Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Announces .net

CmdrTaco posted more than 14 years ago | from the submitted-more-times-than-bill-gates-mugshot dept.

Microsoft 428

Meenky writes: "I heard on NPR that Microsoft announced their newest product, .net. This is a product that integrates with windows using XML to store all of your information on Microsoft servers, so any computer in the world can be used as "your" computer. "

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Piracy (2)

macx666 (194150) | more than 14 years ago | (#980391)

So it this the ultimate in scanning your "computer" by MSFT? Seems like this is the eaisest way for them to tell if you have pirated something. I might, maybe, sort of, kinda consider it if lots of bandwidth were included.
-Mr. Macx


Fantastic Idea!! (2)

garethwi (118563) | more than 14 years ago | (#980393)

Now, all the next I Love You virus needs to do is hit the Microsoft servers, and their air tight security will result in the loss of data for millions.

The real reason (5)

doctor_oktagon (157579) | more than 14 years ago | (#980395)

Knowing the big MS, it probably means *anyone* can use your computer from anywhere in the world!

umm... (1)

the.mad.artist (175364) | more than 14 years ago | (#980398)

Y'know, this sounds way too much like "Microsoft patents 1's and 0's"...

Yeah, Right. (1)

Scriven (123006) | more than 14 years ago | (#980401)

Great idea that has been discussed before, but do the words "Not a hope in hell" mean anything to anyone.

The Microsoft Data Storage Centre(tm) (or whatever they call it) wouldn't get my business if my life depended on it. They'd strip mine that data faster than a prospector during the Gold rush.

This is my .sig. It isn't very big.

hmmm... (1)

ph0rk (118461) | more than 14 years ago | (#980403)

I wonder, how often will they, peruse, i mean, 'index' your data?

I dislike this idea.

Feh. (5)

dougman (908) | more than 14 years ago | (#980405)

Gee, so I can look forward to the glorious promise of my PIII 1Ghz Screamin' Expensive Super-Charged Tower Of Power From Hell becoming...uhmm..a dumb terminal?



So, MS is getting a trademark on ".net" (1)

Happy Monkey (183927) | more than 14 years ago | (#980481)


.Net copyright? (1)

ChrisGB (114774) | more than 14 years ago | (#980484)

Let me guess - 2 months down the line after MS have been running this thing, they'll turn round and claim copyright or trademark rights on '.Net'?

Just imagine... shudder

Re:Yeah, Right. (1)

michael.creasy (101034) | more than 14 years ago | (#980487)

Microsoft wouldn't store your data, someone else would, your ISP for example. All MS have anounced in the software to do this.

fantastic (1)

waterhouse (80515) | more than 14 years ago | (#980489)

considering microsoft can't even keep web email secure, i'm not thrilled about the concept of them having more of anyone's data.

can you say sidetracking investors? (1)

Numeric (22250) | more than 14 years ago | (#980497)

I don't think m$ will be buying their innovations anytime soon with their ".net" idea. They are trying to direct more attentions to creating more business than losing it. Simple.

If ya can't beat 'em... (3)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 14 years ago | (#980501)

Remember what MS said when Sun advocated the same thing? "That's ridiculous! The computer is the comoputer, and the network is the network!"

I guess that desparation leads to open minds. What will Redmond "invent" next? NIS?

Re:.Net copyright? (5)

BilldaCat (19181) | more than 14 years ago | (#980504)

They're just setting up to take over .COM and .ORG, then they are going to get revenge and go after .GOV. :) .. now THAT'S scary.

How ingenious (4)

FascDot Killed My Pr (24021) | more than 14 years ago | (#980506)

"...integrates with any computer in the world can be used as "your" computer."

Any computer running Windows, anyway. Oh and you have to install our software.

Prediction #1: We will never hear about this again.
Prediction #2 (somewhat related to #1): ASP's are never going to take off in a big way, at least not for "desktop" software. With the possible exception of email service (for small businesses), ASP's are going to be the 2001 equivalent of the 1996-7 "push technology".

What kind of security? (1)

hardburn (141468) | more than 14 years ago | (#980519)

Do you really want the company who brought you Outlook to give accsess to your computer anywhere in the world? I bet if somebody reverse enginered this thing that they would find a slightly-modified version of Back Orfice 2000.


Hmmm (1)

SnapperHead (178050) | more than 14 years ago | (#980522)

Yesterday, they release c "crap" to screaw up Java. Today, they are going to break xml and a number of other systems.

M$ - "Where do you want to go ..... TODAY!"

Microsoft bought .net ? (1)

bee (15753) | more than 14 years ago | (#980528)

Gee, I knew that Microsoft was taking over the world, and I figured they'd try to get their own top-level domain eventually, but I never anticipated that they'd make a grab for one of the existing ones...


Ummm, profiles barely work now... (4)

alexhmit01 (104757) | more than 14 years ago | (#980531)

Local profiles become corrupted all the time. Roaming profiles get screwy between different versions (NT 3.51 -> 4.0 -> 5.0/2K; Windows 95 - 98). Over a 10 Megabit connection, they are slow to setup if that machine wasn't the last one you used. Over a DSL connection (a client is using DSLs and a private network to run a cheap Wan...), it is unbearably slow, and thats a dedicated DSL for that computer.

This sounds like a horrible idea. If it is "because we can" that's pretty cool, just for the neato factor (although possible now with LMHOSTS files), but as a real approach to computing... right... Unless they are planning to REALLY strip down what goes in a profile (a good idea) and try to make the concept work... but even then, the point seems dubious.

XML == Completely OverHyped (5)

John_Booty (149925) | more than 14 years ago | (#980534)

This is a product that integrates with windows using XML to store all of your information on Microsoft servers, so any computer in the world can be used as "your" computer. "

I've been working with XML for about six months now. I would have to say it's one of the stupidest bizzword-fads I've ever seen

XML is basically a big ol' delimited text file. The only things separating it from a 30-year old text file is the fact that it's hierarchical and the fact that there are parsers that let you navigate the tree structure easily.

People are advocating XML is this great new technology for universal data exchange. Well, it's NOT... no more than a standard text file is. Both parties still have to agree and understand the format and structure of the data before it becomes useful, so that's definitely not a progression over any existing technology. Also, XML is not fast... nor was it designed to be.

Wasn't .net ..... (1)

doctor_oktagon (157579) | more than 14 years ago | (#980536)

.... meant to mean "supplier of network infrastructure" i.e. ISPs and the like?
Another stoopid hijacking of names, which just leads to more confusion. *sigh*

It's Been Done ... (4)

090h (129325) | more than 14 years ago | (#980538)

Gee, Sun has been able to do this for years! Sun employees can log into any system in any office, and have full access to any of their information. Email, calendaring, files, etc. In fact, I do believe that it where the original name of "iPlanet" came from ...

.net confusion (1)

acidrain (35064) | more than 14 years ago | (#980540)

And I was already wondering what the hell ".net" really ment. I'm also suprised that thier marketing goons didn't try ".com" as thier product. Embrace and extend boys. Embrace and extend....

XML is <just>tags</just> (5)

Sneakums (2534) | more than 14 years ago | (#980548)

Oooh, more XML.

People, XML is just a syntax. Unless the DTDs and schemas they use for .NET are fully documented, only Microsoft's own .NET-enabled products will be able to anything useful with the data.

I don't know why the XML angle is being pushed so much; this could all be done with any structured data format, be it text or binary.

"Where, where is the town? Now, it's nothing but flowers!"

I think its a good idea (2)

michael.creasy (101034) | more than 14 years ago | (#980550)

The demos looked really cool. I think it is a great idea for a small tablet to be able to recognise my handwriting and work on it in the background. I like the idea of my mobile phone and pda and desktop all acting together.
This is the way things are going to go, I five years we'll wonder how we survived when all our devices didn't have a permanent connection and could synchronise data automatically wherever you are.
Yes it means storing some data in a public place, but we used to do that when we all used terminals to access a singal machine, so what's the difference ? Before long we started having our own machines and before long we will run our own central servers from home, not everyone will, but some of us, you can bet on that.

The New Microsoft Trademark (1)

Alien54 (180860) | more than 14 years ago | (#980553)

The New Microsoft Trademark(TM) is of course going to be .NET

So sometime in the near future everyone using a .net TLD is going to get a letter from the Microsoft Lawyers(TM) to cease and desist the infringement of Microsoft Trademarks(TM)

Can this be another plan by Microsoft to take over the Internet?

God, it sounds like something out of Pinky and the Brain.

wtf? (1)

gopherguts (203797) | more than 14 years ago | (#980556)

Right. Given Hotmail's past history of having security holes big enough to fly a 747 through and LookOut! --er, I mean Outlook's history of same, does Bill REALLY think I'm gonna trust something he built with my 3 gig pr0n collection?

Not MS Servers (1)

michael.creasy (101034) | more than 14 years ago | (#980559)

MS won't own the servers, it is more likely that the servers will be run by your ISP or employer.

Oh joy! (1)

Madman (84403) | more than 14 years ago | (#980562)

Gee, I want Microsoft to be in charge of my personal data! Given the high quality of their products and their well documented intergrity and ethics, it's a cinch I want them to control every personal document I have!

Privacy (1)

LaNMaN2000 (173615) | more than 14 years ago | (#980563)

Everybody's personal preferences stored on a central server, by Microsoft...Am I the only one concerned by this?

Hmm... (2)

Maran (151221) | more than 14 years ago | (#980565)

Correct me if I'm wrong but....

This is a Microsoft application.

It is integrated with the Microsoft Windows operating system.

That would be a really big breach of the Microsoft ruling then.

Why do I get the feeling that they'll get away with this one as well


Re:XML == Completely OverHyped (5)

TummyX (84871) | more than 14 years ago | (#980567)

XML is basically a big ol' delimited text file. The only things separating it from a 30-year old text file is the fact that it's hierarchical and the fact that there are parsers that let you navigate the tree structure easily.

C is basically a big ol' delimitated text file. The only things seperating it from a 60-year assembly program is the fact that it's expressive, easier to learn and there are compilers that let you write programs faster.

Is their revenue stream so weak (1)

ericlj (81729) | more than 14 years ago | (#980582)

Is their revenue stream so weak that they need to go to the annual-license model for Windows.

I have to hope that even the average first-time computer buyer will be able to compare a new Windows machine (which requires activation like a cellular phone) with a new Mac (or Linux, or BeOS) machine, which actually includes rights to use the Operating System and determine that it might be a good idea to lock down the right to the operating system at the time of purpose. -- I'm probably an optomist!

Heh (1)

Trith (10719) | more than 14 years ago | (#980584)

I like to call this technology NIS + NFS

Huh? (1)

CMiYC (6473) | more than 14 years ago | (#980588)

Did anyone else read the whitepaper and press release on their site, and find yourself going "huh?"

I don't it, myself. All I read was how current development tools suck, and that the web is like a mainframe.

Where is this talk of integrating your computer with the internet?


"Open" Office Document Formats? (2)

arc.light (125142) | more than 14 years ago | (#980590)

According to this Wired article [] (last paragraph of first page), MS will...

[shift from] storing data in the company's proprietary Office formats to open standards.

... that are based on XML. I certainly hope that's true!

.net...the final frontier? (1)

Fjord_Redd (176519) | more than 14 years ago | (#980593)

Yikes. Is this what the world is coming to? Has Microshaft finally convinced the world that resistance IS futile? Let's hope not. This most recient announcement (which doesn't necessarily mean that the product will be available any time soon this decade) proves yet again how microshaft refuses to "innovate" beyond current technology. Indeed, there are already more numerous ways than there are microshaft hackers (I think 5 to be precise). If you don't like ftp-style transfer, there's numerous programs that run off ftp connections that allow file transfer to any computer, making it "your computer." Maybe i'm missing the whole point of this newest attempt at "innovation," but i just don't see how this is anything new at all.

blatant attempt to stay whole (2)

Karmageddon (186836) | more than 14 years ago | (#980597)

this whole scheme is a blatant attempt by Microsoft to circumvent the breakup order. They're going to start bitching and moaning and whining about how everything is integrated now.

But once again, BillG ("Bilge") will learn that lawyers and judges are (a) not stupid and (b) easily irritated by nerds who think "technicalities" will get them off the hook. Why does he have this reputation for being so smart?, (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 14 years ago | (#980599)

I heard about this yesterday somewhere; Microsoft intends to use Windows.Net, Office.Net, etc. for online versions of their major software.

Interesting that Microsoft doesn't own the domain.

I noticed that isn't registered yet. Anyone feeling up to the task of throwing together a parody site?


What will they think of next? (1)

arberya (176464) | more than 14 years ago | (#980602)

It is amazing how M$ take some half decent ideas and botch them up. It is almost like running the 100m dash, but stopping at the 80m mark, because you were in front when you got there first.

...paving the way to pay-per-use... (5)

Masem (1171) | more than 14 years ago | (#980620)

Maybe, maaaaybe sometime in the future, when T1 lines are standard and cheaply available in all homes and businesses, will networked apps be reality. There's also matters of security and convinence (can you get to the networked Word if you are at 32000 ft from LA to Tokyo?)

IMO, the primary reason MS wants to go this way is that with net connections, you *can* count the number of times certain apps have been open, send that info securely back to MS, and MS can then send you the bill for $1.00 per Word doc you opened, or $10 per Windows restart. Pay-per-use has been in the works for a good year or so by more than just Microsoft (RIAA wants that too), and anything that depends on a net connection to work is going to be frowned upon until realistic pricing models and cheap fast net connections are in place.

Are we ready? (1)

2starr (202647) | more than 14 years ago | (#980624)

I think the real question with this strategy is are we ready for this level of internet dependancy? Let's take one area: security. Okay, we know Microsoft's record for security. Come now. Are they going to be able to say that my information, which can be stored on their servers so I can use any computer as "my computer", is realy going to be safe? And what about speed? I know there has been some good progress in getting DSL, etc. out, but I for one still live in a small town. I'm lucky if I can connect at 52K. Though I actually think this is a good direction to be heading (as Sun said, "the network is the computer"), I'm not sure we're ready for the broad-sweeping scenario that MS is suggesting... yet. I'd love to see them dump some real research (dare I say inovation?) into things like better security and ways to distribute information faster & better.

Re:The real reason (1)

doctor_oktagon (157579) | more than 14 years ago | (#980627)

What's new is that they never actually used this to advertise their applications before!
Next up we'll have headlines like "MS Team up with BO2K to offer full home-working systems"

IBM all over again... (2)

EnderWiggnz (39214) | more than 14 years ago | (#980630)

It used to be that Big Blue and their mainframes ruled the land of computers.

ONE of their computers fulfilled the needs of your business. They provided hardware and software support, and all you had to do was pay a monthly (exorbinant) fee to have IBM take care of all your data in this one central location.

What stopped this? The PC revolution. Microsoft took over computing because they offered greater flexibility, personalization and control?

Now they're going to try IBM's model?

Why on earth would you attempt that again?

We'll see. I dont think that I'd be happy if all of my data - my resume, budget, expenses, etc. - were sitting on a hard drive other than the one on my desk.

And I dont think that a whole lot of people will be, either...

hey (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#980631)

I could keep all my bomb designs safely off site. They would never find them when they searchd my apartment.

Re:.Net copyright? (1)

Coz (178857) | more than 14 years ago | (#980633)

Not to any other country...

"Komrades, the Microsoft Missile Defense System is about to become operational!"

"Fine, fine... schedule our attack for the beta test period for version 3.1...."

Re:The real reason (2)

dattaway (3088) | more than 14 years ago | (#980636)

so what's new?

It means you can now put all your easter eggs in one basket.

Your one-stop law enforcement shop! (3)

Archeopteryx (4648) | more than 14 years ago | (#980637)

Wow! This is a great idea! ::sarcasm mode::

If I were in law enforcement this product would make me cum in my drawers! One place where all of the essential data exist for tracking people, money, communications, and associations. Now, all we need is one "easy" federal judge, and the keys to the kingdom are in hand!

This is almost too much like the plot of that really awful film "The Net".


It is not for today (1)

mirko (198274) | more than 14 years ago | (#980638)

Many JobServe [] addicts might have been hunted by Microsoft HR forces during the last summer. I remember being interviewed in june 1999 in a luxurious Hotel in Paris and this was about developping this product.

If we consider the lack of Green Cards that prevented them to actually get their newest recruits before October, then we could be sure that the product might not even be in a suitable alpha stage.

In the meantime, I can just telnet any server in the world, export its DISPLAY to my machine and just have the same thing done.

Finally, Bill Gates abandonned his place to Steve Balmer during the Winter and was then supposed to lead this product.


you've gotta give it to MS... (5)

unbrokenlamb (175771) | more than 14 years ago | (#980653)

They've got a flair for naming things. ".NET" sounds WAAAAAAAY better than "mainframe".

Software leasing (4)

phil reed (626) | more than 14 years ago | (#980656)

As part of this announcement, M$ also announced that their Office products would be provided on a "subscription" basis. This could be unbelieveably bad - if you fail to pay your subscription fees, you could find yourself locked out of your own documents. No corporation will be willing to put itself in the position of being held hostage to Redmond.


Re:Ummm, profiles barely work now... (1)

LiveFreeOrDie (193975) | more than 14 years ago | (#980662)

Roaming profiles get screwy between different versions (NT 3.51 -> 4.0 -> 5.0/2K; Windows 95 - 98).

Roaming profiles aren't meant to be compatable between diferent clients. In fact, the profle files for NT and Win9x aren't even the same file (NTUSER.DAT for NT, USER.DAT for 9x.

although possible now with LMHOSTS files

I don't see what WINS resolution has to do with the topic.

Nifty logo (1)

Eirik Refsdal (29142) | more than 14 years ago | (#980663)

I like their nifty logo on the left side on ult.asp best. Nice colors.

Re:Is their revenue stream so weak (1)

witz (79173) | more than 14 years ago | (#980665)

Check the annual reports - their revenue is enormous, profit margins are ridiculous.

Re:XML == Completely OverHyped (1)

anonymous loser (58627) | more than 14 years ago | (#980667)

Both parties still have to agree and understand the format and structure of the data before it becomes useful, so that's definitely not a progression over any existing technology.

Isn't that what schema are for? Or perhaps you didn't get to that in your vast XML programming experience yet.

M$ Final Solution (1)

wiZd0m (192990) | more than 14 years ago | (#980668)

Well it is pretty clear in the Bill Gates speach [] on the new [] website what they have in mind (Pay attention to minute 21:30 seconds of the speech)

There is a very strong analogy with what we do now and what we did with windows. And it is even more analogeous for the internet to what we did in 1995 with windows, the browser and the 18 months that followed...Today, it is far more ambitious

Can it be clearer?

Re:Microsoft bought .net ? (1)

beagle (99378) | more than 14 years ago | (#980681)

Don't you remember - it's "embrace, extend, extinguish." :) We've heard this all before! :)

Just this time, it's the Internet and not just another company (a la Netscape).

Hide your domains, people! (1)

hal200 (181875) | more than 14 years ago | (#980685)

Don't you see what they're doing?!? They're trying to 'embrace' the entire .net TLD! Soon, simply having one will be grounds for a trademark lawsuit! And what happens when they introduce the commercial service, .com? Anarchy, I tell you! Anarchy! And ol' Billy Gates will be sitting there as the licensing cheques flow in, applauding himself on his 'inovation', and we the people will be subjugated under the oppresive arm of the MS-DOJ....RMS, ESR, Linus, Allan and Steve Jobs will be hunted criminals. Dogs and cats living together! Mere mention of Linux, Apple, Netscape, or AOL will be punishable by death! This is the end of civilization as we know it, people! Put your slavery hats on, we're going for a ride!

Incidentally, for the humor impared, this has merely been a product of a coffee-deprived mind. Any relation to any conspiracy, living or dead is merely conicidental! ;)

There's some sense in this... (3)

teraflop user (58792) | more than 14 years ago | (#980687)

I've had a university account for the last decade, and I use it for exaclty this purpose. Initially it just gave me a constant email address, but I've gradually moved to keeping more and more useful information in a private directory. This includes addresses and phone numbers, any projects I'm working on, data for tax returns and so on.

The benefits are enormous, especially if you are reasonably mobile, and even more so if you live in more than one country.

But I can only do it because I have a university account. I could just about get by using the personal webspace provided on an ISP account, but using encryption, grep, .forward and other tools would be much more difficult.

If Microsoft are looking to offer this service then I think they are making a sensible move. It would make more sense for ISP's to put together an appropriate service, but despite fierce competition non-one seems to be doing so.

Maybe an Apache module would kick some ISPs into action? Maybe Microsoft will catalyse the creation of such a tool.

Re:Just wait (3)

Tony-A (29931) | more than 14 years ago | (#980689)

They don't even need to get cracked. Think dining philosophers and how many ways are there to screw up cooperating asynchronous processes.Think of NT Server with everything loaded on. Now scale it an order of magnitude or so.Think of using MSN to actually do work. This sounds like a bigger pie in the sky than the worst of the claims for Artificial Intelligence.

Hey, I've got a new product too! (2)

SecretAsianMan (45389) | more than 14 years ago | (#980692)

I've just released a new product called (drum roll, please) Windows (TM)! The Windows Technology (TM) allows one to see through walls! No, I'm not kidding. Just install Windows (TM) in your own home, and you will be provided with several ample-sized viewports, each made of a clear solid known as ActiveGlass (TM), allowing you an unobstructed view of the world outside your home. Look for Windows (TM) at your local home improvement center starting in summer 2008.

This is NOT about dumb terminals. (2)

entropy7 (113401) | more than 14 years ago | (#980697)

If you read all the information this is very far from being about dumb terminals.

MS hate dumb terminals - why would they go in that route?

Its a long term strategy about moving the majority of business to business and business to consumer data around as XML.

It beats the crap out of the way current web pages operate. It sucks ... everything currently runs off the server. Now turn it around.. E.g. Imagine if I could get CNN content as XML, then I could view it on any device - not just a web browser.

Then imagine what you could do with it using your local processing power. I can view the content/data the way I want to. I can process it the way I want to. If all information was transmitted this way, it would make for some really interesting ideas and things you could do...

Recycled Feature (1)

bopal (201900) | more than 14 years ago | (#980699)

Another recycled feature by M$.
When you have your home directory on a server
connected to the internet, you can do the same
with your unix box.

Microsoft sux (1)

ThighMaster (192664) | more than 14 years ago | (#980700)

Microsoft will not admit that the center of thier business( OS platform dev for PCs ) is old hat. Java, Jini, Wireless communication devices, all will make Microsoft a minnor player in the information revolution. I cant believe that msoft actually thinks people will believe that they can provide this type of technology well. confusion (1)

doctor_oktagon (157579) | more than 14 years ago | (#980701)

I remember when Demon Internet actually changed their main site to "", and was suitably impressed at the time: it seemed like some order was being restored to the jungle that is DNS.
I realise now this was a complete waste of time, and even when we get .banc .shop .pr0n etc. nothing will change either!
I'm still holding out for .sukkas! which I expect will be transferred to Mr T ;-)

Re:XML is <just>tags</just> (5)

Matts (1628) | more than 14 years ago | (#980702)

People are missing the point about XML.

Yes its just a syntax. But its an accessible syntax.

What does this mean? It means developer freedom. It means that even if MS decides that they're going to customise SOAP and make their own proprietary SOAP based format (which they've almost done already with their enveloping format), there's not a damn thing they can do to stop me using Perl's XML::Parser to create an MSSOAP service or client. And it won't be hard like sniffing network packets to try and reverse engineer samba. I'll just look at the structure and bam! Instant reverse engineering.

Why should this matter? Because there are still a lot of Win boxes out there, and if my Unix skills allow me to interoperate with those boxes then all the better.

And XML is slow. Big deal - this is MS talking about integrating it, not Linus. So we get our nice zippy Linux boxes talking away to slow, bogged down in XML parsing, Windows boxes. Sounds pretty good to me actually!

I think MS are way off the mark here, for what its worth. XML is a great interchange format (slashdot.xml is much better than the old ultramode text format, for example), and its pretty darn useful for doing web and other documentation work (content/design separation and all that), but as a low level network service or IIOP replacement? No thanks, Bill.

Security will be an issue (5)

anticypher (48312) | more than 14 years ago | (#980704)

From the people who brought us Outlook, with its multi-billion dollar damages due to lack of security, now bring us a central place to store everyone's files.

Expect the word "hacker" to take another tarnishing when .net gets cracked.

It doesn't matter how many bits of encryption they use, when the average windoze (l)user's password is their first name. So there will be many cracks of this system, and some of them will be embarassing.

And what happens if some (l)user decides to use this at work, so they can take their work home with them. Now a company's secrets are stored on a M$ server, where just about any one can peruse them. M$ will claim somewhere in the fine print they must review all content on a regular basis to prevent illegal material from being stored, and if they just happen to see a competitor's secrets, we can trust them to not take advantage of it.

Now corporate firewalls will have to block access to this site, as with the other new net services offering the same thing. I doubt .net will ever become very successful unless M$ uses its monopoly power to force everyone to use their servers.

the AC

Salon article on "MS" (2)

upstateguy (90019) | more than 14 years ago | (#980705)

Salon magazine has an article article [] about the announcement and their take on's not even *predicted* by MS to be out by 2002 so don't hold your breath:

"Most Ambitious" and "Bet the Company" (1)

dman123 (115218) | more than 14 years ago | (#980706)

I read an article on my.netscape that included in it the following...

"This is far more ambitious than anything we've done in the past," Gates said at a Microsoft Forum 2000 conference at the company's headquarters in Redmond, Wash. "You could say it's a bet-the-company thing."

Isn't that what Gates said about Windows 2000, and probably every major product announcement in the past 5 years? They sure seem to be betting the company often since the DOJ has gotten serious. Is it a scare tactic to think we'll say, "Oh no. If we don't use this Microsoft will tank and then the whole US (or world) economy will suffer?" Puh-leeze.

dman123 forever!

Re:Piracy (1)

John Napkintosh (140126) | more than 14 years ago | (#980707)

Anyone who uses .net to store pirated software is retarded and deserves whatever punushment is decided upon.

Re:XML == Completely OverHyped (1)

Augusto (12068) | more than 14 years ago | (#980708)

Even if you can read the file, your program must be able to understand what it's reading and act upon it !!!

It doesn't do me any good to read your schema, if I don't know that "FOO" means.

I'm sorry, but it is overhyped. I use it, to configure servlets, but by God, it just made my configuration files about 10x bigger and more difficult to edit !!!

.net is not the NC (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#980709)

Before making uninformed comments people ought to enlighten themselves by watching the .net presentations at kers.asp.

.net is different from network computers. I think it was Bob Muglia who said "this is not dumb clients and smart servers, this is smart clients and smart servers".

For example, in the proposed .net world, you automatically download a copy (or a cached subset, depending upon your device) of your work from the "cloud" and automatically synchronize your changes later. This permits disconnected operation, e.g. working from a disconnected notebook or low-bandwidth wireless handheld. Don't the Oracle NC and Sun SunRay require a permanent high speed server connection to function?

Watch the videos. There is some really good stuff (and some way-out science fiction -- like quality voice recognition without a noise reduction microphone headset).

What this community bashes now, in three years they will eagerly clone -- see OLE2 vs Bonobo.

Re:XML is <just>tags</just> (1)

ballestra (118297) | more than 14 years ago | (#980710)

I think the promise of XML is that there will some day be more intelligent programs that can read the "field descriptions", meta-data, or whatever you want to call it, from the DTD. It's a formal way to structure identifiers for data.

I agree that as it's used today (for data exchange, I'm not talking about XHTML and the more graphical applications) it's no better than an agreed-upon text or binary format. What XML would allow, if people used it properly, is for future programs to make sense of data without having an agreed-upon format. So, even if there are five or ten or a thousand different formats for "I've got something for sale, any takers?" intelligent agents can decipher all of them and give you meaningful search results to questions like, "show me the five (cheapest/closest-match/newest/closest-in-location ) items for sale that meet my criteria"

I'll rejoice when/if this happens, but in the mean time I'll have to search ebay, yahoo auctions, aol auctions, amazon auctions, the local classifies, etc, and manually compare them. (Sigh...)

Not quite right: (2)

jabber (13196) | more than 14 years ago | (#980711)

This is a product that integrates with windows using XML to store all of your information on Microsoft servers, so any computer in the world can be used as "your" computer.

Umm, more like:
This is a product that integrates with windows using XML to store all of your information on Microsoft servers, so any data in the world can be used as THEIR data.

Sheesh! You'd think people would have learned by now. The only thing M$ 'innovates' is new means of leeching money from consumers under the false pretense of convenience.

Re:Just wait (1)

lunatik17 (91135) | more than 14 years ago | (#980712)

Actually, I think MSN is mostly run off of UNIX, Probably *BSD.

Here's my [] DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?

Re:Piracy (2)

Kailden (129168) | more than 14 years ago | (#980713)

"In the long term, all applications software will likely be provided as a service, subscribed to over the Internet. This will allow Microsoft and other software service providers to provide better customer service, transparent installation and backup, and a positive feedback loop into the product-development process. Software delivered as a service would also allow Microsoft and independent developers to respond more swiftly with backups and antivirus protection. "

Yes, I agree, using APPLICATION SERVER technology enables better support. There is nothing new here. And it does cut down on software priracy quite a bit. However, I do question what privacy the end-user has. I mean, if all the office software now runs as an application delivered from a Microsoft portal, can I really trust microsoft enough to use that in my company?

I'm confused, can someone clarify? It's not really clear whether you can buy the server software to serv apps to your company or whether all applications will be delivered only from microsoft servers.

If you could set up some subscription service to update your servers from microsoft servers, then I think it is a good idea. It would be like MSDN without the CDS in the mail.
To me, that would be the only way to let "developers, businesses and consumers to harness technology on their terms."
Besides, having a single digital identiy isn't all its cracked up to me. I think the popularity of chat rooms would attest to that.

Don't want them to have my data. (1)

Raistlin99 (201550) | more than 14 years ago | (#980718)

Personally I don't want microsoft to have my data because accessing it would be a pain in the ass, especially over a regular internet connection. However everyone is posting that Hotmail has security holes and Outlook is messed up. I'll agree on Outlook but Hotmail security can't be blamed on Microsoft completely. Unless NT got good enough to handle the traffic Hotmail is running Apache on a FreeBSD machine.

Re:What will they think of next? (2)

signe (64498) | more than 14 years ago | (#980721)

It is amazing how M$ take some half decent ideas and botch them up. It is almost like running the 100m dash, but stopping at the 80m mark, because you were in front when you got there first.

You forgot the part where they pull out their sniper rifle and take out all the other runners so that they can't reach the finish line either.


Amusing bit (1)

Knile (18599) | more than 14 years ago | (#980722)

From the Q&A with Steve Ballmer: "Microsoft .NET services, products and tools will give businesses the power to engage seamlessly and securely with customers and partners, and provide consumers with an integrated, secure and easy-to-use Internet experience."

Because we know that MS products always work seamlessly. And nothing they create ever has security problems.

Integrated means "You must publish the materials using Office 2000 while on Windows 2000 and..."

The day a MS product is truly "easy-to-use" is the day.. I dunno. Cows fly home out of my, no that's not right.

Re:Not MS Servers (1)

doctor_oktagon (157579) | more than 14 years ago | (#980725)

No, the servers will be 0wn3d by some 13 year-old k1dd1e!

.net uses SOAP - basically RPC/DCOM over HTTP! Yuk (5)

cowbutt (21077) | more than 14 years ago | (#980726)

See what Bruce Schneier says in his latest Crypto-Gram [] .

Hint: he doesn't like it. And neither do I.

More development by the marketing department (1)

ReconRich (64368) | more than 14 years ago | (#980727)

This looks like another Brilliant Idea from M$ Marketing. It has all the telltale signs of the same genius who put VB Script in everything so that virus writers could have a high level language to use. I personally can't wait to live in a world where I just rent my own data from Bill; isn't that some kind of copyright violation or something? IMNSHO, we should just make Gates Dictator For Life, and then we won't have to worry about anything.

-- Rich

Re:XML == Completely OverHyped (2)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 14 years ago | (#980728)

Isn't that what schema are for?

No. Semantics of the data still remain in the code that processes it, everything else is a minor convenicnce -- the more complex the data usage is, the less noticeable is the convenience.

Re:fantastic (2)

lunatik17 (91135) | more than 14 years ago | (#980729)

Not inflammatory, true. How many times has Hotmail's security been compromised? How many times was it because of their stupidity? More times than I can even remember.

Here's my [] DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?

Re:I think its a good idea (1)

Sneakums (2534) | more than 14 years ago | (#980730)

  1. The tablet is nothing to do with .NET per se; it was a bit of flash to cover up the fact very little of what has been announced is actually available right now.
  2. Demos are designed to be cool; it is essential to their nature. Remember the demo of NT 3.5 that was actually pre-recorded and mimed to by the presenter? Demos are not a reflection of reality in many cases.

"Where, where is the town? Now, it's nothing but flowers!"

Re:IBM all over again... (1)

zettabyte (165173) | more than 14 years ago | (#980731)

I guess it gets into security. I do believe in the idea of a central repository for data. Call it the 'core', the 'mainframe', the 'crypt' (i wish), whatever. But, for that idea to work, I see two fundamental needs:

1. A fast, reliable network connection from anywhere (within reason).

B. Extremely tough, reliable, trusted encryption for your data.

We have neither now, nor would most of us trust Microsoft to provide the latter. This is an evolutionary process, and this idea, stemming from Sun/*nix environs, is being tested by MS. MS seems to be attempting to adapt to the Internet era (yow! did i just say that?).

I'll wager they're not successful b/c they don't understand security. Their whole OS philosophy stems from the single, standalone machine days. Anyway, enough of that.

This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

Re:Is their revenue stream so weak (2)

alfredo (18243) | more than 14 years ago | (#980732)

But you must remember that about 38% of that revenue comes from investments. Many of their markets are saturated. Look at what they had to do with Back Office. they had to change the licensing to bring in more money. Before it was seats, not it is seats and shifts.

Look for them to use this to charge by the minute. You won't be paying a flat fee, but you will be charged by the amount of time you use their software. They will probably charge for the amount of disk space used.

I would also be very afraid of intellectual property. What will you have to sign away to use their software?

Corel vDrive? (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 14 years ago | (#980733)

Posted by 11223:

Aybody here heard of Corel's vDrive? A network drive (20mb) that you can access from, well, it's basically the same as what Microsoft just announced. Gotta hand it to Microsoft - stealing ideas from Corel!

ssh vs .net (1)

shomon2 (71232) | more than 14 years ago | (#980734)

This [] bbc article is more biased toward the move being linked to the legal stuff going on with the DOJ.

It seems like a predicatable move: if everything microsoft does is net-centric, then it gets harder to meaningfully split it. And by the time the split gets implemented, the decision will be out of date.

Most of microsoft's whitepaper on this is centered around the "mainframe" a centralised model that http operates on. The internet is more than just the web however, but that's what the FUD is about here. Personalised stuff on other computers is a job for ssh, telnet, rlogin, all that stuff.

If this is the direction MS is going to take, any competitors are going to have to find ways of doing ssh, etc, but in a way that's as user friendly as the dot net method. Somehow, I think this will accelerate the development and evolution of remote login programs..

Hmm, maybe the battle will be fought on the command line after all, but it might go GUI in the process... :)

Not that hard actually (1)

hsk0 (136454) | more than 14 years ago | (#980735)

I just registered a domain name and setup web hosting on Concentric [] . I was surprised at how easy it was, and how functional. This was their low-end CH-1 option, $25/mo. I get 20 mailboxes, 100M disk space and 7GB transfer per month. They have a nice browser-interface for reports and various administrative functions, plus "VDE" which seems to provide most of a Unix shell environment.

[Not 100%, e.g. CHMOD doesn't exist because they use ACLs so some ported scripts could fail but functionally it's about the same in the end, and easier for simpler things.]

Not something I'd recommend for the technical illiterate, but you don't have to be a Unix guru to do quite a lot, and you can always pick up more as you go. Sounds like you're well past the *nix-newbie phase so something like this would be a snap for you. Assuming you didn't have the college account; $25/mo is pretty good, but $0 has its appeal :-)

-- Howard

M$ being the .NET? Now that's scary :-) (2)

crovira (10242) | more than 14 years ago | (#980748)

Given the sieve like consistency of M$ product security and the promiscuity with which the system bares it vulnerable Office innards to every script kiddie who can move a mouse, I suspect (and fervently hope,) that MIS managers of businesses big and small will give this idea the trouncing it deserves.

Think of it. We already don't have to pay for a good OS (Linux,) or can pay (Solaris and the upcoming OS X[BSD] or Amiga [Linux]) instead of shelling out to Redmond.

Now M$ wants to nickle and dime you to death for using the applications you were extorted into buying in the first place. WordPerfect Suite and StarOffice and a whole raft of free software looks better and better.

M$ is Gates is a thief and a bully. (That was the gist the finding of law!)

Microbull (5)

Lion-O (81320) | more than 14 years ago | (#980751)

Just when you wondered 'what could they possible come up with next' you get news like this ;) Anyway, I skimmed the site a bit and came up with quite some "remarkable" sections.

For the Web developer, the tools to build, test and deploy engaging Web sites are hopelessly inadequate. Many focus more on building attractive rather than useful Web sites.

Hmz, I think its kinda harsh and very arrogant to call tools like Dreamweaver "inadequate". It focusses on nothing and leaves the user completly open to do -anything- with the site that he or she wants to do. Either write code from the bottom up and look at the results or drag and drop and watch the code being added. Its your choice. So may I conclude here that this man is saying that total freedom is inadequate? Since Dreamweaver is a well known product I think its quite hard to miss it.

The fundamental idea behind Microsoft .NET is that the focus is shifting from individual Web sites or devices connected to the Internet, to constellations of computers, devices and services that work together to deliver broader, richer solutions.

So basicly Microsoft finally managed to grasp the idea behind Unix? I mean; c'mon.. I've been doing this kind of stuff for quite some years now. Allthough I have to admit; in a total different environment. Instead of clicking I'm entering "cd /net.priv/dave/updates" to access the computer of my friend Dave in the US and check out the latest updates he has. This whole thing is kinda silly if you think of it; in the past Windows would warn us if we accidently left netbeui and such linked to a dial up adapter (people can access netbios shares over the internet in this case) and just when we finally learned not to do this it gets re-instated? ;)

Microsoft .NET will take computing and communications far beyond the one-way Web to a rich, collaborative, interactive environment. Powered by advanced new software, Microsoft .NET will harness a constellation of applications, services and devices to create a personalized digital experience

And offcourse using .XML to do all this marvelous miracles. Well, by looking at the past I can only think of one thing at this time; they are trying to take over and flood the Net with a complete new standard leaving all other net based products (Unix/BSD/Linux/OS/2) out of the game. We want to use Unix based products? Well, would not surprise me if SCO got upgraded to handle this stuff.

And yes; I know that more products can handle XML. But that would only leave the question if the XML being used will be genuine or, just like kerberos in win2k, some MS mutated new flavor. Basicly the whole idea scares me. If they truly want to set up a functional environment like this the least thing they could have done is making Windows more secure and use this engine into this new product. At this moment Microsoft is not capable of securing Windows, take a look at the vsb scripts in the email, and yet they truly believe that they can build one giant "windows .NETwork" over the Internet and still insure the safety of the locally stored documents? Don't make me laugh.

Re:Privacy (1)

Sneakums (2534) | more than 14 years ago | (#980754)

Judging by the lack of replies, I would imagine so.

"Where, where is the town? Now, it's nothing but flowers!"

Re:Fantastic Idea!! (1)

dthable (163749) | more than 14 years ago | (#980756)

Yeah...hey Microsoft! Let me upload all of my Quicken data to you also. While I'm at it, I might as well send you a copy of my tax data and all of the PIN numbers. I'm sure nothing bad can happen then...

Whoohoo. No more email viruses (1)

nachoman (87476) | more than 14 years ago | (#980757)

No more email viruses...
How you ask??

Well... You see, you will no longer need to download them in email form, they just magically appear on your computer.

I can see it now, Cracker makes kickass virus and infects his 'own' computer thus infecting everyone else.

Or what about this...
Format c:
WTF?? I just formatted the internet...

Re:XML == Completely OverHyped (2)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 14 years ago | (#980759)

I worked with XML a while ago, and I'd have to agree: it is completely overhyped. Yes, it is better than a plain-text or (horrors) a digital file. However, it is by no means a method of trading data universally (yet). Before it can do that, people need to decide on schemas which explain how to structure a given form of data. Yeah, like that'll happen any time soon.

More fun - it being extensible, even if (for example) all car companies decide on a given schema, it is still possible for one company to break compatibility by adding new data. Say that the default schema doesn't have a place to list number of cup holders (it's an example, ok? :)), so it adds a field called <CUPHOLDERS> . And they create a special car browser to display the number of cupholders in their cars - well, this won't work with the offical standard, now... all this meta data being put off into nowhere...

Actually, what I was working on was trying to come up with a solution for that, involving RDF files. The theory was people could encode computer-readable examples of what the data meant and then dynamically create pages which would allow you to search through something. Unfortunately, I don't think a solution was ever reached.

Also, from the XML spec, "Terseness is of minimal importance." These XML files can be HUGE. Maybe the data format of the future will be GZipped XML files, as compression works fairly well on text. But until there are universally agreed upon schemas, XML will remain just a method of creating a hierarchical structure to represent data.

Re:How ingenious (2)

Wah (30840) | more than 14 years ago | (#980760)

ASPs are a useful service, they'll be around for a bit, but I seriously doubt that anyone wants to run a word proc that is dependant on a Net connection for functionality. M$ is flying off into their own little world with these NGWS or whatever, more power to 'em (they'll go farther away)

Re:So, MS is getting a trademark on ".net" (3)

generic-man (33649) | more than 14 years ago | (#980761)

Relax. They're just getting a trademark on _software_ bearing the name ".net". For example: the next version of Office will be, Visual Studio will be Visual, and Windows will be

Stupid as this sounds, just wait until competitors start naming all their software products with names ending in .net, just like they switched to appending the year to the name of the software after Windows 95 came out.

Sounds like GRID (2)

Camelot (17116) | more than 14 years ago | (#980762)

.. which is going to be _the_ thing for distibuted computing. See this link [] , for example.

Who needs Microsoft anyway ?

HA! (1)

BigD42 (2965) | more than 14 years ago | (#980763)

<i>The .NET platform breaks new ground in terms of using Internet standards</i>

and God knows they will keep everything standard....right?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?