Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

No ZFS Support in Leopard?

SeaFox said:
Aw, no comment on the pun stuffing. :p

No, but seriously, though. ZFS and resolution independence in the UI were two things I was looking for. Because they're two features that really kick sand in Microsoft's face. Aero is underwhelming and WinFS was vaporware, even with all the delays.

The top secret Finder has been:
  • a redesigned sidebar
  • gratuitous use of animation
  • built-in remote access and
  • a "glass" menubar.
thus far.

Photocopiers, indeed.
Click to expand...

Performance is also much improved.

Dont forget the likes of Quick Look work with the Finder, and with Spotlight supports boolean searches. You are really selling it short.
 
Lessien said:
According to Steve, Leopard has 300+ new features of which he showed 10 in yesterday's keynote. I think that Apple is playing it very close to the vest so that they'll have plenty to tout at release time in October.
Click to expand...

They really can't leave something as big as ZFS out till the release. A new filesystem would break lots of (older) applications. It needs rigorous testing by the developer community or it will be a disaster at release time.

I'd say most of these 300 features are tiny little things like an extra button here or there.
 
I don't really care what FS Time Machine uses, as long as it does the job. I'm buying Leopard for everyone at my org just because of Time Machine.
 
ZFS in MacFUSE?

Now that Apple doesn't seem to be willing to implement ZFS, would it perhaps be possible through MacFUSE? There seem to be some implementations in progress on the original (non-mac) FUSE, so it should be possible, although it will of course lack Apple's user-friendly configuration and management tools such as Disk Manager.
 
GekkePrutser said:
A new filesystem would break lots of (older) applications.
Click to expand...

No, it wouldn't. The point of a file system is to abstract the low level stuff so that the applications don't have to worry about it. So as long as Apple's ZFS implementation provides the same high level functions as HFS+ (Resource Forks, Attributes, Case Insensitivity etc.) there is no reason why it should break any applications. Take a look at the Linux world: there are a zillion different file systems, some of them networked, distributed etc., but no application programmer cares about what kind of file system his application is run on.
 
Lessien said:
I think that Apple is playing it very close to the vest so that they'll have plenty to tout at release time in October.
Click to expand...

Nope. That was their chance. The devs have got their hands on Leopard now. It's done. Finished. OSX.5 is complete. Nothing more to see.

People need to accept that that was it. Nothing wrong with it- it looks good. Just stop hoping it's something it isn't.

MA.
 
synth3tik said:
h, well then ta hell with this. I'm going out right now and buying a Vista PC


for realz. yes, ZFS would have been great, but I can not remember the last time Apple said "Oh, people really want this, it's fully functional, so ummm, lets leave it out"
Click to expand...

ok so um. let me see if i understood you correctly.

you're going to go buy a windows vista PC, based on the 10 features Steve Jobs demoed, from the Beta build, at a Developers conference?
 
GekkePrutser said:
Now that Apple doesn't seem to be willing to implement ZFS, would it perhaps be possible through MacFUSE? There seem to be some implementations in progress on the original (non-mac) FUSE, so it should be possible, although it will of course lack Apple's user-friendly configuration and management tools such as Disk Manager.
Click to expand...

If ZFS was to run in FUSE, it will be running in user space (as opposed to Kernel space) and there will be definitely a performance hit.
 
gjwfoasfsaevg said:
No, it wouldn't. The point of a file system is to abstract the low level stuff so that the applications don't have to worry about it. So as long as Apple's ZFS implementation provides the same high level functions as HFS+ (Resource Forks, Attributes, Case Insensitivity etc.) there is no reason why it should break any applications. Take a look at the Linux world: there are a zillion different file systems, some of them networked, distributed etc., but no application programmer cares about what kind of file system his application is run on.
Click to expand...

I know, however I read that ZFS would incorporate some changes that are not compatible with HFS+, like mandatory case-sensitivity. That could break some applications, the same way that UFS currently does. It could also break software doing direct disk access such as backup software. It would in any case require some good testing. Only showing it to the world on release day would in my opinion be a cause for major problems.
 
Can't believe no one has mentioned this yet....

I wouldn't exactly be surprised if Steve got so pissed at the Sun CEO for spilling the beans that he axed that whole plan.

Kind of like with the "Asteroid" device we were supposed to see a few years back.
 
kenzbud said:
I sure hope they at least make it an option in some way. Is ZFS compatible with vista? I am about to buy an external Lacie hard drive & need to format it to work both with OS X & XP/Vista. Didn't know once 10.5 is released if I formated the external drive in ZFS if a Windows computer would be able to read/write to it.
Click to expand...
Afaik no ZFS in Vista, you can get it as a userland filesystem for Linux and in FreeBSD 7 thought.

Better use NTFS I guess, or HFS+ but then you would have to buy a driver.
 
nagromme said:
I still bet it happens someday, maybe October, maybe later.

I wasn't likely to reformat my whole drive just to go ZFS anyway, but it would be cool to have the option. ZFS sounds like an outstanding FS. Maybe one day it will be the default on new Macs.
Click to expand...
I would definitly reinstall just to get ZFS, if nothing else for the benefit of actually knowing when some of my files have become corrupt for some reason.
 
please DO NOT confuse NFS (network file system) with NTFS. They are NOT the same thing.

NTFS is a proprietary format that is not published as open by MS. All operating sytems, that aren't windows have "hacked" NTFS support. That means all linux, unix, os x. It's not something that microsoft helps with. Even google, who has endless money doesn't have a great version of NTFS available, only the FUSE project which they use on there own servers, but realize that it's extremely slow compared to real NTFS, and buggy.

Apple was kind enough to put in read support on NTFS, if you need to exchange files with this format it's best to use network sharing or another method.

boobooq88 said:
from here

I guess it is still NFS:(




Another find I found interesting... Leopard not BSD based? same link as above
Click to expand...
 
EricNau said:
A certain somebody at Sun isn't going to be happy...
Click to expand...
Sun probably couldn't care less, ZFS is a major advertisment for them. ZFS is a reason to buy Sun servers. If Apple doesn't support ZFS it's their loss.

It's not open sourced because Sun wants everyone to steal their work, it's open sourced because it sounds better and more safe and future proof.
 
mrfrosty said:
For me ZFS was going to be the thing that properly made leopard "next generation" without it the improvements whilst taking us forward are not "all that !".
Click to expand...
Hey, atleast you can put a funny looking "folder" in your dock, you get a grass background and you get thumbnails in finder without replacing that **** with path finder! ;/
 
SeaFox said:
From what I've watched of the releases of Java, they're pretty leisurely about tech incubations. Like Sun thinks they have billions of years to burn developing stuff, and people will just sit and wait. But instead they get hot under the collar and move on to the next cool tech.
Click to expand...
Atleast they doesn't release **** which isn't ready, stable and will be compatible with all future versions.
 
GregA said:
Yeah, ZFS doesn't support boot volumes. Perhaps the Sun guy just got a bit too wound up?
Click to expand...
Schwartz didn't said it would be the default bootable filesystems. Other choosed to interpret it that way.
GregA said:
It would make sense to put ZFS on a user partition though, allowing us to backup our files and our applications online - a real separation between the user and the OS. Doing this would also allow us to move our files and our applications to any Mac, though that Mac might have different hardware and slight differences in OS setup (version 10.5.2 vs 10.5.3?).

It would be the start to a shift towards our data & apps.
Click to expand...
You can't share HFS+ partitions between OS revisions? Only huge advantage for ZFS would be in their serversystems.
 
boobooq88 said:
Creating a fully 64 bit OS is not a minimal tweak fyi ;)
Click to expand...
Linux, the BSDs, Windows of course, Solaris, ... or all available in 64 bit Intel versions. Anyway who cares? Most peoples systems work better / more conveniently with the 32-bit version of the OS anyway. I don't have over 4GB ram.
 
Lessien said:
According to Steve, Leopard has 300+ new features of which he showed 10 in yesterday's keynote. I think that Apple is playing it very close to the vest so that they'll have plenty to tout at release time in October.
Click to expand...
Old versions have also had like 300+ features, but they count a new wallpaper, screen saver, dashboard widget and whatever as a new feature... Apple features aren't like those you are used to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back