__/ [ Mark Kent ] on Wednesday 27 September 2006 08:37 \__
> begin oe_protect.scr
> thad01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <thad01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> espoused:
>> [H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is one of the best articles I've read in a while, and one for the
>>> bookmarks. My brief reading convinced me this is one of the most
>>> poignant descriptions of XP so far. I'd rank it up there with "Why I
>>> hate Microsoft".
>>
>>
>> I've just got one criticism of the article; it implies that WinXP
>> is part of the Win9X line, when really it is part of the WinNT line.
>> As best I can tell, it is mainly Windows2000 with a new coat of
>> paint.
>>
>
> I think that you'd be right, too. Win2k is Win NT5, WinXP is NT5.1,
> ie., a smallish update to Win 2000, or a larger than usual Service Pack,
> depending on how you look at it.
>
> I think that Vista was slated to be NT6, /but/ as pretty much everything
> new has been removed, and all you're really getting is a new GUI look &
> feel, then it's most likely better seen as NT5.2
>
> I expect that MS will name it something like NT7 or NT7000 or something,
> in order to hide the lack of progress they've made in the last 6 years.
They play those cards with the XBox 360 and the renaming of Longhorn. It had
accumulated bad reputation that got indexed, so articles and negative
publicity could be evaded through identity change. This are just two
examples among several more.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Y |-(1^2)|^(1/2)+1 K
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 182 total, 1 running, 178 sleeping, 0 stopped, 3 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
