On 11 June 2011 22:32, Grant Sewell <dcg...@thymox.co.uk> wrote: > On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 22:13:03 +0100 > Alan Bell wrote: > >> On 11/06/11 21:06, (:techitone:) wrote: >> > >> > Windows is a familiar word. It's releases have progressive names, >> > Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7. They sound cool. >> not to me, they sound confused. 1, 2, 3, 3.1, 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME, >> XP, Vista, 7. That is a complete and utter mess, far from progressive >> it totally fails to form any kind of coherent progression. > > The Windows naming convention is totally baffling. There have been 2 > main "branches" of Windows - DOS based and NT based. The naming scheme > seems to be a bit off on both sides: > DOS based: > + Windows 1 > + Windows 2 > + Windows 3 > + Windows 3.1 > + Windows 3.11 > + Windows 95 > + Windows 98 > + Windows ME > NT based: > + Windows NT 3.1 > + Windows NT 3.5 > + Windows NT 4.0 > + Windows 2000 (NT version 5.0) > + Windows XP (NT version 5.1) > + Windows Vista (NT version 6.0) > + Windows 7 (NT version 6.1) > + Windows 8 (NT version 6.2) > > It is completely non-sensical.
True! And you missed out 98SE & NT 3.51 - the latter being my personal favourite-ever version, followed by Win 2000. NT 3.1 was really v1.0, of course; 3.5 and 3.51 were actually 1.1 and 1.2, and NT 4 was version 2.0. :¬) And then there are the server versions... -- Liam Proven • Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lpro...@gmail.com Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419 AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508 -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
