Maybe it's a myth, but it sure sounds plausible. The software that checks the "Windows 9" substring doesn't even have to exist for this to be reason they chose to skip to version 10 — they just had to be concerned that it might exist.

Sure, maybe there's no C function that returns the string, but there's a ver command. It would be trivial to shell out to the command. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ver_(command)

This doesn't prove anything, but there are a TON of examples of code that checks for the substring. It's not hard to imagine that code written circa 2000 would not be future proof. https://sourcegraph.com/search?q=context:global+%22%5C%22windows+9%5C%22%22&patternType=keyword&sm=0

[–] dan@upvote.au 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

but there are a TON of examples of code that checks for the substring

oh no

There's code in the JDK that does that??

I really wish I didn't see that.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yup!! Never look under the hood in software, you'll just be disappointed ☹️

[–] dan@upvote.au 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I've been a software developer for 20 years and this comment is too real. Some days I'm amazed that any software even works at all.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Having worked in both food service and software, I encourage you not to visit the kitchen of any restaurants you enjoy either.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 9 months ago

Please don't show me how the sausage is made