From:	Daniel Yu <daniel DOT yu AT autodesk DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.graphics.packages.3dstudio,comp.os.msdos.djgpp,comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer.misc
Subject:	Re: FreeWin95 Project
Date:	Wed, 12 Feb 1997 13:29:56 -0800
Organization:	Autodesk, Inc.
Lines:	55
Message-ID:	<33023654.10CF@autodesk.com>
References:	<01bc07a2$6d6d3060$46031fc8 AT nextsite-server> <32EBA1B6 DOT C20 AT singnet DOT com DOT sg> <5ci6km$c5p AT salomon DOT mchp DOT siemens DOT de> <01bc0c83$f164dea0$2a39eac2 AT genius DOT image DOT dk> <5cl7hf$adg AT nntp1 DOT best DOT com> <seandE4tzns DOT 3JH AT netcom DOT com> <01bc0eee$5b35f780$87ee6fce AT timpent DOT a-sis DOT com> <32FD03F5 DOT 50C2 AT iamerica DOT net> <5dm4ua$svk AT dfw-ixnews3 DOT ix DOT netcom DOT com>
Reply-To:	daniel DOT yu AT autodesk DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Host:	192.187.232.156
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

bushwick AT ix DOT netcom DOT com wrote:
> 
> In article <32FD03F5 DOT 50C2 AT iamerica DOT net>
> Joel Ellis Rea <jrea AT iamerica DOT net> wrote:
> 
> > Tim Behrendsen wrote:
> >    Oh, and whatever happened to Word for Windows 3, 4, and 5?  Or Win NT
> > 1.x and 2.x?  Is this a case of trying to make products seem more mature
> > than they actually are?  Who'd want to buy Windows NT 2.0 (which is what
> > the latest version really is) when OS/2 is out with a properly numbered
> > 4.0, and especially since Windows 2.0 was such a stinker?  I'd like to
> > see Microsoft be honest even in such a relatively minor thing as product
> > version numbering!  But apparently even THAT is too much to expect from
> > them.  (Not that they're the only ones: 3D Studio Release "4" should be
> > 3.5 at BEST!  There was not ONE change made that was visible to the main
> > users [as opposed to IPAS developers] that didn't involve bundling new
> > IPAS plugins or editing 3DS.SET, from Release 3 to Release 4!  On the
> > other hand, we have such things as Novell releasing Netware 4.11, which
> > is a DRASTIC improvement over 4.1, with LOTS of new features and greatly
> > boosted performance, and yet changing only the rightmost digit, which is
> > usually reserved for maintenance/bug-fix releases!)
> 
> Not to be too picky, as I agree with you on most parts, but NT did exist as
> "Microsoft LAN Manager" before it was called NT and had been released in both
> a 1.x and 2.x versions.   They just changed the name to Windows NT when they
> stuck the Windows interface on it, as it existed as a console app before.
> 
> Pete Rittwage
> bushwick AT ix DOT netcom DOT com

If memory serves, Word for Windows jumped from v2 to v5 because MS was
trying to synch version numbers between it and Word for Mac, which was
on v4.  Not a great reason for version numbering, admittedly.  But there
was a reason.

WinNT v4 seemed pretty accurate to me -- I suspect very few folks used
WinNT v3.1, which really should have been WinNT v1, but we have had
versions 3.5, 3.51 and 4 since then.  v4 is perhaps the first version
with a different UI, but if you base your versioning on this, then
OS/2 really shouldn't be at the version it is, since Presentation
Manager has not drastically changed cosmetically for some time.

Lan Manager could be considered a predecessor to NT in an extremely
loose sense.  But I always considered it more of a LAN server package.

True, 3DSr4 really was a "plug-in" release.  And don't even talk to me
about AutoCAD version numbers :)


-- 
=======================================
Daniel Yu
email: daniel DOT yu AT autodesk DOT com
       dsyu AT holonet DOT net
=======================================

- Raw text -