Microsoft Lifts Curtain on Indigo Software 315
daria42 writes "Microsoft has released an early version of Indigo on the Microsoft Developer Network. Indigo is a new communications system intended to let Windows programs more easily connect to other software. Indigo was one of the three original "pillars" of Longhorn, however under the new plan it will be re-tooled to work with Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, in addition to Longhorn."
XP - Longhorn (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:5, Funny)
But the real reason, is that Microsoft wants developers to start using these technologies as soon as possible. If they back-port it to XP, there are already millions of potential customers for software built on the foundation. From my point of view, Apple had a tough time at the beginning with OSX. When a new OSX program cameout that would not run under OS 9, we were stuck with the old version. Then, after upgrading to OSX, we were stuck booting back into OS 9 to run a few programs that weren't compatible.
If I can avoid the same thing with the next version of Windows, I'll be happy. (Not as happy as I would be if Natalie Portman let me lick honey off of her body...but happier than if I had to eat chocolate cake from between Rhea Perlman's thighs)
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:2)
That's certainly one possibility. Another is that they are planning to take a run at getting end users on some sort of subscription based upgrade plan. That would undercut the folks using cracked versions of Windows and fits with their plans to limit access to currently "free" dow
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:2, Funny)
Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 API (Score:5, Interesting)
Everything in Longhorn will be based on the .NET framework and sandboxed, with the Win32 API scrapped. Longhorn's ability to run the Win32 API will be through a compatibility layer, similar to the DOS compatibility layer in XP. However, WinXP's ability to run Indigo and Avalon, the two pillars of Longhorn, will be done through a forward compatibility layer.
Fortunately, they're doing everything clean this time with XML and SOAP, with an open API, as opposed to binary-only files, arcane RPC calls, and endless piles of undocumented, insanely messy code dating back until the early 90s. There actually might be some interoperability this time around -- Longhorn SAMBA certainly won't be nearly as hard to code and reverse engineer, especially with Mono in hand.
More details: http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/understanding/p illars/default.aspx [microsoft.com]
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:5, Funny)
He's a witch! Burn him!
However, on a somewhat more serious note...
"It took an hour just to talk about all the security revamps in the kernel. Unfortunately, its all 'MS confidential' for now... "
... I think you have a real future working on a rumormill blog. You're supposed to post this stuff as an AC, though. :)
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:2)
But seriously, I was really worried that LH didn't really offer much until I actually was able to sit down and peer into what is going into the system. It's not a 95 to 98 jump, but a 98 to NT. Should be interesting when the official beta comes out, 'sall I'm saying!
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:2)
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:2)
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:2)
The eventual goal is to write them from scratch -- for real, and eliminate the dependency on Win32.
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:3, Interesting)
The post several generations before was actually talking the standard smoke and mirrors of distance "it's all gonna change!" bullshit. Longhorn is basically taking Windows XP, with largely the same kerne
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:2)
Now about the Open API, not so sure on that...
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:2)
Its a totally new windows API with the old API being supported only through backwards compatibility layers (I assume its basicly something like WINE but better and able to use bits of the windows source code where needed)
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:2)
Fortunately, they're doing everything clean this time with XML and SOAP
Truly distributed applications using XML/SOAP for RPC tend to be horribly slow. The development community has largely rejected distributed architectures because they simply aren't the right tools for the job in most cases. What's left
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:2)
You are thinking of the old hardware, back when computers only ran at 2.0 GHz and had only 1 GB of RAM.
You're going to need a hardware upgrade for Longhorn.
There's a reason it is called Longhorn. Because you're really, really going to get screwed this time with all of the DRM.
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:2, Insightful)
You're a damn fool if you believe that. Or at least, if you believe that and that Longhorn will be released this decade.
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:3, Informative)
No clue where you're getting your information, dude, but that's all false.
Even when parts of the Longhorn shell was being built on managed code (which
Re:Certainly not -- they're scrapping the Win32 AP (Score:3, Funny)
www.timecube.com [timecube.com]
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:2, Funny)
Yes, and millions of people will still buy it.
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:5, Insightful)
For a great many users, that "$499 Upgrade" will ship installed on their new $500 Dell.
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:3, Insightful)
95 finally brought a modern gee-whiz interface to Windows, 2000 brought stability* to Windows. Hopefully Longhorn will be a good upgrade, I still don't see the benefits of XP over 2000 as a lowly end-user. That and my 2000 box is still runnning (mind you over a non-clean install) and my XP box is barely alive a year later, XP2 and all.
* As defined in the Microsoft Internet Dictionary: stability. n.. Not TOO unstable.
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:5, Interesting)
I use XP-pro at work, 2k at home. When I'm at home, there are a few reasons I'd rather have xP. I'm not trying to talk you into switching to XP (I doubt you'd be all that happy if you did) but I figured I'd share in case you or anybody else is considering it.
1.) I like ClearType. YMMV.
2.) XP's image viewer is nice for viewing sequences of images. Some of you probably know what I'm implying.
3.) You can run multiple simultaneous users on XP. Mildly nice, but if you're the only user, hardly worth mentioning.
4.) You can actually LOCK the taskbar so you don't accidently drag that around. I'm extremely hacked off that I can't do this in 2k. Because of this feature, my Task-bar is quite useful since I've tweaked it.
5.) Grouping of common tasks (i.e. several folder windows) and system tray items takes a little getting used to, but in some cases it's very useful. (Potentially annoying, too. But you can always choose.)
6.) The start menu shows the most recently used stuff. Not the greatest whoop-de-doo ever, but I have to admit I've saved a little time as a result of it.
XP has grown on me. I haven't had stability or security issues with 2K or XP so I can't tell you that it's better or worse in that regard. 2K to XP is sort of like getting a moon-roof for your car. You pay more for it, and it has its uses, but you probably wouldn't miss it if you didn't get it.
Okay, I'm not being terribly on-topic here, but I imagine there are people out there wondering if 2K to XP is worthwhile.
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:2)
Of course the real topic is back-porting Longhorn features to XP. Since I'm not enthusiastic about XP, I'm not expecting to make much use of those features unless/until some killer app makes it worth my while. I used OS/2 until its Win3.1 subsystem became too out
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:2)
"I don't play with the taskbar."
Before I start, I just want to mention that I'm not preaching to ya or anything.
I really think that XP's taskbar is one of the most underrated features of this OS. (Actually, most of what I find useful about it started with 98...) You can do some really slick stuff with it. For example: I have 'my computer' linked to it like the Quicklaunch bar. I have all the drives ready to go just by clicking o
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:2)
That's what the Desktop toolbar is supposed to be for. You get My Computer as a flyout, and you also get to see what else you might have left on your desktop, My Network Places, or whatever, without minimizing any active apps.
Of course, My Computer is already under the Start menu, but that's a whole extra click-and-move-mouse away.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:2, Informative)
I've seen a lot of people complain about this as well as other changes like not having My Computer on the desktop by default, etc. On my XP machine it takes 5 clicks to make the start menu and the desktop act like windows 2000...
1. Right click on taskbar
2. Click Properties
3. Click the Start Menu tab
4. Select "Classic Start Menu"
5. Click "OK"
The look of the start button and windows etc can also be easily changed to resemble windows 20
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:3, Informative)
I actually prefer IrfanView [irfanview.com] for this purpose on my W2K install. It has many more options than the built-in XP image viewer, such as lossless JPG rotation.
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:2)
There are some minor things I like about XP but for the most part, I can't really tell what OS is
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:5, Informative)
Everyone is forgetting about Aero
Alvon [microsoft.com] is to Quartz [apple.com] as Aero [microsoft.com] is to Aqua [apple.com]
Aero is not being backported to WinXP. Avalon, Indigo, and WinFS are going to be supported of WinXP; this makes Aero THE reason to upgrade to Longhorn.Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:3, Funny)
2400 on the SAT's here I come!
What? They took out the analogies? Those insensitive clods!
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:2)
The third pillar of Longhorn was the Avalon GUI framework, but even that is being backported to Windows XP!
Re:XP - Longhorn (Score:3, Interesting)
Anything useful in Longhorn? (Score:4, Insightful)
For ONCE, I want a newer version of Windows to be faster and smaller than the previous version and more stable as well.
Re:Anything useful in Longhorn? (Score:2)
Re:Anything useful in Longhorn? (Score:5, Interesting)
Windows 2003 actually satisfies that requirement, by a solid margin.
However, Microsoft never decided to release it in a non-server version... And if you've never tried running a server version as a home version, well, you have no idea how many otherwise "free" (as in beer but not speech) programs will refuse to run.
As an aside, you can trick 2003 into identifying itself as XP with only two tweaks to the install CD. I will not disclose them for fear of invoking the Legal Wrath of the Gates, but with a Google search for similar hacks to Win2k, you can probably figure out what to change. And no, the well-known product version switchers out there that worked on 2k will not work, and will actually render your system unbootable if they manage to do anything at all. Really, trust me on this, I tried both of them.
Re:2003 = XP (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes and no...
From a high-level view, 2003 roughly corresponds to the "server" version of XP, which itself equates to 2000 Pro.
For Win2k, however, every version used the same underlying OS, with only the list of installed products (and a few config details) changing with the server-ness of the product you installed.
Windows 2003, however, Microsoft actually released as NT 5.2 (compared to XP as NT 5.1, and Win2k as NT 5.0). Now, version numbers don't mean a whole lot, but with Win2k3, Microsoft actually did optimize it both in terms of memory footprint and CPU efficiency. As an example, you can just barely fit a hand-trimmed XP installation into a 96MB RAM footprint. Win2k3 you can do in half that, under 48MB (without running server-specific services and applications, of course), comparable to the footprint of a baseline NT4 Workstation installation.
And don't think you give up speed for that - Not even close. 2003 not only "feels" quite a lot more responsive, it actually does run arbitrary code faster... I don't know how (perhaps XP has that much bloat?), and I had to write a dozen or so small test apps to prove it to myself, but you'll easily see a 10% gain even on mostly CPU-bound tasks, and I frequently notice that multiple I/O bound tasks that on XP would take time 2X, take around 1.1X on win2k3.
And for stability... Wow. I thought Win2k took a huge leap forward, and XP a big-but-not-so-big leap back, until I started playing with 2k3... You just can't crash those things! On one of my servers at work, I have an uptime over a year, and it hasn't even started getting flakey! Almost as good as a BSD box!
And no, I don't work for Microsoft... I even prefer Linux, myself. But, finding myself more-or-less forced to use Windows, I REALLY wish MS would release a pro or WS version of Win2k3 (my particular hack works for now, but I kinda wonder how Win2k3 SP1 will react to my trying to install it on a nonexistant product line... With luck it'll work just fine, but I expect I'll need to slipstream it in and do a clean install, sigh).
Re:Anything useful in Longhorn? (Score:3, Interesting)
That depends: Whenever Microsoft announces something, everybody on Slashdot is suddenly a minimalist. "Oh, I don't REALLY need a scrollwheel."
Whatever.
I'm personally excited about their vector based UI. There's a couple of reasons I'm digging it:
1.) Some of the UI (the most important part for a good deal of computing) will be offloaded from the main processor to the GPU. Reality may tell a different tale, but I'm happy about th
Re:Anything useful in Longhorn? (Score:2)
Please, that was just a sad post. Can't wait to get Tiger next month, whether it's rough-edged or not.
First exploit! (Score:5, Interesting)
I've got a great idea. Now that all the DCOM holes have been plugged (either at the OS, or at the firewall, or both), let's pick a new port number that'll be open and listening to the world by default, and on which all the OS components will have to rely.
For bonus points, I'll justify this by saying that it makes something that sounds really cool on paper if you're a CTO, but is actually the first line from the functional spec for "A platform for writing remote exploits" to anybody with even a millineuron of cynicism left in their brain.
One Liners (Score:4, Funny)
Will Prince's 1999 be the theme song for this technology or will they choose Purple Rain?
Will they get the Indigo Girls to do a version of Galileo that goes "how long til they get the software right?"
My name is Indigo Montoya -- you killed my father, prepare to die!
Cool - A malware framework. (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm sorry, but this sounds like a recipe for making windows security even worse. There are enough cross-network/cross-
Re:Cool - A malware framework. (Score:4, Informative)
That's probably your problem. It's a standard used with SOAP message exchanges. It provides authentication, integrity and confidentiality (nee encryption and a few other things).
As long as you trust the .NET framework (as far as its ability to protect you from, say, buffer overflows) then the WSS implementation for Indigo should be safe enough to use. It would be no different from anything written with JNI, for example.
Re:Cool - A malware framework. (Score:2, Informative)
All this talk about blocking ports and security problems seems fairly unfounded -- Indigo is simply a way of using Web Services for app-to-app communication, while taking advantage of the latest WS security mechanisms.
I can't see it being less secure than Java Web Service calls, or HTTP communication in general. Just my 2c.
Re:Cool - A malware framework. (Score:2)
They way that quote reads, I could just grab any Java app and suddenly be able to read it's data in some
All we have is a name for it - no substance (Score:2)
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:2, Funny)
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:2)
All your user-interface are belong to us.
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:3, Interesting)
This doesn't work on XP. Explorer.exe is automatically restored when you mess with it. Of course, it'll be assumed that this is because Microsoft is enforcing a monopoly instead of it simply being a security feature.
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:2)
of course, i could just log in as administrator and do it and it would stick, right?
i mean, the operating system wouldn't prevent me, as machine owner and admin, from doing something i wanted to do, would it?
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:2)
GeoShell [geoshell.com]
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:2)
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:4, Interesting)
Hey, I have fond memories of Fisher Price products from my youth as well. But when I sit down at a computer, I don't want flashbacks to using a Speak n Spell (unless I run it as an emulator [speaknspell.co.uk] (Yeah, I know, TI made it, not Fisher Price, but you get the idea).
It really, truly horrifies me that people actually like XP's interface. As the first thing I (and every single competant computer user I know, without exception, N>40) do when setting up an XP box, I disable the themes service. Poof, no more craptastic prettified round window edges taking up valuable screen real-estate.
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:2)
is it possible to replace the window manager on a windows box? i recently held my nose and tried litestep on a win2k machine, and though it was kind of nice, i still had to put up with the windows window manager.
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:3, Interesting)
Those first leaked screenshots of longhorn (the only ones I've seen) seem to take it to the next level with more buttons along the top of the explorer windows, more widgets in the start bar and hella more crap on that sidebar thing
Re: WinXP - Longhorn (Score:2)
Let's hear it for the Marketing Department! (Score:2, Insightful)
Like they say... (Score:5, Insightful)
This, Avalon, and WinFS are all jokeworthy now, but at least one of these if not all of them will see decent implementation in GNU/Linux three to five years after they're being used in Longhorn, at which point Microsoft will have the replacement ready for release.
It might even have a better interface than Apple, spawning a whole new series of Longhorn themes for X-Windows.
Re:Like they say... (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.cairogrpahics.org/ [cairogrpahics.org] is bringing avalon-like stuff to linux, and you can download early versions now.
http://www.gnome.org/~seth/storage/ [gnome.org] is bringing WinFS/google-desktop -like stuff to [gnome desktop] linux at the user interface level (and Hans Reiser is still saying he's going to do it at the system level, unlike Microsoft's revised WinFS approach), and you can download early versions now.
(Why patents on the areas in question are particularly s
Re:Like they say... (Score:3, Insightful)
On an offtopic note, Microsoft is screwed if developers start using the Google Desktop API [google.com]. All it takes is one
Re:Like they say... (Score:2)
Re:Like they say... (Score:2)
Yes, well, not everything has perfect one to one relationships in terms of available libraries and exactly what specific functions they provide. Avalon is also the new rendering model for Windows, and Cairo, as well as being hardware acceleration, is a new rendering model to run on X. Both of these are following along the lines of DisplayPostscript and Quartz which have a rendering
Re:Like they say... (Score:2)
Cairo != Berlin == Fresco.
Berlin, to which you refer, became fresco [fresco.org] which doesn't appear to have had any updates since 2003. I think we can call that mostly dead. Berlin/Fresco was supposed to replace X with something entirely new.
Cairo is something entirely different and runs on top of X11. It is simply a new rendering model for on screen drawing. Think of it as being akin to DisplayPostscript or Aqua: instead of addressing the screen in terms of pixels it addre
Re:Like they say... (Score:2)
Cairo doesn't have anything to do with Fresco/Berlin, aside from the fact that both projects have a namesake city.
It's not a windowing system, it hasn't been around for 7 years, it's not dead, and it has produced quite a bit.
Upset (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Upset (Score:2)
Breaking News! (Score:5, Funny)
Nah, just kidding. That will never happen.
What a drag ... (Score:4, Funny)
From the colour of the year [macworld.co.uk], the 6th [solarraven.com] chakra or a hype system [g-lenerz.de] to M$ software.
Sheesh.
CC.
Re:What a drag ... (Score:3, Informative)
In they go! (Score:2, Insightful)
Indego, in they go!
This will change everything. (Score:5, Funny)
I can just picture the next windows virus... (Score:2, Funny)
A reboot follows, right after changing you background wallpaper to goatse.
Pillars of Longhorn? (Score:5, Funny)
Real Soon Now (Score:2)
Indigo Is Appropriate (Score:5, Interesting)
For centuries, Indigo used to be a very valuable dye; the exclusive looking deep blue color was a sign of wealth. Of course that "exclusivity" went down the toilet when they developed synthetic indigo in 1905 and everyone with a new pair of blue jeans could have some of that exclusivity.
It sounds like a good name for a Microsoft product.
Windows Insecurity By Design: The Beat Goes On (Score:2, Informative)
Windows will never be secure until and unless Microsoft changes its design philosophy to something a little more paranoid, and a lot less "let's all be friends".
Re:Windows Insecurity By Design: The Beat Goes On (Score:4, Insightful)
It's just a pity that the managers for XP chose to have everyone run as Administrator so as not to confuse grandma. Thankfully, Longhorn will, out of the box, make your desktop account non-admin.
Putting ALL MS Faberge eggs in ONE basket (Score:2, Insightful)
Never plan around one technology, or in this c
Re:Putting ALL MS Faberge eggs in ONE basket (Score:2)
The last thing we need is another closed "under the hood" protocol out there that allows programs to interface with other programs "seamlessly". Virus and Trojan writers will most likely figure out exploits quickly.
Meanwhile, I'm still figuring out how to uninstall Internet Explorer. I've been trying to figure that out since 1996.
Am I the only one... (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm getting this funny feeling... (Score:2)
Is anyone else getting a funny feeling that just maybe Longhorn will never make it out the door?
I'm wondering if by the time the market is ripe for Longhorn (ie, enough of us can justify the more expensive hardware it needs that it stands a chance of competing in the market), there will be too many of us who will be migrating core pieces of our daily work to thin client models that run on established internet protocols. As that migration starts to pick up steam, it is going to become increasingly importan
Re:I'm getting this funny feeling... (Score:2)
You make the same common mistake people made with "Chicago", "Cairo", and "Memphis".
You assume that the project name is meant to
lead to the release of only one product or
service on the Windows platform.
While the dream is to release some all-encompassing product that becomes the next
killer app, the reality at MS has been to spin
off technologies where they can during the
development process. Both to make the eventual
release easier to swallow, and to get all the
buzzw
Who is the target audience? (Score:4, Informative)
I can only assume that the people that understand how XML, Web Services, Service Oriented Architecture, Enterprise Application Integration effect large corporations have remained silent.
The people that have replied have stated clearly that they don't know what Web Services are, have never worked with XML, and don't understand how EAI has changed the way businesses do things.
Indigo is an extraordinary technology that will very likely be copied by IBM for Java (IBM and Microsoft both partnered on all of the WS-* standards) and will usher in a whole new era of interoperability for the business world.
If you're even the slightest bit curious about what this is all about I suggest the following reading material:
http://www.ws-standards.com/ [ws-standards.com]
http://community.java.net/java-ws-xml/ [java.net]
http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/understanding/ [microsoft.com]p illars/Indigo/default.aspx
WinFX Indigo Docs [microsoft.com]
http://pluralsight.com/blogs/tewald/default.aspx [pluralsight.com] I'm sure there is a lot more.
Cassandra's history of Indigo (Score:5, Insightful)
Those of us who love F/OSS and Linux need to be less dismissive and more frightened.
MS is fragmented and balkanized internally but there are pockets of real capability. Web Services have not achieved anywhere near the level of adoption they could/should have by now (to all you trolls: the few dozen desultory SOAP projects at your company prove my point, not disprove it). And that's because of lack of "security," which boils down to lack of widely supported standards. We gotta be more proactive about this, and not make the same mistakes we are making in regard to Avalon.
Re:Yet another lock-in scheme... (Score:5, Informative)
EG:
"RSA WS-Security: SOAP Message Security Patent License Agreement Instructions
RSA Security has identified four patents ("the RSA Patents") we believe could be relevant to implementing certain operational modes of the OASIS WS-Security: SOAP Message Security specifications. To obtain a reciprocal royalty free license to the RSA Patents to make, use and sell products conforming to the OASIS WS-Security: SOAP Message Security specifications, a customer or partner must sign the attached Patent License Agreement."
I imagine there are more of these out there..
Re:Great! (Score:2)
Aah, if only (Score:3, Interesting)
Unless you have a *very* smart transparent HTTP proxy, there go a lot of your RPC blocks. SOAP seems particularly vile in this respect.
Re:Aah, if only (Score:2)
A quick Googling found this page that lists some other options:
http://www.webreference.com/authoring/l
Re:Aah, if only (Score:2)
Re:Great! (Score:2)
Ah, so the disease is the cure! Brilliant!
Re:Wouldn't this (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How cool! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Codenamed what? (Score:2)
Re:Codenamed what? (Score:2)
couple hundred copies of MSFT's WinNT4 for the
last of SGI's x86 based workstations. I think
the very last of SGI's factory reconditioned
Indigo2 workstations were sold off in 1999.
I would dearly like to have one of the SGI Indigo
R4 workstations, if for nothing else than to case
mod it into a bar refrigerator.
Re:Codenamed what? (Score:2)