“‘Yukon,’ the code-name for a major overhaul of SQL Server, will be ready for general availability sometime during the 2004 fiscal year, and “Longhorn,” the code-name for the Windows operating system release after Windows .NET Server 2003, is coming in 2005, according to a senior Microsoft official. […] As part of Longhorn, Allchin said customers can expect to see new features for intelligent auto configuration, such as BIOSes and firmware that can be ‘automatically updated in a seamless way.’ Also, Allchin said Longhorn will include new functionality for server resiliency, such as self-healing characteristics, a more componentized architecture, and additional monitoring services with filters that can ‘dynamically’ flow out to servers.” Read the report at ENTnews.
Allchin: Yukon Coming in ’03-’04, Longhorn in ’05
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
What is it with this Allchin guy? Is he doing some kind tell-all at Microsoft? This is his third big story in the last week!
Allchin said Longhorn will include new functionality for server resiliency, such as self-healing characteristics….
Oh now thats something I can’t wait for……….
Given the MS track record, does this mean we will start to see DDoFUA ( Distributed Denial of Firmware Upgrade attacks ) /me ponders the future…. while gentoo silently begins to emerge new toys.
>such as self-healing characteristics….
and additional bloat at the HD-makers requests
Anon:
That’s how things work in the computing world… although you seem to not know the difference between bloat and useful features.
Simply, company A makes a piece of hardware, then company B makes a pice of software to take advantage of that hardware, and so Company A comes out with a new piece of hardware, so on and so forth.
Nah, you won’t see any *denial* of firmware updates… I think you’ll see a lot more updates than you want to see.
i’d be just a tad skeptical about self-healing capabilities on a server…call me a control freak but i don’t want my server to do anything unless i tell it to
maybe that’s why i think FreeBSD rocks 😀
-bytes256
Is this to fix software problems that shouldn’t break in the first place?
BIOSes and firmware that can be ‘automatically updated in a seamless way.’
Welcome to virus hell….. Mwhahahahahaha
it’s gotta be perfectly safe to let windows update the bios of a production server…i’m sure it would be nice and secure and stable and wouldn’t crash halfway through the update leaving a totally fucked up system
what kinda server admin actually wants to maintain their server themselves…it’s not like it’s their job or anything
-bytes256
This whole self healing thing is total crap.
they have just recently made an operating
system that is stable. I think its funny that
they have to make a self fixing OS instead of
one that just freaking works most of the time.
They do have a billion dollars ya know. I guess
without real competition they can invent whatever
the want.
“BIOSes and firmware that can be ‘automatically updated in a seamless way.”
Does this mean that Microsoft now has control over your BIOS. If this is the case they will most likely put in some code that detects whether Linux is running and make it randomly crash. Remember DR DOS.
If this does happen, Microsoft will control ALL software in the PC realm. Whether its a Microsoft program or not they will dictate whether it will run or not. Or this is one step to Palladium. Who knows.
“We want to federate everything”
OK now I am scared. What does that mean? Am I going to need a MS dictionary to understand how and why microsoft uses everyday words in new and imaginative ways. I realize there is a LOT of technobabble on both sides but this seems different. Its like how we are now part of an ‘ecosystem’ all of a sudden. Well now we shall have to join the Microsoft Federation. I wonder if we get to wear clever uniforms? And maybe by the time Longhorn comes out we will have Phasers.
I realize the article never actually said Microsoft Federation. Yes I am a smartass. Or a dumbass. Take your pick. Its multiple choice. Its just that once ‘everything’ has been ‘federated’ will I want to use a computer any longer.
Nice to see Microsoft hasn’t changed its “Vaporware” tactics. Per annouce a bunch of pie in the sky crap to get IT policy makers hold off on purchasing anything from the competition cause Microsoft will be releasing the “new big thing” real soon now.
Probably not – they just want Linux phased out 😐
While self fixing maybe great for newbies who don’t understand what their doiong when they delete their system directory to clear up space, it is not what servers need.
IMO servers should be run by experts who know what their doing, and know what impact it will have. Self healing creates just another extra layer of complexity that could (will) add a whole host of new bugs and security issues.
I belive the KISS approach really is what is required for servers.
Having said this, i am just a geek though, not a sysadmin so maybe this is a good idea, who knows. I bet managment folks love the idea thinking they can hire a few less people who know what their doing…
And by “grain” I mean a big MOFO rock. Microsoft is the king of anticipation and the king of lies, for that matter. How many companies have put off installing NetWare 5 because they wanted to see this fantastic NT 5.0…. which never materialized. And they missed the opportunity to have a robust, very scalable directory service because thought the Microsoft Active Directory would be The Thing. It wasn’t. It still scales about 4000 times less than NDS does … with thenth the functionality.
IMO servers should be run by experts who know what their doing, and know what impact it will have.
Well, as a UNIX sysad, I agree. On the other hand, as a Windows sysad, I *wish* I had a framework to provide this functionality for me. UNIX is easy, if it isn’t in /sbin or /usr/sbin, then it is in /etc or /var. Do you know how to find stuff in Windows? Do you have any idea how many registry entries there are? What if ONE of those gets changed by some crappy say… streaming media player application you install. Wouldn’t it be nice if the OS just fixed it for you, since doubtless you will not be able to find it on your own.
Windows already does stuff like this today. Software vendors *love* to replace pieces of the OS with functionality that they think is better. This was one of the major flaws with the Win9X line. Just about everyone had their own msvcrt.dll which they would use to replace the Microsoft supplied one, and may or may not cause the OS to crash. Can you imagine if Corel had thier own libc.lib that they installed on UNIX? Now imagine 20 different apps arbitrarily replacing system functionality because they believe it is in the best interest of their particular app (nevermind the OS as a whole). Starting with the Win2K line, Windows keeps track of these Microsoft supplied system DLLs. It allows installer programs to replace them (so they don’t complain or give up) and then deletes the new file, replacing it with the Microsoft signed version. I for one am glad. It may make some app behave improperly, but better that than the OS.
As an aside, I’ve seen a (albeit entirely conseptual… read FLASH) demo of Longhorn in action. If the Longhorn team can pull off what they are planning, it will be a significant step forward. This is the first release of Windows that I feel has a chance to compete with the look/feel/usability of MacOS, long dominant in the area of desktop friendliness.
Microsoft’s offerings right now are, to be fair, VERY fully featured. Moreso that an any alternative besides MacOS X. So… seeing as how a MS date of 2005 probably means 2006 in reality, we have 4 years to develop the REAL future of computing. That’s not so bad, is it? Let’s get hacking!
What if ONE of those gets changed by some crappy say… streaming media player application you install.
What are you doing installing a streaming media player on a server?
Can you imagine if Corel had thier own libc.lib that they installed on UNIX?
What are you doing installing random apps on a Unix server?
This is what people were saying about how sysadmins should be experts who know what they are doing and don’t do stupid things like install unknown/untested apps on a server. Repeat this until you understand : ‘Good sysadmins don’t take chances with production serving environments.’
‘Taking chances’ involves installing ANYTHING that you are not very confident in. If an app REALLY DOES need to be installed, if you are a good sysadmin you’ll have researched the app and you’ll know what it’s ramifications on your system will be. That’s what the sysadmin game is all about, knowing the products. Anything less is just a tech with an install fetish.
PS – you only have 4 key places for your critical files? You’ve never worked in a heavy Unix shop have you?
Hi folks,
My one experience with a limited version of “self-healing” was with a set of IBM servers. These had the delightful habit of sensing that the system had been idle for X hours, and then performing a hard reset. The net result was until a co-worker figured out what was going on, every morning we came in to see the machines sitting around complaining about file system damage from having been improperly shut down.
Yours truly,
Jeffrey Boulier
It was the silent piece of junk in ower computers since the first consumer PC, I think you guessed it-The BIOS-.
2nd crap is the HD technology-with its ancient 4 primary partitions limit in the MBR of its first sector.
I think that MS knows that they can beat Linux just by its capablity to switch OEMs to develop for their own OS, and letting Linux play the catch-up game. We were loudly asking MS to develop new technologies and apply them, but with results in the past 10 yeas (I mean the customers).
Now its the time to enjoy this new wake up in PC industry, where PC must be reinvented to keep us interested about their product!!!
So let me get this right.
Because the windows desktop style OS is not a good layout for a server, then the solution is to add extra junk on top of it to fix it if it breaks?
This just doesn’t seem the right approach to me if this is indeed what is happening.
I think it would be better to work the other way and strip down the offending bad design, again KISS.
As I said before, this sounds like it could be great for desktops. For servers and workstations however, I think it is not only not usfull, but will actually cause more harm than good.
Ores:
Microsft is retaining KISS, simply, the desktops and workstations will be using the same UI, so the Server should have the same one as well. Also, Win.NET Server already supports operation in a headless environment (meaning no local interface at all, you have to run a TS client to configure it).
Gone are the days when only large organizations had servers. Every one-man-and-his-dog company has a server and they can’t necessarily afford to employ a sysadmin. The more that a mainstream OS manufacturer can do to make that OS out-of-the-box secure and self-repairing, the better.
Conversely, many large companies employ many, many servers. The ability to set central policies and have the machines police and repair themselves is also good in these scenarios.
IT policy makers shouldn’t be IT policy makes if they judge a piece of software on how it is going to be and not how it is like right now. And quite frankly, a lot of IT decision making is done without looking at the roadmaps.
mario: How many companies have put off installing NetWare 5 because they wanted to see this fantastic NT 5.0…. which never materialized.
Did you smoke dope? Microsoft released NT 5.0. It is called Windows 2000. (Besides, what kind of stupid company hold off installing the best for today because somebody said something better is coming from its rival?)