Print - WinInfo Short Takes: Week of January 31

An often irreverent look at some of the week's other news...

New Record: Microsoft Profits Double on Windows, Server Products Growth
Microsoft announced yet another record quarterly profit, doubling its profits year-over-year for the quarter ending December 31. The company made $3.46 billion on $10.82 billion in sales. And, amazingly, in a rare move, Microsoft actually raised its guidance for the coming year. The software giant expects to financially outperform previous expectations, an excellent indication that the PC business has indeed turned the corner. Check out this gung-ho quote from the usually taciturn company: "We expect corporate and IT spending to remain healthy for the rest of the fiscal year," Corporate Vice President Scott Di Valerio said. "Corporate profits are strong, and worldwide GDP growth is good. The world is buying a heck of a lot of servers." It sure is. Sales of Windows and Microsoft's server products grew in leaps and bounds during the quarter. Microsoft SQL Server sales were up 25 percent, and Microsoft Exchange Server 2003 is the fastest-selling server product Microsoft has ever shipped. Even the Xbox, the best-selling video game console of the holiday 2004 selling season, made money, thanks largely to the success of Halo 2. (Fear not, Xbox will be back in the tank by the end of this quarter as Halo 2 sales die down.)

Sorry, Mac Fanatics; Search Patent Doesn't Show Apple Head Start
The fan boys over at The Mac Observer gleefully reported this week that a patent just granted to Apple Computer reveals that the company had a "multiyear head start" on Microsoft for the desktop search technology that Apple is now adding to its next OS release, code-named Tiger. There's just one problem: The report isn't true. And you can do more research than a typical Macintosh fan site by simply taking 5 seconds to search Google for the term Storage+. Storage+ is an earlier code name for WinFS that dates back to the late 1990s. If you perform this search, you'll note that two of my articles about this technology, one from 1999 and one from 2000, appear on the first page of Google results. And those dates--go figure--are before Apple started its patent request and, not coincidentally, years after Microsoft actually started working on Storage+. However, to reiterate, I never meant to suggest that Microsoft "invented" instant desktop search. But I do believe that Apple decided to add instant desktop search to its own OS products only after Microsoft started talking it up (which first happened in the late 1990s, thus my reports from that time). And when Microsoft promised in late 2003 to add the functionality to Longhorn, Apple jumped on board to make it a Tiger feature, knowing that it could get its product to market faster than Microsoft. And that, folks, is exactly what's happening: Speed to market is one of Apple's key strengths. I know the realization that Apple isn't first with everything is painful for faithful Mac fans, but that doesn't dim the company's successes. Mac fanatics just need to get over the mentality that for Apple to win Microsoft has to lose. If I'm not mistaken, Steve Jobs first said that.

Apple Sells 250 Million Songs Online
Speaking of Apple, one area in which the company is clearly leading is digital music. This week, Apple announced that it has sold a whopping 250 million digital song downloads (or, in Apple's gushy wording, "a quarter of a billion!") through its Apple iTunes Music Store. That's more than one million songs (or, "one one-hundredth of a billion!") a day, putting Apple on track to sell a gajillion songs this year. That's a great accomplishment, even if you can play those songs only on Apple's locked-in iPod player. I'm interested in seeing what level of success Apple has to obtain before the US Department of Justice (DOJ) steps in.

Apple Launches Made for iPod Program
And speaking of the iPod, Apple revealed this month that the company is instituting a Made for iPod logo program that's designed to help consumers identify the iPod accessories that have earned Apple's seal of approval. The first qualification is that the product must be made mostly of bright white plastic, especially if it's a set of headphones. Second, the metal surface must be so easy to scratch that it will actually get marred simply by looking at it the wrong way. And, finally, if the accessory uses the iPod docking port in any way, Apple has to sell it. Otherwise, you have to pay a licensing fee. This inclusive strategy should appeal to the many companies that make iPod accessories. Oh, wait...

Microsoft Embroiled in Freedom of Speech Flap
Various Web logs (or blogs, as the kiddies call them) have received nastygrams from Microsoft in the past few weeks because they spilled the beans about Windows Mobile 2005, code-named Magneto. Due this spring, the next major version of the Windows Mobile platform will work with both Pocket PC devices and smart phones and will include ActiveSync 4.0, major new versions (finally) of the Pocket Office applications, and other new features. Microsoft's problem with the posts, apparently, is that many of the blogs included screen shots of the new software, which Microsoft says violates its intellectual property and trademark rights. That's an interesting interpretation of the law, but I'm not sure it supersedes your right to communicate a fact, especially if you didn't solicit the material in question. The big question for these blogs is whether they want to be on Microsoft's bad side. Typically, in a case like this, you're better off working with Goliath than taking out a pebble and assuming you'll pull a David. But in the "gotta have it first" mentality of Web pseudo-journalism, we'll probably see this kind of situation crop up more often. Indeed, even Apple is suing one of its many fan sites for a similar reason.

Google Snags Mozilla Developers
Although Google has tried to quell rumors that it's working on a Mozilla-based Web browser that will be branded with Google's corporate identity and feature integrated Google services, this week the company hired two Mozilla developers, Ben Goodger and Darrin Fisher. Goodger, in particular, is a high-profile acquisition; he's one of the key developers who works on the successful Firefox project. (Fisher, meanwhile, works on back-end technologies). Both men maintain that they'll continue their roles at The Mozilla Foundation. But questions remain: Is Google going to create a Web browser? And, if so, why? And if not, why bother hiring these guys?

Blog Maker Strikes Back Against Similarly Named MSN Spaces
A small Bay Area company named Edict has been selling a blog tool called Spaces for about 2 years, which explains why the company was a bit taken aback late last year when Microsoft announced its own blog tool called MSN Spaces. Edict's founders have attempted to contact Microsoft about the problem and have contacted lawyers but, so far, Edict hasn't heard back from the software giant. "We can't understand how they came up with the name Spaces," Edict Founder Tor Hough told "The Detroit Free Press." "Even a simple Google search on the Net would have shown there was another blogging company out there with the same name." Ironically, that comment actually explains the problem. Microsoft uses MSN Search, not Google, and when Microsoft developed MSN Spaces, MSN Search was still using a lackluster Yahoo!-based back end. I think Microsoft could find Edict Spaces now if it searched for the name Spaces using MSN Search.

Jobs Was Right: 2004 Was the Year of the Laptop--But Not for Apple
In January 2004, Apple CEO Steve Jobs declared that 2004 would be the "Year of the Laptop." And he was right, although Apple's 2004 notebook computer sales were nothing to write home about. In the overall PC industry, however, notebook sales jumped 24 percent during the 2004 holiday selling season, whereas desktop PC sales fell 7 percent. And Intel says that the number of notebook-oriented microprocessors it sells more than doubled between 2001 and 2004. Better yet, Intel expects the market to double yet again by 2008.

Napster to Move into Movie Downloads
Online music service Napster pioneered the subscription music model, and now the company wants to get into downloadable movies, a market that niche players such as CinemaNow and Movielink currently dominate. Napster hasn't revealed whether its movie plans include movies for sale--in which customers would own perpetual rights to downloaded films--or just a la carte rentals, like the existing services. Frankly, the days of media ownership are coming to a close. No one really needs to watch "Dude, Where's My Car?" more than a dozen times, anyway.

Nintendo Profits Surge on DS Demand
Video game maker Nintendo reported sharply increased profits during its most recent reporting period (curiously, the last 9 months of 2004). However, almost all those profits were due to the recently introduced Nintendo DS handheld gaming device, which has sold almost 3 million units since its late November 2004 release. In fact, DS sales are so strong that Nintendo raised its worldwide sales goal through March to 6 million units. Unfortunately, sales of all other Nintendo devices--including the much-maligned GameCube video game console--were down during the same period. Indeed, Nintendo expects to sell just 4 million GameCubes in its current fiscal year, far below the levels Microsoft's Xbox and Sony's PlayStation have achieved. As a result, Nintendo has lowered its overall sales forecast for the year. The company says it will announce its yearly results by April.

Ex-Microsoftie Pleads Guilty to Software Theft
Finally, let's start the weekend off right with a little petty larceny. The ringleader of a group of ex-Microsoft employees who stole almost $2 million worth of software from the company pleaded guilty this week to federal felony charges of conspiracy and money laundering. The 36-year-old man admitted his role in stealing almost 2700 pieces of Microsoft software between April 2001 and November 2002; he made about $2.3 million, apparently by selling the software in darkened Redmond-area parking lots after hours. But this criminal has a few excuses. First, although Microsoft values the wholesale price of the stolen software at $7.1 million, our little felon asserts that the theft actually cost the company less than $15,000. Second, he has agoraphobia (a fear of open places). How that translates into an excuse for theft is hard to imagine, but we're talking about the US legal system. My guess is he'll have his own talk show within 6 months.

Blogs and pseudo-journalism? What would you call your site then? Careful taking your pebble near glass houses...

"sure is: Sales of Microsoft's server products and Windows grew in leaps and bounds during the quarter. SQL Server sales were up 25 percent, while Exchange Server 2003 is the fast-selling server product Microsoft has ever shipped." But profits were DOWN. THe profit doubling was a result of cutting R&D massively. 1.5 billions worth. Otherwise, profit would have been about the same. "And when Microsoft promised in late 2003 that it would add this functionality to Longhorn, Apple jumped on board, making it a Tiger feature, knowing that it could get its product to market faster than Apple." Keep revising history. MS started talking about Blackcomb in 2001. Apple was also researching db-based file systems and searching in the late 80s as well, Paul. "That's a great accomplishment, even if those songs can only be played on Apple's locked-in iPod player" Shut up, already, Paul. People PREFER it. "Typically, in a case like this, it's better to work with Goliath than take out a pebble and assume you'll pull a David." When it's Apple, they're hurting their customers and fan base, but when its MS, everyone should do what they say? Hypocrite. "But questions remain: Is Google going to create a Web browser? And if so, why?" Because Microsoft no longer does. " In the overall PC industry, laptop sales jumped 24 percent during the holiday 2004 selling season, while desktop PC sales fell 7 percent." Since when does 2004 only equal the Holiday Season? Apple's notebooks sales are doing great, Paul. Apple is way ahead of other manufactuers in converting the CPU ratio in favor of protables over desktops. "...in which customers would own perpetual rights to a downloaded film..." I thought nobody wanted to own anything any more? "Indeed, Nintendo expects to sell just four million Game Cubes in a year, far below the levels achieved by Microsoft's Xbox and Sony's PlayStation." Really? Even according to you and Microsoft, there aren't much more than 15 million total XBoxes. Halo2 has sold five million copies; both you and MS said 1 in 3 XBox owners owns Halo2. So, in its entire history, MS has sold only 15 million units. 4 million per year keeps perfectly in line with that Paul.

Typical Microsoft. Waving its lawyers at those it thinks are violating its rights, but running roughshod over the rights of others.

everybody knows apple didn't invent desktop search. even apple fans know it. but that doesn't matter. apple fanboys just like to think so. in their mind, apple invented the apple fruit, and nature just copied it.

"But profits were DOWN" No. They doubled.They may have doubled because Microsoft cut R & D spending. But they still doubled. Cutting costs is one way companies increase profits. The rest of you "fact checking" was just as stupid.

"Halo2 has sold five million copies" 6.2 million and climbing. And 1.4 million XBOX Live customers.

Exactly what would the Justice Deptartment look at? The fact that iTunes Music store matches with iPOD doesn't eliminate the fact that there are other alternatives for listening to music. I saw one report that equated the number of tunes purchased with the number of iPods and it equates to about 25 songs per iPod. In light of the overall music industry, the numbers are miniscule to overall record/song sales. So, in no way does Apple appear to have anything close to a monopoly on music sales as compared to the documented monopoly Microsoft has in desktop OS and Productivity Suite (e.g., Office) world. Additionally, I thought you were gloating a while back how Microsoft's music solution is going to blow away Apple's anyway. Therefore, what is the DOJ to be worried about. As long as Microsoft is around, there is always competition. Real Networks may not survive, but I doubt Microsoft will abandon the market.

Ah yes classic Thurrott. First he gets to stroke his ego by pointing to some articles which parrott spoon-fed Microsoft propaganda, pointing to a simple combination of a file system with database features, and equating this to Apple's work. But we then get the humor part of the post, where he points to TMO (which has folks with qualifications such as journalisim and advanced computing degrees) calling them a "fan" site, and somehow thinking that his regurgitating of Microsoft marketing materials qualifies him as a "news" site. Suggestion - leave the Mac reporting to those who are qualified; you'd better serve your audience by putting more time into Windows content. But of course you'll keep taking swipes at Apple to "keep them honest" or some other such nonsense. Keep it up, Paul, you're one of the funniest Windows "news" sites on the web!

Why does Paul always refer to anyone who uses a Mac as a fan or fanatic? Since Paul owns and uses some Apple equipment, does that also qualify him as a fanatic? Or is he the only Apple user in the world that is just a simple user of their technology?

Why to MAC & Linux people read this site, and then complain about it. You can't spell, you have no "business sense", and you struggle to complete a thought within a sentence. There is no “perfect solution”. Not MAC, Windows, or any flavor of UNIX. It’s all about the business, stupid. What does the business need? That’s the question; not “My” platform is better. Please GO AWAY.

Alot of you people need to get lives. Seems like if I wanted to see where all the 8 Mac users in the world are, I can come here.

If Paul didn't constantly take swipes at Mac and UNIX users because of their choice of platform, then we wouldn't get the constant stream of complains from those camps. Plain and simple. Paul brings this on himself.

Did Paul REALLY say that 1 million was 1/100th of a billion? Nah. Couldn't have. If they sell a few more, they might even get to a THOUSAND!

Har har! Paul complains about a supposed Mac "fan" site not being able to do thorough research, but Paul's handle on basic math looks like it needs some work as well.

"Why to MAC & Linux people read this site, and then complain about it." Because Paul spends 80% of his time bashing them... "Seems like if I wanted to see where all the 8 Mac users in the world are, I can come here. " ...Because douchebags like this post here and need to be smacked.

"6.2 million and climbing." Okay, I provided to general an estimate. However: "The company now expects that by the end of June it will have sold 21 million to 22 million Xboxes since the product debuted," So, using these numbers, there are 18.6 XBox users. It's been out since Nov, 2001. Thats. 3.25 years. That's a total of 5.7 million units per year. Not much better than the GameCube. However, using MS's guidance, they are hoping to sell between 2.4 and 3.4 million XBoxes in half a year, or 4.8 or 6.8 Xboxes per year. Since when is 4 "far below the levels Microsoft's Xbox [] ha[s] achieved."? 4 and 4.8 are virtually the same. The fact is PT wants to pretend that the XBox is competing with the PS2 and killing Nintendo. It is still neck and neck with the GameCube, and Sony has blown both of them out of the water.

Hey Paul, if you actually took your suggestion, and took time to search for something other than your own articles, you may come across something called AIAT (Apple Information Access Toolkit) a text indexing and search technology which, by the dates of the articles, came well before Storage+. Keep trying! Maybe someday you'll actually get to the point of doing things that real journalists do, like research.

How come a web site that calls itself "windows it pro" has someone that can't even count? Perhaps Paul would like to buy a PC with 1 Gig of Ram... (=100 Meg)

Paul's Fact Checker : "But profits were DOWN. THe profit doubling was a result of cutting R&D m***ively. 1.5 billions worth. Otherwise, profit would have been about the same." What an idiot! Where did you learn your accounting at? North Korea? Before you open your ignorant mouth and spew out nonsense, will you go back and read Dec 2003 Microsoft re****s and then read Dec 2004 reults again? Of course Microsoft profits were UP m***ively. And.. R&D spending in 2004 was actually solidly UP, to a m***ive $6.8 Billion! What do you CRAPPLE idots smoke every morning? Stupidity juice?

Paul's Fact Checker aka Clueless Idiot: "Even according to you and Microsoft, there aren't much more than 15 million total XBoxes" Yeah? Where do you get that from dude? Steve Jobs? Nowl ets look at the real facts now shall we, and leave your fanatsyland behind. Total XBOX sales to date up to Dec 31, 2004 is now..drums roll.. 19.9 units, made up of 13.2 million units in North America, 5.0 million units in Europe, and 1.7 million units in Japan and Asia Pacific region http://www.totalvideogames.com/pages/articles/index.php?article_id=7106 Paul's Fact Checker aka Clueless Idiot:" Halo2 has sold five million copies". Wrong again, fool. Total Halo 2 sales is 6.3 million units, as at Dec 31, 2004. http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-fi-micro28jan28,1,6404142.story?coll=la-headlines-technology&ctrack=1&cset=true Do you actually have ANY idea what you blathering on about at all, dude? Pauls's fact checker eh? I wouldn't hire you to clean the toilet, if this is how you "check" facts,let alone come even close to checking any facts.

No stupidity juice in my home, however now that I think about it . I did have a retard sandwhich for lunch. I LOVE PAUL!!!!

Paul's Fact Checker the buffoon : "Apple's notebooks sales are doing great, Paul. Apple is way ahead of other manufactuers in converting the CPU ratio in favor of protables over desktops" CRAPPLE still has an underwehelming 1.8% market share of the pc market. I don't call that "doing great". Its abysmal, given that CRAPPLE once had over 25% of the market.

"What an idiot! Where did you learn your accounting at? North Korea? Before you open your ignorant mouth and spew out nonsense, will you go back and read Dec 2003 Microsoft re****s and then read Dec 2004 reults again? Of course Microsoft profits were UP m***ively. And.. R&D spending in 2004 was actually solidly UP, to a m***ive $6.8 Billion! What do you CRAPPLE idots smoke every morning? Stupidity juice?" Where did I get it? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/27/microsoft_fy2005q2_earnings/ No, R&D spending was not up. If you read their results, unit shipments were up, revenue was up, but profits would have remained exactly the same had it not been for the m***ive 1.5 billion R&D cut. Hence, from an investors perspective, yes, profits are down. As an investor, you expect consistent and predictable R&D, and you don't expect R&D to be m***ively cut in one quarter jsut to demonstrate profit growth that's not really there. ""Yeah? Where do you get that from dude?" From Microsoft. They say 1 in 3 XBox owners bought Halo. I roughly estimated. Can you read my correction above? So it's 6.2 x 3 = 18.6. If your numbers are correct, Microsoft has m***ive problems, and PT should be ashamed. Again, as I stated above, and quoting MS: "The company now expects that by the end of June it will have sold 21 million to 22 million Xboxes since the product debuted." If they've sold 19.9 million units, they are only going to sell 1.1 million or 2.1 million units in a 1/2 year. That's between 2.2 and 4.2 million units this year. LESS than Nintendo's projections!!! "Wrong again, fool." Learn to read, buddy, I had corrected that statement a couple of hours ago... FOOL. "CRAPPLE still has an underwehelming 1.8% market share of the pc market." What the ***** does that have to do with invalidating the statements Apple made? Apple said they'd sell more laptops than desktops. They did. The 4th quarter did poorly because they didn't release any new products, but the other quarters were fantastic. In other words, I'm not trying to compare dicks. I'm stating that Paul is misappropriating, misinterpreting, and misrepresenting what was said and what was accomplished. I'd much prefer to be Apple than Gateway or even HP. Dell performs well but I don't see anything interesting about them. All they do is make the cheapest products in the cheapest possible way. So why would I care about marketshare? Apple is the 5th largest PC manufacturer in the world, has a growing developer base, has enough of a software base already to make me happy, and full access to OS software. I don't care about being the big guy... I care about being financially sustainable and whether or not they provide the products that I want.

"In January 2004, Apple CEO Steve Jobs declared that 2004 would be the "Year of the Laptop."" No. It was January 2003. And he was refering to 2003 "Jobs Was Right: 2004 Was the Year of the Laptop--But Not for Apple. In the overall PC industry, however, notebook sales jumped 24 percent during the 2004 holiday selling season, whereas desktop PC sales fell 7 percent." Apples's holiday quarter actually yielded a 47% increase in laptop sales (year over year). And strangely.... Apple's desktop sales increased by 37% ! So it seems that Apple actually OUTPERFORMED the rest of the PC industry in BOTH laptop AND desktop sales. Paul, you have every right to brag about whatever you want to, and also point out when Apple 'aint doin' so good but don't do it when you are just plain wrong. Apart from that, glad to see you are back on Apple bashinfornoreason form. With your latest 'Nexus' banner, I thought you had lost it! Piot

Paul's toilet cleaner :"Learn to read, buddy, I had corrected that statement a couple of hours ago... FOOL" I can read CRAPPLE vermin! You stated 5 million to start off with, creep. You only grudgingly accepted the right figures when someonme else brought it up. It was an easy enough fact to check. You are still a buffoon and an idiot.

"No, R&D spending was not up. If you read their results, unit shipments were up, revenue was up, but profits would have remained exactly the same had it not been for the m***ive 1.5 billion R&D cut" What an idiot! Are you really that stupid? You accept rubbish from that tabloid called "The Register"? Are you for real? Listen, fool, go to the Microsoft site, the full resuts for Dec 2003 and Dec 2004 are there for everyone to see, and read it, then you can begin to have a clue what Microsoft's profits were all about. I repeat, Microsoft R&D for 2004 went UP to $6.8 Billion. http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/89/microsoft.html NO amount of spin by the British tabloid called "The Register" is going to change facts.

Paul's Tiolet Cleaner : "If your numbers are correct, Microsoft has m***ive problems, and PT should be ashamed. Again, as I stated above, and quoting MS: " # 1, my numbers ARE correct. I already provided full links to back 'em up. and # 2, my #,s being correct means Microsoft is simply smoking! 20 million consoles sold against 2 entrenched competitors and smoking Nintendo which has been in the business for over 20 years, with their very first XBOX consol is simply awesome! Plus the XBOX actually made a profit this quarter. BTW, what happened to the CRAPPLE inspired "Pippin" game console? They couldn't even sell even a single million.

I thought I would throw in a few bits of URL history into this conversation... Paul you talk about Microsoft's work on Storage+ that dates back to the late 1990's. Well, I thought I would point out that there was a company called Be, Inc. that made an OS called the BeOS (you may have heard of it..if not here is a link that may help jog your memory...http://www.osdata.com/oses/beos.htm). The BeOS was known for a number of things...one of them being its filesystem which was unique because it supported extended meta-data and search. I would argue that many companies found this approach interesting, two of which were obviously Microsoft and Apple. Be, Inc. was at one time considered by Apple for purchase. We all know that Apple later chose instead to get back Steve and the NeXT OS which was the foundation for OS X. However, at least one person from Be, Inc did go on to Apple. His name is Dominic Giampaolo and he was the creator of the Be File System (BeFS). If you look at Dominic's web page (http://www.nobius.org/~dbg/), you will see he happens to currently work on the Spotlight team... hmmm. I also remember being at the PDC when Microsoft announced WinFS and I remember the sell being much like that of the of BeFS with a .NET spin. When Steve demo'd Spotlight, the product took a very different direction than what was promised in Longhorn. Spotlight limited its focus to a tightly integrated search engine that could locate a do***ent based on a file's embedded attributes vs attributes maintained in the filesystem. Microsoft's designers did not plan for the complexities caused by moving this extended data with do***ents as they move around on a network. Ironically, Apple's search focused approach appears to have been the more practical near-term option (Apple seems to be better than Microsoft at making these types of focused decisions these days). Microsoft clearly realized it bit off more than it could chew including WinFS in Longhorn and used Apple's Spotlight approach as its new ship goal. How is this different that anything else these companies have done. Apple may not have come up with the idea, but they found the right packaging (remember Xerox). As for Microsoft, time with tell what value they will contribue to this space. WinFS Links: PDC WinFS - http://www.computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/storage/story/0,10801,86543,00.html Client Only WinFS - http://computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/windows/story/0,10801,95698,00.html Longhorn sans WinFS - http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/windows/story/0,10801,95538,00.html

Paul's a Wintard. Here's the proof: http://www.openstep.se/jobs/ My question to Paul is: How long before this was shot did s. jobs, kick your *** on the play ground?

Can we PLEASE stop the ad hominem attacks and focus on facts? Besides, this piece is CLEARLY labeled as opinion and not news. Paul may be biased, but he usually maintains a modi*** of fairness, even if he does like to make cute attempts at anti-Apple jokes. The fact that he's no good at it is no cause to personally insult him. So cut it out.

Microsoft copied/latched on to the database file system idea from NeXT back in 1993. NeXT came up with an object oriented database file system as part of their MeCCA project. Microsoft later went into vapor promotion mode on this and everything else they could from NeXTSTEP to try and sound all object-oriented, which they are not till this very day, but FUD counts. Anyway, Microsoft then got a "clue" and added this "bullet point" onto the upcomping features of Cairo, which really never manifested into anything. In actuallity, everything OO in Cairo, actually all of Cairo was dropped with the exception of this OODBFS, which was morphed into longhorn after all these years and thats where they got the idea. Here's a news group post describing Mecca from mid 94, but it was known and compared against by microsfot from before then. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.sys.next.advocacy/browse_thread/thread/f73a4c0d69318e8c/5d645b6258d77904?q=next+object+%22file+system%22+(mcca+OR+mecca)&_done=%2Fgroups%3Fas_q%3Dnext+object%26num%3D100%26scoring%3Dr%26hl%3Den%26ie%3DUTF-8%26as_epq%3Dfile+system%26as_oq%3Dmcca+mecca%26as_eq%3D%26as_ugroup%3D%26as_usubject%3D%26as_uauthors%3D%26lr%3D%26as_qdr%3D%26as_drrb%3Db%26as_mind%3D1%26as_minm%3D1%26as_miny%3D1981%26as_maxd%3D28%26as_maxm%3D1%26as_maxy%3D1995%26safe%3Doff%26&_doneTitle=Back+to+Search&&d#5d645b6258d77904 This Byte article shows all the rage of OO'ness a few months later when Microsft just announced thier additon of an OO filesystem after thinking it was such a great idea by NeXT: http://www.byte.com/art/9411/sec12/art3.htm However, it appears even NeXT pilfered some of these ideas from the Taligent project and a caltech project called eText that was worked on at least as early as 92. All of this file system stuff was "in the air" at the time, but a lot of the others like BeOS etc. were later to the party--and to date, no major operating system vendor has actually fully implemented an OODBFS. Microsoft, as always, just likes to take credit when it's not deserved, even in vapor wars! Then agian so does Apple! It's all typical corporate revisionist history. However, one thing we can say with relative certainty, it wasn't a case where Microsoft was first.

Oh well.. Apple is getting another patent thanks to that 'speed' it has from being closed-architecture... Will MS care if Apple has a patent.. hmm.. not really.. The point is not 'who thought of it first'.. 'finding stuff' isn't a brilliant idea.. the only reason it's hugely important is because for the first time, HD's are nearing 160GB for some users out there and.. finding stuff is getting harder. Admittedly, Apple's search is ALREADY years ahead of MS. THey'll rip off the search bar in the Finder (ahem.. Exporer) window and then some.. As for unreleased technology in Tiger...Paul keeps saying it's not as thorough (pardon the pun) as.. er.. whatever MS Search is called... Which to me.. is rhetoric. Apple shows its search tech at every keynote.. developers are already using it and working with it... it's not vaporware... MS's search technology so far looks cobbled together (hmm where have we heard that before).. the MSN Search App is absolutely disgusting... Last Point: MS keeps saying they're betting the company. Apparently not. They're building LH on top of XP. What a disappointment. For Apple that means they're set to be about 4 years ahead for the near future. Built on top of XP? They're not even TRYING to compete with Longhorns featureset..

To the comment about "as an investor, profits were actually down" because Microsoft had SUPPOSEDLY (according to the Register - LOL) cut R&D spending. Mate, seriously, stick to whatever you know alot about because understanding corporate accounting isn't one of them. Even if Microsoft HAD cut R&D to an investor that's irrelevant because it simply means that Microsoft took money out of the "cost" side of their business. In fact, this would generally be viewed as a good thing because it would mean that they are becoming more efficient. I've double-checked, their R&D spending was up year-on-year as at December 2004. I'm not going to get into debates about Apple and stuff, but I think it is safe to say that taking anything Slashdot or the Register say about anything, not just Microsoft, as gospel and then repeating it is a surefire way to make yourself look pretty stupid.

do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents do***ents

Amazing. This site's attempts to filter out "naughty" words makes it ***** near unreadable. What's wrong with the word "Modi***"? M-o-d-i-c-u-m. It's a legitimate word. Oh, we must protect people from profanity. What silliness.

That's "d-a-m-n" near unreadable. Sheesh. You can't even refer a "m-a-s-s-i-v-e" failure. This is ridiculous. ****ing ****ty *** filters.

Why is the formatting of this article so messed up that it is three screens wide when viewed in Firefox. HAVE THE PEOPLE WHO DO THIS WEB SITE NEVER HEARD of this browser, or are they just TOO DARN SLACK TO EVEN WORRY ABOUT MAKING A SITE THAT WORKS!!!??? Shame on you, lazy american fools.

"even if you can play those songs only on Apple's locked-in iPod player" uhm... they also play on a gajillion of (non-apple) cd-players

"everybody knows apple didn't invent desktop search. even apple fans know it. but that doesn't matter." that's true, what actually matters is who can deliver it to it's customers instead of 'talking about it'

>>If Paul didn't constantly take swipes at Mac and UNIX users because of their choice of platform, then we wouldn't get the constant stream of complains from those camps. Plain and simple. Paul brings this on himself. Puh-leeeze If that ain't the most stupid form of illogic out there. Same logic terrorist use.

>>>>If Paul didn't constantly take swipes at Mac and UNIX users because of their choice of platform, then we wouldn't get the constant stream of complains from those camps. Plain and simple. Paul brings this on himself. >>Puh-leeeze >>If that ain't the most stupid form of illogic out there. Same logic terrorist use. Um...huh? So Paul should be allowed to express his opinion about users of other platforms, but those users aren't permitted to respond? How is responding to his (often flawed) reasoning on the same level as terrorist logic, whatever that is? So people who disagree should just sit down, shut up and take it? Last I checked, the best way to deal with free speech is to counter it with more free speech, not stick your head in the sand.

>>>Um...huh? So Paul should be allowed to express his opinion about users of other platforms, but those users aren't permitted to respond? How is responding to his (often flawed) reasoning on the same level as terrorist logic, whatever that is? So people who disagree should just sit down, shut up and take it? Last I checked, the best way to deal with free speech is to counter it with more free speech, not stick your head in the sand. Let's see, where did I state that people couldn't or shouldn't respond. hmmm, nowhere at all. I also maintain my right to respond to other responses. I also did not say it was on the same level as terrorists, just the same kind of logic they use to justify their actions. For example, terrorist a few days ago told Iraqis that if they voted, they would kill them. They then stated that it would be the Iraqis fault since they had been warned.

>>Let's see, where did I state that people couldn't or shouldn't respond. hmmm, nowhere at all. I also maintain my right to respond to other responses. >>I also did not say it was on the same level as terrorists, just the same kind of logic they use to justify their actions. For example, terrorist a few days ago told Iraqis that if they voted, they would kill them. They then stated that it would be the Iraqis fault since they had been warned. Although I despise the term terrorist (one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter) I don't see the parallel between taking someone's life because they choose to vote, and someone who chooses to differ with Paul. I guess you could make some sort of comparison, in that you feel that the person who is upset and chooses to "attack," be it kill a voter, or post a rebuttal to Paul's drivel, is in the wrong. Is this what you are trying to say? The problem here is that Paul is the subject of ridicule because he posts content intended to be inflammatory, but which is factually weak. For this, he deserves what he gets. Though it sounds like you'd probably disagree with this statement too, which is certainly within your right.

>>I guess you could make some sort of comparison, in that you feel that the person who is upset and chooses to "attack," be it kill a voter, or post a rebuttal to Paul's drivel, is in the wrong. Is this what you are trying to say? No that is not what I was trying to say, although as I look back at the posts and think about it some more, that's the way it looks like it came out. I apologize. btw, who's "freedom" are the terrorists fighting for???

I can't read this page in Firefox, even with style sheets turned off. How did you manage to write HTML that wouldn't wrap?

I usually read this page every week, but the formatting is so crap in Firefox that I can't be bothered to scroll sideways through it...

I've been reading this site for years, and have sometimes posted as "Preston" in the past. I'm finding the site, however, too inflammatory to pay attention to. Paul, you used to seem more balanced with your reporting in the past, but nowadays it seems like you keep taking so many pointless swipes at users of other operating systems that it's hard to take the actual content of the article on its own merit. I'm going to stick with Activewin for my Windows news and check back in a few months to see if this place is any better for me...

"everybody knows apple didn't invent desktop search. even apple fans know it. but that doesn't matter." Check out thinksecret... Spotlight patented back in 2000?? Furthermore.. even if you just look at what's already on store shelves... Panther has waaaaaay better searching than any iteration of the WIndows virus... Or do you still think MS is at the forefront of Desktop Search?