Talk:List of Microsoft codenames
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Does Wikipedia really need this? Lists of Microsoft codenames have been done before, and most of the time, in a more complete way. So, is this worthy of an encyclopedia? --82.135.12.44 04:59, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
For that matter, why does Microsoft get its own page when there's a larger, more inclusive list located at list of computer technology code names? I see that this list includes background for some of the names, but is it really necessary? --Paulymer5 03:15, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] ATTENTION NITPICKERS
Do not second-guess the intentions of this article. You write the article, not the other way around. Please do NOT, ever again:
- mutilate the historical Windows NT timeline by removing the Windows 2000 entry, despite its lack of a codename. It must be included because it has no codename, an anomaly that warrants an explaination. The table will look incomplete otherwise and prompt people to readd the entry. I can't believe I have to explain this
- remove major entries because they lack a codename. I will just, e.g., move "COM+ Runtime" into the codename column, because it only appeared in internal source code, the product was never announced as such. Why waste my time?
- forget that this is the only Wikipedia article where internal names for Microsoft products are discussed. If you remove related information from this page, it is lost forever
The article title is not policy. It used to be just "Microsoft codenames". Some nitpicker decided this was a list, and moved it. It won't take a lot to put together some accompanying blurbs to the tables, what will you do then? remove them because this is just a "list"? (… and yet, in my heart I know someone will) Please let it rest. I cannot believe anyone could be deleting legitimate entries from this page
--KJK::Hyperion 02:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Error?
I believe this sentence is in error:
The Windows line has been since dropped altogether, and Windows NT operating systems are now simply referred to as "Windows".
Perhaps it should read "The Windows NT line..."?
- Nope. The "Windows line" refered to is that of the MS-DOS based Windows 3.x, 95, etc. Although, from a consumer point of view, Windows 2000 and XP represent a "coming together" of this and Windows NT, they are in a technical sense almost exclusively a continuation of the NT line. In other words, the Windows brand continued, but it's the NT technology that now carries it. - IMSoP 23:13, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Windows Vista status
Windows Vista is listed as a final name. Shouldn't we mark it differently until we know that it is the final name? 4.255.40.245 00:11, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- Microsoft has announced it as the final name. They've invested millions (billions?) of dollars in branding to this point, and are not going to throw that all away. Alereon 00:39, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Update
Codenames from this http://www.bitzenbytes.com/Content-Arcanum-18-1-61.html source could be added.
If not add Mira, the now shelved Windows Smart Display codename.
- Hmmm... I really like the source in the table... might add this to the tables sometime. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:51, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Damn, Microsoft codenames are cool
Microsoft needs to just start releasing their products under their codenames...scrolling through the list, most of these are pretty badass. Xizer 01:41, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, especially considering their official names are so lame. And they're not even consistent, I mean: 98, ME, 2000, XP, 2003 - what a mess. I personally think they should've better leave out those two-letter-codes, it would be better if they used years all the time. And the meanings of those... ME - "Millenium Edition"... yuck! :) And XP... as I understand, it was supposed to stand for "experience", which is yuck too, but I'd also say it's actually incorrect. Yes it might be eXPerience, but i think the original meaning of XP as 'experience' was from the gaming term which is actually short from 'eXperience Points' :) --Arny 07:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cairo
To be honest, I'm still not sure whether Cairo is NT4.0, NT5.0, both or neither... --Arny 15:11, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- NT4, but Cairo was actually abandonded as a codename. Jim Allchin refers to it now as a group of "concepts". Every new Windows release since then has contained something he originally hoped for in Cairo. SchmuckyTheCat 16:53, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- wasn't Cairo used for XP? because it draws sounds from the two greek letters chi and roe, with the symbols X and P! if is this is not true i will be very upset, as that has just got to be the best codename ever! mastodon 16:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- XP stole ideas from the Cairo "vision" but XP was never referred to as Cairo. SchmuckyTheCat 18:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- I still think I remember that upcoming NT 5.0 was advertised as "Cairo" in magazines. It was finally released as Windows 2000. Arny 07:36, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- Windows 2000 never had a codename. This is mentioned in the Windows 2000 article. Aluvus 12:31, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- I still think I remember that upcoming NT 5.0 was advertised as "Cairo" in magazines. It was finally released as Windows 2000. Arny 07:36, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- XP stole ideas from the Cairo "vision" but XP was never referred to as Cairo. SchmuckyTheCat 18:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- wasn't Cairo used for XP? because it draws sounds from the two greek letters chi and roe, with the symbols X and P! if is this is not true i will be very upset, as that has just got to be the best codename ever! mastodon 16:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Singularity
where is Singularity? Muzzle 08:20, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
- Just another MSR project - not a product. SchmuckyTheCat 18:45, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Venus
I was viewing the source for the documentation of BeginPaint and the line VENUS_START caught my eye. I did some searching and came up with this page which mentions other codenames as well. Hackwrench 17:34, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] LINQ
Should LINQ even make the list? It seems more like a specific feature than an overall product... atanamir 05:26, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- If you can find a source that describes "LINQ" as a codename, then by all means be bold and add it in! I think it might be an acronym, though, for "Language Integrated Query" or somesuch. Warrens 05:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Microsoft Build Numbers
How about putting the build numbers in as well? Make it a bit more complete... I will do it if no one else does. --203.118.135.21 11:45, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Windows NT 3.1
I don't think it's correct to say that 'OS/2 3.0' was a codename for Windows NT 3.1. The project was originally called 'NT OS/2', and was intended to ultimately be released as 'OS/2 3.0', but I don't think either of these ('NT OS/2' or 'OS/2 3.0') really qualifies as a codename. Maybe it could be said that 'NT' was the codename, but then that was actually used in the final product name, so perhaps there simply wasn't one.
This article is also the first place I've ever read the claim that the choice of '3.1' for the first version of NT had anything to do with having a higher version number than OS/2. Does anyone know what the source for this claim is? It seems to me that synchronising the version number with the DOS-based Windows product line is a sufficient explanation for the choice.
[edit] Office
What about Office codenames? Ones for Flight Simulator and other games? — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 05:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Windows 2 and 3 codenames
The list currently says Windows 2000 was the first major version without a codename since Windows 2.0. Is there any evidence that Windows 2.0 didn't have codename, Windows 3.0 did and Windows 2000 didn't?
[edit] re-used codenames
i noticed: Janus Windows 2000 64-bit Same codename as Windows 3.1 so is Hydra used in both "SQL Server 6.5" and "Terminal Services, Terminal Server"
when i added this extra info it was removed minutes after ... so what to do with re-used codenames?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.220.114.102 (talk) 13:39, August 21, 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Notes" column
Please don't put information about the product itself in the "notes" column, unless it's unreleased (e.g. cancelled or planned)
--62.101.126.225 (talk) 02:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Why? This makes no sense, and removing the information, [1] makes the table plain, outright wrong. The notes column contains general information relevant to the codename. Look at that diff. Look at the first entry, "Trainyard". Without information in the notes column, the table now says that Trainyard was the codename for XPSP1. That is absolutely not the case and this can be (and is) explained in the Notes section.
- There certainly is information in the Notes that is irrelevant, or better explained by the linked product articles (like how to get W-FLP through SA) but the Notes section is entirely general, and germane, to miscellaneous information and no argument except "don't" says otherwise.
- Hence, I'm reverting the last change to the article. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)