I took the liberty to add the (OT) for this off topic thread.
I am only posting a reply because I am wondering why the thread is about
*WINDOWS 10* ???
Unless I missed something, Windows 8 is the current version.
That means Windows'9' will be next!!!!
(Unless Microsoft decides to call it Vista2, Windows2015, or
Millenium+15 edition, or Windows for Offworkgroups....)
Of course if it's released this year, why not just called it "Windows
Deflated", or "Windows Balls"..... (In honor of the Superbowl crap) :)
They are just trying to put a lot of distance between 8. It confuses my life
-- a lot of the sofware I use is at the 10 major version so if someone says
"Will that work with 10.1?" I've got to ask "10.1 what?"
I dont know why they didn't just stick with using the release year for a
Windows 95, 98, 2000, etc....
The next release would then be Windows 2015 (if it is relased this year)
and Windows 8 was released in (I think) 2013.
Being consistent avoids confusing people.......
Anyone running Windows 98 is using the LATEST version if you go by the
number. 98 is bigger than '8' Of course that could get touchy whether
They do for some of the products just to confuse the issue. Server 2003 is
XP generation, Server 2012 is 8, and Server 2012 R2 is 8.1. The preview
release still refer to Windows Server 10 but it might turn into 2015 on
release. Or not.
Windows ME was the last in the line of OSs that began with DOS and
included Windows 95 and 98.
Parallel to the DOS-based Windows was the "NT" product line. It was
descended from Microsoft-IBM's joint OS/2 product. The first released
version was NT 3.1, then Windows 2000, then Windows XP, and so on.
The end of the DOS-based OSs overlapped the beginning of the NT-based
OSs. The naming conventions are pretty arbitrary and have little to do
with the order they were released.
Thanks for getting that right. I didn't want to hear any more claims
about Win ME not using DOS.
There is an internal version number, which starting with 95 seems to
have nothing to do with what that version is called. 95 98 and ME are
version 4. 2000 and XP are version 5. Later Windows (even Windows 10
preview) are version 6.
I actually thought Windows ME was released in 1999, but I looked it up.
It was released in 2000, as well as Windows 2000.
I suppose this is what caused problems using the year as the release
name. Even though Win ME could have been called Windows 99 and no one
would have complained, since it was developed in 99.
Windows ME and Windows 2000 was where MS sort of forked or branched off
in two directions. Win2000 was supposed to be more for businesses while
WinME was for home.
Just my opinion, but it would seem that MS released both of them in
2000, just to make more sales, because WinME was a poor attempt at
upgrading Win98SE, and Win2000 was based on NT and was their "new
direction". But WinME contained both the code from Win98se and some NT
as well. MS could (and should) have spent a little more time developing
their new OS and just released one STABLE version. Because WinME was
unstable, while Win2000 was fairly stable, but lacked the tie to Win98.
As it says in that webline (above), WinME was Microsofts biggest failure
(at that time), but later Vista was even worse. It almost seems like
every other version of Windows has been dud ever since after Windows
I guess they're too fast on the trigger to make another release and thus
They are pests on Win 8.
You have to go back to their ap store to get back games like solitaire
and while free they have pop-ups and then send messages that for maybe
$1 you can rid yourself for them.
MS Office when you prepare a new doc and want to save it the first
option is their cloud where they try to hook you into paying.
Wish they would take note and not bring this crap into 10 but I bet they
Win9x was known as platform 1. NT is platform 2.
So Win98 was v. 4.1, platform 1. WinME was v.
4.9, platform 1. NT 4 was v. 4, platform 2. Win2000
was v. 5.0, platform 2.
WinME was a flop, which was actually convenient
when MS tried to push people to XP. WinME was
almost new when XP came out, so it didn't make
much sense to say it was obsolete. What MS did
instead was to pretend ME never existed (as they've
done with Vista) and then talked about upgrading
the "obsolete" Win98 to XP.
Seems MS is good at trying to trick people, just by using different
names. I found an article written by MS. The reason they are calling
the next version Windows 10, is "to put some distance between Windows
8". THe reason is because the original release of Windows 8 was a flop
too, but their 8.1 sort of fixed some of that.
But so what????? So we skipped a number...... Who cares, it's still the
same product (the next release after Windows 8.x).
That makes about as much sense as calling "John Doe" who is the homeless
town drunk. But if you call him "Mr. Doe", he suddenly becomes the
town's wealthy Police Chief.
Sense never comes into it.
Product naming is always done by sales.
Names are chosen for many reasons, including emotional impact.
In the computer business, this is especially true.
I've seen the exact same piece of software go though so
many names that I'd need a chart to keep track.
I'm sure the technical people would just like ascending
consecutive version numbers. Probably fortunately,
the sales people control picking names.
| Seems MS is good at trying to trick people, just by using different
| names. I found an article written by MS. The reason they are calling
| the next version Windows 10, is "to put some distance between Windows
| 8". THe reason is because the original release of Windows 8 was a flop
| too, but their 8.1 sort of fixed some of that.
| But so what????? So we skipped a number...... Who cares, it's still the
| same product (the next release after Windows 8.x).
I think they also skipped at least one number in
the IE versioning, in order to match the Netscape
versions at the time. But... it's their product. And
version numbers don't represent anything in
particular. Sometimes a new version is a big change.
Sometimes companies just push out a new version
because they're trying to make money. Some software
takes years to get to v. 1, while Mozilla turns out a
whole version number increase about every six weeks,
makin their version numbers all but meaningless.
I found it more confusing that they named the
Metro system Windows RT. That was the limited
Metro-only system on most tablets. But Metro
didn't even have windows, the namesake of the
OS! Only one, fullscreen program could be run at
a time. And Windows software won't run on RT.
A lot of people were surprised to get their "Windows
RT" tablet home and try using it.
I wouldn't be surprised if MS even phases out the
Windows name. Based on the rumors going around and
what they've said, it sounds like MS is hoping to
start an entirely new chapter in their business --
devices with services rather than OS software.
I'm especially curious how that will play out with
their corporate customers. I read last week that
Citigroup estimates non-corporate Windows sales
are only about 2% of the total. Their real customer
is business. Asking business to switch over to hosted
services, with no control over how the system works
or where company records are stored, and perhaps
with all previous Windows software phased out, is a
big thing to ask.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.