IT vendors. He has many industry contacts, many of whom are friends and all of whom he has opinions about. Robin has relationships with many companies in the technology industry. Every company he writes about may have sought to influence his opinion through carefully-crafted marketing messages and self-serving white papers, gifts ranging from desk calendars, t-shirts, lunches and trips as well as analyst or consulting assignments. He also invests in some technology companies. He may accept payment for services in stock as well. Robin discloses financial investments in or client relationships with companies named in Storage Bits. To help readers sort out the gold from the dross in his writings, Robin tries to communicate his reasons as clearly as he can. If you agree, you are intelligent and discerning. If you disagree, well, you disagree. In all cases, Robin encourages readers to subject everything they read, see or hear on the internet or from politicians to some simple questions: * What assumptions are implicit in the world view and judgments of the author? * What, if any, is the factual basis for the opinions the author expresses? * Is it reasonable, logical and clear? Your critical faculties: use ‘em or lose ‘em!

Biography

Robin Harris

Harris has been messing with computers for over 30 years and selling and marketing data storage for over 20 in companies large and small. He introduced a couple of multi-billion dollar storage products (DLT, the first Fibre Channel array) to market, as well as a many smaller ones. Earlier he spent 10 years marketing servers and networks. After leaving corporate life he founded TechnoQWAN, a consulting and analyst firm. He also developed StorageMojo into one of the top storage industry blogs.

Robin writes, consults, coaches and lives among the mountains of northern Arizona.

129
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

It didn't quite make it eh folks?
me@... 11th Apr 2010
still waiting...

In the meanting OpenSolaris now has asynchronous depduplication in place and working well.
0 Votes
+ -
Timing
johnfenjackson@... 20th Jun 2008
How sweet would it would be if App??e could deliver Grand Central and ZFS at the point of WINDOWS 7 release. The marketing people would have a field day!
0 Votes
+ -
A MS Pipe Dream
Daves3 20th Jun 2008
Did you ever here of WINFS? MS struggled to get a new file system for years and shelved it because of performance issues
(longhorn what a disappointment): http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc164028.aspx.

As a long time WindowsForms/WPF/Web developer and now a
newly proud Mac fanboy I find it hard to believe that MS will
get a new file system, multi-core processors support and a
OpenCL equivalent (using the GPU as a parallel processor to
speed up ordinary apps like excel instead of it doing little or
nothing when not playing games) by 2010.

I hope for MS's sake Windows 7 will be what they promise this
time, but doubt it... There market share will be a slow and humiliating decline. Balmer should resign for simply dropping
the ball on all of this and of his fixation with Google that
became fruitless.

I am certain Apple will capture at least 10-15% market share by
2010 because of all the people MS pissed off with the Vista
abortion. I considered it a beta release when it launched a year
ago simply because MS 2005 SQL Studio not being able to run
on a pre release of Vista, my whole team lost it when MS had
to make a patch for there own software. They lost there way
and I am sure Apple is and will take advantage of that.
0 Votes
+ -
I wonder how long it will take for Apple users to fervently believe Apple invented it. (like everything else Apple sells) The power of the Jobs Reality Distortion Field is amazing.
0 Votes
+ -
Apple users know full well that Apple hasn't necessarily invented most of the technologies they use, but they were the first to make them actually usable by people other than nerds and geeks with tape on their glasses, and wearing pocket protectors.

Even with Apple's examples staring them right in the face most tech companies continue to fall over themselves making products that have laundry lists of features you can check off but only a bare handful of those features, if any, are actually usable.

TiVo seems to be one of the few others that can actually get hardware+software done right. Palm started off doing a good job, but they've lost it ever since they turned their PDAs into phones. Conversely, Nokia lost it when they stopped making their phones just be phones. I suppose some of the GPS makers aren't too bad. Sony had the ability to make usable products but lost it a long time ago.

Thank goodness that a company like Apple is around to raise the bar, or we might all still be controlling our computers mostly from a command line. (And anyone who proceeds to defend command lines after this has completely missed the point.)
Kudos to Apple for actually making new tech usable

Go ahead. Does the file system have a nicer UI? Are the bits written with little Apples on them?

You gave the standard excuse about how features are bad but you never wrapped it up with a specific example for why Apple gets kudos for making ZFS more usable. I'm presuming you've seen some advanced copy of Apple's version of ZFS so please share with us how Apple ZFS is better than Solaris ZFS. Thanks! happy
0 Votes
+ -
If it's so easy
frgough 20th Jun 2008
why hasn't MS done it?
0 Votes
+ -
Seriously...has this really been the problem that Robin would have us believe it is?
Or did you finally graduate to NTFS? Microsoft themselves must know that NTFS is outdated, because they had "tried" to create a new file system call WinFS with the release of what has become known as Vista. However, they couldn't get it to work right, so dropped it from the release just to get the overdue OS out the door. Or do you remember that (maybe intentionally forgetting in your bias)?
0 Votes
+ -
Look...I'm not arguing against progress. I use ZFS on some of my Solaris systems. I just don't think other file systems are nearly as unreliable as Robin would have us believe.
0 Votes
+ -
Not quite right...
tcrichard 20th Jun 2008
WinFS didn't replace NTFS, but rather provided data modeling capabilities on top of a NTFS drive.

NTFS may be old, but it is a lot more robust than people give it credit for.
0 Votes
+ -
The Microsoft Apologist's new case for simplicity.
YinToYourYang-22527499 20th Jun 2008
Microsoft's new reality: nothing broken, nothing to fix.

Microsoft can't claim being innovative any longer.
::DING!DING!DING!:: YES! It's DEFINITELY even worse of a problem than Robin makes it out to be!
0 Votes
+ -
What are you talking about?
ye 20th Jun 2008
Please clarify as I have no idea what you're trying to say.
0 Votes
+ -
Its not an easy adventure, at all. Yes you need to be pretty fluent in Unix, but beyond that, its time consuming, even if you know what you are doing.

And with Apple always wanting to make everything into an easy to use GUI, I can pretty much assure your that setting up ZFS under OS X will be a point and click adventure that takes just a few moments.
mirror: zpool create my_pool mirror /dev/dsk/c0t0d0 /dev/dsk/c0t0d1

RAID"5": zpool create my_pool raidz /dev/dsk/c0t0d0 /dev/dsk/c0t1d0 /dev/dsk/c0t2d0

Wouldn't take a lot to wrap this in a GUI.
0 Votes
+ -
Seriously?
ferricoxide 20th Jan 2009
What's so difficult about `zpool create `. Man, that's a toughie!
0 Votes
+ -
How is Apple ZFS better than Solaris'?
YinToYourYang-22527499 20th Jun 2008
Well first of all, Apple is a company and Solaris is an
operating system. So your question is really: How is Apple's
ZFS better than Sun's ZFS?

That's easy. Apple's ZFS runs on a Mac.
0 Votes
+ -
No it doesn't.
ye 20th Jun 2008
Apple's ZFS runs on a Mac.
0 Votes
+ -
You're being nit-picky
YinToYourYang-22527499 20th Jun 2008
Obviously I mean on a Mac running Snow Leopard, which, by
the way, is in the hands of those who attended WWDC 2008.

But you can even run ZFS on today's Leopard. You just have
to download the beta.
0 Votes
+ -
I think it was fairly apparent his question was really:

"How is Apple implementation of ZFS better than Sun implementation of ZFS"

But, true to form, ABMers can't see the forest because of all those trees.
0 Votes
+ -
By actually putting it somewhere?
online@... 20th Jun 2008
Perhaps the point is that Apple makes ZFS "more usable" by putting it in the hands of "more users." Right now I can't get anything better than a crippled version. Once Apple vets ZFS via Snow Leopard Server it will make its way to the workstation OS. That seems to me a big improvement.
0 Votes
+ -
He's not saying it's better
GoPower 20th Jun 2008
He's telling you what it is and what it does vs. older file systems. He's giving Apple Kudos for bringing it presumably to the desktop (Snow Leopard Server first). Geez, read the article before you post.
0 Votes
+ -
Nerd bashing
tikigawd 20th Jun 2008
Apple users know full well that Apple hasn't necessarily invented most of the technologies they use

Uh, no they don't. We're talking about consumers here. They usually don't know where things come frmo, they just use them.
Every day I hear Apple users bragging about how Macs "just work." That translates into "it does that and I don't know, or care, how."

but they were the first to make them actually usable by people other than nerds and geeks with tape on their glasses, and wearing pocket protectors.

Very colorful depiction of those "nerds and geeks." Don't forget to thank them for inventing the stuff you find so "cool."


Lastly, please explain how exactly does Apple make ZFS more useful than Sun? Just because you'll see Justin Long bragging about ZFS while you watch American Idol doesn't mean Apple is the only company using the technology.
0 Votes
+ -
kadic 20th Jun 2008
there is nothing wrong with tape on glasses and pocket protectors!!!!

happy
0 Votes
+ -
Do me a favor there friend....
James Quinn 20th Jun 2008
Can you give me a single example of some Apple Fan that
actually makes the claim that Apple "invented" a product that
Apple in fact did not invent? I mean I give Apple tons of
props for making exsisting tech usefull or usable as it were
but I can't remember ever claiming that Apple invented
something that they did not in fact invent.

Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
Careful
shawn_dude 20th Jun 2008
Apple was first to market with the desktop point-n-click interface. Do you really want to take the bet that no fanboy is unaware of Xerox PARC? Back when the Mac vs Windows wars were over the desktop details, a Macfolk were often unaware that Apple purchased that technology rather than invented it.

I can't wait for my Ubuntu to get ZFS. I wonder if I could put Gnome on top of Darwin?
0 Votes
+ -
Ah, the revisionists.
frgough 20th Jun 2008
The Xerox PARC was not the complete source for the Mac GUI.
Apple was working independently on their own GUI. They bought
stuff from PARC because PARC had done some things Apple
hadn't been able to, but the actual Apple GUI was not a PARC
clone. It was significantly different. Different enough that it's not
an unreasonable stretch to say they invented it.
0 Votes
+ -
nt
0 Votes
+ -
Yes, be careful
Len Rooney 20th Jun 2008
While it is true that Apple licensed the desktop metaphor
idea from Xerox with a stock deal, they did not receive one
line of code from Xerox. Apple engineers where simply
given a demo of PARC's UI work. But it's equally important
to note that PARC's GUI was little more that a point and
click experience. Apple, from that starting point, did
indeed invent many of the the Mac/Windows GUI
conventions that we now all take for granted. Simple
things like standardized menuing between all apps, drag
and drop file manipulation, drop down menus, true
overlapping windows, and common mouse behaviors like
drag and drop, double/multiple clicking, click and hold.

Credit where credit is due, please. No fanboy-ism
required.
0 Votes
+ -
back in the day it could have happened? Oh well. I think it is
equally possible that Apple fans claimed that Apple was the
first to make the GUI based OS available to the mainstream.
Still I have not proof either. And my request was about some
sort of proof BEFORE the complaint. The ole horse before the
cart thing.

Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
Ubuntu won't get ZFS
Kaiwai 20th Jun 2008
Ubuntu won't get ZFS because CDLL is GPL incompatible. With that being said, why wait? download Solaris Express Community Edition right now, and it has bootable ZFS support etc. I've got it on ny laptop and desktop, and the external drive too.
0 Votes
+ -
Mac vs. Windows? Not Quite ...
cwkoller2@... 20th Jun 2008
The Mac came out in '84. Windows 3.0 (the first usable
version) came out in 1990. For six years the PC luddites
were arguing Mac vs. DOS/ GUI vs. CLI (yes, they thought
the GUI was a "toy"). Not until Win95 did MS offer
something compelling ... 11 years later. Then the
Mac/Windows war kicked in, just as Apple's leadership
imploded.

As for Apple/XEROX, the Star/Alto was a commercial
failure, Apple allowed XEROX to BUY $1M worth of stock
for the Jobs day-long tour. Apple refined the GUI
considerably from what they saw. Several PARC employees
moved over to Apple.
0 Votes
+ -
Mac vs Windows timeline...
PollyProteus 23rd Jun 2008
CWKoller2 wrote -> "The Mac came out in '84. Windows 3.0 (the first usable version) came out in 1990."

This is true, and Apple could have owned the desktop except for one small flaw in their whole scheme: You had to buy their hardware to run their operating system. Microsoft was more flexible with regard to hardware base, which gave the the edge.

Apple won't ever take over the desktop or server market until they open up their operating system to install on any third party box that has the right processor/mb combination to suppport their OS. The thing is that if/when they do, they will have similar stability and vulnerability issues that Windows currently suffers from.

Linux has a better chance of overtaking Windows in the desktop share, but that's not going to happen until they have a solid unifying distro that "just works" for the average user regardless of hardware set.
0 Votes
+ -
It seems that most...
arminw 23rd Jun 2008
people still obsess about having a particular
hardware being able to run any and all Operating
Systems. Repeat 100 times: It is NOT the hardware
that makes a computer do what it does. It is the
software. I can run Windows on a Mac. Apple
makes HARDWARE. Comparing Apple to Microsoft
is foolish, stupid and invalid. Compare Apple to
Dell, HP, Toshiba, Sony and the rest. Apple makes
their own engine, whereas everybody else buys the
engine from MS. Why should Apple want to sell
their engines to their competitors?

When it comes to true Market Share, comparing
Apple's share to any ONE of the other computer
makers, gives a vastly different picture. In that
light, Apple is first in profits and at least second or
third in the number of computers sold each year.
Since Apple makes the whole gadget, they will be
able to come out with a modern file system long
before MS will. MS job is akin to herding cats,
having to deal with all that hardware, just different
enough for things often NOT to "just work".
0 Votes
+ -
You are correct saying you have never claimed Apple invented something they didn't (AFAIK). You aren't representative of most Apple users. Most I personally know are not as educated about the devices they use as you are. I'm amazed you haven't run into distorted beliefs yourself if you talk to a lot of average Apple product users.

Prime example: I have had numerous occasions where somebody told me Apple invented the MP3 player (Creative Labs had them years earlier). I also quite recently had somebody reply to a post saying that Apple invented the dock (NextStep had it prior to Apple buying them). Another said Apple invented the 3D dock (Looking Glass from Sun had one sooner). A lady in an art class mentioned to me that Apple invented the smart phone when she was showing me her new iPhone two weeks ago that her husband bought her.

In the more distant past, I have had numerous run-ins with Apple users who told me Apple invented the graphic user interface, as well as the mouse, and that Microsoft simply copied their ideas. I saw the Xerox research before I ever heard a rumor of a Mac coming. (Loved that hockey puck.) If Microsoft copied anyone, they copied Xerox.

Personally, I don't give a crap about Microsoft. I prefer OSX to Vista hands down. If I could just get the software I need on it, I'd have switched long ago. Microsoft uses the ideas of others just as much as Apple (arguably a lot more). But I rarely hear their users saying they invented the stuff. Their users don't care enough about their products to give MS much credit at all.

In my mind, inventing something equates to originating the idea, not improving it, varying it slightly, adding to it, buying the inventor, buying the patent, licensing it, or implementing it in a product. The originator of the idea is the inventor.

I totally agree that Apple excels at designing marketable products using cutting-edge technologies. I personally use those products, and wish I could use more of them. However, they rarely do what I would call "inventing" those technologies.
0 Votes
+ -
Tru Dat
James Quinn 20th Jun 2008
Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
Who invented what
spotvin 20th Jun 2008
We should also consider
that there are Windows
users who believe that
Microsoft invented the GUI.
No matter that operating
system, there are
misinformed people.
0 Votes
+ -
Quit trolling!
YinToYourYang-22527499 20th Jun 2008
You could say Apple lost and Microsoft won the proprietary wars
in the 90s.

Since then Apple bought NeXT who changed the Apple culture.
So the Apple community has moved on and doesn't care who
invented things. We just wish to get our job done as efficiently
and elegantly as possible. Apple accommodates us.

Besides ZFS, check out SproutCore, Objective-J, WebKit (based on
KHTML), all of the OS X Server technologies (Apache 2, Postfix,
ClamAV, Amavis-new, SMB, et. al), Cocoa-Ruby and Cocoa-
Python bridges, Bonjour, CalendarServer, launchd, on and on and
on.

Apple is deeply embedded in the open source community which
Microsoft denies exists. So it seems you are the one under the
reality distortion field, Microsoft's.
0 Votes
+ -
Open source and Microsoft...
PollyProteus 23rd Jun 2008
YinToYourYang wrote -> "Apple is deeply embedded in the open source community which
Microsoft denies exists."

Wow, you really do sleep under a rock, don't you?

Microsoft has been fighting the idea of Open Source as a "good thing", they never denied it exists.

Recent changes in thinking have actually lead to Microsoft offering some small amount of support to the open source community. They recently got slammed because they had "Sandcastle" available on a Microsoft sponsored open source site (http://www.codeplex.com/) without actually supplying the source code. They removed it with an apology to the public at large for the gaffe.

Wake up and smell the coffee, the world is changing under your feet as you gaze adoringly toward Cupertino and prostrate yourself in worship.
0 Votes
+ -
What Microsoft has to do with this ?
timiteh 20th Jun 2008
Why can't you just talk of what Apple does without involving Microsoft in Articles despites the fact that there is no reason to do so ?
It is interesting that Apple will use ZFS in Leopard but i don't see what it has to do with NTFS or with Microsoft.
0 Votes
+ -
Competition and SPICE!!!
James Quinn 20th Jun 2008
It is widely excepted that MS and Apple are competitors.
At least on some levels so it spices up the article.

Still I have to admit while these Snow Leopard
developments like Grand Central sound promising over the
years I've often heard claims that Y OS is going to kick the
blank of Z OS and back and forth. To tell the truth they
both seem to make gains from version to version. I only
hope one day there is a LEAP to make people sit back and
go WOW!

Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
Then open your eyes!
bmgoodman 20th Jun 2008
MS recognized the need for a new file system about a decade ago. Vista was SUPPOSED to include it, but it proved too complex and MS dumped it to push Vista out the door. (A year before it was ready, but 3 years too late.) People are increasingly rejecting Vista and either staying with XP or looking at alternatives. Apple is one alternative, and their adding this MAJOR new ability is yet another reason to at least consider leaving Microsoft for good. If you google "Windows Home Server data corruption", you'll find a good explanation for a major bug that never would have gone unnoticed on a ZFS file system.

Microsoft is in a graveyard spiral, and one can only hope they can do something about it before it is too late.

And, FWIW, I'm no Apple fanboy. I'm a longtime supporter of MS who earns a living off supporting their products. I just think they can do better than hey have been these past 7 or so years....
0 Votes
+ -
Searching Killed the WinFS Star
DannyO_0x98 20th Jun 2008
The relational database overlay for NTFS, as I understand
it, was meant to facilitate searching and multiple
contextual filing. It was not about reliability of the physical
storage as that is tasked to NTFS and the hardware.

Files and contexts are many-to-many and I suspect that
implementation would have been a chicken-egg loop that
breaks down on the practical question of how may a user
know all the contexts for a file at its creation. What would
be the consequences of bypassing the user? Can you
imagine the mayhem an automated non-semantic system
would create as it relates all files that contain the same
word? To incorporate semantics, to this lay mind, means
implementing AI and how much time and money would
that take and to what level of success?

Meanwhile, the machines got faster and multi-core. Search
got faster and smarter. Virtual directories (think smart
folders in Apple terminology) are commonplace. The
relational db file system concept was obsolesced.
0 Votes
+ -
Not really
NoThomas 20th Jun 2008
"MS recognized the need for a new file system about a decade ago. Vista was SUPPOSED to include it, but it proved too complex and MS dumped it to push Vista out the door. (A year before it was ready, but 3 years too late.)" So what you are saying is that MS will never ever have a new file system? MS is being very tight lipped about Win 7, who knows what it has in it, maybe it does include a new filesystem now that they have had more time to work on it. Maybe they are not telling people that yet because they dont want to make the same mistake that they made with Vista and annoucing to early. Time will tell on that one.

"People are increasingly rejecting Vista and either staying with XP or looking at alternatives. Apple is one alternative, and their adding this MAJOR new ability is yet another reason to at least consider leaving Microsoft for good."
People are rejecting Vista because they are not giving it a fair shake, atleast not all of the people, SP1 fixed my only complaints about Vista, I have told my friends who were early adopters to give it another shake after they went back to XP. The ones that have says that their problems are fixed. (mostly drivers and copy speed issues).
I think you should always consider another OS if they one you are using does not suit your needs. I dont think one OS is completely perfect, you should always be checking out alternatives that should be obvious.

"If you google "Windows Home Server data corruption", you'll find a good explanation for a major bug that never would have gone unnoticed on a ZFS file system." First you should tell the whole truth about this. for example that its now fixed, that it only happened if a certain set of circumstances were met which only affected a small percentage of users. Also tell that it was not a ordinary NTFS volume, WHS handles data a bit differently then Server 2003. How exactly do you know that it would not have gone unnoticed? I would say that according to them it should not mess up but I would not say a 100% certain. You really believe their are no bugs at all in a new File System? You believe they got it 100% right the first time? Great if you do, I take a more realistic approach and would not bet my house on it.
"Microsoft is in a graveyard spiral, and one can only hope they can do something about it before it is too late." I wouldnt say graveyard spiral, I mean really? Why? Is it because Vista got bad press, it got bad press before it was even out, I remember reading articles about how it was doomed to fail because someone figured out that every other release seemed to tell if it was good or bad. NT4 was good for business's, hardly any games would work but it was rock stable, Win 2000 was excellent and you could play games on it, Win Xp was ok when it first came out and got alot better with SP2. Vista is great, I love it have no issues at all with it now. I did when it first came out because of drivers and slow copy speeds but thats all fixed now. Think though XP came out what 7-8 years ago now? If you hardware is 7-8 years old then don't upgrade dont attempt it. really you shouldnt upgrade at all if the new OS doesn't offer you a good reason to. I wanted the Media Center first 2005 which is why I mostly wanted XP and then the new Media Center that come out with Vista. If not for that reason I would probably still be on Win 2000.
"I just think they can do better than hey have been these past 7 or so years...." I agree with you they can do better. Vista could be better with a new Filesystem perhaps WIn 7, will show us.
0 Votes
+ -
Good points -
ItsTheBottomLine 20th Jun 2008
- Vista problems were over dramatized - I have not had any problems. It's been great.
- If they are indeed feeling the pressure (remember we deal in the trade realm so it tends to be a little sensationalized), then that is good and gets MS up and working again.
- People that are "predicting" there demise are - well idiots living in another world.
0 Votes
+ -
.
0 Votes
+ -
It's called peer review
Len Rooney 20th Jun 2008
We find out how good one technology is in relation to
another by comparing them.

ZFS is a leap ahead in storage technology, it's very exciting.
NTFS is older, error-prone technology used by a peer
competing OS. The comparisons a valid and important for
anyone interested in modern computing technology.
0 Votes
+ -
Competition and Innovation
chessmen 20th Jun 2008
Last time I checked, both Microsoft and Apple were competing for server market share. Therefore, it is right to make the comparison between Apple and Microsoft. The tone of this blog, and the conclusions it draws are dead on. Microsoft is coasting on monopoly power instead of innovation.
MicroShaft doesn't have a THING to do w/it - that's the PROBLEM!
0 Votes
+ -
killer app
russguill 20th Jun 2008
That right there makes it worth upgrading when Snow
Leopard comes out.
0 Votes
+ -
It didn't quite make it eh folks?
me@... 11th Apr 2010
still waiting...

In the meanting OpenSolaris now has asynchronous depduplication in place and working well.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix