Windows 10?!?

[42undead2]

So at a Microsoft event, Microsoft did indeed reveal the new Windows. What was it called? Not Windows 9, but Windows 10!

Live coverage here: http://live.theverge.com/microsoft-windows-9-event-live-blog/

Windows 10. Because 7 8 9.

[Kryten]

With this and the xbox one, I'm starting to think somebody high up in microsoft has lost the ability to count.

[Alshain]

I'm still not convinced Microsoft is really interested in supporting PC users. We'll see.

[TheSaint]

I remember (he said, dusting the salt off his shoulders) back when they released Windows 95. All the IT people were questioning why they were leaving the traditional decimal versioning system and using the year of release. Microsoft's statement was that people would find it less confusing. So, in the intervening 20 years we have had:

Windows 95

Windows 98

Windows 98 Special Edition

Windows Millennium Edition

Windows 2000

Windows XP

Windows Vista

Windows 7 (which had an internal version number of 6.1)

Windows 8 (which had an internal version number of 7)

Windows 8.1

And now, Windows 10 (which used to be Windows 9, but will probably have an internal version number of 8.) Yes, much less confusing. <rolleyes>

[Godot]

Windows 10? That is very bad, as we all know that windows with even version numbers sucks ...

hopefully they don´t wait tooo long (after the release of Windows 10) till they release Windows 11

[Capt.Joseph Kerbertson]

We can call it windows 10.0, now with DOS.

[Franklin]

maybe they're trying to avoid hurting japanese sales by avoiding an unlucky number?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_superstitions#Numbers

i mean china doesn't like 4, 5 or 6, and sometimes avoids them in elevators,

we do the same with 13

[rtxoff]

I think it's more because if they continue like in Windows 8 with patches raising the version numbers like 8.1 and 8.2 then Windows 9.5 (if they ever would came up to this number) could cause some confusion beeing too similiar to Windows 95 and they are trying to avoid such things in first place.

[wbhokie13]

I think it's more because if they continue like in Windows 8 with patches raising the version numbers like 8.1 and 8.2 then Windows 9.5 (if they ever would came up to this number) could cause some confusion beeing too similiar to Windows 95 and they are trying to avoid such things in first place.

And here I was thinking that they were worried about their sales performance in Germany. Windows 9 = Windows Nein = Windows NO. (insert Twitch Kappa for sarcasm)

[bsalis]

I read they were contemplating calling it Windows 1. However chose not to because there has already been a Windows 1.

Considering the new Metro UI does not use windows, perhaps the should drop the whole "Windows" name all together.

[lajoswinkler]

Supposedly 8.1 is very different from 8, so... yeah.

[Red Iron Crown]

I'm betting the actual version number (i.e. the output of "ver" at a command prompt) is still 6.x. MS should have just stuck to their release year naming scheme.

[42undead2]

XP was 5.1.2600

Vista was 6.0.6002

7 was 6.1.7601

8 is 6.1.9200

8.1 is 6.3.9600

So yes, I would guess so.

[NovaSilisko]

Possible explanation from reddit

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/By4GyZdCUAAWuL3.png:large

Edited October 1, 2014 by sal_vager
Pic not working :/

[Red Iron Crown]

Possible explanation from reddit

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/By4GyZdCUAAWuL3.png

They could have just called it Windows Nine, though that might have run afoul of Windows NT.

Aside from the name though, this looks like a great upgrade from Win8. That old adage about every second version of Windows being the one to buy may hold water.

[ElJugador]

maybe they're trying to avoid hurting japanese sales by avoiding an unlucky number?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_superstitions#Numbers

i mean china doesn't like 4, 5 or 6, and sometimes avoids them in elevators,

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/ShanghaiMissingFloors.jpg/220px-ShanghaiMissingFloors.jpg

Regarding the image: they may have avoided all the fours... but that still leaves them with 14 buttons. QED.

Edited October 13, 2014 by ElJugador

[Vaporo]

The marketing people at Microsoft must not be very good. I can think of some better names off the top of my head.

Windows X

The Wonderful Windows of Oz

Windows Norris

Iron Windows

SuperWindows

Windows: Ghostbusters Edition

Windex

To Windows and Beyond

Windows: The Next Generation

Windows: Return of the Jedi

BatWindowsMan

Not Windows 8 (It's their biggest selling point, after all.)

Doorways

Window: Bacon

57696e646f7773

[TonyC]

Well..that's my personal PoV, but Microsoft always screws up one major version on two (since 98):

Win Millenium : Fail, no one bought

Win XP : Worldwide success

Win Vista : Worldwide complaint, too much resource consuming, unstable, local network issues, ect..

Win 7 : Fixed ! Everyone happy !

Win 8 (and .1) : Failure, attempt to merge computers and tablets fail, combined with too much changes.

I think Windows 10 (since 10 is after 8) will be much better, if the logic continues.

I heard that before this even applied to MS Office.

Edited October 16, 2014 by MegaUZI
corrections, typo.

[Bilfr3d]

It was because of a subroutine in windows that looks for the version of windows. If it sees any part of "9" in that version, it goes "NOPE" and crashes. Hence, why the fast forward to windows 10. that's just a brief explanation of it. Google the whole thing.

[Red Iron Crown]

It was because of a subroutine in windows that looks for the version of windows. If it sees any part of "9" in that version, it goes "NOPE" and crashes. Hence, why the fast forward to windows 10. that's just a brief explanation of it. Google the whole thing.

The subroutine is not in Windows itself, but in 3rd party applications where the version checker's writer was too lazy efficient to have separate clauses for Win 95 and Win 98. In fairness to them though, the Windows version numbers are anything but consistent, it seems unlikely they could have predicted that MS would switch back to simple version numbers.

[AaronLS]

Possible explanation from reddit

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/By4GyZdCUAAWuL3.png:large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/By4GyZdCUAAWuL3.png:large

In a perfect world your third parties should be doing feature detection instead of version detection. Same kind of problem occurs when websites detect a specific version of a browser instead of detecting whether the browser supports a feature. Bottom line, this kind of if(*isSpecificVersion*) code is horrible. In a just world, Microsoft would upgrade and let such third party code break and suffer the pains of poor programming. However, the reality is if they did this then the perception of users would be that Windows was at fault, rather than the fault of the application.

This kind of thing has always been the plague of every Windows upgrade. When windows began to tighten security, many programs broke because they tried to leverage permissions they didn't need. For example, they were written to request read/write access to the registry when they really only needed read permissions. Thus post-upgrade these programs crashed because they didn't have write permissions.

It's not a problem unique to Windows. There's absolutely the same types of problems with other operating systems, but the ecosystem of closed source Windows programs and drivers that are no longer maintained means that when such problems arise, users of these programs are left with a choice: either downgrade to older Windows version, or do without the incompatible program/driver. They have no hope of getting a fix for a non-maintained closed source app/driver. This might mean losing the ability to use a piece of hardware.

I had a printer that didn't have drivers that worked with Win7 64bit, so I installed a Win XP virtual machine and gave it direct access to the USB connection.