Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Microsoft skips Windows 9 - new operating system will be called Windows 10 — Parallax Forums

Microsoft skips Windows 9 - new operating system will be called Windows 10

Ron CzapalaRon Czapala Posts: 2,418
edited 2014-10-05 22:14 in General Discussion
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/microsoft-skips-windows-9-emphasize-172044547.html
The next version of Microsoft's flagship operating system will be called Windows 10, as the company skips version 9 to emphasize advances it is making toward a world centered on mobile devices and Internet services.

Joe Belfiore, a Microsoft executive who oversees Windows design and evolution, said Windows 10 will offer "the familiarity of Windows 7 with some of the benefits that exist in Windows 8" to help business users make the transition.
«134

Comments

  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2014-09-30 12:10
    Yawn, who cares any more?
  • Dave HeinDave Hein Posts: 6,347
    edited 2014-09-30 12:20
    Heater. wrote: »
    Yawn, who cares any more?
    Maybe the more than 50% of computer users that run Windows?
  • RDL2004RDL2004 Posts: 2,554
    edited 2014-09-30 12:58
  • localrogerlocalroger Posts: 3,451
    edited 2014-09-30 13:12
    They should call it Windows 7 1/2 and include a portal that leads to the mind of Steve Ballmer.
  • xanaduxanadu Posts: 3,347
    edited 2014-09-30 13:23
    Heater. wrote: »
    Yawn, who cares any more?

    Permissions Parrot

    permissionserror.jpg?dl=0
  • Ron CzapalaRon Czapala Posts: 2,418
    edited 2014-09-30 13:24
    Dave Hein wrote: »
    Maybe the more than 50% of computer users that run Windows?

    Now Dave! I'm sure you value Heater's opinion as much as I do... :lol:
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2014-09-30 13:40
    MS has skipped version numbers on other products before. Back in 1993 Word skipped from version 2 to 6. Visual Studio changed version number schemes many times over it's life. I assume it's the marketing department thinking they're doing something useful, but I tend to not really care about it.
  • Dave HeinDave Hein Posts: 6,347
    edited 2014-09-30 13:40
    Now Dave! I'm sure you value Heater's opinion as much as I do... :lol:
    I value everyone's opinion on this forum equally. Some are just more equal than others. :)
    Martin_H wrote: »
    MS has skipped version numbers on other products before. Back in 1993 Word skipped from version 2 to 6. Visual Studio changed version number schemes many times over it's life. I assume it's the marketing department thinking they're doing something useful, but I tend to not really care about it.
    I remember when they jumped to Word 6. It broke compatibility with Word 2. Now that was a real pain. They fixed it by adding a converter plugin that would allow you to import Word 2 documents.
  • mindrobotsmindrobots Posts: 6,506
    edited 2014-09-30 14:09
    Win X

    (Not to be confused in any litigation with OS X)
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2014-09-30 14:22
    Martin_H wrote: »
    MS has skipped version numbers on other products before.

    Yeah, what about that? They went from 3.1 to 95 in one swoop. Then from 98 (where did 97 go?), all the way up to 2000. These guys don't know how to count! :lol:

    Seriously, this is why they (temporarily) switched to named products: XP and Vista had no implied heritage, though everyone knew they were Windows 5 and 6. Yet, how boring is that? I think MS should start naming their releases the same way car makers name their models. I want to use the new Windows Armada. Or how about the Windows Quest. Now THOSE are cool names.

    All this reminds me of an unintentional slight I supposedly made to the fine city of Chicago. Way back I wrote a book, part of a series, called "I Hate Windows." It was in the For Dummies mold, and in fact, was intended as a direct competitor. My book covered Win 3.1. They planned a new edition of the book for the next release of Windows -- you remember the codename for Windows 95 was "Chicago."

    In the book trade there's a publication, formerly only seen by booksellers, for forthcoming books in print. My book, "I Hate Chicago," was proudly listed. Only it never came out, because although my title had decent numbers, the others in the series didn't live up to expectations, so the publisher shelved all of them.

    Now comes Amazon, which to fill out their catalog of books raids Forthcoming Books in Print, and suddenly I'm the author of what must be a distasteful critique of the Windy City. It's still listed as an "out of print" book, which technically is true.

    http://www.amazon.com/I-Hate-Chicago-Gordon-McComb/dp/1565299221
  • W9GFOW9GFO Posts: 4,010
    edited 2014-09-30 15:24
    You must be familiar with the Windows 95 Secrets series of books, written by a fellow hang glider pilot who spends pretty much all his time traveling the world organizing or competing in hang gliding competitions. He has been maintaing the Oz Report for well over a decade now.
  • Oldbitcollector (Jeff)Oldbitcollector (Jeff) Posts: 8,091
    edited 2014-09-30 15:32
    Ah, so what you are saying is, "Wait for Windows 11..." :)

    You realize there is an important marketing reasoning behind this right? Windows 7 is the last "stable" platform and this will become a way to pressure the public into thinking they need to upgrade because they have a version that is 3 versions out of date.. sheesh..

    The year of Linux approaches...
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2014-09-30 15:36
    Ah, so what you are saying is, "Wait for Windows 11..."

    By all means, they should have jumped directly to Windows 11.
  • xanaduxanadu Posts: 3,347
    edited 2014-09-30 16:01
    Windows 8.1 SE doesn't have a nice ring to it like Windows 9 or 10.
  • User NameUser Name Posts: 1,451
    edited 2014-09-30 16:17
    erco wrote: »
    By all means, they should have jumped directly to Windows 11.

    LOL!

    I'm so not cool, hip, or even interested in popular entertainment, yet I recognize Spinal Tap. Strikes me as almost unbelievable.
  • doggiedocdoggiedoc Posts: 2,241
    edited 2014-09-30 16:20
    mindrobots wrote: »
    Win X

    (Not to be confused in any litigation with OS X)
    I just spewed milk through my nose!
  • RDL2004RDL2004 Posts: 2,554
    edited 2014-09-30 16:37
    When I first heard about Windows 9, it all sounded good. The closer it gets to being released the worse it sounds. Microsoft sure has made a lot of mistakes and bad decisions in the last few years - doesn't look like they want to stop.
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2014-09-30 17:42
    Going straight to 11 would restore order in the universe. Starting with Windows 3.x:

    Windows 3.x - Version 3
    Windows 95 - Version 4
    Windows 98 - Version 5
    Windows ME (Win 98 with gaudy lipstick) - Version 5.1
    Windows NT 3.1 - Version 6
    Windows NT 4.0 - Version 6.1
    Windows 2000 - Version 6.2
    Windows XP - Version 7
    Windows Vista - Version 8
    Windows 7 - Version 9
    Windows 8 - Version 10
    Windows 9 - (Skipped)
    Windows 10 - Version 11
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2014-09-30 17:57
    W9GFO wrote: »
    You must be familiar with the Windows 95 Secrets series of books

    I knew of Brian Livingston, but not the others that co-wrote the Secrets books. I met Brian a few times at Comdex, where authors would trot out their hot best-selling books to get free stuff from vendors!

    I didn't get much free stuff.
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2014-09-30 19:47
    I still maintain that Windows 2000 was the best release of Windows, and it's been generally down hill from there. It ran perfectly well on a machine with 128 MB of RAM and is great as a guest OS in a VM on Linux. It also predated the activation feature which meant you could fiddle will your hardware without a risk of a OS deciding you were violating a license agreement. We made a lot of use of that when settings up test systems.

    Windows 7 is a close second, but the Aeroglass shell is a resource hog, but the addition of on demand privilege escalation makes up for it. Windows XP is third as it is near as lean as 2000, but not as secure as 7. Both have the activation feature which can be a headaches at times.

    Don't talk to me about Vista, Windows 8, or the Office ribbon bar. I hate them with the fury of a billion exploding stars.
  • GadgetmanGadgetman Posts: 2,436
    edited 2014-09-30 23:43
    Going straight to 11 would restore order in the universe. Starting with Windows 3.x:

    Windows 3.x - Version 3
    Windows 95 - Version 4
    Windows 98 - Version 5
    Windows ME (Win 98 with gaudy lipstick) - Version 5.1
    Windows NT 3.1 - Version 6
    Windows NT 4.0 - Version 6.1
    Windows 2000 - Version 6.2
    Windows XP - Version 7
    Windows Vista - Version 8
    Windows 7 - Version 9
    Windows 8 - Version 10
    Windows 9 - (Skipped)
    Windows 10 - Version 11

    Except that list is wrong...

    The NT and 2000 entries is from the SERVER line, and were made in parallell with the desktop OS line.
    Convergence didn't really start until Win2000 and XP.

    And the WinNT numbering sequence is based on MS LAN Manager and OS/2...
    (I'm so old that I remember INSTALLING OS/2 1.3 with Lan Manager 2.2... )

    You also missed NT 3.51, which is what anyone sane ran as soon as they could, instead of 3.1, or even 3.50
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2014-10-01 00:11
    Gordon,
    Going straight to 11 would restore order in the universe. Starting with Windows 3.x:

    Windows 3.x - Version 3
    Windows 95 - Version 4
    Windows 98 - Version 5
    Windows ME (Win 98 with gaudy lipstick) - Version 5.1
    Windows NT 3.1 - Version 6
    Windows NT 4.0 - Version 6.1
    Windows 2000 - Version 6.2
    Windows XP - Version 7
    Windows Vista - Version 8
    Windows 7 - Version 9
    Windows 8 - Version 10
    Windows 9 - (Skipped)
    Windows 10 - Version 11
    Did everyone forget already that Windows 3.x, 95, 98, ME were actually still MSDOS ?!
    NT was a totally different thing.

    So it's more like:

    Windows NT 3.1 - Version 3
    Windows NT 4.0 - Version 4
    Windows 2000 - Version 5
    Windows XP - Version 6
    Windows Vista - Version 7
    Windows 7 - Version 8
    Windows 8 - Version 9
    Windows 9 - Version 10 (skipped?)
    Windows 10 - Version 11

    In order to restore order to the universe MS would have to delete everything they ever wrote :)


  • prof_brainoprof_braino Posts: 4,313
    edited 2014-10-01 04:36
    Dave Hein wrote: »
    Maybe the more than 50% of computer users that run Windows?

    you mean the ones that havent switched to linux yet? lm sure this will help them transition. of course, some folks never will, just as theres folks that still ride horses. theres a place for everything, even microsoft.
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2014-10-01 05:19
    Dave,
    Maybe the more than 50% of computer users that run Windows?

    I said "Who cares any more?". My observation is that most Windows users don't care. They don't salivate and get all excited when a new Windows version is coming. Possibly the last time that happened was when Windows 2000 came out. As noted as Martin_H hinted at above. People are as exited about Windows as buyers of Ford Transit vans. I.e. not at all.

    On the contrary I hear and read Windows users fretting all the time about what mess is coming from MS next and how can they get back to what they had before.

    So yes, you are right, in as much as it makes Windows users nervous as to what they will have to deal with in the future I guess they do care.
  • Dave HeinDave Hein Posts: 6,347
    edited 2014-10-01 06:03
    The "more than 50%" number comes from the Wikipedia page on Usage share of operating systems, and is based on web browser usage. The number in the table is actually 57.12%. If we use the numbers from the table on "Desktop operating system browsing statistics on Net Applications" the total percentage of Windows users is about 91%. OS X is 6.4% and Linux is 1.6%.

    Of course most Windows users care about the operating system they use. It bugs them when the lose a feature that they had in the previous version of Windows. However, most users are oblivious to security enhancements, and features that they don't normally use. It seems that Microsoft messes up every other release that they produce, and then they fix it in the next release. Vista is an example of a version they messed up, and then fixed it in XP. XP had a few security holes, but they were fixed in patches. I'm still using XP on my laptop at work even though the IT department has stopped supporting it when Microsoft stopped their support.

    Windows 7 is also a good OS, but it is missing a few things that I liked in XP. I use Windows 7 on my desktop computer at home. We have Windows 8 on my son's laptop and my wife's Surface. I helped my son install a device driver for a game controller on his laptop, and the lack of the Start menu made it very difficult. I had to resort to Googling how other people had done it, and followed the instructions in a YouTube video that some teenager had posted. I got it installed, but it was complicated because Windows 8 shields the user from the lower levels of the OS.

    I ran into a similar problem with my wife's Surface, and a Start menu would have made things a lot easier. Hopefully, Windows 9 10 will resolve this issue.

    I use Linux at work, and I like it for doing work things like writing code and compiling code. I also use Cygwin on my Windows machine, which provides the same command-line environment as Linux. As I mentioned several times before, I'm a command-line type of person. I use vi for editing and do all my code development from the command line. I've never used a GUI under Linux, but some of my co-workers do.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2014-10-01 06:07
    It's almost like Microsoft bashing never gets old for some Linux people.
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2014-10-01 06:17
    Going straight to 11 would restore order in the universe. Starting with Windows 3.x:

    Windows 3.x - Version 3
    Windows 95 - Version 4
    Windows 98 - Version 5
    Windows ME (Win 98 with gaudy lipstick) - Version 5.1
    Windows NT 3.1 - Version 6
    Windows NT 4.0 - Version 6.1
    Windows 2000 - Version 6.2
    Windows XP - Version 7
    Windows Vista - Version 8
    Windows 7 - Version 9
    Windows 8 - Version 10
    Windows 9 - (Skipped)
    Windows 10 - Version 11

    Gordon,

    You missed Windows 2.1. (Windows/286 and Windows/386).

    I tossed a sealed version of Windows/286 in the dumpster 10 years ago. Could have been worth a little money on ebay to a collector now.
  • Ron CzapalaRon Czapala Posts: 2,418
    edited 2014-10-01 06:19
    erco wrote: »
    It's almost like Microsoft bashing never gets old for some Linux people.

    Really?!?

    I hadn't noticed :smile:
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2014-10-01 06:53
    Publison wrote: »
    I tossed a sealed version of Windows/286 in the dumpster 10 years ago. Could have been worth a little money on ebay to a collector now.

    I would have traded you several incredibly valuable laser diodes for that!
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2014-10-01 07:10
    MS bashing. I have not seen any here yet. I was just making an observation.

    Seems to me, from my observation of the interaction between people and their computers that most Windows bashing comes from Windows users themselves. I mean, why was this thread started?

    Mac users don't so bash as look down their noses at Windows.

    Linux users just yawn at the news. They do tend to whine a bit when all the Windows users they have to deal with make life inconvenient.
Sign In or Register to comment.