in

ASP.NET Weblogs

Jason Nadal

Restless C#ding

Codename "MONAD"

In one of the most overlooked cool things at the PDC (in my opinion, anyway), the new Command Shell that will be in Longhorn blew me away when I saw it.  I walked up to the booth asking if unix-like file aliases would be in the new shell, and was given a demo by the team that had my mind racing.

First off, file aliases are possible.  WinFS type queries are possible through new commands called “commandlets” that you can write.  Similar to the unix pipe, you can do this with MSH (Microsoft shell / codename MONAD) as well.  Query results are actually .NET objects, so you can do things like (Don't quote me on the syntax; I'm working from memory here):

$p = get/process FileName
$p[5].ToString()
foreach ($p) { $p.ToString() }

A rather simple example, but consider that you can do this from the command line!

You can do WinFS filtering through the “|”  symbol. MONAD can also export natively to: HTML, XML, Excel, or plain command text in either a Table or List format.

And....the commandlets are developer friendly.  You can make a commandlet by inheriting from the commandlet base class, and adding attribute tags to the public properties to make them parameters to the commandlet.  .NET handles whether the user types “-?” or “/?”, so you don't have to care anymore!

I was all set to post that I had attended DOS's funeral after the keynote on Monday, but I wasn't prepared for what was being created to replace it.

One last thing: anything can be mapped to a drive, and drives don't just have to be letters. (Ok, I lied - that was 2) The example I was shown was that the registry was mapped to a drive, and you could navigate it like any other drive, with the results being returned from the commandlet as .NET objects!

Comments

 

David McGhee said:

What we will need next is intellisense for the command line!
October 29, 2003 5:18 PM
 

Jason Nadal said:

Yes we do!

They're working on the UI last, from what they said in the breakout session on the topic. Intellisense was mentioned, and they do want to do it.
October 30, 2003 1:33 PM
 

Greg said:

Finally a real Next Gen command shell... And one that looks to put the others to shame.

Nice leep frog MS...
October 30, 2003 5:18 PM
 

TrackBack said:

October 30, 2003 6:38 PM
 

Daniel O'Connell said:

If they add intellisense, I wonder if they will add support for console apps via xml or something...That would be nice as well, I played the concept at one point but without more underlying access to the system console it wasn't possible to do in any serious manner.
October 30, 2003 8:45 PM
 

Jason Nadal said:

I did see a GUI editor for MSH scripts; They did say something about possibly adding support in VS for intellisense. I imagine something like the right-click & run query for database projects in VS2003. Only "Run Command" instead.
October 30, 2003 8:55 PM
 

Daniel O'Connell said:

Its possible, I think intellisense should be, optinonally, supported directly into the prompt, unfortunatly as best as I can tell MS has to do it.
October 30, 2003 9:23 PM
 

Jason Nadal said:

I think it would be difficult to do a graphical popup, but perhaps they could use bash-style tab completion. Say for instance, I typed "get/" and hit tab, it should list all of the available nouns that I could put after the get/ verb.
October 30, 2003 9:40 PM
 

Daniel O'Connell said:

I don't think it would be too difficult if they abandon the old console code. A console is, at its roots, a text buffer with speicifc properties, by this point it really needs to be upgraded for various other reasons, I don't think it is out of reach, but more a matter of if they are willing to put the effort in or not.

However, tab completion would be acceptable, sometimes scripting gets to be rather complex and any shortcuts or helpers are valuable. I am really rather curious what all they can manage
October 30, 2003 9:48 PM
 

Jason Nadal said:

Actually, this is all new managed code. That's what allows you to have everything returned as .NET managed classes. If you want the old console around, you can use it. However, if you want the GUI, or your own app with text-completion / intellisense, you can make it in managed code, and really it's just calling MSH behind the scenes. Really cool stuff...
October 30, 2003 9:56 PM
 

Daniel O'Connell said:

So I suspected, but I havn't had a chance to play with it yet(Hopefully soon), its a matter of what kind of extensibility exists. Point is it should be possible, and probably not to difficult in that case, to provide a graphical popup(considering the shell probably exists in a window of its own), however its more a matter of if anyone will do it or not. Possibly within the msh it will be possible where it wasn't possible to write a app that could do that with the old console.
October 30, 2003 10:20 PM
 

Daniel O'Connell said:

Also, when I said console i meant the console itself, not cmd.exe, but the console backend.
October 31, 2003 12:56 AM
 

doug reilly said:

Excellent post! I think you are right about it being the most neglected feature at PDC. Can't wait to play with it!
October 31, 2003 1:07 AM
 

McGroarty said:

Take that, dirty Linux hippies! Take that, Thieving Macintosh Republicans!

Seriously, this is a wonderful thing. The shell has been one of the most lacking areas under Windows. I don't know how many times I've dropped into Cygwin or, before that, wasted time writing little C apps just to do basic bulk renaming operations and the likes.

Any word on whether they'll standardize the environment across all Windows products, or is this likely to be a server product only? Will this be the standard shell replacement, or will we now have command.com, cmd.exe and newthing.exe all living in parallel? I like choices, but Windows apps' ad hoc use of largeley-incompatible command.com and cmd.exe is already a source of pain.
October 31, 2003 9:27 AM
 

Thunderbird said:

<i>Seriously, this is a wonderful thing. The shell has been one of the most lacking areas under Windows. I don't know how many times I've dropped into Cygwin or, before that, wasted time writing little C apps just to do basic bulk renaming operations and the likes. </i>

Seriously... you wrote C apps? Ever heard of, say, Python?

How ever hard MSFT tried, it will never catch up on Unix-alikes. You can throw a million dollars worth of sugar coating on a pile of shit, and it still remains a pile of shit.


October 31, 2003 9:39 AM
 

Jason Nadal said:

Currently, there's both cmd and msh. MSH is currently v. 0.3

It will be supported for Win2003 and XP as well as longhorn. And it actually is msh.exe
October 31, 2003 9:39 AM
 

chromal said:

Ewww. I'll take /bin/bash over that gobbledygook, thank you very much.
October 31, 2003 9:40 AM
 

nobody said:

Microsoft innovates the bash shell. What is that quote about reinventing Unix...
October 31, 2003 9:40 AM
 

McGroarty said:

p.s. -- I can hardly wait to see the name of the GNU version. MONAD... G...?
October 31, 2003 9:43 AM
 

John Carter said:

they more they deny Unix is dead, the more they imitate it - way to go MS.
October 31, 2003 9:45 AM
 

SLK said:

After adding "X-Windows" features to his OS, MS is about to add .... a shell <:o)

More thant 30 years after Unixes !!!

I love innovation@microsoft.... what will be their next thing : write a java like portable platform with a new object language ? ;-)

LOL !
October 31, 2003 9:46 AM
 

Brew said:

Hmmm, why don't they just but rights to /bin/bash. It's an excellent shell script and would fit into the M$ model well. What is new is old. ;p
October 31, 2003 9:49 AM
 

llamas said:

Um, this looks a lot more like a general purpose scripting language (with objects and the whole deal) than it does bash. Stop trolling.
October 31, 2003 9:50 AM
 

nobody said:

Exactly McGroarty; what uses what shell and with what capability, and how do you keep it all straight, and how long will it be before everything you use is shell-aware? Great for the computing newbies of 2009, but by then we'll all be doing somthing else; No thanks, I'll pass.
October 31, 2003 9:51 AM
 

AMABITxS said:

Microsoft trying to copy *nix. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I guess those ms developers finally figured out *nix is better!
October 31, 2003 9:51 AM
 

PWRXS said:

Note that this page hit Slashdot @ 9:33 AM.

I now introduce to you a barrage of MS-bashing..

(Quite predictable, really)

October 31, 2003 9:52 AM
 

Andy said:

the current cmd.exe does commandline completion - not true intellisense, in that I hope you'll be able to 'tab' through all commandlet parameters, with their syntax handily displayed.

You want TweakUI to turn on cmd line complation or HLCU/software/MS/command processor/completion char - set to 9, restart cmd.exe

Someone said 'unix is dead then they imitate it'.. well, MS has has simple completion and pipes, and command-line programs like unix for years, now they're doing something far, far more powerful.
October 31, 2003 9:53 AM
 

McTroll said:

It is now official - Netcraft has confirmed: IIS is dying

Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered Microsoft community when
recently IDC confirmed that IIS accounts for less than a fraction of 1
percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft
survey which plainly states that IIS has lost more market share, this
news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. IIS is collapsing
in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last
[samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict IIS'
future. The hand writing is on the wall: IIS faces a bleak future. In
fact there won't be any future at all for IIS because IIS is dying.
Things are looking very bad for IIS. As many of us are already aware,
IIS continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of
blood. ASP developers are the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of
its core developers.
October 31, 2003 9:54 AM
 

Chris said:

You can run, but you can't avoid Slashdotting ;)
October 31, 2003 9:55 AM
 

Joe7Pak said:

I don't see any M$ bashing.
It's nice to see M$ get away from the "you will do it only one way" mentality.
October 31, 2003 9:56 AM
 

CyberWolf said:

Ok... I had done every thing they say in that report for about a year...
And that in windows! Using Bash and python ported to windows...

Whats the news here?!
October 31, 2003 9:56 AM
 

Bill Pechter said:

Man... does this look like DEC DCL on a VAX?


$p = get/process FileName
$p[5].ToString()
foreach ($p) { $p.ToString() }
October 31, 2003 9:56 AM
 

Anonymous Peon said:

Not bad. (As in: Get rid of the worst of the monopolist baggage and popup annoyances in the default installs - MSN Messenger, etc. - and I will manage to enjoy this when I'm forced to. You know how it is. ;))

"One last thing: anything can be mapped to a drive, and drives don't just have to be letters." -- So was this a conscious effort to copy the Amiga, or did it just work out that way?
October 31, 2003 9:59 AM
 

Desmond said:

This is THE definitive tool that was long-awaited by virus creators :-(

If we trust the casual MS security level, this new CLI will allow modication of public classes and lead to hell.

One of the most efficient shelter against non-binary viruses was the poor shell of MS OSs... since they needed high level apps (MW, EXL) or interpreter (VB) to release their lethal load!

Not any more :-(

"It is not a bug, it's a feature." (tm) M$

Alas !
October 31, 2003 10:00 AM
 

McGroarty said:

What's all this about Microsoft bashing, PWRXS? This isn't Microsoft bash. This is a new shell. Please read before posting, tiny-minded confused-person!
October 31, 2003 10:02 AM
 

John said:

"How ever hard MSFT tried, it will never catch up on Unix-alikes. You can throw a million dollars worth of sugar coating on a pile of shit, and it still remains a pile of shit."

Hmm, okay, let's say they sugar coat every layer of the pile of shit, then won't the pile of shit now be a pile of sugar? Unix is elegant in a lot of ways, but microsoft can replicate or even improve most of these features. If you don't believe that then maybe you need to read abit more about OS design, and realize that it isn't that crazy. There are good things about windows nt+, but judging by your post you either A. don't know anything about them or B. don't want to acknowledge them. Do I think that microsoft will make their stuff as slick and nice as UNIX? Maybe. This longhorn release of windows sounds a lot like they are making some pretty big moves. We'll just have to wait and see.
October 31, 2003 10:03 AM
 

Stephen Booth said:

Looks like Korn shell with a few tweaks. Oh well, if you're going to nick stuff you might as well nick it from the best.
October 31, 2003 10:03 AM
 

Jerry Haltom said:

Here's what I'm curious about. Fellow .NET knowledgable people: They are taking code, compiling it to IL, and then maybe JITting it, as you type it. Does this not involve the overhead of a VM? Of course it does. Are they going to leave a VM laying around in memory all the time, or will you have to deal with startup times on your console. A VM is about 10MB. What about hte overhead of compilation/JIT.

One of the great things about the Unix shell is it's extremely small footprint. It takes just under a mb for me to launch bash. Can they get an entire VM in just under a MB?

And yes, lets not have that "but hardware is cheep" argument. My SQL servers are OUT of memory, they have 2GBs. This is rightfully so, as they cache EVERYTHING they can. Unused ram is wasted ram. But it means I have to sacrifice 10MB of that for a console.

I don't see that as a fair trade YET, at least not when they're is a competitor that doesn't require it.

October 31, 2003 10:04 AM
 

tony kwong said:

Beanshell anyone? http://www.beanshell.org/
But then it is Java code that runs on many platforms NOW. That obviously makes it inferior to vaporware.
October 31, 2003 10:06 AM
 

Linus said:

<i>It's nice to see M$ get away from the "you will do it only one way" mentality.</i>

Well, as long as you do it <i>their way</i>, sure. This is still re-inventing the wheel. Albiet it, that wheel now runs on all monster trucks. But that begs the question: Do I really need a monster truck to drive to the office?

Think I'll take the subway instead. It's efficient, proven, pollutes less, serves the greater public at large, and just makes sense.
October 31, 2003 10:06 AM
 

csoto said:

This is great. Long a reason why I prefer Unixy environments. The talk about a GUI is sort of a step backwards. We want something very useful from a remote, textual environment (a la ssh and bash on Linux).

October 31, 2003 10:06 AM
 

McGroarty said:

Jerry Haltom --

I'd like to suggest you enable virtual memory on that SQL server. Then it won't MATTER if the shell is 10mb since when it's not being used, it's quite nearly 0mb.

My consulting fee is in the mail, love.
October 31, 2003 10:08 AM
 

Bill Sterling said:

Wow! This looks like a really great innovation from Microsoft! I'll let my developers know to keep an eye on this one.
October 31, 2003 10:09 AM
 

some guy said:

"Those who do not understand *nix will reinvent it."
October 31, 2003 10:09 AM
 

2 Bits said:

I have to agree that it looks like the virus creators are going to have a field day. I predict that Longhorn is going to get kicked right in the Monads.

"Those that don't learn UNIX are doomed to reinvent it.......poorly."
October 31, 2003 10:09 AM
 

Toshiaki said:

10MB of less than half a percent of that 2GB of memory. I doubt it's making an impact. Waah~~
October 31, 2003 10:09 AM
 

Alex Holt said:

While all developers will love this new Command Line interface, Sys Admin now have a new security worry....
October 31, 2003 10:09 AM
 

h8 said:

I hate m$ as much as the next guy and love writing scripts in bash etc (at home).
But there are always going to be M$ systems I have to WORK on and if they have MONAD I would be a hell of a lot happier.
October 31, 2003 10:10 AM
 

McGuy said:

Dozen messages back some guy trolling passed an article full of lies. Here's a current back down on server usage:

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html

People have to realize that straight up lying only makes people tune them out. If you seriously want people to listen then state facts. And another problem is you get your follow supports to read your crap then talk about it like fact - then made to look like idiots... oh, yeah, so maybe continue that. I like that.
October 31, 2003 10:11 AM
 

angoranimi said:

finally there will be something decent to spawn.
October 31, 2003 10:12 AM
 

MrSelfDestruct said:

cygwin works fine. kthxbye
October 31, 2003 10:12 AM
 

Matthew said:

" Take that, dirty Linux hippies! Take that, Thieving Macintosh Republicans! "

- {snicker}

MS is not so smart. There are already very user friendly distros of Linux that offer all of these same tools for free. Microsoft is throwing millions at re-creating (cylce testing) all these tools - which will cause them to look towards ROI (more sneaky and market manipulation tactics required).

Basically they are plotting a migration path for their customers to Linux and I can't figure out why. You see, the average manager/CIO will spend thousands of dollars implementing Longhorn just to discover that the same tools are available in a free tool. Game. Set. Match.

-Matt
October 31, 2003 10:15 AM
 

Casey Marshall said:

If you need a decent CLI interface to Windows, there's already a better alternative: <a href="http://cygwin.com">Cygwin</a>!

MS should focus on what they do best, like the UI or the .NET framework. Their CLI historically has been a hack (it looks like DOS, but it's not!). Why should they reinvent the wheel when there's bash? Too much pride? Would having a POSIX shell make Windows too similar to OSX?
:)

What would be awesome is if Microsoft actually partered with RedHat to add WinFS and Indigo support to Cygwin. Of course, that would mean MS working with GPL code! What am I saying?!

Casey
October 31, 2003 10:16 AM
 

TomH said:

I've been doing the euqivalent on Windows and Solaris with TkCon/tclsh for years.
October 31, 2003 10:17 AM
 

Batgar said:

"Good artists copy, great artists steal"
-- Steve Jobs paraphrasing Andy Warhol

MSFT is not blind. They see OS X 10.2 (and OS X 10.3), Mandrake 9.x, RedHat 9.x, and they know where the bar is set.

MSFT has something that even Apple doesn't have: $40 billion cash.

MSFT can afford to create ANYTHING. The Longhorn command line is only the beginning. What little we have seen and heard of Longhorn is only the beginning (ex. WinFS). Remember: MSFT has been planning the major features in Longhorn since 1993 (ex. Cairo). MSFT is going to release Longhorn in direct response to the threats posed by Apple and the Open Source community. MSFT doesn't respond to percieved threats with a "fly swatter attack" they pull out the 80 megaton nuke and say "Come Get Some!".

Never underestimate Microsoft. The .NET technology suite should remind you that, when threatened, MSFT brings out the heavy stuff against that threat.
October 31, 2003 10:19 AM
 

me said:

The thing that I really find funny, is the fact that MS tends to leave shit out of their OS, that MANY other OS's have in by default. Then, they throw some sort of half assed, half working, buggy piece of crap at their users, and then they think it is somthing totally brand new and cutting edge. Hell, Windows went SO LONG w/o being able to ADMINISTRATE the damn server from the command line OR having commands like grep, that when I was at the release party for 2k3, they said "..and now with win2k3 you can use tools like grep!". Half the people cheered, half wondered what the hell grep was. I broke out laughing so loud and I fell on the floor laughing clutching my stomach because it hurt so much to laugh so hard. Try switching off of MS products. It works. You just have to ween yourself away from it. I had a Win box set up specifically for work, and it only took me getting a power book to finally get rid of it. MS is a fucking joke, and now people are just starting to realize.
October 31, 2003 10:25 AM
 

A non-zealot said:

I'm a Slashdot regular, but damn, there are a lot of trolls here. For shame, zealots, for shame.

Anyway, this is cool stuff. Yes it's "been done before" (epistemologically speaking you could say that about a lot of software), but what is important is 1) what MS had before, well, sucked 2) this is not your father's bash, this is integrated into the system platform/library itself. While bash/ksh are really nice and provide some high level programming features, that is nowhere near complete platform integration. Beanshell would be closer, but tell me, who is running a Java OS? Nobody. The integration is just not there (note: I am an enterprise Java programmer, and I use Beanshell frequently). Show me your bash/ksh doing native system calls and GUI hooks (I strongly suspect this sort of thing is/will be possible with MSH, given that it is apparently all running on .NET/CLR). To quote Dana Carvey doing Bush "na' genna' happen". The next most similar thing would be, oh, a python shell or something.

Damn, at least be happy MS is doing something (anything) right. For all the crap flung at .NET/CLR, it is a gigantic step forward, and I sincerely wonder how Linux and Open Source on the desktop are going to tackle the mounting integration in the Windows platform (even if you accept that anything Microsoft is evil, the question still remains, what do you have to show to the user to meet the (potentially perceived) value). Mono is a good start, and KDE boasts tight integration within its own scope, but for Linux to be a usable desktop it needs more...perhaps FreeDesktop.org, etc., can forge a unified direction here. Part of the problem is the "old school" being resistant to anything new - that will strangle Linux on the desktop.
October 31, 2003 10:26 AM
 

MicrosoftSkull said:

Microsoft sucks and has to steal ideas and work on other peoples implementations to try to stay in the lead.
October 31, 2003 10:27 AM
 

malfunct said:

I think the changes to the windows file system goes well beyond leaving drive letters behind. If I understand the presentations correctly they are leaving the idea of file location behind. The file can reside anywhere and that doesn't matter, the key is what the file is. You search through stacks of file based on what they are as described by the metadata. Moreover it looks like all of the metadata is indexed so that these searches don't have to scan the entire hard drive. I think it will be cool to open up explorer, ask for all documents relating to development project 1, and having them all found in no time at all regardless of where they lie, whether its random locations in my filesystem, or in some other filesystem or network that you asked windows to keep an index on. My only hope is that it really works, maybe we need to wake for longhorn 3.0 before we really get excited.
October 31, 2003 10:28 AM
 

Nix said:

While all developers will love this new Command Line interface, Sys Admin now have a new security worry....

Zackly. Virus heaven...help me Obi Wan etc
October 31, 2003 10:34 AM
 

iobuffa said:

"I walked up to the booth asking if unix-like file aliases" ... "..Similar to the unix pipe, you can do this with MSH.."

Yup, UNIX is the real thing. Microsoft knows this. I don't see this as any better or worse than bash/ksh.. probably because I haven't used it yet. This is a good thing for Microsoft developers... or are they converted UNIX developers? :) Goes back to the old argument that UNIX developers are better than Windows developers. heh heh. Don't flame me, was just a joke.
October 31, 2003 10:39 AM
 

Cthulhu said:

The problem with too much integration, of course, is that MS might be accused of not respecting the term of the various Anti-trust settlements it's bound to...
October 31, 2003 10:41 AM
 

MxCl said:

I'm a so called "linux-hippy", this sounds a lot more innovative than anything I'm used to. If it lives up to the hype this guy has created I will be most impressed.

Also this is great because *nix shells have stagnated in recent years without anyone seemingly encouraging new features or functionality. It won't take long for this kind of competition to push the shells I use into new leagues of functionality.
October 31, 2003 10:41 AM
 

Stephen Booth said:

FAO "A non-Zealot"

Not sure about other shells or other distros but KSH on both Redhat and SuSE has been able to do both for at least 4 years now.
October 31, 2003 10:47 AM
 

eluusive said:

Finally, Microsoft does what apple has been doing with OSAscript for years. WOW! You have to admit that bash and csh are both lacking in quite a few areas when it comes to writing robust scripts.
October 31, 2003 10:48 AM
 

Smitty said:

Now all they need is to open source the OS, provide me with the ability to fully customize every aspect of my system, basic network tools, some sort of meaningful support, stability, BASH, some sense of personal security....hmm...
October 31, 2003 10:51 AM
 

Future Shock said:

As someone who has been working in PCs since CP/M-80 professionally, let me say that I am impressed. Not as impressed as I would have been if they had done this 10 years ago, like they should have, but still, very impressed. There have always been the add-on shells that have improved the old CLI, but being an add-on were of limited ability. Imagine being able to assign the registry as a drive and treat it as an I/O device! Export to/from XML, et al! Face it, MS has really done something developer/power user friendly. As for this being a rip-off off other systems, I find that funny coming from a bunch of Linux lovers WHO'S WHOLE OS WAS A CHEAP DIY COPY of real Unix...talk about derivative works with little imagination...
October 31, 2003 10:54 AM
 

A non-zealot said:

RE: Stephen Booth

"Not sure about other shells or other distros but KSH on both Redhat and SuSE has been able to do both for at least 4 years now."

I'd appreciate any links or references, that is very interesting if true.
October 31, 2003 10:54 AM
 

m0psy said:

"Hmm, okay, let's say they sugar coat every layer of the pile of shit, then won't the pile of shit now be a pile of sugar?"

If I take a bucket of sewage and add a thimbleful of wine, you know what I get? A bucketful of sewage. Conversely, if I take a bucket of wine and add a thimbleful of sewage, you know what I get? A bucketful of sewage.

Cheers.
October 31, 2003 11:00 AM
 

.NETless said:

.NET? WTF is that? ;-)
Seriously, is anyone actually using .NET for anything?
October 31, 2003 11:04 AM
 

kolla said:

GNU version?

GOMAD
October 31, 2003 11:05 AM
 

Mercer said:

While I applaud Microsoft at its choice to put some lovin' into the command shell, I feel that it's only fair to mention that <A HREF="http://www.gregorpurdy.com/gregor/psh/">The Perl Shell</A> has existed for quite a while.Of course, MONAD implies tighter integration with the underlying system, and this can only be a good thing.

I've always made a point to note that while Windows improves, it's console has remained what it was since the 80s. I'm glad to see that they have finally decided to address the console.

October 31, 2003 11:06 AM
 

Another man said:

Map the registry to a drive? Is that an invitation to hackers to screw up your machine? :? I guess if they can scew you now anyways, it really doesn't matter.
October 31, 2003 11:08 AM
 

gnonad: linux replacement for msh said:

Who wants to (or rather doesn't :| ) start the gnome replacement for MSH. Its gotta be called GNONAD. It makes sense really...
October 31, 2003 11:09 AM
 

Happy said:

I'm a UNIX user, and I'll admit it: bash really sucks. Everyone keeps arguing about how great it is and how it never needs to change, and the end result is something that's horrifically outdated. Before blindly flaming, re-read the original article. This is a much more sophisticated shell than bash on all counts.
October 31, 2003 11:10 AM
 

Gilligan said:

Oh wow, now we can have a useful shell in Windows! Oh wait, Cygwin gives me bash, zsh, etc already. And UNIX has for years. I can't believe MS has been sitting there with cmd.exe for so long when every other OS had usable shells for years. Hell, even sh and csh are more powerful than cmd.exe, and those are older than I am.

But seriously it'll be nice to have something better native to the system. I'd be nice if MONAD would be a bit more like the UNIX shells instead of a different beast altogether though. Difference for the sake of incompatibility is stupid - and common at Micorsoft. At least there will be a few neat built in to the shell with .NET and MS file formats (whether they should be built in or external program is another matter I guess, but oh well).
October 31, 2003 11:20 AM
 

Joeseph Troll said:

who need gonads? Oh, monad, my bad...
October 31, 2003 11:24 AM
 

Dom said:

as a linux user i see this as a good thing

as said before, giving windows devvers a shell like this means at least more semi-portable code. this puts them back in a unixy way of thinking, which will make apps easier to port over to *NIX (in theory of course im sure MS will think of some way to lock it in)

what bothers the majority of linux people is not that this kind of thing has been around and has been incredibly useful for 30 years, nor the fact MS came up with something like it and thinks they're the all seeing all dancing crap of the world for doing it, but its on one hand they say '*NIX is obsolete' and they turn around and release something based entirely upon it.
October 31, 2003 11:26 AM
 

steve said:

they are trolls, they care not about facts.
October 31, 2003 11:29 AM
 

Someone said:

Yes, it's Just Another Scripting Language(TM), but it would have been nice if Microsoft just used the REXX stuff years ago. After all, it was in OS/2 and Windows NT was originally called OS/2 NT. They already support *.cmd files in NT based Windows...

It's "not another shell" to me. Although the shells for UNIX is not perfect, it is well known and powerful. In my opinion, they should just base their new shell on something which is in wide use, such as BASH and modify it for use in Windows.

It would be nice to have something similar to pgbash (bash for PostgreSQL).
October 31, 2003 11:32 AM
 

Bob Smith said:

Imagine: mount registry as an I/O device, import pre-hacked, exported to XML registry, instant hacked computer!! Sweet! Thanks Microsoft!
October 31, 2003 11:35 AM
 

bert said:

Heh heh heh.
I cannot wait to see all the point and click brigade when faced with a CLI. Shame they're not getting rid of the "my first computer" GUI while they're at it.
October 31, 2003 11:36 AM
 

A non-zealot said:

"Yes, it's Just Another Scripting Language(TM)"

No, it's not Just Another Scripting Language. The point is that it runs on .NET/CLR which gives it immediate and native access to the <i>entire system API</i>. That is not something your typical standalone created-from-scratch scripting language has. The trolls in this thread seem to be along the lines of "MS HAS CREATED A CAR! H4R H4R STUPAD MS, COPYING OUR WHEELBARROW THAT HAS WORKED FOR 30 YEARS!"
October 31, 2003 11:39 AM
 

majortom1981 said:

just a piece of info .Microsoft used to develop things for unix . lol i know its funny. i used to work for a company that bought software that microsoft was developing for unix.You never now what is in unix now that microsoft put there lol. look into a company called proginet lol.
October 31, 2003 11:43 AM
 

georgebush said:

To Panama77:
well yes, he _did_ get shot at the end of the episode but you cannot be sure he was shot _dead_, and i'm pretty sure he wasn't cause it would make the script pretty difficult to continue

To B4rt51mp5on:
maybe you's like to know that the guy who originally invented the series has been fired, that's why they feed us such crappy episodes lately!

Wait... what's this? Another Microsoft forum?

WELL PHUCK MICROSOFT, FREE KEVIN, LINUX RULEZ, we cant get infected by vbs viruses ahahahahah
More slashdot fun for everyone :D
October 31, 2003 11:43 AM
 

A non-zealot said:

I don't know why I am wasting my time defending MS here, but these are really awful trolls:

"Imagine: mount registry as an I/O device, import pre-hacked, exported to XML registry, instant hacked computer!! Sweet! Thanks Microsoft!"

Imagine: tar -xf myhackedetc.tar /etc

Sweet! Thanks insecure OS!

Uh, wait, you can't do that because of security restrictions. Although MS is typically awful on security, I'd like to at least give them the benefit of the doubt on something as naive as this.

A more functional system universally implies more security exposure, regardless. And just because the Inix security model works, doesn't mean it's anything necessarily to proud about, as it is rather primitive, and I'm sure all the various ACL systems being proposed will introduce similar issues into *nix.
October 31, 2003 11:45 AM
 

ProfessionalCookies said:

Ok ok...Say you're in this MSH and you're copying a 17 meg file...
October 31, 2003 11:47 AM
 

majortom1981 said:

I find it really wierd microsoft had a lot of experience with unix. Even had password security software for it. But they sold it off. Now why didnt windows have more unix like security and stuf in it already?I was amazed when i worked for proginet that they bought unix software from microsoft.
October 31, 2003 11:48 AM
 

b1llg@te5 said:

the GNU version will be codenamed "GONAD"
October 31, 2003 11:48 AM
 

Jules said:

> Seriously, is anyone actually using .NET for anything?

Erm, yes. Not as much as it will be in the future (a lot of people are holding back because of compatibility issues with older OSs, but those will fade away to background problems in time, just like I don't really worry about the fact that I write applications that won't run on Win95 any more), but still quite a few.

.NET is actually pretty useful: a managed code environment, giving you similar advantages to Java (and, yes, a lot of code will run cross platform), plus the ability to compile directly to native code when performance is critical.

In the next year or so, my guess is it will almost entirely replace VB for rapid development of Windows applications.

> Not sure about other shells or other distros but KSH on both Redhat and SuSE has been able to do both for at least 4 years now

I've looked through the KSH manual, and can't see anything relevant. OK, there's a plugin API which would allow you to write plugins to perform this kind of work... is what you're referring to a plugin of some kind?
October 31, 2003 11:49 AM
 

Unix Guy said:

Windows sucks.

QED.
October 31, 2003 11:50 AM
 

Gabe said:

For the guy that mentioned that it looks a lot like VAX, well remember Microsoft hired a bunch of people from DEC a while back, actually a lot of the WinNT components come from the VMS/VAX era.

anyway, i dont see why people get exited about marketing hype such as .NET and all this other crap.
October 31, 2003 11:56 AM
 

Zapperlink said:

Microsoft would clone Unix with its own minor tweaks if it could get away with it legally. They are more concerned about keeping with the "oooh it looks perdy and plays my games too" scenario. Don't get me wrong. This concept is great for designing ma' and pa' programs but when it comes down to it.. programmers need to care less about how perdy it looks and if the consumer is going to find the product with a thousand bells and whistles.. and just stick to strong, stable and efficent programming...
October 31, 2003 12:07 PM
 

Everyone said:

Macroshit are totally retarded anyway.
October 31, 2003 12:13 PM
 

Xeph said:

Haha. This is just another ploy to imitate a *nix-like environment. Micro$oft know's they're losing the market, so they're going with the flow: If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

~ Xeph.
PS. Nice Blog. Got to it via http://slashdot.org
October 31, 2003 12:17 PM
 

Dak said:

Welcome /. Readers. Hi CowbowNeal :)
October 31, 2003 12:17 PM
 

huh boy said:

You Windows guys seem to be rather easily impressed.
October 31, 2003 12:21 PM
 

Ethan said:

The codename "MONAD" is retarded. What the hell does a <a href="http://www.abercrombiegroup.co.uk/~noel/research/monads.html">Monad</a> have to do w/ a command line shell?
October 31, 2003 12:33 PM
 

3seas said:

Ok, what to many fail to understand is the sum total and what it means, that MS is working towards.

The Common Language Infrastructure (CLI #2) is a sum of most all programming concepts and datatypes then integrated into a non-conflicting package so that most any language can be translated into the Common Intermediate Language (CIL) and run on a run time engine. This unifies all programming languages. But also another part of .NET is that of Inter-Process Communications (IPC) and there is also direction towards standardized GUI functionality. Then Add in this Commandline Interface (CLI #1)...

(CLI #1) + (GUI) + (IPC) = the three primary UIs which is like paint having three primary colors, for which you can create any color in the spectrum. Take away one and you greatly limit what you can do... ok..
using these three primary UIs in processing the (CLI #2) it becomes possible and probable that an autocoding environment can and will be developed.
additionally by adding a voice to text interface to the CLI #1 you can achieve the ability of the end user/consumer to ask for a program to be created and the system will do it.

by patenting it..... all your base will be owned by MS... do a google search in "autocoding" and be sure to set aside any arrogance and ignorance you may and probably do have.
October 31, 2003 12:34 PM
 

Lobo said:

I am a troll, I don't care about facts!

Seriously, do you think we are stupid just because we run another OS than what conformist yuppies want us to do? Reality is plastic per se, dude...

Regarding M$' CLI: If this is anything like "Unix Services for Windows", I'll laugh even harder.

And to the guys and dolls who believe bash et al is a simple and ancient scripting medium: $man bash

Care to explain what "Monad" can do on top of what is already available in scripting? Manipulate the registry? BWAAHAAAAHAAAA!!!!

*nix all the way, baby!
October 31, 2003 12:41 PM
 

James said:

Two things:

First of all, the GNU version will undoubtedly be named "MOGNAD."

Second, a shell does not a *nix make. If they actually employed some *cough* memory management in an operating system for once, that'd be one thing. I think this will be a good thing for Windows power users who don't get freaked out by white text on a black background, but a shell doesn't make a system good.

</$.02>
October 31, 2003 1:27 PM
 

linux said:

linux
October 31, 2003 1:32 PM