terms for classifying different Windows operating systems

  • Thread starter Thread starter artie.ziff
  • Start date Start date
A

artie.ziff

Greetings,

I'm constructing a interopability matrix that reflects compatibility
with various MS Windows operating systems. I want to label the
Microsoft product entries on my document, correctly, such that the
labels are consistent with the way Microsoft labels their own products.


Outside of a link to this information on the Microsoft web site (which
I have not been able to find), can anyone could help identify the
proper classification of the various attributes of the Windows
operating systems? Here is what I think so far:

For example, the "base version" is one of NT, 2000, 2003.

And of course updates to versions ar represented as service pack
numbers such as "SP4".

An "edition" is whether it might be "Professional", "Advanced Server",
"Web", "Standard", and "Enterprise".

Although I have not seen it explicitly stated as such, 32 bit and 64
bit variations are attributes related to how the source code was
compiled; so I am inclined to label this as "architecture".

Does anyone have "the skinny" on the way Microsoft labels/classifies
these various product attributes? Comments on the above? Does it seem
adequate?

Thanks for your input...

Cheers!
 
Anyone?

OK... how about a question about editions...

Why does Microsoft make a distinction amongst editions when it comes to
certified compatibility? Here is an example:
<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ca...tail&pgn=a639c3cb-3079-eb80-2edd-60ae919811df>

What makes a Microsoft Operating System release different from edition
to edition? I see edition names such as, "Datacenter", "Enterprise",
"Standard", "Web", and "Advanced".

Are these edition names merely labels for different application
bundles? I do not understand why the WHCL certification is not simply
for a 32-bit or 64-bit compiled version of a particular release level.
Why must these editions make any difference at all?

Cheers,
AZ
 
Back
Top