Microsoft makes Windows 7 name final
For the first time in recent memory, Microsoft has chosen to stick with its code name for a final Windows release.
In a blog posting, general manager Mike Nash said that the next version of Windows will retain its Windows 7 code-name when it is released to the market--a date currently pegged as late 2009 or early 2010.
"Simply put, this is the seventh release of Windows, so therefore "Windows 7" just makes sense," Nash wrote.
Microsoft plans to give developers at the Professional Developer Conference later this month a pre-beta version of the software.
"For me, one of the most exciting times in the release of a new product is right before we show it to the world for the first time," Nash wrote. "In a few weeks we are going to be talking about the details of this release at the PDC and at WinHEC. We will be sharing a pre-beta 'developer only release' with attendees of both shows and giving them the first broad in-depth look at what we've been up to."
Nash said the decision to stick with the Windows 7 name is "about simplicity."
"Over the years, we have taken different approaches to naming Windows," Nash wrote. "We've used version numbers like Windows 3.11, or dates like Windows 98, or 'aspirational' monikers like Windows XP or Windows Vista. And since we do not ship new versions of Windows every year, using a date did not make sense. Likewise, coming up with an all-new 'aspirational' name does not do justice to what we are trying to achieve, which is to stay firmly rooted in our aspirations for Windows Vista, while evolving and refining the substantial investments in platform technology in Windows Vista into the next generation of Windows."
Microsoft has said precious little about what's actually in Windows 7. In a May interview, engineering chief Steven Sinofsky said it would use the same driver structure and underpinnings as Vista. The software maker has also talked about its multitouch capability.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
P.S. You should see Win XP on an i-Mac. It just flies. I use it for my genealogy program. LOL
they really could have gone with a less transparent strategy.
I suppose it saves money but why not just call it Windows 2009?
2. win95
3. win98
4. Millenium
5. 2000
6. XP
7. Vista . . . .
Yep figures someone at Microsoft cant count.
But wait, didn't XP and 2000 use NT under the hood? And what about Windows 2 and 1? Let's try again:
1) 1; 2) 2; 3) 3; 4) NT; 5) 95; 6) 98; 7) Me; 8) 2000; 9) XP; 10) Vista
So I guess that would make this new one Windows 11, unless 98SE is considered its own release, in which case we're at Windows 12.
Maybe if they use Roman numerals it'll make more sense.
so XP would be 5,
ME2, I mean, Vista, would be 6
and 7 would be 7
http://www.oraxcel.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1194096605
NT 3.1 - Windows NT 3.1
NT 3.5 - Windows NT 3.5
NT 3.51 - Windows NT 3.51
NT 4.0 - Windows NT 4.0
NT 5.0 - Windows 2000
NT 5.1 - Windows XP, Windows Fundamentals for legacy PCs
NT 5.2 - Windows Server 2003, Windows XP, Windows Home Server
NT 6.0 - Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008
NT 7.0 - Windows 7 (codenamed Blackcomb, Vienna. Release date 2010?)
and the poster is correct on this one.
I think that just like, Windows 3, had many versions: there was Windows 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 3.whatver Network edition... you know what I mean?
So I think they're talking about fundamental changes in the release, the underpinnings.
I think we could go as follows:
Windows 3.0, 3.11, etc. (third version)
Windows 95, 98, Millenium (forth version)
Windows 2000, XP (Fifth version)
Windows Vista (Sixth Version).
Windows 7 (Seventh Version)
I don't agree with blanket Microsoft bashing, it's a good (if not great even) company.
Don't forget the consumer AND business OSes before XP!!!!
NOTE: (C) = consumer line (B) = business line (CBW) = merged workstation line (CBS) = merged server line. If I don't have a notation, I don't know which line it came from. :)
1. Windows 1.0
2. Windows 2.0
3. Windows 2.1
4. Windows 3.0
5. (C) Windows 3.1
6. (C) Windows for Workgroups 3.11
7. (B) Windows NT 3.1
8. (C) Windows 95 Version a (OSR1)
9. (C) Windows 95 Version b (OSR2)
10. (C) Windows 95 Version b USB (OSR2.1)
11. (C) Windows 95 Version c (OSR2.5)
12. (B) Windows NT 3.5 (Workstation, Server)
13. (B) Windows NT 3.51 (Workstation, Server)
14. (B) Windows NT 4.0 (Workstation, Server) (BackOffice Small Business Server 4.5) (Service Packs 1-6 and 6a)
15. (C) Windows 98
16. (C) Windows 98 Second Edition
17. (B) Windows 2000 (Professional, Server, Advanced Server, Datacenter Server) (Small Business Server 2000) (Service Packs 1-4) [also known as NT 5.0]
18. (C) Windows Millennium Edition
19. (CBW) Windows XP (Starter, Home, Professional (including Tablet PC and the various Media Center Editions)) (Service Pack 1-3) [also known as NT 5.1]
20. (CBS) Windows Server 2003 (Standard, Enterprise, Datacenter (includes R2) (includes both 32 and 64-bit versions) (includes Windows XP 64-bit Edition*) (Small Business Server 2003 Standard and Premium) (Windows Home Server) (Service Packs 1-2) [also known as NT 5.2]
21. (CBW) Windows Vista (Starter, Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, Enterprise, Ultimate (including 'N' versions)) (Service Pack 1) [also known as NT 6.0, Build 6000 is no Service Pack, Build 6001 is SP1]
22. (CBS) Windows Server 2008 (Standard, Enterprise, Datacenter) (Small Business Server 2008 Standard, Premium) (Essential Business Server 2008 Standard, Premium) (starts at Service Pack 1 level already) [like Vista SP1, it's NT 6.0, Build 6001]
23. (CBW) Windows 7 (versions unknown at this point) [NT 6.1 or 7.0?]
Either way, if you count ONLY the consumer line or ONLY the business line, it still doesn't add up.
The NT version number would add up only if Windows 7 is NT 7.0 and not NT 6.1 or anything of that sort.
windows 2.0
windows 3.0
Windows 3.1
Windows 3.11 with work grupes
Windows 95
windows 95 OSR 2
Windows NT 4.0
Windows 98
Windows 98SE
Windows 2000 Pro
Windows xp
Windows sever 2003
Windows vista
windows server 2008
Windows 7
I am shour i left somthing out LOL WINDOWS 7 IS a JOKE
IT NEED A NEW NAME LOL
The way the version scheme works is this:
NT 3.x
NT 4.0
Windows 2000 (Windows 5)
Windows XP (Windows 5.1)
Windows Vista (Windows 6.0)
Windows 7
You can argue this doesn't make sense from a consumer branding standpoint, but Microsoft has been consistent with this Windows version scheme for years and years so it isn't like they just invented the Windows 7 moniker out of thin air.
Where's NT 1.0? And XP should be 6 in my opinion. At least XP SP2 should be. Then Vista would be 7 and 7 8 and If there had been an NT 1 and 2 then 7 would be 10. That's not even counting 95, 98, 98SE, and ME. It's pretty obvious they only count when they want. It's not even the seventh version of the kernel that will run it. There is nothing about it that has anything to do with the number 7. It's just a made up number. Kind of like the 7 hundreded dollar bailout figure.
1) 3.11
2) 95
3) 98, 98SE, ME
4) 2000
5) XP
6) Vista
7) 7
Get the Mac and dual boot OS X and Linux on it already!
Nothing more than that folks!
Wanna bet the version AFTER that won't be Windows 8?
Windows NT 3 (1), NT 4 (2), 2000 (3), XP (4), Vista (5), Windows 7 (6?) Nope that's not right either. I guess we are counting some non-NT versions.
Windows 1, Windows 2, NT 3 (3! Wait what happened to 1?), NT 4 (4), 2000 (5), XP (6), Vista (7), Windows 7 (8?) No No NO! that's still not right! One more time!
Windows 1 (but it's not NT!), Windows 2, NT 3 (Now it's NT) NT 4 (4), 2000 (5), XP (5.1? Just a point. That's all XP gets? Just a lousy friggin point?), Vista (6), Windows 7 (7). Oh now it makes sense. Wait, no it doesn't. Windows version numbers still don't make any sense.
Its like when you save Google advanced search to a favorite.
What you get? ?Google Advanced Search?, not :
?Google Advanced Search For Fast, Efficient Internet Searching and Information Locating with New and Improved Search Algorithms to Speed you on Your Way and Search Options for Full Text Searching in Multitudes of Languages?.
Sometimes less is a helleva lot more than more, and sometimes ?nuff said is ?nuff said.
Now...did u roll some heads for that Vista blunder?
BTW...kudos for axing Seinfeld.
Better to get a clue late than never.
Need I say, ?work on that ?late? part??
Windows 7=Windows Vista SP2 or SP3
I wish they had developed a new OS from ground zero, not just an "evolution" of the Vista failure. I guess we'll have to wait for Windows 20 for that.
However, Vista and Server 2008 are both going to get an actual SP2, despite Windows 7.
Wow, Microsoft stock wow.... with so many idiots hating on you for no reason based on reality, how will you ever come back?
Oh wait, Vista drivers suck right... oh oh oh....
compared to ... Linux?... Mac OS X? Windows XP? .... only PERHAPS worse than Windows XP AFTER 6 years. Vista is really awesome, unlike Vista bashers I actually know what I'm talking about. I've been using Ubuntu for a few years (and it's really good, and fun), been using Mac OS X since 10.2 (overrated to say the least, especially when it comes to driver support, I mean really).
I think most people need to get a new computer, they're going around bashing stuff not even realizing how good things have gotten since they spent thousands on their last computer. Now you can spend $800.00 and get a great laptop, $400.00 and get a great desktop (Vista in either case). ... times have never been better (and these prices are considerably lower than Macs... considerably).
http://readerszone.com
- by shadedecho October 13, 2008 8:49 PM PDT
- how about "windows mojave!?" :)
- Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 3 pages (70 Comments)