Did the Windows 95 interface have a code name?

Commenter kinokijuf wonders whether the Windows 95 interface had a code name.


We called it "the new shell" while it was under preliminary development, and when it got enabled in the builds, we just called it "the shell."

(Explorer originally was named Cabinet, unrelated to the container file format of the same name. This original name lingers in the window class: CabinetWClass.)

Comments (17)
  1. Phil says:

    Wasn't Windows 95 (as a whole) code named Chicago?

  2. chliebel says:

    @Phil: True. However, the commenter asked for the code name of its interface. ;-)

  3. Phil says:

    @chliebel – Right – mine was more of a follow-up question :-)

  4. Boris says:

    But Phil, couldn't you have simply bing'd "Windows 95" and "Chicago" together?

  5. MNGoldenEagle says:

    I'm guessing that's why the Explorer-style shell beta program for Windows NT 3.51 was called "NewShell"?

  6. James Curran says:

    Answering only 13 months after it was asked… The backlog is shrinking..

  7. Mike Dunn says:

    I have vague memories of the term "Newshell" — a proper noun, one word — being used around the time of NT 4's release to distinguish its shell from NT 3.5's shell.

  8. Gabe says:

    And NT 4 didn't really have a codename either. It was just the "Shell Update Release", or "SUR".

  9. WndSks says:

    The funny thing about CabinetWClass is that if you run "explorer.exe /e" or use CMF_EXPLORE (on pre-Vista systems) then the class name is changed to ExplorerWClass. This is rather strange since you can toggle the folder pane on/off in the UI either way.

  10. WndSks says:

    …and some of the old (probably undocumented in the 90's) shell stuff like ReadCabinetState() used the Cabinet name while its cousin SHGetSetSettings() just used the now common SH prefix.

  11. Vitor Canova says:

    Hey Raymond, how to suggest you something? Suggestion box 4 is closed, email form you don't have and I think twitter is not an option too. I would ask why this: http://www.hanselman.com/…/HowToCreateAFileWithADotPrefixInWindowsExplorer.aspx

  12. Andy says:

    Vitor, to steal a phrase from Raymond, I don't know, but I can guess. Explorer hides known extensions from some users, so it tries to protect them from typing a file name with an extension but nothing before it, as renaming a file ".doc" would leave it with a blank file name. This explains why explorer stops you when you just have a leading dot, but why does the second dot help? Because it's the part after the final dot which is the extension, so the leading dot is now just like any other part of the filename. The final piece of the puzzle is another bit of hand-holding from explorer – if you type a dot at the end but don't add an extension, explorer tidies it away instead.

  13. Vitor Canova says:

    @Andy Well, looks possible and acceptable. ;)

    @Boris Thanks. I was trying search for "point" instead of "dot". Sorry my poor English but it's not my first language ;)

  14. Joshua says:

    I'm going to violate my own rule about following on up a major derailment.

    With the popularity of git on Windows to even the point of Visual Studio now supporting it via MS's own development, leading . in a filename does now need to be allowed. The rules HAVE already changed and the least damage is now allowing it and not treating an initial dot as part of the extension. Depending on the bug in the check about the trailing period is stupid.

  15. 99% of Windows users says:

    >With the popularity of git on Windows to even the point of Visual Studio now supporting it via MS's own development, leading . in a filename does now need to be allowed.

    "WTF is a 'git'?", you git.

  16. Joshua says:

    What's bad for developers is bad for everybody. See what happened to IPhone. It was the first successful and had no competition for years. It got stomped by android in one year because it was bad for developers.

Comments are closed.