Talk:Winsock
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'll fix the winsock page this weekend, it is out of date and definately needs updating on Win 2000 and Win XP implemenations of the protocol. --Jared Buck 22:33, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Not very informative...
My apollogies in advantance to the person who wrote this article, but this article doesn't quite explain the real funtion of Winsock.
[edit] Version 1.0 seem missing from the list
Maybe it's just nitpicking, but if there's a list of versions, it has to be complete... --tyomitch 01:21, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
- This isn't meant to be an exhaustive list, there were quite a few versions of Winsock from quite a few different vendors. This is just a list of which versions were bundled with Windows. AlistairMcMillan 01:53, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- Version 1.0 was bundled with Windows 3.x, as one can infer from the words 'has been supported ... since Windows 3.0', but shouldn't that be stated explicitly? --tyomitch 02:58, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Bzzt wrong. Winsock for Windows 3.x was a separate download. See Windows 3.x AlistairMcMillan 03:26, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
-
Just found out: Winsock couldn't be supported by Windows 3.0 in any case, because Windows 3.0 was released two years before the initial Winsock spec. --tyomitch 21:22, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
Another mismatch: David Treadwell of Microsoft joined the team for version 1.1 of the specification, published in January 1993. - David Treadwell is listed in the Credits section of Winsock v1.0 spec, dated June, 1992; am I to delete his mention? --tyomitch 22:34, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Windows Sockets has been supported by every version of Microsoft's operating system since Windows 3.1, yet the first version of Windows to be shipped with Winsock was Windows 95.
Regarding this snippet from the article: I think it's poorly worded. "yet the first..." makes it sound like Microsoft sat on its hands with respect to incorporating winsock into Windows, when indeed it was incorporated into the first major version of Windows to be released after Winsock 1.0
[edit] As one of the authors....
Microsoft's involvement during the early stages of the WinSock work was ambiguous, to say the least. The individual participants from Microsoft were active and engaged, but Microsoft's corporate commitment was very unclear. It's important to remember that at the time of Winsock 1.0, Microsoft had a lousy reputation in the TCP/IP area: their first home-grown stack was sadly deficient in features and performance.
While I'm commenting, I'm confused as to why Tyomitch hacked the author affiliations to remove all links except for Microsoft. Either all author affiliations should be included, or none. I'm going to restore them.
If you want to know what really happened in WinSock, feel free to ask me.
Geoff Arnold, co-author of WinSock 1.0 and 1.1.
[edit] An IP stack's IP
- There was some discussion about how best to address the copyright, intellectual property, and potential anti-trust issues, and consideration was given to working through the IETF or establishing a non-profit foundation. In the end, it was decided that the specification would simply be copyrighted by the four individual authors. (It seems unlikely that corporate legal departments would sanction such an approach these days.)
This comment hides a great big deal. It's an encyclopedia's duty to inform, so no need to be stingy with explanation here. Why would this approach not be sanctioned "these days"? This comment should either go or it should be expanded. It's obvious intellectual property issues in software are not now what they were 15 years ago, but that's hardly a full explanation. 82.92.119.11 21:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
This is a reasonable comment. I'll amplify the comment.
Geoff Arnold
