I imagine that many people just aren’t aware of the great strides taken in SMB 2.0, but they are really doing themselves, their companies, and the products a disservice by using that old name. This is not a minor semantic matter: By clinging to the ‘CIFS’ moniker, the industry is holding back adoption of a much-needed and much improved alternative, SMB 2.0. When customers hear that name, they assume it will suck and start looking for alternatives, even though the alternative is already at hand.
Would be amazing for storage engineers to actually absorb this simple fact. So much “CIFS” (which for them is synonymous with Windows) hate whilst at the same time glorifying NFS (which for them is synonymous with open and *nix).