To: Snowshoe who wrote (3486 ) 7/29/1998 10:20:00 PM From: Allen Benn Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 10309
Allen, he got it from the PCWEEK article you just cited. Here is the precise quote: While Windows NT 5.0 is not expected to fully support I2O, Unisys officials said components in their NICs enable a server to support I2O without the support of the operating system. Sorry, I keyed off of Joe's concern that Windows 5.0 would not support I2O, which brought the Everen statement to mind. It didn't connect with me that the fully would be ignored. It appears that Windows 4.0 with a service patch does now, and Windows 5.0 will support I2O, even in Beta. However, that is not to say Microsoft's level of support will include as broad a collection of device types or other advances as do other vendors, such as Novell, and hence the qualifier fully . (Remember that I2O began life as version 1.0, advanced recently to version 1.5, and version 2.0 is under construction.) I2O is a dynamic standard that constantly will be upgraded to support additional types of devices as well as enhanced features, like security. Microsoft probably will not always be the first to update their OSM's to accommodate latest additions, at least in the beginning. Perhaps this is what confused Everen, causing them to think Windows 5.0 might not support I2O. Actually, the dynamic, growing nature of I2O is one of the appealing aspects of the standard. Because most of the I2O functionality is implemented in software controlled by IxWorks, obsolesence is forestalled by merely installing IxWorks upgrade patches, enhanced ISM's and/or configuration files. As all devices in the network gravitate to I2O, periodic upgrades will be easy to manage because of the uniformity of the I/O operating environment. This means a company can implement state-of-the-art but fluid protocols using I2O without fear of committing prematurely to a version which may become obsolete, because compatibility changes can be pushed through networked I2O devices with ease and confidence. Most of the dynamics probably will not involve the OSM, but some will, such as support for different classes of devices. I suspect that Unisys has developed the capability of wrapping a LAN type of device in something that looks to the OSM as something else, like a block storage device (version 1.0). Once the Microsoft OSM supports LAN devices, the wrapper can be discarded. Allen