Why Microsoft don't make any build of some codenames?

[YueLing11]

Why Microsoft don't make any single build of Windows Odyseey or Windows 7 during Blackcomb/Vienna codenames?

[TheCharizard31]

I think they didn't take the time to make build. It is possible also Microsoft made builds but they didn't leak them.

TheCharizard31

[Zv45Beta]

Only they know why exactly Odyssey didn't make it into any beta builds they started with Odyssey as a replacement for Win2k and Neptune as a replacement for Win9x, but in the end merged those two into Whistler (Windows XP).

[AlphaBeta]

Why would they? Developing two versions at the same time is not common practice at all. Most of the time Microsoft tried to do that, they ended up scrapping one of them because the other one has sucked the entire feature set.

Neptune and Longhorn were at such early stages that already coding Odyssey and Blackcomb at the same time would most likely be inefficient, especially if we consider the major changes that were planned for the former two. Not to mention that Longhorn eventually became what was supposed to be Blackcomb to the point where the codename was just another "vNext" moniker referring to a future Windows version with no exactly defined feature set.

they started with Odyssey as a replacement for Win2k and Neptune as a replacement for Win9x, but in the end merged those two into Whistler (Windows XP).

That's not actually true, Neptune was supposed to succeed both Windows 2000 and Windows 98 (and then Windows ME) which would itself be succeeded by Odyssey.

[Windows Alfie]

Not to mention that no builds of a large majority of cancelled codenames. Think about it, the only codename with a large majority of builds even found is Longhorn.
To this day it's unknown whether:
A. Microsoft did not get past planning for Odyssey, Triton, and Blackcomb.
A. A. Odyssey was first mentioned in documents from 1997, and was last mentioned in 2000.
A. B. Triton was planned quite a bit, even having month and year releases and even planned post-release updates.
A. C. Longhorn.
or
B. Microsoft did compile builds, but haven't been known.
B. A. Odyssey's fate still remains unknown whether builds were compiled or not. Most likely not.
B. B. Triton could have had a demo preview or something along the lines of that to show business executives in terms of progress. I doubt it though.
B. C. THis theory flat out would not work with Blackcomb because it's impossible to have builds compiled prior to the reset. It's just not possible that a Blackcomb build was ever compiled until 2006/2007.

[mrpijey]

Simply put: Because MS assigns a codename to something doesn't mean it ends up as a compiled build. Or that the compiled build ever reaches outside the internal dev team. And projects change, merge and gets renamed.

[winnt32]

I read some old news articles that said they did start compiling Blackcomb builds, but almost reset to Longhorn pretty quick.

Odyssey might have started too, considering that some early Whistler planning documents say "what we've learned from Neptune, Odyssey, Millennium, and other projects".

Then again, I've also read articles somewhere that said that the codename "Longhorn" was first thought up on a ski trip in 1999.

The timeline goes like this:


1991-1996: Cairo (cancelled)
1992-1995: Chicago/Windows 95
1995-1996: Nashville (cancelled)
1996-1998: Memphis/Windows 98
1996/1997-late 1999 (released early 2000): Windows NT 5.0/ 2000
1997 (planning)/roughly July 11, 1999, but maybe a bit earlier (beginning of development)-late January 2000 (cancellation/merge with Odyssey): Neptune
1997/199? (beginning of development)-late January 2000: Odyssey
1998?-1999: Windows 98 SE
1999-2000: Millennium/Windows ME
1999?/2001/2004 (reset)/2006/07: Longhorn/eventually Windows Vista
2000-2001: Whistler/Windows XP
At least early 2000, potentially even earlier/2006 (project rename)/2007 (beginning of development as a refined Vista)/2009 (release): Blackcomb, later Vienna or Windows 7
2001: "Idaho" - was on some blog post from 2006.
2001-2003: Windows XP Advanced Server/Windows Advanced Server "Limited Edition"/Windows .NET Server/Windows .NET Server 2003/Windows Server 2003 (yes it had that many names)
2003-2004: Windows XP SP2 (it was really that big, one of the project leads said it could have easily been released as a new version of Windows)


The 90s was really a mess at Microsoft.

[YueLing11]

I read some old news articles that said they did start compiling Blackcomb builds, but almost reset to Longhorn pretty quick.

Odyssey might have started too, considering that some early Whistler planning documents say "what we've learned from Neptune, Odyssey, Millennium, and other projects".

Then again, I've also read articles somewhere that said that the codename "Longhorn" was first thought up on a ski trip in 1999.

The timeline goes like this:


1991-1996: Cairo (cancelled)
1992-1995: Chicago/Windows 95
1995-1996: Nashville (cancelled)
1996-1998: Memphis/Windows 98
1996/1997-late 1999 (released early 2000): Windows NT 5.0/ 2000
1997 (planning)/roughly July 11, 1999, but maybe a bit earlier (beginning of development)-late January 2000 (cancellation/merge with Odyssey): Neptune
1997/199? (beginning of development)-late January 2000: Odyssey
1998?-1999: Windows 98 SE
1999-2000: Millennium/Windows ME
1999?/2001/2004 (reset)/2006/07: Longhorn/eventually Windows Vista
2000-2001: Whistler/Windows XP
At least early 2000, potentially even earlier/2006 (project rename)/2007 (beginning of development as a refined Vista)/2009 (release): Blackcomb, later Vienna or Windows 7
2001: "Idaho" - was on some blog post from 2006.
2001-2003: Windows XP Advanced Server/Windows Advanced Server "Limited Edition"/Windows .NET Server/Windows .NET Server 2003/Windows Server 2003 (yes it had that many names)
2003-2004: Windows XP SP2 (it was really that big, one of the project leads said it could have easily been released as a new version of Windows)


The 90s was really a mess at Microsoft.

Maybe Blackcomb/Vienna builds is completely private and no information leaked.