in Windows, some teams/people use it others don't. Historically it hasn't worked well with some of the internal build/test/etc stuff, that's mostly changed in recent years.
this is how I did "AI coding" (for unfamiliar languages/frameworks/etc.) back in the GPT-3.5/4 days. Except I'd also test each line to verify it actually did what I thought it did.
MAI is supposed to have its own design language/brand identity that is unrelated to the overall Microsoft brand. It has its own fonts, logo, colors, etc. The weird thing is that consumer Copilot, which is (or was) developed at MAI (as opposed to business/M365 Copilot which is developed in Redmond and designed based on the regular Microsoft stuff) also has its own design language which is different from the regular Microsoft stuff and different from the MAI stuff.
tbh all of this has always struck me as an ego thing from the MAI team, who are mostly based in Silicon Valley, not Redmond, and think of themselves as too cool for Microsoft
Wow, no wonder Copilot looked so out of place within the Windows UI. It's not the only core app that blatantly goes against Windows' design language either- Movie Maker and later the built-in video editor in Photos both died for ClipChamp which is some horrible, out-of-place web-based video editor with a mandatory login and feels like it has absolutely no relation to Windows. I'm surprised people from above don't enforce at least basic UI elements that look like they belong to the same product (forget about using the same UI framework across the OS)
Microsoft's head of marketing at the time posted about this on internal Yammer. He said there were two main reasons: first, "Windows 10" just did better in focus groups than Windows 9 or other alternatives; second, since the plan at the time was for all future changes to be delivered as updates rather than a newly branded Windows release†, it felt better to end on a round number.
† btw, what became Windows 11 started development as just another Windows 10 feature update, and what gets branded as a "new release" vs an "update" is mostly a marketing decision.
> what became Windows 11 started development as just another Windows 10 feature update, and what gets branded as a "new release" vs an "update" is mostly a marketing decision.
The move from Windows 10 to Windows 11 came with some pretty severe restrictions on supported hardware, so the version jump in this case makes sense to me. It would be a lot more difficult to push an "update" which obsoleted so much hardware like that.
> came with some pretty severe restrictions on supported hardware
That's hardware, and just like with the Linux kernel you have some tough choices to make about what you continue to support. Apple rendered my Intel Mac Mini a brick because despite having a 64 bit CPU its BIOS/UEFI or whatever was 32 bit and I was stuck with MacOS 10.6, no way to upgrade to 10.7 Lion.
I'm not sure there's any crisply definable bright line separating them. Generally embrace/extend strategies do involve trying to make extensions that some people will consider valuable.
reply