Timeline for What's up with "Window XP" and "Window 7"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:04 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://superuser.com/ with https://superuser.com/
|
|
| Feb 3, 2012 at 17:11 | answer | added | studiohackMod | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 13, 2012 at 13:22 | comment | added | kinokijuf | @DanielBeck No, the official name is Microsoft® Vista™. | |
| Jan 12, 2012 at 22:08 | comment | added | Daniel Beck Mod | @kinokijuf Nitpicker ;) Interesting though. But I still don't think a single use of "Microsoft Vista" (does this real name have a Microsoft prefix?) was created with that in mind. | |
| Jan 12, 2012 at 20:47 | comment | added | kinokijuf | @DanielBeck Vista doesn’t have Windows in its name. | |
| Nov 19, 2011 at 21:19 | comment | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | Also quite a few X Windows (note that the search has false positives which mention X windows, as in windows on the X Window System). | |
| Nov 15, 2011 at 7:54 | comment | added | studiohack Mod | Cheers @Gareth! :) | |
| Nov 15, 2011 at 7:49 | history | edited | Gareth | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
studiohack worked his way through Windows 7
|
| Nov 15, 2011 at 7:37 | history | edited | Gareth | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
cleared up XP posts
|
| Nov 15, 2011 at 1:40 | comment | added | Gareth | I revised a fair number of these, but got bored after a while. :) | |
| Nov 14, 2011 at 17:03 | history | edited | slhck | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 341 characters in body
|
| Nov 14, 2011 at 15:08 | history | edited | slhck | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| Nov 14, 2011 at 8:19 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackSuper_User/status/135995203227107328 | ||
| Nov 14, 2011 at 7:21 | history | edited | slhck | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 266 characters in body; edited tags
|
| Nov 14, 2011 at 7:20 | comment | added | slhck | @Lord Definitely agree with you here. It's a perfect "low quality" indicator. I even think that posts should have a hidden "low-quality" flag when they have any of these. It's the same for "Problem" in titles: Allow usage, but flag them automatically. If we can manage to go through the first list ourselves, I'd prefer to do it manually and fix the rest of the post as well. | |
| Nov 14, 2011 at 5:55 | comment | added | Pops | This reminds me of Can 'u' and 'i' part ways with Stack Exchange?. I'm wary of autofixes, especially for low-volume errors. Easily searchable mistakes even kind of make it easier for us to find posts in need of editing. | |
| Nov 14, 2011 at 4:42 | answer | added | Psycogeek | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 14, 2011 at 4:34 | comment | added | Daniel Beck Mod |
The Microsoft Windows name and brand is internationally the same, just select some interesting looking language on the Windows site and see for yourself. People are just lazy or stupid. Win ?(XP|7|Vista) and Window ?(XP|7|Vista) would probably make good poor post indicators… We even have 14 questions containing Microsoft XP, 5 questions containing Microsoft Vista, 2 questions containing Microsoft 7
|
|
| Nov 13, 2011 at 23:14 | comment | added | Simon Sheehan | Well, time to grab some spare keyboards - this is gonna mean lots of editing ;) | |
| Nov 13, 2011 at 23:10 | comment | added | slhck | No, I'm actually talking about the raw text content, tags would be easy :) | |
| Nov 13, 2011 at 23:08 | comment | added | nhinkle Mod | Whoops, misunderstood. Not tags, just in the text. Hmm. | |
| Nov 13, 2011 at 22:58 | history | asked | slhck | CC BY-SA 3.0 |