5 ms·

Longhorn was the codename for Windows Vista... so not a great choice of a name (IMO).

by d3Xt3r 1y ago

onionisafruit 1y ago
Longhorn is a fine name, and it doesn't matter if somebody else used it 20+ years ago
- weinzierl 1y ago
  By that logic Titanic would be a fine name too.
  - NewJazz 1y ago
    Hmm, maybe just shorten to Titan?
    - esafak 1y ago
      Just don't use it to name a database.
  - bigstrat2003 1y ago
    I mean, I think it would be. Superstition about naming is silly.
  - ofrzeta 1y ago
    https://www.titanic-magazin.de https://www.titanic-magazin.de
- fineallaround 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - privatelypublic 1y ago
    Even complaining about Vista raises eyebrows. It had two huge issues: overactive UAC, and Microsoft handing "Vista Certified" to basically anybody who asked. (Frequently to machines that would barely run XP pre-SP1.) Most of the complaints can be reduced to one of those. Yes- I hand wave away a lot of other things: because they were required for a huge step towards a decently secure and stable OS.
    - samplatt 1y ago
      >a huge step towards a decently secure and stable OS It absolutely was an important (and required) step towards a more secure and stable OS. What it was not, though, was a secure and stable OS. Windows ME was the same. A required step on the path towards something better, and ALSO something that had the "Windows XX-ready" badge slapped on anything that asked. But no one is lining up to try Vista again apart from technical challenges.
      - privatelypublic 1y ago
        ME is... not comparable? There's no security boundaries ME could implement- it was still DOS and fat32. The list of changes Vista made were never going to go off without a hitch. When you put new boundaries in place in the kernel, and a driver violates them because it was recompiled not updated to handle a separation and handle errors from it: there's no choice but to Kernel Panic. Compatibility Shims were introduced for userland changes. Despite the hate, DWM handled the most frequent crashes: graphics. Microsoft is STILL working on pulling graphics code out of the kernel and into userland.
      - hulitu 1y ago
        > It absolutely was an important (and required) step towards a more secure and stable OS. What it was not, though, was a secure and stable OS. Every Windows version was a "step towards a more secure and stable OS". The issue is: they never get there.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- selfhoster11 1y ago
  That is false. Sincerely, a lover of Gemini (the protocol, and the AI) and Gopher (the protocol, and not the language).
tracker1 1y ago
I remembered the Windows Vista reference as soon as I saw the name. That said, I don't think it's a big deal.
gdbsjjdn 1y ago
I did this was going to be about the Vista and how some of the FS stuff that got cut was prescient. "This old thing that didn't work was ahead of its' time" is a whole genre of post (ex. Itanium)
antod 1y ago
Could've been worse eg Cairo or Blackcomb.
pjmlp 1y ago
Indeed, does it uses .NET in its implementation, or are they already rewriting it into COM?
Delphiza 1y ago
I agree. You have to be a certain age to remember that a big part of Microsoft "Longhorn" was WinFS (Windows File System), which was intended to completely rework storage into a relational file system (or object-oriented depending on your view). "Longhorn" was supposed to do away with NTFS and failed miserably at that objective. I believe that WinFS delayed things considerably and eventually didn't ship with Vista. Microsoft Longhorn's failure to be the next big thing was largely due to the bad implementation of a storage subsystem. The result was Windows Vista, which was derided as a bad OS (at least until Windows 8). Due to that history, I would not name any file system 'Longhorn'. It may not be the same as naming a cruise ship 'Titanic', but you wouldn't name it 'Iceberg' either.

Longhorn was the codename for Windows Vista... so not a great choice of a name (IMO).

by d3Xt3r 1y ago

Longhorn was the codename for Windows Vista... so not a great choice of a name (IMO).

onionisafruit 1y ago

Longhorn is a fine name, and it doesn't matter if somebody else used it 20+ years ago

weinzierl 1y ago
By that logic Titanic would be a fine name too.
- NewJazz 1y ago
  Hmm, maybe just shorten to Titan?
  - esafak 1y ago
    Just don't use it to name a database.
- bigstrat2003 1y ago
  I mean, I think it would be. Superstition about naming is silly.
- ofrzeta 1y ago
  https://www.titanic-magazin.de https://www.titanic-magazin.de
fineallaround 1y ago
[flagged]
- privatelypublic 1y ago
  Even complaining about Vista raises eyebrows. It had two huge issues: overactive UAC, and Microsoft handing "Vista Certified" to basically anybody who asked. (Frequently to machines that would barely run XP pre-SP1.) Most of the complaints can be reduced to one of those. Yes- I hand wave away a lot of other things: because they were required for a huge step towards a decently secure and stable OS.
  - samplatt 1y ago
    >a huge step towards a decently secure and stable OS It absolutely was an important (and required) step towards a more secure and stable OS. What it was not, though, was a secure and stable OS. Windows ME was the same. A required step on the path towards something better, and ALSO something that had the "Windows XX-ready" badge slapped on anything that asked. But no one is lining up to try Vista again apart from technical challenges.
    - privatelypublic 1y ago
      ME is... not comparable? There's no security boundaries ME could implement- it was still DOS and fat32. The list of changes Vista made were never going to go off without a hitch. When you put new boundaries in place in the kernel, and a driver violates them because it was recompiled not updated to handle a separation and handle errors from it: there's no choice but to Kernel Panic. Compatibility Shims were introduced for userland changes. Despite the hate, DWM handled the most frequent crashes: graphics. Microsoft is STILL working on pulling graphics code out of the kernel and into userland.
    - hulitu 1y ago
      > It absolutely was an important (and required) step towards a more secure and stable OS. What it was not, though, was a secure and stable OS. Every Windows version was a "step towards a more secure and stable OS". The issue is: they never get there.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
selfhoster11 1y ago
That is false. Sincerely, a lover of Gemini (the protocol, and the AI) and Gopher (the protocol, and not the language).

tracker1 1y ago

I remembered the Windows Vista reference as soon as I saw the name. That said, I don't think it's a big deal.

gdbsjjdn 1y ago

I did this was going to be about the Vista and how some of the FS stuff that got cut was prescient. "This old thing that didn't work was ahead of its' time" is a whole genre of post (ex. Itanium)

antod 1y ago

Could've been worse eg Cairo or Blackcomb.

pjmlp 1y ago

Indeed, does it uses .NET in its implementation, or are they already rewriting it into COM?

Delphiza 1y ago

I agree. You have to be a certain age to remember that a big part of Microsoft "Longhorn" was WinFS (Windows File System), which was intended to completely rework storage into a relational file system (or object-oriented depending on your view). "Longhorn" was supposed to do away with NTFS and failed miserably at that objective. I believe that WinFS delayed things considerably and eventually didn't ship with Vista. Microsoft Longhorn's failure to be the next big thing was largely due to the bad implementation of a storage subsystem. The result was Windows Vista, which was derided as a bad OS (at least until Windows 8). Due to that history, I would not name any file system 'Longhorn'. It may not be the same as naming a cruise ship 'Titanic', but you wouldn't name it 'Iceberg' either.