httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexei Kosut <ako...@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject "Win32"?
Date Wed, 15 Jul 1998 07:03:57 GMT
Hmm.

Thinking about Marc's recent change to the 1.3.1 Announcement, I think the
word "Win32" is too liberally applied in that, and other, documents.

We're using "Win32" to mean "Windows NT, 95 and 98", but AFAIK, it simply
refers to an API. So while saying that "Apache 1.3 has a Win32 port" or
referring to "the current Win32 code" is fine, saying "on Win32, there is
more than one name for a file" isn't. I mean, it's not the API's fault
that the file system and the part of the kernel that talks to it is
screwed up. And there is definitely not a "Win32 file system". In the
various Windows incarnations, there are at least three in common use (FAT,
FAT32, NTFS).

IMHO, the proper word to use here is just "Windows". It's also clearer -
in all probablility, not everyone knows what Win32 means, or should.

-- Alexei Kosut <akosut@stanford.edu> <http://www.stanford.edu/~akosut/>
   Stanford University, Class of 2001 * Apache <http://www.apache.org> *



Mime
View raw message