Microsoft Features and Releases Timeline? 23
maggard writes "Does anyome have any good timelines for MS Windows releases, their original feature-sets & what they eventually shipped with? MS has a long habit of promising lots of features in future operating systems, mapping out elaborate plans with dates & product codenames, etc. then, er, well it not quite happening. I'm looking to track some of these plans and match them up against what really shipped and when. I'm also looking to track all of the various Win-flavors out there now (something like a dozen or so) to point out that Unix isn't the only thing out there in danger of fragmenting."
You mean for future releases too? (Score:1)
- A.P.
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
Re:Why single out Windows? (Score:2)
As to MS being an easy target on /., yes, that's why I asked here. I considered asking on news://alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer [alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer] but I doubted I'd get many replies or as much useful material.
-- Michael
ps - Just to correct your "OS-X (AKA Rhapsody)" comment - not accurate. Rhapsody did ship as MacOS Server 1.0, the client version was dropped in favor of the Darwin / MacOS X strategy. Check out this [slashdot.org] posting on /. of mine a week ago. Interestingly this is the post that got me interested in the MS timeline.
Re:Fragmenting? (Score:2)
However there will still be a number of variations (DataCenter, a possible-WebServer-specific flavor, other high-end implementations, etc.) as well as the various quasi-Win-OS's like Embedded Windows, X-Box, Palm Windows (neé WinCe) etc.
These days it looks like MS is rolling out new Windows as fast as old ones wither so I'm not sure what the final tally will be. That's why I'm trying to get a timeline / family tree put together.
Re:Why single out Windows? (Score:2)
As to failed deliveries & fragmentation, they were two topics. I'm interested in both the Windows "family tree" & in the feature-sets/timelines as originially planned & what actually shipped when.
Regarding the Apple server-redirects, likely because most customers are interested in the desktop OS & not the server OS. As it stands right now MacOS Server 1.0 (actually 1.something, it's in the link I pointed out previously) is due to be replaced with MacOS X Server 10.0 soon. Apple claimed within a month of the MacOS X release & reports are that it's on track & looking stable.
In Apple's timeline MacOS 9 was what came after Rhapsody debuted & aborted so it seems a reasonable place to redirect folks. As MacOS Server 1.0 hasn't been availaible for purchase for months & clearly has no future then pushing it on the website wouldn't make much sense. Personally I'd expect those links to go to MacOS X Server 10.0 promo stuff but it's possible they set them awhile ago & are holding off on changing anything 'till MacOS X Server 10.0 ships. Or they just screwed up.
Rhapsody != OSX (Score:2)
As to trying to bait me with "Which company is better" or even "which OS is better" or "Look how bad (whatever) is" - sorry, won't work. You seem to have glommed on to MacOS as a counteragument for me but I simply corrected you since you were wrong: I don't have any emotionial committment to it. Indeed I don't have any particular emotionial committment to any of them. Go find your agument somewhere else.
I believe that MS uses it's roadmap as a tactical weapon when competing in the market. I believe there is a consistant & generally unremarked discrepancy between what MS projects to be in a product & when it will ship and what actually does & when. I believe that MS "Windows" is as 'fragmented' (broad, varied, whatever) as the *nix market is often portayed. I am interested in collecting & compiling information to discover if these beliefs are true or not.
Now, you may have some desire to see MS portayed in some way or not in another - fine. Go work for Werner-Edelstrom. If you feel my studies may be biased you're welcome to conduct your own. You can see the same links suggested as I do - go at it.
But please don't go try dragging me into some asinine OS or company war. Once I've got some material put together I can test my hypothosis & discover the validity of my premises. In the meantime it's just so much hot-air & frankly your style doesn't appeal to me anyhow.
I'll post a link with what I put together in a few weeks. Then you'll be welcome to go read it yourself.
Re:timelines (Score:1)
Fragmenting? (Score:2)
I know the developers at my last company hated doing USB code because of the different variations.
Re:Fragmenting? (Score:2)
...check this out. (Score:2)
http://www.metrics.com/WinFAQ/winver.htm [metrics.com]
It has some versions, some dates, some features...
ScreenShots - Over time... (Score:3)
http://pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/index.html [pla-netx.com]
http://www.windrivers.com/TIMELINE/1.htm [windrivers.com]
...they're essentially the same, I believe, so someone must be copying/mirroring/whatever someone.
Re:Find old trade magazines (Score:1)
Yeah, MS came to my university before Win2K came out to talk about whatever (an OpenBSD using friend of mine won a copy of Win2K Final RC in a drawing). Anyway, at one point someone asks if they're going to be meeting their (supposed) release dates. Response: "Don't believe everything you read on Slashdot, Win2k will ship on such-and-such a date". Of course it was actually released a couple months after that date (pretty much when everyone here thought it would be), but they seem to have toned this down for XP (same OpenBSD using friend won MS Flight Simulator at the MS XP talk, BTW). We (the Unix contingent at the talk) we amused, to say the least.
Re:Why single out Windows? (Score:1)
Ummm, Mandrake 7.2? I've been using it "out of the box" to sync with my Visor for 5 months now... Oh, and it's Red-Hat based. -Wulfhere
There you go (Score:3)
You're tired of Slashdot ads? Get junkbuster [junkbusters.com] now!
Re:Fragmenting? (Score:1)
Re:Fragmenting? (Score:2)
It's a race now.... (Score:1)
Re:Why single out Windows? (Score:1)
And you didn't answer my question as to how failed deliveries will lead to fragmentation. Actually, Mac OS Server seems to be a hint of evidence of this phenomenon, but I fail to see it in Microsoft's future, at least any fragmentation due to announcements/failed delivery on their part.
Rhapsody == OSX (Score:1)
Precisely. If they went looking for Rhapsody, they were looking for the desktop OS, which early reports describe as 'media rich' and 'next generation OS,' not 'new server offshoot thingy.'
If you read the press release [apple.com] that announces Rhapsody, they talk about the 'next generation OS' which will "improve multimedia capabilities" and be great for consumers and developers alike. The release for MacOS Server [apple.com] always refers to it as a 'server OS,' never as 'the next generation OS,' or 'Rhapsody.' So they kluged together a portion of what was destined to become OSX and released it only sorta late. That wasn't even close to what Rhapsody was ever meant to be. And until they update iTunes to fully work under OSX (i.e. not in 9.1 emulation mode and with CDRW, DVDRW, and for Chrissake DVD play ability) they haven't even really finished, particularly since instead of improving multimedia capabilities, they have crippled them significantly.
Hey, by your logic, Microsoft is never late - they just release 'iterative fractional' versions of their roadmaps too! The funny thing is, that Mac is the one fragmenting at this point, and Microsoft aims to unify in the near term.
Re:Rhapsody != OSX (Score:1)
Just looking for the 'truth.' Sorry.
As to trying to bait me with "Which company is better" or even "which OS is better" or "Look how bad (whatever) is" - sorry, won't work. You seem to have glommed on to MacOS as a counteragument for me but I simply corrected you since you were wrong:
I wasn't baiting you - I simply corrected you since you were wrong.
Plus, you had better call Apple. They've got their OS roadmaps and redirects all screwed up, and you know what they should have set up.
I believe that MS uses it's roadmap as a tactical weapon when competing in the market
You mean they aren't dreaming of gumdrops and lollypops and helping other companies push them out of business? Gosh, they sure are nasty, those Redmond boys. I'm sure glad nobody else ever uses roadmaps and technical announcements [apple.com] as a business weapon. Why, when Apple said they would "leapfrog ...other 'modern' operating systems, such as NT," and "The first release of Rhapsody is expected to be launched to developers in mid to late 1997 and to customers within 12 months," they were merely stating facts without any hidden agenda.
I believe there is a consistant & generally unremarked discrepancy between what MS projects to be in a product & when it will ship and what actually does & when.
Once again, you make statements singling out Microsoft. They're true, absolutely - but they apply to virtually everyone out there, so why bother making them? I'm not saying Apple sucks, ha ha, It's just that every problem you seem to have with Microsoft is universal to the industry.
I believe that MS "Windows" is as 'fragmented' (broad, varied, whatever) as the *nix market is often portayed.
OK, so we've got Windows 3, 3.1, 3.11, (mostly the same), Windows NT 3.51 and 4, Windows 95, 95B, (mostly the same), Windows 98, 98SE (mostly the same), 2000, ME, and WinCE. I'm supposed to believe that's more fragmented than Unix/FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD/Caldera/Corel/Debian/M andrake/LinuxPPC/Yellow Dog/RedHat/Slackware/SuSE/TurboLinux (and something over 100 more distros)/IRIX/MINIX all the RTOS/embedded ones, etc. on x86, PPC, 680x0, MIPS, Alpha, etc. with just a few flavors of NT on other platforms? You seriously believe that? This is less/equivalently fragmented than Microsoft?
BTW, yes, I know some programs even work on more than one Linux, and many distros are based on other distros, but the fragmentation there is unreal!
Now, you may have some desire to see MS portayed in some way or not in another...
Look, I saw someone bashing Microsoft for being a business and doing what the others do. If you had asked for a roadmap for all major commercial OSs (since you obviously don't have an accurate one for Apple) to document how they all kinda do the same thing (in this area), that would be one thing. But it's as if you're insisting the Democrats are evil because they've broken campaign promises in the past, and are bought out by special interests. When someone points out that the Republicans have done the exact same thing, you have a fit, and try to distort their own literature into proving they're squeaky clean.
But please don't go try dragging me into some asinine OS or company war.
Hey, there are plenty of valid criticisms of Microsoft, but it seems silly to focus on the industry-standard crap they pull, since 'everyone else is doing it.'
Once I've got some material put together I can test my hypothosis & discover the validity of my premises. In the meantime it's just so much hot-air & frankly your style doesn't appeal to me anyhow.
Well, I already have plenty of links off of Apple's own website to support my argument. I'm sorry if my style of 'arguing with someone who is clearly distorting a company's image to further his own agenda' and 'correcting fallacies' is bugging you. Or was it the 'showing you you were wrong' or 'supporting my argument with links rather than brag about the links I was GOING to provide eventually?'
Why single out Windows? (Score:3)
If you are interested in broadening your timeline to include other operating systems' promise/delay/delivery-not-meeting-expectations, there are plenty of other examples out there, notably OS-X (AKA Rhapsody [apple-history.com]) which is 3 years late and lacks CD-R(W), DVDRW, DVD play support, along with missing printer and SCSI drivers (without running in 9.1 emulation mode). I'm still waiting for a major x86 Linux distro with good enough USB support [binghamton.edu], lacking for over a year, to use my Visor that I don't have to manually upgrade the kernel (I know, short work for some of you kernel hackers, but too much of a PITA for me), preferrably Red Hat, but their 'next several weeks' [redhat.com] continues to drag on.
I doubt the 'promises/delays/letdowns' are exclusive to Windows, but fairly standard practice for the industry as a whole. That doesn't make it right, just typical.
Even more puzzling to me is how these apparently industry standard release cycles contribute to fragmentation, especially from a single proprietary vendor who can control all the different flavors! Sure, if they want it to fragment, they could make it happen, but it would require them to make it happen (or perhaps a federal judge ;).
Re:Find old trade magazines (Score:2)
Remember that the Cairo talk started before either Windows 95 or NT 4.0 shipped. Perhaps "Hailstorm" fits this model, but I have a feeling that it doesn't.
Find old trade magazines (Score:3)
Trying to find any information on the web about previous product plans is nearly impossible. My suggestion is to head down to the local library and see if they have old copies/microfitch of "PC Week" or "Infoworld". ZDNet pubs are especially good because they tended to be more sycophantic to Microsoft. The more consumer oriented mags like PC Magazine might have some good info too.
Of course, none of this information will be officially from Microsoft. But I think it's clear who is whispering into journalist's ears. In MS's defense, nowdays they don't quite blow the vapor like they used to.
timelines (Score:2)