Talk:Cairo (operating system)

message: In early August, an editor renamed this article to Windows "Cairo".  I've renamed it back to its prior name, Cairo (operating system).  The reason for this is that the in-quotes codename is something that has developed in the last few years when discussing beta versions of Windows software, in lieu of a final name.  The press, and Microsoft themselves, didn't use this naming pattern when discussing Cairo.  Being internally consistent in terms of how we represent products with codenames isn't important... what's important is how other people refer to it, and that we are consistent with that.   -/- Warren 22:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  name of this article 

message: if we read the letters of "xp" greek, we read it "chi"-"rho", "cairo".
is there a correlation between xp and cairo?
--80.219.164.136 15:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather, "New Order of the Objects".  Earksiinni (talk) 20:11, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

text: Makes sense.  Jeff.homme (talk) 03:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  cairo -> xp 

message: The article states that the Cairo (which I guess would be pronounced Kayro, like the town in southern Illinois, if that bit about being between Chicago and Memphis is true) was developed in 1991-1999.  Yet in the features section, the article then leaps ahead to WinFS, Vista, and Windows 7.  I don't see the relationship here.  If the article just indicates that a file object system was intended for Cairo and points out that one such system was intended for Vista, I think it could be transitioned better.  The way the article currently reads sounds like WinFS was originally crafted as part of Cairo.  According to the WinFS article, WinFS was first demoed in 2003, four years after the cancellation of Cairo.  If that section of the article could be improved for clarity, that would be great.  Mandanthe1 08:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree about the lack of clarity, but WinFS really has its roots in Cairo's Object File System. The connection is better explained in the article on WinFS. --bonzi (talk) 09:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing Features Section 

message: Shouldn't we add something about how it made people wait for years upon years for a product that never actually came to complete fruition in a single, integrated product?  All Cairo really was was Microsoft introducing the concept of stuff a decade and a half before it was possible to be implemented on the average desktop computer.
Cairo was not just "another cool thing from Redmond", it was vaporware intended to damage Microsoft's competition.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.165.246.61 (talk) 09:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And if you want Wikipedia to editorialize in this manner, then I guess we'd need to add the same comments to the section on Copland (operating system), Apple's version of "Cairo" which was vaporware as well. Or maybe it's just a simple case of both companies shooting for the moon and not quite being able to get there. Jsc1973 (talk) 11:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It was the later - both companies were hoping to actually release "visionary" new systems, only to be proven to have overreached vastly. Of course, marketing of both companies also used the development effort to keep the customers in the perpetual state of waiting for the "great thing just around the corner" and so never considering switching to the competition. However, it is not up to Wikipedia to pass judgments like these. BTW, I seem to remember that this article was much longer and better, with more details on the scope of the project and its reflections in today's products... If I had time I would go trawling through the article's history and revert at least portions of it. And I couldn't believe that someone actually proposed this article for deletion as a possible hoax! I remember magazines like Byte (R.I.P.) devoting almost whole issues to it. --bonzi (talk) 09:37, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

text: A requirements document for Windows Cairo labeled as a plaintiff's exhibit 5542 in Comes vs. Microsoft is posted at Cairo Product Requirements.  If this document is part of the public record, information from it may be used to show that it is not a hoax.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hv8EEHpq (talk • contribs) 00:53, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vaporware??? 

message: Is this article a stub, or is there just not enough information out there for a larger article?
I'll add what I can find to the article! :) 157.185.66.2 (talk) 19:05, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub?