Hacker News Reader

Comment by shin_lao | Hacker News Reader

Looked at differently, though, the third-is-right adage is wrong. More typically version 4 crosses the good enough threshold -- Windows 95 as the fourth from 1.0 and XP as the fourth from Windows NT 3.51, for example. By that reckoning, Windows 9 promises much, as v. 4 from Vista.

Windows XP is version 5.1 of Windows NT. I think it is really dumb to try to see "laws" in product versions.

View on HN

5.1 means nothing. It's an arbitrary internal version number. The article is trying to address major overhauls to the system. (Though it should have said NT 3.1, not 3.51.)

NT 3.x -> NT 4 -> Win2k -> XP

Win 1.x -> 2.x -> 3.x -> 95

The major and minor version number are not here just for show. For example the transition from NT 3.51 to NT 4 implied the transition of the GDI to the kernel.

In NT 5.0 there was the addition of PnP with full ACPI support (and it saw the inclusion of the WDM).

NT 6 saw a major update of the graphic driver model that enabled to have a smooth desktop experience (also IPV6 was totally included in the system).

So no, it does not mean "nothing". ;)

I guess your parent referred to the fact that NT didn't start with 1, as your earlier statement sounded like »XP is actually version 5.1 so what's the nonsense with iteration 4?«.

True, the first release of NT was named 3.1 to match the current Windows version, but then minor updates count as iterations as well and therefore XP is the 5th iteration (we will all agree that 2000 to XP is a major step).

My point was that if you want to find number laws, you will find making a point around them is really, really silly.

If you let DirectX 9 and the Microsoft firewall from XP be installed into 2000, 2000 would be exactly the same as XP.

XP and 2000 are basically the same OS, XP was a big service pack.

Unless I am mistaken, the following features were not available in Windows 2000: GDI+, Clear Type, Remote Desktop, Windows Media Player, much better Internet support, USB 2.0, FireWire 800, etc.

The list is very long. XP is not a big service pack. It includes everything that was missing in 2000 to make it consumer-ready.

None of those things couldn't be added with a service pack, and several were. XP and 2000 are basically the same OS.

I have no idea what you mean by 'better internet support' so I can't say anything about that.

Remote desktop did exist in 2k, it was called Terminal Services. All XP did was bring a stripped down server to the client.

GDI+ is available as a patch for Windows 2000.

There was nothing preventing MS from releasing ClearType on 2k, they just didn't.

Media Player 9 was released on Windows 2000.

USB 2.0 and FireWire 400/800 are supported in Windows 2000, they're just device drivers. A little googling seems to indicate they were added in Service Pack 3 or 4.

XP wasn't like Vista where they changed the driver model or made changes to the authentication system with UAC. XP was just addons to 2000, holding back things like the firewall and the last patch to DirectX 9 were artificial limitations to make XP seem worth the upgrade.

xp was 5.1, but your point stands, this is a dumb article, win95 and XP are from different lines.

After Win 3.11 (wfwg) they made win nt (3.5-4.x), 2k (5.0), xp (5.1-5.2) the one line, win 95, 98, 98se, me, on the other.

The first release of WinNT was 3.1.

Of course, he is completely ignoring the continual Service Packs which keep fixing the bugs and adding features long after the OS has been shipped.

Most of the time, windows users are advised to wait for the first or second service pack before they start using a new version as their primary OS.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com