<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Will Mac OS X 10.7 Lion use ZFS?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/</link>
	<description>News, tips, software, reviews, and more for Mac OS X, iPhone, iPad</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 19:52:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: someguy</title>
		<link>http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/#comment-178051</link>
		<dc:creator>someguy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 20:16:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://osxdaily.com/?p=9126#comment-178051</guid>
		<description>Interesting that you say that.  All you are doing is clicking a button.  You are still trusting the software and hardware to do what you requested when you did so.

How is manually kicking off the section of code that is supposed to commit information to the storage medium different from it happening automatically?  Either way, you are trusting the computer to do it for you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting that you say that.  All you are doing is clicking a button.  You are still trusting the software and hardware to do what you requested when you did so.</p>
<p>How is manually kicking off the section of code that is supposed to commit information to the storage medium different from it happening automatically?  Either way, you are trusting the computer to do it for you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/#comment-175236</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2011 22:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://osxdaily.com/?p=9126#comment-175236</guid>
		<description>This is amazing...  How do people come up with these ideas?  Auto save and copy-on-write, and in fact ZFS as a whole, have absolutely nothing to do with each other, and neither makes the other any easier or more difficult.  It&#039;s like saying, &quot;Hey because you like eggs, you&#039;ll love football!&quot;  ...Really? Why&#039;s that?  

Don&#039;t get me wrong, ZFS is the best thing to happen to storage since the hard drive, but that doesn&#039;t mean Apple it going to adopt it.  The fact people don&#039;t even understand what ZFS is or what it&#039;s good for, as is evident by the statements made in this article alone, provide Apple little reason to trying to cross the now plentiful red tape to get it into their OS.  Since Oracle has taken over the ship there is a very different attitude toward sharing and open source in general, one very similar to Apple&#039;s honestly, but the problem is this attitude does not lend itself well to Apple adopting ZFS.  

More over I don&#039;t know that Apple is going to prioritize creating a next generation FS.  Apple goes after bullet points that the public is going to respond to with their wallets, not because they are ones that are necessarily needed.  The fact is regardless of the necessity Mac OS X, as well as most OSs aside from Solaris, desperate has for a new, more robust, FS to handle the ever growing data piles we are all amassing and insure their robustness, this isn&#039;t a subject the public understands, and thus isn&#039;t something Apple can market.  Apple goes after the &quot;oh geewiz&quot; factor, and file systems simply don&#039;t have that, not yet at least, and the may never manage to get it. After all Apple&#039;s FS tech, aside from some patch work, dates back 30 years. That&#039;s a REALLY long time in the computer world!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is amazing&#8230;  How do people come up with these ideas?  Auto save and copy-on-write, and in fact ZFS as a whole, have absolutely nothing to do with each other, and neither makes the other any easier or more difficult.  It&#8217;s like saying, &#8220;Hey because you like eggs, you&#8217;ll love football!&#8221;  &#8230;Really? Why&#8217;s that?  </p>
<p>Don&#8217;t get me wrong, ZFS is the best thing to happen to storage since the hard drive, but that doesn&#8217;t mean Apple it going to adopt it.  The fact people don&#8217;t even understand what ZFS is or what it&#8217;s good for, as is evident by the statements made in this article alone, provide Apple little reason to trying to cross the now plentiful red tape to get it into their OS.  Since Oracle has taken over the ship there is a very different attitude toward sharing and open source in general, one very similar to Apple&#8217;s honestly, but the problem is this attitude does not lend itself well to Apple adopting ZFS.  </p>
<p>More over I don&#8217;t know that Apple is going to prioritize creating a next generation FS.  Apple goes after bullet points that the public is going to respond to with their wallets, not because they are ones that are necessarily needed.  The fact is regardless of the necessity Mac OS X, as well as most OSs aside from Solaris, desperate has for a new, more robust, FS to handle the ever growing data piles we are all amassing and insure their robustness, this isn&#8217;t a subject the public understands, and thus isn&#8217;t something Apple can market.  Apple goes after the &#8220;oh geewiz&#8221; factor, and file systems simply don&#8217;t have that, not yet at least, and the may never manage to get it. After all Apple&#8217;s FS tech, aside from some patch work, dates back 30 years. That&#8217;s a REALLY long time in the computer world!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack fungi</title>
		<link>http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/#comment-153949</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack fungi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2010 18:29:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://osxdaily.com/?p=9126#comment-153949</guid>
		<description>I completely agree. Thinking like that is what defines apple.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I completely agree. Thinking like that is what defines apple.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thursday Morning News &#124; MacTalk Australia</title>
		<link>http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/#comment-127866</link>
		<dc:creator>Thursday Morning News &#124; MacTalk Australia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2010 21:46:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://osxdaily.com/?p=9126#comment-127866</guid>
		<description>[...] version of OS X around the corner, another round of ZFS rumours. Nothing too new here folks, but as always there are certain signs one can correlate to an all-new [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] version of OS X around the corner, another round of ZFS rumours. Nothing too new here folks, but as always there are certain signs one can correlate to an all-new [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: icebreaker</title>
		<link>http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/#comment-127763</link>
		<dc:creator>icebreaker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:50:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://osxdaily.com/?p=9126#comment-127763</guid>
		<description>Computers can fail so I never trust automated file savings. Just like making a back-up. I like to do it manually so I know it actually gets done.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Computers can fail so I never trust automated file savings. Just like making a back-up. I like to do it manually so I know it actually gets done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Me</title>
		<link>http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/#comment-127582</link>
		<dc:creator>Me</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:26:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://osxdaily.com/?p=9126#comment-127582</guid>
		<description>Anyone care to explain what having applications auto save state (persisting data structure in RAM to disk) has to do with snapshotting on a file system level? If the application doesn&#039;t commit changes made to a document to disk first, there is nothing to snapshot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone care to explain what having applications auto save state (persisting data structure in RAM to disk) has to do with snapshotting on a file system level? If the application doesn&#8217;t commit changes made to a document to disk first, there is nothing to snapshot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: xsec007</title>
		<link>http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/#comment-127567</link>
		<dc:creator>xsec007</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:45:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://osxdaily.com/?p=9126#comment-127567</guid>
		<description>I believe if Apple makes the change to ZFS it will be beneficial for them because ZFS also does volume managment and they can offload that to ZFS rather than having their own.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe if Apple makes the change to ZFS it will be beneficial for them because ZFS also does volume managment and they can offload that to ZFS rather than having their own.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Septus</title>
		<link>http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/#comment-127558</link>
		<dc:creator>Septus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:58:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://osxdaily.com/?p=9126#comment-127558</guid>
		<description>I think everybody is seeing it wrong. Apple is always looking for ways to change the game, bringing fresh ideas to how we interact with our daily digital life. The ipod, the iphone and surely the ipad changed a lot.

The Mac App Store is not about trying to control the apps on osx. The app store for IOS devices is a simply way to find apps &quot;for your type of device&quot;. some developers make the apps build just for the ipad, some that are compatible with multiple devices.
The signs are there that there will be an app store for apple tv. different device, different type of user input. But some apps that already exist for the iphone/ipad can probably be easily adjusted to work correctly on an apple tv.

I believe Apple will be introducing new hardware in the next couple of years that will change how we work and interact with a computer. The Mac App store will be a launchpad for these new types of computers easily taking away the confusing of which app works on which device.

And if this new hardware will launch as well as the ipad did it will probably take a &quot;lion&quot; share of the market :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think everybody is seeing it wrong. Apple is always looking for ways to change the game, bringing fresh ideas to how we interact with our daily digital life. The ipod, the iphone and surely the ipad changed a lot.</p>
<p>The Mac App Store is not about trying to control the apps on osx. The app store for IOS devices is a simply way to find apps &#8220;for your type of device&#8221;. some developers make the apps build just for the ipad, some that are compatible with multiple devices.<br />
The signs are there that there will be an app store for apple tv. different device, different type of user input. But some apps that already exist for the iphone/ipad can probably be easily adjusted to work correctly on an apple tv.</p>
<p>I believe Apple will be introducing new hardware in the next couple of years that will change how we work and interact with a computer. The Mac App store will be a launchpad for these new types of computers easily taking away the confusing of which app works on which device.</p>
<p>And if this new hardware will launch as well as the ipad did it will probably take a &#8220;lion&#8221; share of the market <img src='http://cdn.osxdaily.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian</title>
		<link>http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/26/will-mac-os-x-10-7-lion-use-zfs/#comment-127553</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:33:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://osxdaily.com/?p=9126#comment-127553</guid>
		<description>I say not a chance, Apple likes doing their own thing not borrowing from others</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I say not a chance, Apple likes doing their own thing not borrowing from others</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced (User agent is rejected)
Database Caching 1/3 queries in 0.002 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 281/282 objects using disk: basic
Content Delivery Network via cdn.osxdaily.com

Served from: osxdaily.com @ 2013-05-23 04:48:35 -->