Answer my own question - I get it now.
The player is incidental, and since its all done at the OS level its
just a windows shell API.
Libraries for content files are mandatory, managed by the OS, accessed
(=consumed) by players or search programs.
* *SHAddFolderPathToLibrary* - Adds a folder to a library
* *SHCreateLibrary* - Creates an IShellLibrary object
* *SHLoadLibraryFromItem* - Creates and loads an IShellLibrary
object from a specified library definition file
* *SHLoadLibraryFromKnownFolder* - Creates and loads an
IShellLibrary object for a specified KNOWNFOLDERID
* *SHLoadLibraryFromParsingName* - Creates and loads an
IShellLibrary object for a specified path
* *SHRemoveFolderPathFromLibrary* - Removes a folder from a library
* *SHResolveFolderPathInLibrary* - Attempts to resolve the target
location of a library folder that has been moved or renamed
* *SHSaveLibraryInFolderPath* - Saves an IShellLibrary object to disk
Its actually a kind of shake-down I think, MS have needed a logical
data management layer and a more universal set of APIs for a long time,
ie an abstraction layer. They can then integrate the windows shell with
.net, integrate local users better with sharepoint and other servers etc.
that can also use the same logical libraries model.
So the OS starts to look more like a DBMS really.
It all kinds of reminds me of the Pick OS that already achieved a
database approach many years ago, and that was relational too, not just
trees.
Keith
Keith Allpress wrote:
> I did try unsuccessfully to disable Google Desktop indexing. And yeah,
> there is an option to switch on/off shares but its very existence is a
> worry, so yeah "Off with its head".
> As far as Microsoft goes, the next stage is obviously to define sharing
> (device and network access) at the logical (metadata) level that
> requires a "player" (presumably Microsoft's) to support it.
> At the very least a media "player" becomes an essential component in
> this worldview, but does anyone know how open is this model?
>
> Stig Manning wrote:
>
>> Hi Keith,
>>
>> Don't want to highjack your thread, but we were having some problems
>> with a windows share server running slowly at work, including high
>> network load. We discovered that a computer on the network was running
>> Google desktop and whenever the screen-saver was running it was indexing
>> ALL the network shares it knew about - and generating serious network
>> traffic and CPU load on both the server and client.
>>
>> Needless to say we don't allow Google desktop on any machines here anymore!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Stig
>>
>> Keith Allpress wrote, on 9/06/2009 9:31 AM:
>>
>>
>>> I was getting massive CPU load during idle time and straight away was
>>> able to identify that Google desktop had a rundll that vainly was trying
>>> to index Microsofts entangled Vista rubbish folders.
>>> Uninstalling that proved it
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.55/2160 - Release Date: 06/07/09
>>> 05:53:00
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.55/2160 - Release Date: 06/07/09
> 05:53:00
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
NZ PHP Users Group: http://groups.google.com/group/nzphpug
To post, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe, send email to
[email protected]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
