3 ms·

That is not true: when some good logic is applied to naming, human names are too in order, with the alphabetic order, so that at any time you could know what yo

That is not true: when some good logic is applied to naming, human names are too in order, with the alphabetic order, so that at any time you could know what you are talking about (at least easily if it is "before" or "after" each one)

codetrotter 4y ago
> when some good logic is applied to naming, human names are too in order, with the alphabetic order, so that at any time you could know what you are talking about That's just like, your opinion. Even operating systems that try to follow that idea are not fully able to do it. For example, Ubuntu has been using alphabetically ordered names ever since version 5.10, which was released in October 2005. But sooner or later they have to wrap. And they already did that once. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DevelopmentCodeNames https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DevelopmentCodeNames So now, for someone on the outside who tries to apply this idea that names should encode release order, we still can't tell, which of the following was released first: - Ubuntu Maverick Meerkat or - Ubuntu Lunar Lobster Well, if all we know about Ubuntu is that the names are alphabetically sorted then we might think that Lunar Lobster came before Maverick Meerkat. But Ubuntu Lunar Lobster is the upcoming version 23.04. Ubuntu Maverick Meerkat was version 10.10, released all the way back in October 2010. And so my point is, if you want to compare version release dates. Just look at the version numbers. It is not sensible to claim that somehow the names have to be in alphabetical order. Do you use alphabetical order for the hostnames of your computers? Do you name your children in alphabetical order? Maybe you do. But not everyone will, and that's perfectly fine.
- oblio 4y ago
  > But sooner or later they have to wrap. And they already did that once. Frankly, that's not a problem. They have 26 letters to go through, so that's 13 years. 13 years is a geological age in computing. By that point the previous product has been deprecated for so long it's basically a museum piece and nobody can spot it in the wild.
  - codetrotter 4y ago
    > 13 years is a geological age in computing. By that point the previous product has been deprecated for so long it's basically a museum piece and nobody can spot it in the wild. Microsoft Windows XP was released to retail on October 25, 2001. Extended support for Microsoft Windows XP ended on April 8, 2014. ~13 years after its release Back then, in 2014, 13 years after its release, Windows XP still had a big market share according to for example this page from 2014 https://sourcedigit.com/6553-windows-xp-will-die-april-8-2014-xp-still-holds-29-53-os-market-share/ https://sourcedigit.com/6553-windows-xp-will-die-april-8-201... Regardless. All I am saying is, there is no reason to try and insist that marketing name should encode version release date. If you want to compare versions, use the version numbers and compare those. That's what the version numbers are for.
    - mlajtos 4y ago
      Not proud of this, but there is IBM X41 from 2005 in our family that is still running XP.
- gregoriol 4y ago
  Hostname can have many orders: if it's a technical/location name like "dc-room-row" then it's in order. If it's a character name, they could follow the logic of the characters: some are leading (frontend), some are smarter (backend), some are... If you had more than 20 children, you would clearly want some logic in naming. People often apply that to twins for example. Anyway, that applies better to "more than a few" groups; Ubuntu did well because they release many versions, and you really rarely need to check against versions from 13 years ago with that release speed. Microsoft didn't need it for Windows because they only had 4 or 5 versions in 20 years.

codetrotter 4y ago

> when some good logic is applied to naming, human names are too in order, with the alphabetic order, so that at any time you could know what you are talking about That's just like, your opinion. Even operating systems that try to follow that idea are not fully able to do it. For example, Ubuntu has been using alphabetically ordered names ever since version 5.10, which was released in October 2005. But sooner or later they have to wrap. And they already did that once. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DevelopmentCodeNames https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DevelopmentCodeNames So now, for someone on the outside who tries to apply this idea that names should encode release order, we still can't tell, which of the following was released first: - Ubuntu Maverick Meerkat or - Ubuntu Lunar Lobster Well, if all we know about Ubuntu is that the names are alphabetically sorted then we might think that Lunar Lobster came before Maverick Meerkat. But Ubuntu Lunar Lobster is the upcoming version 23.04. Ubuntu Maverick Meerkat was version 10.10, released all the way back in October 2010. And so my point is, if you want to compare version release dates. Just look at the version numbers. It is not sensible to claim that somehow the names have to be in alphabetical order. Do you use alphabetical order for the hostnames of your computers? Do you name your children in alphabetical order? Maybe you do. But not everyone will, and that's perfectly fine.

oblio 4y ago
> But sooner or later they have to wrap. And they already did that once. Frankly, that's not a problem. They have 26 letters to go through, so that's 13 years. 13 years is a geological age in computing. By that point the previous product has been deprecated for so long it's basically a museum piece and nobody can spot it in the wild.
- codetrotter 4y ago
  > 13 years is a geological age in computing. By that point the previous product has been deprecated for so long it's basically a museum piece and nobody can spot it in the wild. Microsoft Windows XP was released to retail on October 25, 2001. Extended support for Microsoft Windows XP ended on April 8, 2014. ~13 years after its release Back then, in 2014, 13 years after its release, Windows XP still had a big market share according to for example this page from 2014 https://sourcedigit.com/6553-windows-xp-will-die-april-8-2014-xp-still-holds-29-53-os-market-share/ https://sourcedigit.com/6553-windows-xp-will-die-april-8-201... Regardless. All I am saying is, there is no reason to try and insist that marketing name should encode version release date. If you want to compare versions, use the version numbers and compare those. That's what the version numbers are for.
  - mlajtos 4y ago
    Not proud of this, but there is IBM X41 from 2005 in our family that is still running XP.
gregoriol 4y ago
Hostname can have many orders: if it's a technical/location name like "dc-room-row" then it's in order. If it's a character name, they could follow the logic of the characters: some are leading (frontend), some are smarter (backend), some are... If you had more than 20 children, you would clearly want some logic in naming. People often apply that to twins for example. Anyway, that applies better to "more than a few" groups; Ubuntu did well because they release many versions, and you really rarely need to check against versions from 13 years ago with that release speed. Microsoft didn't need it for Windows because they only had 4 or 5 versions in 20 years.