windows 10 Windows 10 May Have Gotten Its Name Because of Lazy Coders

[veternan]

 

When Windows 10 got announced, there was one immediately glaring question: Why Windows10? Maybe for the extra distance from 8, but a Redditor who claims to be a Microsoft dev has a better?and funnier?answer. The name "Windows 9" could break a whole bunch of lazy code.

 

 

If you're not code literate, allow me to explain. An easy (and lazy, and bad) way to check what version of Windows a user is running is to just read in the first little bit of the name the operating system is using to identify itself. There are better ways to do it, but if that first bit reads "Windows 9" it means the operating system has to be either Windows 95 or Windows 98.

 

Unless of course there's a Windows 9.

 

It's a y2k sort of problem, where programmers either didn't think the Windows naming scheme could ever generate another "Windows 9x" version, or didn't want to bother future-proofing their code to control for it. And while it's just an unsubstantiated theory that this is why the name is Windows 10, the problem this coder brings up is verifiably a common shortcut. We've reached out to Microsoft for comment, but we may never really know. What's for sure though is that this name just happens to solve one big, obnoxious problem.

 

Source: Gizmodo

[PGHammer]

 

When Windows 10 got announced, there was one immediately glaring question: Why Windows10? Maybe for the extra distance from 8, but a Redditor who claims to be a Microsoft dev has a better?and funnier?answer. The name "Windows 9" could break a whole bunch of lazy code.

 

 

If you're not code literate, allow me to explain. An easy (and lazy, and bad) way to check what version of Windows a user is running is to just read in the first little bit of the name the operating system is using to identify itself. There are better ways to do it, but if that first bit reads "Windows 9" it means the operating system has to be either Windows 95 or Windows 98.

 

Unless of course there's a Windows 9.

 

It's a y2k sort of problem, where programmers either didn't think the Windows naming scheme could ever generate another "Windows 9x" version, or didn't want to bother future-proofing their code to control for it. And while it's just an unsubstantiated theory that this is why the name is Windows 10, the problem this coder brings up is verifiably a common shortcut. We've reached out to Microsoft for comment, but we may never really know. What's for sure though is that this name just happens to solve one big, obnoxious problem.

 

Source: http://gizmodo.com

That is going to BE a problem when backward-compatibility remains a mantra - why was so much made of the infamous "Y2K" problem - which turned out to be a great deal smaller in terms of impact than was thought?

 

We may moan and groan about it - however, all too many of us (as users) insist ON that backward-compatibility, especially when it comes to Windows - therefore, I'm not in the least surprised by the "gotchas" that result.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

My coding knowledge isn't the best, but if in the code Windows 95 and 98 were referred to as "Windows 95" and "Windows 98" then it would be completely different to writing "Windows9" wouldn't it? Problem solved?

EDIT: Second thoughts, perhaps not since you would still have to rely on the devs to remember to drop the space between Windows and the number 9. If they didn't, whoops. Problem still exists.

[notchinese]

My coding knowledge isn't the best, but if in the code Windows 95 and 98 were referred to as "Windows 95" and "Windows 98" then it would be completely different to writing "Windows9" wouldn't it? Problem solved?

EDIT: Second thoughts, perhaps not since you would still have to rely on the devs to remember to drop the space between Windows and the number 9. If they didn't, whoops. Problem still exists.

 

When you check StartsWith("Windows 9") it lumps both versions together, likely because they were very similar kernel wise. The proper way to do it is to check the version number.

[francescob]

So they'll skip from Windows 89 to Windows 100 as well?

[ensiform]

Apparently its fairly common in the java world: https://searchcode.com/?q=if(version%2Cstartswith("windows+9"%29

 

Not sure how common it really is in C/C++ since you would use GetVersion/GetVersionEx which you compare integer values and other struct members rather than by string.

[Argi]

I guess we'll have to skip over Windows 90-99 and jump straight to Windows 100 as well

[DConnell Member]

So they'll skip from Windows 89 to Windows 100 as well?

 

No, they'll skip Windows 69 to 100.

[Aokromes]

No, they'll skip Windows 69 to 100.

110 :P

because:

7x

8x

9x

10x

[scumdogmillionaire]

I don't buy this at all. Been a developer for two decades and I've never, nor seen any other dev, check for the version by the OS Name. You always use major/minor version.

 

EDIT: Looks like ensiform hit it... it's a java thing. Bleh. Still not sure I buy it.

[pqt]

Good thing they didn't call it Threshold. Because then lazy coders would have taken away all other "T" options in the future.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

I don't buy this at all. Been a developer for two decades and I've never, nor seen any other dev, check for the version by the OS Name. You always use major/minor version.

 

EDIT: Looks like ensiform hit it... it's a java thing. Bleh. Still not sure I buy it.

 

Just look at the searchcode link. It's clear that thousands of apps would be affected by this:

 

https://searchcode.com/?q=if(version%2Cstartswith(%22windows+9%22%29

 

Note this isn't just "some Java developer" - the actual Java SDK apparently includes this problem. And who knows how many others would be affected. It's sad, hilarious, and annoying all at once.

[Max Norris]

Just look at the searchcode link. It's clear that thousands of apps would be affected by this:

Ugh, died a little inside just looking over that. Feels like Y2K all over again.. there's even an actual os.version they could have used to get the real deal instead of using os.name.

[SharpGreen]

It's the same reason why NT is still version 6 instead of 7 or 8 or w/e....because idiots.

[+Majesticmerc MVC]

Just look at the searchcode link. It's clear that thousands of apps would be affected by this:

 

https://searchcode.com/?q=if(version%2Cstartswith(%22windows+9%22%29

 

Note this isn't just "some Java developer" - the actual Java SDK apparently includes this problem. And who knows how many others would be affected. It's sad, hilarious, and annoying all at once.

 

In all fairness, Java developers will never learn :P

[Brandon Live Veteran]

In all fairness, Java developers will never learn :p

/facepalm

Java really is the worst.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

I totally buy this, I've had sites tell me that I'm running OS X Puma because they parse the version string as a number and never expected a 10.10 release.

[binaryzero]

It's a name.

[farmeunit]

It's the same reason why NT is still version 6 instead of 7 or 8 or w/e....because idiots.

This is what I was wondering.  Why they don't use that numbering?  Why would anyone check version using Windows 9?

 

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

 

That's how our desktop management determines OS version.

[SharpGreen]

This is what I was wondering.  Why they don't use that numbering?  Why would anyone check version using Windows 9?

 

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

 

That's how our desktop management determines OS version.

Yea, and that's how you're supposed to do version detection.

 

To answer your question: Because idiots. lol that's really the only reason I can come up with. Especially given that MS has been saying for YEARS to NOT do that, since it tends to break things.

[Praetor]

while this isn't official, it's pretty much dead on; even today i'm still seeing this crap all over.  :/

[+Warwagon MVC]

I'm pretty sure they did it to distance themselves from Windows 8 / 8.1 .. Windows 9 seemed way to similar, so they went with 10.

[Yuhong Bao]

I totally buy this, I've had sites tell me that I'm running OS X Puma because they parse the version string as a number and never expected a 10.10 release.

java had that problem too!

[Jose_49]

That's why I like using Try{} and Catch{} statements.

[fred65]

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/jj663498.aspx

 

They should be using build numbers, to determine OS version, not the name of the OS.