, elmer wrote

I know that MS has a long history of apparently random product version numbers and names (who can forget the first version of Windows-NT being V3.1) but this business of using years to indicate versions is just so stupid.

I was developing for NT in the early days of the product and when the new interface came out for the non NT version of Windows, code named Chicago, NT did not have the new features. The numbering scheme was matching the versions of the other Windows products so that when 3.5 came out, the UI matched the regular Windows that also had the same underlying number scheme.  Or something like that. I did not like being on the bleeding edge of technology. So unproductive. Don't get me wrong though, I knew it was the future so I stuck with it. 

I'll tell you about my days trying to figure out TFS during its beta phase some other day. Smiley