Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwup | Hacker News Reader

This is WSL 2 1.0.0.

Microsoft is the worst company on the planet when it comes to version numbers. Don't even get me started about "Xbox One".

View on HN

USB 3.2 gen 2x2 would like a word. I had to Google it to make fun of it, and I’m still not sure if it’s “(gen 2) x2” or “gen (2x2)”.

USB has learned their lesson and finally have a sensible naming strategy going forward. When is Microsoft going to learn their lesson?

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/09/usb-if-says-goodbye-...

that didn't stop them from announcing new speeds (80 and 120Gbps) as USB4 2.0 though...

They have not. There are still optional components of USB4.

I’m not sure how or why this happens. USB, HDMI, BLE, all have optional components and it’s insanely frustrating. It’s got to be some new feature of designed-by-committee groups where it’s easy to get a feature only 1/2 the group wants.

Because, you see, if power transmission is optional, we can manufacture a cable without it for 37¢ instead of 39¢. Think of the savings!

... yes, I hate it too :(

By Grabthar's Hammer

For longer cables the cost is significant. USB-C can carry 5A, so you need 18 gauge wire for ~12 feet. Ideally you'd do the 8 power/ground pins at 18awg and the 16 data pins at 28awg. But that's a substantially more expensive cable than just 24 wires of 28awg.

And as a user it's annoying to have an excessively stiff cable, so it's suboptimal to have every cable support 240W charging, but for cost and convenience.

It's a mess. We all said we wanted one cable that does everything, and I still feel that way, but here I am buying different cables for laptop charging versus iPad charging because I want a light/thin cable for the iPad. Sigh.

Weren't all those names deprecated in favor of just calling it USB 10/20/40 Gbps in market facing use? I Think the whole "Gen X" makes sense for technical documentation, but it's clearly too specific for consumer communication.

You can still use WSL 1 with this version, so it's technically WSL 1&2 1.0.0, which feels more on par with the USB thing to me.

> This is WSL 2 1.0.0.

> Microsoft is the worst company on the planet when it comes to version numbers.

I take some bleak comfort in the fact that this subsystem appears to be built on New Technology Subsystem Technology...

Department of Redundancy Department

Didn't Apple call a specific non-first version of iPad just iPad? Like it was, iPad, iPad 2, iPad again. Or am I misremembering?

Anyway nobody is really worse than USB-IF who recently released USB4 2.0 specification.

yup, you remember it right. It looked like they wanted to have an iPhone-like numbering scheme with iPad 2 and then.. changed their minds I guess?

IIRC it was literally called “the new iPad” which is nonsensical a decade later.

When the iPad 3 released Apple called it "The new iPad" everywhere.

So you had:

- iPad ("iPad")

- iPad 2 ("iPad 2" or "iPad 2nd generation")

- iPad 3 ("The new iPad")

- iPad 4 ("iPad with Retina display")

So in late 2012 you had people shopping, and having to pick between "The New iPad" (last year's model), "iPad with Retina display" (this year's model), and the iPad Air.

Apple stopped after that, going with iPad [type] [number] naming.

I always try to just skip to the (year) identification scheme, which is potentially less confusing (unless I'm actually looking at my specific piece of hardware), unless they release multiple iterations each year, which it seems they've done a couple times.

It's not that unusual, especially in games. For instance,"The Witcher 2" version 3.3 [1], "Dota 2" version 7.32c [2], but also "Struts 2", version 6.0.3 [3]. Some others may be more considered a product name than a version number, e.g. "GNOME 2", "Winamp 5".

[1] https://en.cdprojektred.com/download/patch-3-3/ [2] https://www.dota2.com/patches/7.32c [3] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WW/Version+Notes...

I'd agree, but they are calling it "WSL 1.0.0", which is reflected in the release name for example ("Microsoft.WSL_1.0.0.0_x64_ARM64.msixbundle"). Which is natural of course because they are already calling the WSL2 repo simply "WSL".

Seriously?

Will there also be WSL 1 2.0 then? But WSL 1 was never called 1, it was just WSL in contrast to WSL 2.

I think most people at this point call WSL1 "WSL1". That does seem to be the lasting "names" of these: WSL1 and WSL2. Arguably they aren't version numbers at all but naming in the way people name Word docs that start off as clones and slowly diverge. Perhaps someday we'll get WSL.Final and WSL.Final.Final to truly close the loop on the Word doc style naming scheme.

I think that honor goes to USB-IF.

Hmm I was confused about this as well. Thank you for the clarification here. Perhaps we could get a title update to something like "WSL 2 out of beta".

As an aside, I love WSL. Some of my favorite software out of Microsoft in years.

What about "Xbox One Series" ?

glares at video card numbering schemes

They're just trying to beat Sun.

What should the version have been?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com