Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
@jinushaun: The key difference being that ZFS was never a flagship item. The only people who care are people who run data centers- ZFS is waaaaaay too much file-system for your average user.
1) They underestimated the work getting it fully integrated; not just 'there if you know how to get to it', but fully productized and easy enough for their audience to use. And taking into account all the new failure and configuration paths.
2) It's not really something blingy that they can explain to most of their customer base. How many people are using their MacBook or iMac and going 'dang, this file system is really just adequate' and tossing the OS in disgust?
3) So they just never had enough manpower to dedicate to it full time when they could have those people working on something else like MMS in the iPhone or the iTablet or a thousand other things. The best people for this job would have been the ones who were desperately trying to get 10.6 out and had their hands full of other stuff like the Finder rewrite.
@oldtaku: you make some really good points. the only thing that I thought I'd add is that the target customer base for Mac OS X Server is going to typically be a much more 'technologically literate' group of people than the average Mac customer... meaning that ZFS isn't necessarily something that Apple would really need to advertise as a 'blingy' feature. Then again... it IS Apple after all...
@oldtaku: I don't buy argument #2, considering that it was announced as part of Snow Leopard Server. The Server product is not about "blingy" features, and NONE of it is described to most of their customer base. People using MacBooks and iMacs typically wouldn't be using X Server anyway.
Argument #3 doesn't quite make sense, since Apple keeps their project teams so discrete.
has anyone else notice that the interface was updated in iTunes when you run snow leopard. the scroll bar when view apps is well different. at least from my knowledge. EDIT: sorry if that was out of the blue, i just saw the comment below and i was thinking about the UI
Wasn't there also something called a "Marble Interface"? Perhaps in the Blizzard edition. Still -- looking forward to Snow Leopard which I should receive from Amazon by Friday of this week. Rumors be damned. This is the real thing. Thanks Apple!
@ploopsy: apparently you missed the first sentance....
-------------------------------------------------
In 2008, Apple announced that we would see ZFS as part of Snow Leopard Server, but a year later our copies are shipping with ZFS nowhere to be found.
-------------------------------------------------
09/01/09
09/01/09
08/31/09
1) They underestimated the work getting it fully integrated; not just 'there if you know how to get to it', but fully productized and easy enough for their audience to use. And taking into account all the new failure and configuration paths.
2) It's not really something blingy that they can explain to most of their customer base. How many people are using their MacBook or iMac and going 'dang, this file system is really just adequate' and tossing the OS in disgust?
3) So they just never had enough manpower to dedicate to it full time when they could have those people working on something else like MMS in the iPhone or the iTablet or a thousand other things. The best people for this job would have been the ones who were desperately trying to get 10.6 out and had their hands full of other stuff like the Finder rewrite.
08/31/09
09/01/09
Argument #3 doesn't quite make sense, since Apple keeps their project teams so discrete.
08/31/09
08/31/09
08/31/09
08/31/09
Apple wouldn't have to worry so much about GPL since still owns the Darwin kernel and can license it under whatever it wants.
Also it can just write the file system support as a kmod and not link it in directly (just means you can't boot from ZFS file system).
08/31/09
08/31/09
-------------------------------------------------
In 2008, Apple announced that we would see ZFS as part of Snow Leopard Server, but a year later our copies are shipping with ZFS nowhere to be found.
-------------------------------------------------
see that part about Snow Leopard SERVER........
08/31/09
08/31/09
Actually It slipped my mind by the time I got to the end of it.
08/31/09
08/31/09
08/31/09
"ZFS" became "ZDF" half way through.
08/31/09
Thanks for the catch, fixed.
08/31/09
08/31/09
06/16/09
06/16/09
06/16/09
It's so hard to choose.
04/20/09
Orasun?
Anusunoracle?
04/20/09
They found some spare change in the couch?
Someone lost a round of Truth or Dare?
Forgot that a flush beats a straight?
04/20/09
04/03/09
04/03/09
04/03/09