As it had promised, Microsoft said it will add support in Windows for the recently approved iSCSI storage standard, which allows storage networks to be built using existing Ethernet networks.
Windows to Support Storage Standard
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
So when will they start supporting filesystem standards that have been in use in production systems for years?
Like what? Windows 2k/XP has great drivers for many storage devices.
People, please stop trolling each time you see a Microsoft story over here. It is getting tiring.
He said filesystems, not drivers.. I’m guessing it was a reference to OSS disk formats, since few people want to run Linux on FAT32
>since few people want to run Linux on FAT32
This is hardly “production systems” and “standards” server-related (which is the article’s focus: on server side). It has nothing to do with a few geeks wanting to mount their Linux under XP (or the other way around).
…and which ones? Not trolling. Just curious.
iSCSI? In production system? For years? You’re back from the future?
So this is totally offtopic, but I remember when hyperscsi was announced last year. The technology is sound, and it’s deadly fast, faster than iscsi by a factor of 2 in some instances. If MS wanted to rock the boat they’d bypass iscsi and support that instead. Too bad they would take it and corrupt it with their own proprietary extensions.
I appreciate the effort Eugenia has put into osnews, but please… sometimes her comments are really stupid and narrow minded. Eugenia, sometimes I think you should realize that YOU are trolling more than most of the other users who actually have some legitimate criticism.
I was talking about filesystems and I was off topic.
Eugenia, sometimes I think you should realize that YOU are trolling more than most of the other users who actually have some legitimate criticism.
I think Eugenia is talking more about context than the criticism itself. It’s not whether you like or dislike Microsoft, it’s about whether someone busts out with “Micro$oft is shit!” as a response to pretty much EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE that is even remotely MS-related. I mean, seriously – it gets old after awhile, especially when the criticism given has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the article content.
Even the guy who made the comment that started all this admits he was off topic.
It has alot of backers – Seagate, Quantum, and IBM to name a few, however, I haven’t seen anything grow from a concept.
What I would love to see is IDE completely replaced my SATA in the form of SATA harddrives and CD-ROM’s.
btw, is it possible to hook up a CD-ROM drive to a SATA controller using a SATA to IDE converter?
What on earth are you going on about? NT supports UDF, ISO9660, Joilet extensions, rock ridge extensions, NFS (v3 I think). I mean, sure, they don’t support some weird and obscure OSS filesystem, but for the majority of people the fact remains that they don’t care as they don’t need to have that support.
Darius, thank you for your excellent reply.
> sometimes her comments are really stupid and narrow minded…. she is trolling..
No my friend, I never troll. I may be stubborn as a donkey or highly opinionated, but I never troll. And I am never “narrow minded” towards all these things, I always try to think out of this little [linux] box of yours.
Dresden, get off your high horse and read the comments here: http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=3019&offset=15&rows=26
Highly off topic and trollish, even for a remotely MS-related news story. I AM TIRED of this situation. I want OSNews to be an intelligent and calm place to discuss ON topic, not a Linux/Mac flamatory kind of thing where everything that has the word “microsoft” or “Windows” in it to be a place for stupid off topic flames.
No matter what I do, what I say, no matter how hard I TRY to keep this place cool, people will still think what they WANT to think… Whatever. I am tired of all this.
so I can just pop a CD-RW in and write to it like a floppy with out having clucky software installed seperatly that is incompatable with another vender’s CD-RW software?
//so I can just pop a CD-RW in and write to it like a floppy with out having clucky software installed seperatly that is incompatable with another vender’s CD-RW software?//
Oh, using Windows is such a horrible thing, isn’t it? Having to use an app (likely included FOR FREE with your CD-RW drive) to write to a CD-RW. The terror! The pain! The agony!
Get a life, you Penguinista fool.
>so I can just pop a CD-RW in and write to it like a floppy with out having clucky software installed seperatly that is incompatable with another vender’s CD-RW software?<
you mean sorta like how in winXP you can just pop a CD-RW in it and right to it just like a floppy.
Open up your cd rom in explorer, copy files to it and click write to disk. Ok so you have to click a big button in the window to get it on the disk. What more do you really want. Sure you can’t do all sorts of fun stuff like burn images and such with the built in utility. But for what you say you want it very much does. Maybe you just need to upgrade, yes upgrading has it’s reasons.
Actually, there are plenty of open source iSCSI software.
You can play with this stuff today. Look for open source iSCSI implementations from Intel and UNH for example. Most of it is pretty rough, but so is anything from most vendors at this point.
>No matter what I do, what I say, no matter how hard I TRY to >keep this place cool, people will still think what they WANT >to think… Whatever. I am tired of all this.
Poor Euginia.. Cant controll users thoughts.
I feel sorry for you.
/God
There are a number of iSCSI projects for Linux. The two “big ones” are sponsored by Intel and CISCO.
http://linux-iscsi.sourceforge.net/ is the CISCO one
http://sourceforge.net/projects/intel-iscsi/ is the intel one
As someone who has spent a fair bit of time learning about the intricasies and incompatabilities of various Fibre Channel implementations and disk storage technologies I can tell you that iSCSI has the potential of being much easier to use. Microsoft’s support for iSCSI will make life easier for those who need SAN technology. Fibre Channel is a complete pain in the neck in my opinion.
Like what? Windows 2k/XP has great drivers for many storage devices.
Regardless of what drivers it has, it doesn’t have support for a proper journalised filesystem, or one that uses iNodes instead of ones based on FAT which have been inflicted on people recently. Before you start saying that EXT3 or ReiserFS isn’t a mainstream production filesystem used by corporations, what about XFS? It’s used by SGI. If Linux can support it, why can’t Windows? I think it’s because MS don’t know how to follow a standard. They are quite good at inventing their own, or trying to make something similar, but they can never follow an existing one, so they’d struggle to implement XFS support in Windows.
FAT? Who the hell uses FAT on Win2K/XP? Ever heard the term NTFS? You know what that is? Oh my, a journaled filesystem!
And on another note, since when is XFS a standard? Or for that matter all other filesystems you mentioned? Those are all homebrewn things by SGI or the linux coders!
Okay then if you don’t think much of XFS, what about UFS. That’s a standard. It’s been there longer than NTFS. And I know NTFS displays some characteristics of a journalised filesystem, but it’s main limitations are those imposed by the cat that it has a file allocation table (FAT). Do you use NTFS on Windows XP or 2000? you’re still using a File Allocation Table then.
And how do you go about viewing a particular file as it was 3 days ago on an NTFS filesystem? Can’t think of a way? That’s because it’s not a proper journalised filesystem. I know the ‘homebrew linux’ ones aren’t perfect either, but I’d much sooner trust my data to EXT3, XFS or UFS than NTFS. One corruption/failure is one too many.
I know NTFS is much better than FAT32, but it’s not as technologically advanced as EXT3 or XFS, and therefore lacking some features I’d expect in a modern filesystem.
XFS is a standard on SGI’s systems, just like NTFS is a standard on Microsoft’s systems.