Pinot - Blanc or Gris?
Since 10.2 for all practical purposes is now in the shops (I ordered mine and await it anxiously), it must be time for futurists to turn to 10.3.
Does anyone have hopes, suggestions, rumors, beliefs about Pinot?
I don't want to duplicate the thread which discusses suggestions for UI enhancements in the future; I am looking for slightly more hard "facts" - eh, rumors.
engpjp
PS - the "Blanc or Gris?" part of the heading is merely to get attention, there's no doubt as to which is the better, and this is not a wine conference, after all...
Does anyone have hopes, suggestions, rumors, beliefs about Pinot?
I don't want to duplicate the thread which discusses suggestions for UI enhancements in the future; I am looking for slightly more hard "facts" - eh, rumors.
engpjp
PS - the "Blanc or Gris?" part of the heading is merely to get attention, there's no doubt as to which is the better, and this is not a wine conference, after all...
Comments
Pin-ot (sounds like Pin Not)
Or Pin-O?
Of course, how Steve says it is a different story. "Pie-not", anyone?
One feature that people have mentioned is "junkyard" which apparently is basic data recovery feature in case you've deleted something from the trash and you need it back. I'm going to speculate that Apple plans to make some major revisions to speech features given their revised Aqua guidelines on the subject. I still think a big Dock revision is coming too, but they've been struggling with a lot of scenarios that don't work out.
<strong>There's no accented syllable. It's pronounced "pee-noh." Like so many other French words, just ignore the last letter, and you've got it. And they have no long vowels.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wouldn't get too excited about how to say the word Pinot since I've been hearing that name isn't gonna stick. What will the next release be called? I dunno but I'm pretty sure it ain't gonna be Pinot.
Now as for the feature set... (what really matters) then **IF** Spymac is right and Junkyard will allow for file undelete and the like then maybe that really means something ALOT bigger... As some of you may already know in March of 2002 Apple hired Dominic Giampaolo who wrote the file system for BeOS.
While I was never 'into' BeOS here are some BFS (BeOS File System) features:
Source: <a href="http://www.birdhouse.org/macos/beos_osx/"; target="_blank">http://www.birdhouse.org/macos/beos_osx/</a>;
- BFS (the Be File System) is fully journaled, which means that data integrity is guaranteed even in the event of a loss of power. Pull the plug on a BeOS box and it boots back up in 15 seconds with no loss of data. File system operations that were in process at the time of the outage are simply replayed from the journal. No ScanDisk, no fschk, no rebuilding the desktop.
- BFS is also fully multithreaded for optimum performance, and in keeping with the rest of BeOS, which is multithreaded from the lowest levels to the highest.
- The address space in BFS is 64-bit, meaning that the theoretical maximum file size on a BFS volume is 18,000 petabytes (the practical maximum is much smaller for various reasons, but is still in the tens of thousands of gigabytes range).
- For the everyday user, though, BFS has much more tangible advantages. Any file or file type on a BFS volume can have arrays of metadata associated with it, in the form of "attributes." There is no limit to the amount, size, or type of attributes, and attributes can be displayed and edited, sifted, sorted, and queried for directly in the Tracker (Be's equivalent of the Finder). Because most attributes are indexed, search results are nearly instantaneous, regardless the size of the volume or the number of files being searched through. By default, BeOS ships with reasonable sets of attributes for common file types, but users are allowed to extend and customize these, and to create entirely new file types with entirely new arrays of attributes. In other words, the Be File System doubles as a database.
If you wanna read more check out that link above.
Now maybe I'm taking things too far with with speculation but since Apple did hire the person who built BFS these are all things we could be looking forward to in the future...
Dave
[ 08-17-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</p>
A journaled FS sounds great, but it's a huge undertaking. I would imagine many apps would need to be modified, unless of course, the OS X APIs fully abstract the file system and developers aren't writing to lower-level/incompatible APIs.
Anyone have thoughts on the scope of such an undertaking to OS X where Classic still needs to be part of things?
<strong>How would classic work with a new file system? It might not work at all (or, can you 'plug-in' new file system parsers to OS 9?)
A journaled FS sounds great, but it's a huge undertaking. I would imagine many apps would need to be modified, unless of course, the OS X APIs fully abstract the file system and developers aren't writing to lower-level/incompatible APIs.
Anyone have thoughts on the scope of such an undertaking to OS X where Classic still needs to be part of things?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, the word on the street is that classic, under 10.2, can boot from a disk image. I'd imagine it wouldn't be too hard to have an HFS+ formatted image that classic could boot off of. It probably wouldn't be able to deal with the meta data, so it would just be ignored. So, changing the FS doesn't neccessarily mean having to give up classic compatibility. As far as applications that can be run in both classic and OS X, they might have some problems (CFM apps, I believe). But carbon apps as a whole wouldn't be affected to badly.
I'll venture the focus of the next release (at a system level) will be the FS, and perhaps more Quartz acceleration. As far as low level stuff goes, OSX basically has everything a modern system might need.One has to remember that HFS+ basically has all of BFS' advantages, except for the journalling and the multi-threadedness. It even has one significant advantage, unique file IDs, which allow you to move your files anywhere on the same partition without breaking aliases. The problem with attributes is more of an issue with the Finder not supporting them than the FS not providing them. Same goes for the database like structure, or 64bit readyness.
However, DaveGee, you wrote:
"- BFS (the Be File System) is fully journaled, which means that data integrity is guaranteed even in the event of a loss of power. Pull the plug on a BeOS box and it boots back up in 15 seconds with no loss of data. File system operations that were in process at the time of the outage are simply replayed from the journal. No ScanDisk, no fschk, no rebuilding the desktop."
Isn't fschk an integral part of the *nix toolbox? and won't some kind of checkup program for h/w faults be necessary no matter how much journaling and Undo'ing the FS has?
engpjp
[quote]Don't know about the not ready in time bit... Gimpaolo wrote BFS is about 6 weeks IIRC...<hr></blockquote>
I just don't believe anyone is able to write, test and implement a file system in 6 weeks... Gentlemen, this is - apart from the memory subsystem and the task scheduler the most critical part in an OS.
[quote]One has to remember that HFS+ basically has all of BFS' advantages, except for the journalling and the multi-threadedness. <hr></blockquote>
Multi-threadedness is not part of the file system proper but the OS component that deals with serializing the read/writes. HFS+ is fully multithreaded on that level. Needless to say, you cannot really write to a single harddisk in parallel, so the multithreadedness has to break somewhere in the lower regions. BFS will be no exception to that.
<strong>Since 10.2 for all practical purposes is now in the shops (I ordered mine and await it anxiously), it must be time for futurists to turn to 10.3.
Does anyone have hopes, suggestions, rumors, beliefs about Pinot?
I don't want to duplicate the thread which discusses suggestions for UI enhancements in the future; I am looking for slightly more hard "facts" - eh, rumors.
engpjp
PS - the "Blanc or Gris?" part of the heading is merely to get attention, there's no doubt as to which is the better, and this is not a wine conference, after all...</strong><hr></blockquote>
ThinkSecret announced today that the name has been changed to Panther, I belive it, you can read their resonings at <a href="http://www.thinksecret.com/news/panther.html"; target="_blank">http://www.thinksecret.com/news/panther.html</a>;