Paul Thurrott's SuperSite for Windows
Home > Type > News > The lead architect of Windows 95? Really?

The lead architect of Windows 95? Really?

Jul. 21, 2008 Paul Thurrott | Paul Thurrott's Supersite for Windows

So I'm curious about this one. The Cult of Mac has a blog post claiming that "the lead architect of Microsoft’s Windows 95," a man named Satoshi Nakajima, is now developing software for the iPhone.

The thing is, I've never heard of Satoshi Nakajima.

What I'm wondering is, was Nakajimi really the lead architect of Windows 95? He's described in three different ways in this blog post:

- Microsoft's Windows 95 architect

- the lead architect of Microsoft’s Windows 95

- the software architect of Windows 95 and 98

So which is it? My guess is, it's none of them, not really. My guess is that Nakajimi is just one of thousands of developers who worked on Windows 95. Maybe higher up than your average developer, maybe not. I can't find many other relevant references to him online because the Web is so busy republishing this (dubious?) Cult of Mac story, so all the Nakajimi references are just re-quotes from that one post. His name doesn't appear in any of the many tell-all books about Microsoft I own, but I did find him mentioned in a recent Wall Street Journal article, so I assume that's where the Cult of Mac heard about him. Here's how the WSJ describes him:

Mr. Nakajima, a former longtime Microsoft software engineer ...

Time for ten seconds of research.

I tried to contact the blog post author, someone named Lonnie Lazar. But there's no mention of him on the site's About Us page at all.

I tried to contact Mr. Nakajima on his new company's "Web site" (really a lame blog), but there's no contact info there either. (It literally says "Under construction" on the Contact Us page.)

However, Wikipedia does mention the following:

Satoshi Nakajima ... after thirteen and half years of his work at Microsoft where he had been a software architect for Windows 95/98 and Internet Explorer 3.0/4.0. [Emphasis mine.—Paul]

Ah.

So ... Was this guy really the architect/lead architect of Windows 95? Or is he really just one of thousands of ex-Microsoft software developers out there (i.e. "a software architect")?

I think it's the latter.

I think some guy who's not even referenced on the Cult of Mac blog has trumped up this guy's credentials to make this story seem more fascinating.

And I think the entire blogosphere just fell for it.

But hey, I could be wrong. I'm OK with it either way, really.

But why have I never heard of this guy?

Discuss this Article 56

mikegalos@msn.com
on Jul 22, 2008
@Snakedoctor1 Yes. MOST PC users get an OEM copy of Windows with their computer. ALL Mac users get an OEM copy of OS X with their computer. A TINY number of PC users are not eligible for an upgrade version of Windows because they built a new PC or bought a PC with no OS ZERO Mac users are are not eligible for an upgrade version of OS X because they built a new Mac or bought a Mac with no OS Full package product Windows is available for that tiny group and MOST Windows users only need to buy Update Full package product OS X is NOT avaible since there are NO customers who could use it What are you not getting? And skip the name calling in posts at least where you're asking for something (like an explanation for a simple concept you just can't seem to understand)
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jul 22, 2008
OK Let's try this one more time THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A MAC WITHOUT AN OS X LICENSE There IS such a thing as a PC without a Windows license Hence, there is no need to confirm that you have a right to OS X on a Mac because you since Apple has a 100% monopoly on operating systems for the platform you had no choice but to buy a license when you bought the computer. If you try and install OS X on a non-Mac, let me know how it works out for you. (That's APPLE enforcing their licensing terms)
DRWAM
on Jul 22, 2008
OK I understand, but I sure would love to see Steve's data as I just don't believe him. SNow Leopard outmoding the PPC is nothing new to Apple behavior. While I disagree that their ads are FUD or that they ethics are any worse than any other company, this forcing upgrades kinda blows. It's not just the OS. An example is the gadgets. Some iPods and iPhones require [at least stated by Apple] 10.3 or higher. People have made hacks to make Leopard work on older Macs that don't have the required CPU speed as well as Jaguar hacks. I would not be surprised to find hacks to make some iPods or iPhone work on 10.2 as well. I really dislike it. If a hack can be made, that means the hardware or software WILL work on these older OS's or Macs, and that's what I find disturbing. I would bet that they can come up with some reason [excuse] for doing so, but it leaves most with no other option but to upgrade. Heck, the only reason I upgraded to 10.2 from )S 9 on my G4 was because my brother, a teacher got the software free and could not use it. I upgraded the CPU a few years ago to wait for the Intel Towers, so I have used it since 1999. The boot HD finally died, so I pulled an old external drive that I was testing Leopard for IT, and it worked! Leopard runs on a 1999 G4 Tower that had the 450 MHz CPU replaced with a 1.25GHz purchased for $300 yrs ago., and it at least as fast as Jaguar, 10.2. Go figure. So why can't Apple do better?
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jul 22, 2008
@DrWam, I think the likely reason is that you have a strong motivation to make it work. Apple, on the other hand, has a loyal user base with a history of letting Apple duck backward compatibility requirements and that doesn't give them a lot of incentive to put in the, frankly huge, effort needed to maintain backward compatibility. There's an old joke in the industry. Q. Why does it take six months to roll out a new OS? After all, God created the universe in 6 days. A. Yeah, but he didn't have to worry about backward compatibility.
DRWAM
on Jul 22, 2008
That's a good one! So here's something funny Mike. I was staring at the backyard trying to figure out what old friend that you look like. I planted 29 large rose bushes and 15 mini bushes in the yard, but the wife order a bag of 100 tulip bulbs [I do 100 % of the planting and flower and shrub care of course]. While I was thinking and staring at the yard, I figured out pretty much where I was going to plant, at least most of them, so thanks for the help! But, I never figured out who it was that you look like. Maybe it was the painter guy from Murphy Brown, but remember that I'm just looking at one picture. WAM
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jul 22, 2008
DRWAM, Glad to help. On the other, must be the picture since I don't look at all like Eldin Bernecky.

Please or Register to post comments.

Related Articles

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use
Apr. 18, 2013
Article

What I Use: On the Road 21

Every so often, I publish an updated version of my “What I Use” document, which details the technology products and services I actually use day-to-day. Since I’m currently on my third business trip in five weeks, this is perhaps an ideal time to discuss the technology products I rely on when I travel and a few related points....More
Mar. 6, 2013
Article

What I Use: March 2013 33

Lots of changes since November, including a new PC-based home server running Windows 8, several new smart phones, new PCs and tablets, new cloud backup, Office 365 Home Premium and a nice doubling of my Internet speeds courtesy of Verizon FIOS....More
WinSuperSite.com
Related Penton Sites
Copyright © 2013 Penton Media, Inc