Suggestion to move NewShell

edited January 2015 in Site Issues
In my opinion, NewShell (link to item, location) is more suited under NT 3.x > Patches, as opposed to Applications.

Once again, this is probably something I could do, but I fear breaking something.
I could have probably sorted [Windows 95 RTM/OSR archives] myself... but I fear I'll mess up somehow.

EDIT: Replace "System Updates/Patches" with "NT 3.x > Patches"

Comments

  • Okay, I learnt how to move downloads. Big thanks to wingzeroismine.

    One thing that remains is to remove the NewShell section under Applications.
  • The problem is it is harder for search engines to find it lumped under patches. Pages with the product in the title are more likely to show up first when googling for that product name.

    Also, Newshell is not really an official patch or update to Windows NT.

    It would be better to instead create hyperlinks between the two in the release descriptions. BTW, to do that place the text you want to hyperlink between square brackets and then the URL without the http://winworldpc.com prefix in parenthesis.

    For example:
    [MS-DOS product page](/product/ms-dos).
    
  • SomeGuy wrote:
    Also, Newshell is not really an official patch or update to Windows NT.
    Except that that's exactly what it is. As far as Microsoft was concerned, it was clearly an update that provided the user interface of Microsoft Windows 95 and other features which would later be provided in the next version of Microsoft Windows NT.

    Also, in the documentation that was provided with it, Microsoft even clearly describes it as the "Shell Technology Preview" and as the "SUR" (Shell Update Release).

    It even includes numerous updated system files and other such features, so it is not even an "application" in the same sense as a third party shell replacement, but rather an actual update to the Microsoft Windows NT 3.51 operating system which was released as a preview of features that would later appear in the next version.
  • Perhaps I used the wrong term - it is not a PRODUCTION patch like the service packs. You would have been advised not to install that on any production NT system.

    And that doesn't change the fact that someone simply searching for "NewShell" won't easily find it there.

    There is lots of software here that does not fit cleanly in to any one category or group. That's just the way the real world works. Ask any platypus.
  • SomeGuy wrote:
    Perhaps I used the wrong term - it is not a PRODUCTION patch like the service packs. You would have been advised not to install that on any production NT system.

    And that doesn't change the fact that someone simply searching for "NewShell" won't easily find it there.

    There is lots of software here that does not fit cleanly in to any one category or group. That's just the way the real world works. Ask any platypus.
    OK, thanks.

    Of course, I knew that it was not a "production patch" (as you call it), which would be similar to a service pack, but rather for pre-release software, as I explained above, since it was essentially for beta testing and evaluating the Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 user interface prior to the final product's release.

    Since this is essentially pre-release software, though, and since Microsoft made it perfectly clear, I think that the best way to categorize it would be to simply list it as being exactly that, and between the releases of Microsoft Windows NT 3.51 and Microsoft Windows NT 4.0. That way, we could still gain results while at the same time also categorizing it as properly and as much accurately as possible (as in, someone searching for "NewShell" along with "Windows NT 3.51" or "Windows NT 4.0" would still find it here in the search results).
  • Here's a suggestion:
    - Service Packs are to be kept together with OSes.
    - Other stuff such as NewShell and Windows 2000 High Encryption Pack are to be kept under System Updates/Patches.

    My original intention was to move NewShell to System Updates/Patches, but at one moment having it placed under NT 3.x > Patches seemed like a better idea...
  • Here's a suggestion:
    - Service Packs are to be kept together with OSes.
    - Other stuff such as NewShell and Windows 2000 High Encryption Pack are to be kept under System Updates/Patches.

    This was how I always pictured the system working and what I thought everyone was already on board with from it's inception. Yes it's not a perfect system because there's just too many unique situations like this for that to be practical.

    Use notoriety as your judgement factor. If you think an update or a patch is relevant enough to warrant it's own page it should have one because this is how Google finds things. DirectX, DCOM updates, etc are handled in this way. There's enough content about NewShell to warrant it's own page depsite being applicable to one OS, the same with Citrix WinFrame. Things like the Win95 Dial Up Networking update however I dropped under the Win95 patches page because it's only for Win95 and there's nothing really noteworthy about that itself. That's like, who cares? NewShell was interesting and there's history behind it.
  • Moved back to its own product, added linkage, changed category to "System Updates/Patches", and added screen shots.
Sign In or Register to comment.