Talk:Windows Longhorn

Is there a source for this claim? "One of the biggest mistakes that people commonly make is that they think Microsoft Codename Longhorn is based on Windows XP, when it's infact based on .NET Server (Server 2003) Release Candidate code." (Maza (talk) 04:41, 28 April 2013 (GMT))

I don't know where it originally came from, but I did used to think it was based on Windows XP awhile ago, although I have learned my lesson. (NHL fan (talk)) 04:52 a.m. Sunday April 28, 2013 (GMT) 11:52 PM, Saturday, April 27th, 2013. (CCT (Canadian Central Time))

Posted by Hounsell few years ago:

"Strictly speaking, Longhorn may have started off being based on XP. However, through the 3xxx builds, it tracked the Server 03 base, splitting into 4xxx around Server 03 RC, which is what the later builds can therefore considered to be based upon." (near the bottom of the page)

--AlphaBeta (talk) 05:01, 16 May 2013 (GMT)

Get rid of changelog/finish the changelog
It looks quite unfinished this way, and I personally think we should keep the changelogs on the pages themselves.

Are all of these builds confirmed?
They look really sequential, and the ones without a page are unleaked, so I don't think they should be listed. Also, It would be better If the changelog and the list of builds get merged

I would leave them but we also need to leave fakes. We don't want people to be believing fake builds are real. User:WILSON2bGg

Merge Longhorn & Vista Pages
PLZ DO IT! Nitopurple5431
 * Any arguments for that, aside from "PLZ DO IT"? --AlphaBeta (talk) 11:14, 3 June 2020 (BST)