Earlier quoted context omitted.
Windows using CP-125X encodings by default in many countries instead of a UTF-8 did a lot of damage, at least in my experience.
For many European languages like French or German the switch from local CP-encodings meant that only some characters like å, ñ, ç, etc. would require extra bytes. And thus the switch to UTF-8 was a no-brainer. On the other hand, Cyrillic and Greek are two examples of short alphabets that allowed combining them with ASCII into a single-byte encoding for countries like Greece, Bulgaria, Russia, etc. For those locations…
UTF-8 history (2003)
31–37 of 37 posts
Re: UTF-8 history (2003)
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they did?
UCS-2 support was first released with some add on for Win3.1(which also still did most stuff with multiple character sets).
I think all the actual OS was still codepage (with the "multibyte" versions for things like Eastern languages being pretty much forks), and windows95 wasn't really much different.
Re: UTF-8 history (2003)
#33WinNT missing out on UTF-8 and instead going with UCS-2 for their UNICODE text encoding might have been "the other" billion dollar mistake in the history of computing ;) There was a 9 month time window between the invention of UTF-8 and the first release of WinNT (Sep 1992 to Jul 1993). But ok fine, UTF-8 didn't really become popular until the web became popular. But then missing the other opportunity to make the tra…
Furthermore, the development of Windows NT already began in 1989 (then planned as OS/2 3.0) and proceeded in parallel to the finalization of Unicode 1.0, and to its eventual adoption by ISO that lead to Unicode 1.1 and ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993. It was natural to adopt that standardization effort.
Once established, the 16-bit encoding used by Windows NT was engrained in kernel and userspace APIs, notably the BSTR string type used by Visual Basic and COM, and importantly in NTFS. Adopting UTF-8 for Windows XP would have provided little benefit at that point, while causing a lot of complications. For backwards compatibility, something like WTF-8 would effectively have been required, and there would have been an additional performance penalty for converting back and forth from the existing WCHAR/BSTR APIs and serializations. It wasn't remotely a viable opportunity for such a far-reaching change.
Lastly, my recollection is that UTF-8 only became really widespread on the web some time after the release of Windows XP (2001), maybe roughly around Vista.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Coded_Character_Set#...
[1] "Internationalization and character set standards", September 1993, https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/174683.174687
Re: UTF-8 history (2003)
#34Re: UTF-8 history (2003)
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really wonder why Arabic has never gone back to printing. What we think of the Arabic "alphabet" is just it's cursive form. They have an alphabet that is basically just Syriac. Would have been easier to render on low bit displays. wouldn't have to deal with the word initial variants etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabataean_script
Same with Japan using mostly kanji when they have a syllabary available (while Korea invented a pretty neat alphabet and largely dropped hanja).
Re: UTF-8 history (2003)
#36There are socio-economic reasons why the early computing boom (ENIAC, UNIVAC, IBM mainframes, early programming languages like Fortran and COBOL) was dominated by the US: massive wartime R&D, university infrastructure, and a large domestic market. But I wonder if the Anglophone world also had an orthographic advantage as well. English uses 26 letters with no diacritics, compared to other languages like Chinese (thous…
early character encoding was 6-bit ASCII, no lower case
Re: UTF-8 history (2003)
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
UCS-2 support was first released with some add on for Win3.1(which also still did most stuff with multiple character sets).
IIRC Win32s (the subset of win32 released for windows 3.1) only added UCS-2 string processing, none of the system wide character APIs. I think all the actual OS was still codepage (with the "multibyte" versions for things like Eastern languages being pretty much forks), and windows95 wasn't really much different.
16bit IE brings its own MSNLS.DLL for handling different codepages to ACP(Active Codepage) in Win3.1x.
and win9x also works mainly in ANSI codepage with some kernel side unicode support.