Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Features and Releases Timeline?
maggard writes "Does anyome have any good timelines for MS Windows releases, their original feature-sets & what they eventually shipped with? MS has a long habit of promising lots of features in future operating systems, mapping out elaborate plans with dates & product codenames, etc. then, er, well it not quite happening. I'm looking to track some of these plans and match them up against what really shipped and when. I'm also looking to track all of the various Win-flavors out there now (something like a dozen or so) to point out that Unix isn't the only thing out there in danger of fragmenting."
Not exactly a timeline but interesting, anyhow:
http://pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/index.html
http://www.windrivers.com/TIMELINE/1.htm
...they're essentially the same, I believe, so someone must be copying/mirroring/whatever someone.
There is this nice Microsoft Timeline, covering 1975 till 2000, right over here. It is not exactly what you asked for, but its a M$ Timeline. Enjoy.
You're tired of Slashdot ads? Get junkbuster now!
If you are interested in broadening your timeline to include other operating systems' promise/delay/delivery-not-meeting-expectations, there are plenty of other examples out there, notably OS-X (AKA Rhapsody) which is 3 years late and lacks CD-R(W), DVDRW, DVD play support, along with missing printer and SCSI drivers (without running in 9.1 emulation mode). I'm still waiting for a major x86 Linux distro with good enough USB support, lacking for over a year, to use my Visor that I don't have to manually upgrade the kernel (I know, short work for some of you kernel hackers, but too much of a PITA for me), preferrably Red Hat, but their 'next several weeks' continues to drag on.
I doubt the 'promises/delays/letdowns' are exclusive to Windows, but fairly standard practice for the industry as a whole. That doesn't make it right, just typical.
Even more puzzling to me is how these apparently industry standard release cycles contribute to fragmentation, especially from a single proprietary vendor who can control all the different flavors! Sure, if they want it to fragment, they could make it happen, but it would require them to make it happen (or perhaps a federal judge ;).
+5:offtopic,but anti-American
Microsoft's operating system timetable made some very interesting changes from "Cairo" (originally slated to ship in 1996) to "Windows 2000". One thing I remember about this period is that this release was 9-12 months away for virtually the whole time.
Trying to find any information on the web about previous product plans is nearly impossible. My suggestion is to head down to the local library and see if they have old copies/microfitch of "PC Week" or "Infoworld". ZDNet pubs are especially good because they tended to be more sycophantic to Microsoft. The more consumer oriented mags like PC Magazine might have some good info too.
Of course, none of this information will be officially from Microsoft. But I think it's clear who is whispering into journalist's ears. In MS's defense, nowdays they don't quite blow the vapor like they used to.