Windows NT 6.0

[WindowsCollector2000]

Hey Guys! I've found something on the wiki (BA) that nobody was EVER talking about, Windows Odyssey (aka: Windows NT 6.0)
Do you guys know about NT6?

Thanks for reading!

WindowsCollector2000

[Samuka]

Sorry, but, Windows NT 6.0 is Longhorn/Vista

[beta.a.brian]

No,before that there was a project in 1999 called Odyssey which was NT 6.0,planned after Neptune,which was NT 5.5 .

[Overdoze]

Not much is known about Odyssey, but there's some antitrust documents on the wiki page that mention it, at least. It's only suggested it would be NT6, there's no confirmation of that anywhere.

[lopper]

It most probably never entered development. Maybe Microsoft Research worked on a couple of components that later were used in XP and Vista, but that's pure speculation on my part.

[Overdoze]

Yeah, given the lack of information on this project, it's very likely it was still in planning stages (even Neptune was in actual development for a year at most) before it got cancelled.

[computebrute]

Windows NT 6.0 is nowadays known as Windows Vista.

[WindowsCollector2000]

I wonder why Neptune, Odyssey and Trident were cancelled?
Was it Whistler?

[Overdoze]

*Triton, not Trident.

I guess they needed to redefine their goals, and best way is to start fresh with a new project (Whistler), which was actually delivered in roughly a year or so.

[jimmsta]

Microsoft planned out codenames and featuresets years ahead of time, especially during the development of NT5. You have to remember that up until Vista, a lot of the principles and features planned for NT had come from the Cairo vision of the early 1990's. This included a full network stack, in addition to things like the object filesystem, and multimedia components. Odyssey was such a codenamed version, with its own featureset defined, but as far as we know, nothing concrete. There's no evidence that any builds ever existed - it may have existed on paper, but being an actual product or set of technologies, I have my doubts.

In 1995, Microsoft had just released Chicago, with the new innovative shell, and 32-bit kernel. Meanwhile, NT3.x was undergoing growing pains, which is likely when the codenames and featuresets were devised for these new product ideas. Given that the codename 'Cairo' was re-used for NT4, it wagers a fair guess that Microsoft internally re-envisioned what NT would become, sometime around 1994-95.

The fact is, every design needs a set of blueprints; NT5 was more than just an update to NT3/4, it was a foundation for the next 5-10 years of Windows development. Odyssey was supposed to be the basis of all Windows for the long-term - think 15-20 years out. The codename actually makes some literal sense, if you compare the timeline with Homer's Odyssey - http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Odyssey - which takes place 10 years after the Trojan War, and just so happens to take a full 10 years for the main character to find his way home. I believe the codename was chosen for its figurative meaning, which says a whole lot more than what it was. Effectively, it was a set of ideas that would form the highway needed to go from the NT3-era to the next major iteration of NT.

[WindowsCollector2000]

@jimmsta- Wasn't NT 3.1 released in 1993? It could actually be an earlier beta than July 1991's prerelease (That would be awesome)

[oscareczek]

NT 3.51 was from 1995 IIRC.

[bean980310]

I know that the Windows Vista was NT 6.0, but I don't know what the Windows Odyssey also NT 6.0.

[James]

It's mostly hearsay that NT 6.0 was Odyssey at one point; remember that there was a five year period between NT 5.1 (XP) and NT 6.0 (Vista), and that NT 6.0 underwent numerous, numerous changes; and came out looking nothing like what any of the concepts proposed; makes one wonder if Longhorn really was simply just a pipedream that got smacked upside the head by the reality of computing power in the early-to-mid 00s.

[hounsell]

I think the Odyssey is "NT 6.0" just came about because it's just described as "next major release" - so people assume a bump in Major from the NT 5.x of the time. Maybe not an unreasonable assumption that this would have happened, but equally, it's not like the evidence suggests they ever got as far as assigning a version number to it.

Don't forget also that Longhorn was originally supposed to be a stopgap from Whistler to Blackcomb. A minor update for XP before the major update of Blackcomb. So much for that, lol.

[James]

Pfft, Blackcomb. The only thing I know that came out of that was that gaudy WindowBlinds theme that was basically a dark-colored hybrid between Watercolour and Luna with a MSN logo instead of a Windows logo.

[nazguz]

...
and NT 6.0 (Vista), and that NT 6.0 underwent numerous, numerous changes; and came out looking nothing like what any of the concepts proposed; makes one wonder if Longhorn really was simply just a pipedream that got smacked upside the head by the reality of computing power in the early-to-mid 00s.

if they didn't rely on .net, it wouldn't be a "pipe dream"
the proposed concepts were DONE during end of M3
some were upgraded later (4033, 4039, 406x)
-
thing is they HAD to compete with OSX, and well they still do lol
just compare blue plex concepts and compare with OSX's design at that time

but OSX "won", aside from that, I think we got Longhorn and Blackcomb spreaded
through vista-7-8-10

who knows, what will follow,

but if you look at longhorn itself (not the reset)
all the tech was there... ALL of it, from concepts

WinFS = yes (yes it sucked, but it was there)
Pivot powered by WinFS = yes
Taskbar that centers buttons and merges them (half made, but see win7 has the 2nd part init)
DCE-DWM = yes
Sidebar = yes
WIM = yes
LDDM = yes
DirectX driven Aurora = yes
3D "user frames" = yes (check out 4033's plex frame mesh), in fact you can see them in 4074 game center being implemented already
32bit boot anim = no (but as seen it was in M3 of Win7) - i mention this coz of aurora logon concept
-
this was ALL made by 407x, and were in MSX concepts

they even went step forward;
making 3D file system view
phodeo
uac (tom)
start page/oobe (tom)
that ngsbc or whatever it was called thingy

naturally all this was unfinished
they just toyed too much, and even if LH was to came out as small upgrade to XP
so called Blackcomb as major version would have all these features

but for the unknown reasons to me they dumped it

[WindowsCollector2000]

I heard Blackcomb was a codename for Windows 7, was it not?

[Overdoze]

Actually, no.

That "theory" exists solely because Blackcomb was to be released after Longhorn. When you connect that to what eventually happened (Longhorn became Vista and 7 was released after Vista) people began spreading this nonsense. Blackcomb and Longhorn were originally envisioned quite differently then what was eventually released as Vista and 7, so there's no connection here except that little chronological coincidence.

[jimmsta]

Longhorn was essentially a handful of updated kernel/api bits, mixed with a dash of experimental proof of concept programs, subsystems, and ideas. In the end of it, with the creation of the Omega reboot-tree, they kept the kernel bits in, and left the majority of the other bits for later NT6 releases.

And here we are, with NT6.4/10. What bits are missing from the Longhorn PoC stage? WinFS, a fully immersive 3d interface, ???, built-in spyware... oh wait.

There's really not much missing from the current release, if Longhorn was to be used as a blueprint for future NT6 releases, much like the 'Cairo vision' was used as a blueprint for NT3-5. Given how development is done at Microsoft now, however, I don't see any blueprint for the future. Maybe Microsoft is done with innovations and future-dreams for a while. Only time will tell.

[nazguz]

3D interface is already here since vista
you just can't use it as real 3D, as soon as DWM is ON, OS goes into 3D environment

but for their lack of "innovation" they even didn't know how to utilize it
the whole carousel file view was just by-product of testing and blending icons

if you want to see partial utilized 3D interface, boot up Java's Project Looking Glass

another thing that MS lost is metadata search... BeOS already had it before them
-
Longhorn was just rushed thing to compete with OSX and it failed...

[Maza]

that ngsbc or whatever it was called thingy

That would be BitLocker (a.k.a. "Cornerstone" or Secure Startup) and Code Integrity Rooting.

they just toyed too much, and even if LH was to came out as small upgrade to XP

What about the new audio stack? The new networking stack? WDDM? Desktop Window Manager? Winlogon being replaced with the new Credential Provider model? The new boot architecture that replaces the one used by Windows NT (NTLDR) since its inception? User Account Control? WIM setup?

When I see comments like these I recall Jim Allchin's remarks during August 2004: "I don't think people have any idea what Longhorn really is all about. There's so many great capabilities that we're working on that we haven't shared."

[nazguz]

and gee wiz it was all i386 and xpdm compatible

[Maza]

and gee wiz it was all i386 and xpdm compatible

And your point would be?

[nazguz]

and your?