On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Aaron Kulkis wrote:- This is quite a way off-topic, and should probably move to the off-topic list.
There was no NT-3
There wasn't a version NT 3.0, but there was a version called NT 3.5.
Windows 3.x consisted of Windows 3.1, Windows for Workgroups (3.11),
That parts right.
and Windows 95 and 98 (aka Windows 32x)
But I'm certain that that part's wrong. Win95, and the subsequent versions using the 95 kernel series, weren't based on the same code as Windows 3. They operated in a similar manner, in that they were all graphical shells running on top of DOS and, maybe with the exception of WinME, could exit to DOS. Also, they had to use a compatibility layer to make the 16 bit code run on the 32 bit system, which is where the Windows on Windows appears.
Windows NT is Windows 4.0
ITYM Windows NT 4.0. And, I'm not entirely sure, but weren't there versions later than 4.0 but before 5.0? My web server logs show entries for a browser identifying itself as running on NT 4.1.
Windows 2000 is Windows 5.0
Maybe, but ITYM Windows NT 5.0
Windows XP is Windows 6.0
Wrong. XP identifies itself as Windows NT 5.1. It's almost the same as Windows 2000 but with extra eye-candy added, better(?) plug-and-play, and some security stripped out, all to make it more attractive, "easier" and "friendlier" for the masses. You also missed out Windows 2003, which possibly identified itself as NT 5.2. That would explain the Windows NT 5.2 entries in my web server logs. And there's also Windows Media PC, which may be identifying itself as either Windows NT 5.1 or NT 6.0. I have several entries where the browser says it's running on NT 5.1 and includes "Media Center PC 4.0" in the User-agent string. I've also several more entries where it says Windows NT 6.0 and the User-agent includes "Media Center PC 5.0".
Windows Vista is Windows 7.0
Maybe but, if it is, ITYM Windows NT 7.0. It's actually quite interesting watching the server logs. Strangely enough, my site is almost entirely about Linux, with my Wiki only having openSUSE related pages, and yet there seems to be a majority of browsers claiming to be on Windows OSes looking at them. Oh, and before you state the obvious that the browsers User-agent can be faked, I know. My contention is that most Windows users, especially those using MSIE, aren't going to know how to do that, so I can sort-of rely on it being fairly accurate. Regards, David Bolt -- Team Acorn: http://www.distributed.net/ OGR-P2 @ ~100Mnodes RC5-72 @ ~15Mkeys SUSE 10.1 32bit | openSUSE 10.2 32bit | openSUSE 10.3 32bit | openSUSE 11.0a1 SUSE 10.1 64bit | openSUSE 10.2 64bit | openSUSE 10.3 64bit RISC OS 3.6 | TOS 4.02 | openSUSE 10.3 PPC | RISC OS 3.11 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org