Goodbye to Windows Live

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 09:42:10 -0400, "Dave "Crash" Dummy"

Yes. I just picked it up where the commercial name diverged from the
actual version. I personally switched to NT with 3.51.

Likewise - and never looked back. Sure, the 9x series had a shiny new
UI but NT was rock solid stable (in comparison, it had its moments of
course) and handled networking, memory and multitasking much better
than it did.

 

[Dave \Crash\ Dummy]

That of course is the classic Microsoft example of terrible naming.
It has confused more people than anything else.

Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly on sales staff created bad names. A
classic is "Javascript," which has absolutely nothing to do with "Java."

 

[Dave \Crash\ Dummy]

There was some even earlier 32bit Windows available to developers but
I can't remember what it was called. It would run on various platforms
including Apple. The Intel variant became NT.

As a mainframe developer I slept through most of the Microsoft
presentation - little computers would never catch on

That's how I felt about monoplanes.

 

[Nil]

There was some even earlier 32bit Windows available to developers
but I can't remember what it was called. It would run on various
platforms including Apple. The Intel variant became NT.

OS2? My company used to run a bunch of Microsoft LAN Manager servers,
which ran atop of OS2, which at that time was some kind of joint
venture with IBM, and their answer to Netware. This was before the NT
series.

 

[Nil]

And also note that Microsoft denies that NT stands for anything.

I'm pretty sure they didn't deny it back then. We got reams of
promotional and technical literature about it back when it was
introduced, and I'm almost certain that the phrase was liberally
bandied about.

 

[Tim Slattery]

And also note that Microsoft denies that NT stands for anything.

Quite a few companies do that trick. The SAS institute's name, for
instance, originally stood for "Statistical Analysis System". Now they
say it means nothing. And AARP was "American Association of Retired
People". Now that also means nothing.

Commonplace, but dumb.

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:06:30 -0500, Antares 531

[snip]

Also, Windows Explorer vs. Internet Explorer.

That one makes sense to me.

It may make sense, but it's still bad naming, since it too has
confused many people.

I think that it because they do not know what Windows is and what
the Internet is. They should find out.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

 

[Steve Hayes]

OS2? My company used to run a bunch of Microsoft LAN Manager servers,
which ran atop of OS2, which at that time was some kind of joint
venture with IBM, and their answer to Netware. This was before the NT
series.

OS/2 was IBM's OS, and at one time they were cooperating with Microsoft, but
that fell through when Microsoft started developing Windows 95 (which
nevertheless incorporated some features from OS/2.

Then IBM decided to get out of the desktop software business -- a pity,
because in its time OS/2 ran DOS better than DOS and Windows better than
Windows, and you could have three DOS Windows and a couple of Windows windows
open at the same time, running different programs, and even be running a
couple of native OS/2 Windows as well (depending on the size of the programs
and the memory available).

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

Quite a few companies do that trick. The SAS institute's name, for
instance, originally stood for "Statistical Analysis System". Now they
say it means nothing. And AARP was "American Association of Retired
People". Now that also means nothing.

Commonplace, but dumb.

Tactic Studies Rules (TSR) becames TSR, Inc. with the "TSR"
meaning nothing.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

 

[Ken Blake]

On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:06:30 -0500, Antares 531

[snip]

Also, Windows Explorer vs. Internet Explorer.

That one makes sense to me.

It may make sense, but it's still bad naming, since it too has
confused many people.

I think that it because they do not know what Windows is and what
the Internet is. They should find out.

There's a lot of truth in what you say, but even though half the two
names are very different, the other half is identical. And since
people often use shortcut names, many people call them both Explorer.

It's not very different from Outlook and Outlook Express. Many people
shorten Outlook Express and call it Outlook, thereby creating
confusion.

Or to talk about a different area where shortening names gets people
the wrong result, Americans often shorten "caffelatte" to "latte." Do
you know what "latte" means? Go to a bar in Italy and order "latte"
expecting "caffelatte" and you might be very surprised to get a glass
of milk.

 

[Ken Blake]

I'm pretty sure they didn't deny it back then. We got reams of
promotional and technical literature about it back when it was
introduced, and I'm almost certain that the phrase was liberally
bandied about.

Yes, I think you're right. The denial came later.

 

[Ken Blake]

Quite a few companies do that trick. The SAS institute's name, for
instance, originally stood for "Statistical Analysis System". Now they
say it means nothing. And AARP was "American Association of Retired
People". Now that also means nothing.

Commonplace, but dumb.

If I remember correctly, "IBM" is another example. It used to stand
for "International Business Machines," but no longer does.

 

[Nil]

OS/2 was IBM's OS, and at one time they were cooperating with
Microsoft, but that fell through when Microsoft started developing
Windows 95 (which nevertheless incorporated some features from
OS/2.

Although I can't recall the exact story, yours isn't completely
accurate. Before IBM marketed OS/2 as a desktop OS, I believe it was a
joint project by they and Microsoft, and they both sold versions of the
product under their label. They may both have also sold their own
product called LAN Manager. I was familiar with the Microsoft version
of OS2 (version 1.3 IIRC), and LANManager.

IBM's OS2 desktop OS, Warp, and all that stuff came later, after the
divorce from Microsoft. My company then migrated to MS's NT server
products.

I'm sure I've left out most of the story and mangled the rest, but
that's about how I remember it.

I bought a couple of versions of IBM OS/2 when it was being marketed as
a Windows killer. Windows really was kind of lame in those days, but I
never did get OS/2 working to my satisfaction. I found my old OS/2
software boxes in the attic about a year ago. Tossed 'em in the trash.

 

[Robin Bignall]

Although I can't recall the exact story, yours isn't completely
accurate. Before IBM marketed OS/2 as a desktop OS, I believe it was a
joint project by they and Microsoft, and they both sold versions of the
product under their label.

My memory (often unreliable) tells me that part of the break-up was because
Microsoft wrote its version of OS/2 for the PC/AT chipset, the 80286, which was
a dead end. IBM had to completely rewrite it for the 80386, and simply could
not do it in time for the Windows 95 launch.

 

[SC Tom]

OS/2 was IBM's OS, and at one time they were cooperating with Microsoft, but
that fell through when Microsoft started developing Windows 95 (which
nevertheless incorporated some features from OS/2.

Then IBM decided to get out of the desktop software business -- a pity,
because in its time OS/2 ran DOS better than DOS and Windows better than
Windows, and you could have three DOS Windows and a couple of Windows windows
open at the same time, running different programs, and even be running a
couple of native OS/2 Windows as well (depending on the size of the programs
and the memory available).

The major problem that I saw with OS/2 was the lack of drivers for even the most common pieces of non-IBM hardware. I
had a CD drive that I couldn't get to work, even after contacting IBM ("It's not our problem; it's the manufacturer's.")
and Panasonic (IIRC) ("IBM told us they were going to support it, so we haven't done anything about it."). Then came
OS/2 for Win3.1, and that problem was (somewhat) fixed since now all the drivers that worked in Windows also worked in
OS/2. Other than the driver issue, I thought it was pretty decent. Seems to me it ran pretty solid, and relatively fast
for anything at that time.

It's been too many decades and operating systems since for me to remember anything more specific than that about it.
Seems I jumped on the Win95 bandwagon soon after that and never looked back to IBM Even sold my Big Blue thermal
printer that I bought so I could print from OS/2 ($$$ down the drain there :-( )

 

[VanguardLH]

VanguardLH wrote:


<snipped>

Footnote on Windows version naming. Although they went back to simple
numbers with Windows 7, it is actually NT 6.1. Other NT versions and
commercial names

Windows 2000 = NT 5.0
Windows XP = NT 5.1
Windows Vista = NT 6.0
Windows 7 = NT 6.1
Windows 8 = NT ?? (Should be negative number)

See what I mean? Confusion abounds as to what means what and what is
what.

 

[Jake]

I'm pretty sure they didn't deny it back then. We got reams of
promotional and technical literature about it back when it was
introduced, and I'm almost certain that the phrase was liberally
bandied about.

They said it stood for New Technology.

 

[John Williamson]

They said it stood for New Technology.

Ahbut, that was before it wasn't NEW! any longer.

And ATX stood for Advanced Technology eXtended.

 

[Char Jackson]

They said it stood for New Technology.

I've never seen any documentation from Microsoft where they referred
to NT as New Technology. Has anyone else?

 

[Wolf K]

I've never seen any documentation from Microsoft where they referred
to NT as New Technology. Has anyone else?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT

Wolf K.