July 20, 2007 1:05 PM PDT

Next version of Windows: Call it 7

Next version of Windows: Call it 7
Related Stories

The dawn of Vista

January 26, 2007

Vista debut hits a delay

March 21, 2006
Microsoft is planning to ship its next major version of Windows--known internally as version "7"--within roughly three years, CNET News.com has learned.

The company discussed Windows 7 on Thursday at a conference for its field sales force in Orlando, Fla., according to sources close to the company.

While the company provided few details, Windows 7, the next client version of the operating system, will be among the steps taken by Microsoft to establish a more predictable release schedule, according to sources. The company plans a more "iterative" process of information disclosure to business customers and partners, sources said.

Windows Vista, the oft-delayed most recent release of Windows, shipped to businesses in November and to consumers in January after more than five years of development. Vista's gestation period was marked by shifting product details as internal priorities changed and problems arose with development.

Like Vista, Windows 7 will ship in consumer and business versions, and in 32-bit and 64-bit versions. The company also confirmed that it is considering a subscription model to complement Windows, but did not provide specifics or a time frame.

Next up on Microsoft's agenda is Service Pack 1 for Windows Vista, which is expected before year's end.

The discussion of Windows' future isn't surprising, given that Microsoft has been criticized by business customers for delays related to Vista. Many business customers pay for Microsoft's software under a license agreement called Software Assurance.

Windows 7 was previously known by the code name Vienna. A Microsoft representative confirmed that Windows 7 is the internal code name for the next client release of Windows. The details were released "as part of our ongoing outreach to enterprise customers and partners, Microsoft has begun sharing plans for how they will continue to deliver value to businesses in the future?Software Assurance customers in particular," a representative said in a statement via e-mail.

"Microsoft is scoping Windows 7 development to a three-year time frame, and then the specific release date will ultimately be determined by meeting the quality bar," according to the representative.

See more CNET content tagged:
business customer, Windows 7, representative, development, Microsoft Windows Vista

204 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
Guess ME doesn't count
Win 3.11
Win 95 = 4.0
Win 98 = 5.0
Win ME = ?
Win XP = 6.0

I guess like all of us, MS wants to forget it ever happened.
Posted by obscuriosity (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
whoops
forgot Vista. heck, now i'm really confused. Maybe Vista won't count either.
Posted by obscuriosity (2 comments )
Link Flag
OS Version Numbers are Wrong
Windows 98 was 4.1
Windows ME was 4.9

After that the NT/9x lines converged into XP as V.5
Posted by phknrocket1k (1 comment )
Link Flag
It doesn't..
ME wasn't an OS, it was a BSOD screensaver.
Posted by law_hog (43 comments )
Link Flag
Two Windows lineages
The 16 and 32-bit code bases were two separate, but parallel products. Here are the lineages:

16 bit: Windows 3.0, 3.1, wfw 3.11, 95 (version 4), 98 (4.x), ME (4.y). (ME doesn't really count as a new version. It was essentially Win98 with a new WMP, Windows Movie Maker, and some other minor updates).

32 bit: roots in OS/2, NT 3.5, NT 3.51, NT 4, Windows 2000 (version 5), Windows 2003 [server only], Windows XP (5.1), Vista (version 6)

The 16 bit lineage was thankfully retired after WinME. XP represented a single business/consumer OS.

64 bit started with XP I believe. Windows 7 will probably be 64 bit only.
Posted by frankwick (413 comments )
Link Flag
This Is Windows NT
This is Windows NT, not Windows 3.x, 9x, ME which are the old MS-DOS based kernel.

Windows NT 3.1
~
Windows NT 4.0
Windows 2000 (NT 5.0)
Windows XP (NT 5.1)
Windows Vista (NT 6.0)
"Vienna" (NT 7.0)
Posted by ranqet (5 comments )
Link Flag
missing a few yet
I think I have used just about every OS that microsoft has ever released, excepting of course the latest and so called greatest vista systems (complete garbage if you want my professional view)

Win 3.0
Win 3.1
Win 3.11
Win 95
Win 95 SE
Win 98
Win 98 SE
Win 98 lite professional(ok so this one wasn't issued by microsoft but I still used it.)
Win NT 4
Win ME (if you can call it an OS)
Win 2000
Win XP Home
Win XP Pro
Win XP Media Center
Win XP lite Professional (again not an official release but it ran pretty good)
and if if im not much mistaken there are 5 flavors of vista.

That would make this new windows version 21
Posted by catman0559 (1 comment )
Link Flag
I guess Vista doesn't either
If XP was supposed to be 6 and the next version is 7 where does Vista come in at? 6.5?
Posted by TELinux46 (1 comment )
Link Flag
Need a little help guys?

Official Windows Versions:

Version 1: 1.01, 1.03,& 1.04

Version 2: 2.03, 2.10,& 2.11

Version 3: 3.0, 3.00a, 3.10, 3.11, Win. 95,& Win. 98

Version 4: Win. NT, Win. ME,& Win. 2k

Version 5: XP

Version 6: Vista

Version 7: Win. 7

The versions are separated by the kernel used to make it.

If you don't believe me about the early versions look at this site: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/32905
Posted by thejanitormafia (4 comments )
Link Flag
I would say. Windows 7th generation

Win 3.11 = 1
Win 95 = 2
Win 98 = 3
Win ME = 4
Win XP = 5
Win Vista = 6
....
Posted by Dritzzy (1 comment )
Link Flag
Windows 8 or 9 maybe.
Let me see.. If you follow the NT line, you'd get:

NT 4 = 4
Win2K = 5
XP = 6
Vista = 7
Next up = 8

Or if you follow the 3.1 line, you'd get:

Win 3.1 = 3
Win 95 = 4
Win 98 = 5
Win ME = 6
XP = 7
Vista = 8
Next up = 9
Posted by mypalmike (25 comments )
Reply Link Flag
No, no, you have the numbering wrong
Though at least you acknowledged both lines.

The NT line:

Windows NT 3.1-3.51 = 3
Windows NT 4.x = 4
Windows 2000 = 5.0
Windows XP = 5.1
Windows Server 2003 = 5.2
Vista = 6
Next up = 7

The Windows line:

Windows 1.x = 1
Windows 2.x = 2
Windows 3.x = 3 (this was the first usable and popular version)
Windows 95 = 4
Windows 98 = 4.1
Windows ME = 4.9
Windows XP = 5.1 (converging with the NT line)
Vista = 6
Next up = 7
(Note that I don't include Win 2003 here, since it's not a
consumer OS).

It may surprise you that I'm writing this from a Mac OS X 10.4.9
(Tiger), and that I really have no interest in going back to
Windows!
Posted by Hardrada (359 comments )
Link Flag
You are wrong.
Win9x line of product is dead simple as that so, counting up, it means:

Win 3.1 => WinNT 3.1 => WinNT4 => Win2000 (NT 5.0) => WinXP (NT 5.1 NOT 6.0) => Vista (NT6) and finally Windows 7.

They made no mistake with the number.
Posted by alexender00 (1 comment )
Link Flag
WRONG!
Sorry bub, but Windows 2000 was NT 5.0, XP was built on the same code base and was NT 5.1. Windows Server 2003 was NT 5.2. Vista was NT 6, and Vienna or whatever it will be is NT 7. And Windows XP DID NOT come from Windows ME. As far as marketing, yes, but little if any code from Windows ME went in to XP - XP is built on the Windows NT, specifically Windows 2000, code base.
Posted by Hardrada (359 comments )
Link Flag
ehhh... completly wrong

Windows 3.1 = 3
Windows 95, 98, ME, NT4 = 4.x
Windows 2000 and XP = 5.x
Vista = 6.x
New Windows = 7.x

If you have Windows XP, Press the Windows Key + R, type CMD and Press Enter... In the Command Prompt window type VER and hit Enter and you'll see Windows XP belongs to the 5.x category
Posted by jucardi (1 comment )
Link Flag
Great
I have three years to save up for an overpriced Mac that will probably work a heck of a lot better.

I read an article this week about some guy who's AIO printer doesn't work under Vista. I'm in the same boat. I bought my printer just before upgrading to Vista and it still doesn't work right. Microsoft says that "2 million" printers now work with Vista... well, I *know* there isn't 2 million printers models on the market, so they MUST mean 2 million of the ONE printer model that does work on Vista (whichever the heck model that is...)

Windows 7 eh? Maybe they'll have a driver for my printer by then. Maybe by then printers will be obsolete and whatever you want printed, you click a button in Windows 7 and it magically appears after the Keebler elves finish making it. I don't hold out hope.

But then again, I'm a realist. I know that no O/S is 'perfect' but Vista is so far from perfect... I really need to 'upgrade' back to XP...
Posted by jtfan2004 (40 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Confused
Microsoft neither makes printers or drivers for them. My suggestion is to complain about your printer manufacturer rather than complain about Microsoft.
Posted by law_hog (43 comments )
Link Flag
My new Samsung laser works fine with...........
Linux, encoding videos works perfect,as well as file sharing, flash and all the bells and whistles, work fine, sure games are a weak point of Linux.
Apples are too overpriced and for daily computing a waste and Windows is getting just as bad, even if I have the money just won't buy them, building my own machines, and running Linux that gets better and better every day. I guess I will save, paying for Windows, Nero, Antivirus, and all the extras needed to make Windows function. Consumers have created these mounsters with their " I have to have it " mentality, you guys deserve it don't cry now.
Posted by gerardogerardo80 (28 comments )
Link Flag
RE: Great
Do something constructive and some whining.
If your printer doesn't work go to the manufacturer of the Printer. It is not Microsoft's resposibility to write the drivers for other vendor's hardware. You could have the same issue with a Mac or any other OS.


..The fact that it takes you three years to save up for a Mac only proves why Mac's have never overtaken the market.
Posted by viper396 (2032 comments )
Link Flag
Actually
MS doesn't make generic drivers. They are submitted to MS and MS certifies them. The Speed of which that is done all depends on the manufacturer.
Also there have been more then 2 million printers that have been engineered in the last 25 years that Microsoft actively tries to include support for. Can't expect MS to have all those printer drivers. It really isn't their job to tell you the truth.
There are still some people using 25-year-old ribbon and heat printers. The body shop I get work done on my car at for example uses them to print receipts because the printer is just that reliable. Why get a spanky fresh looking new printer when the old one works just fine?
Since Apple doesn?t have to support so many devices/gadgets and only has about 10% of the market. It would seem they have a little extra time to devote to printers when producing an OS or updates. This is of course for only the printers that its customers use.

Does this make apple better, not by a long shot. But, if it works for you then power to you. Just don?t flame what 90% of computer users think is superior. I don?t think I?ve ever seen a business using a 30 year old apple I as a register (or workstation) as many times as I?ve seen them use IBM terminals from the late 1970s (with Motorola/Intel 86 /w Ancient Dos lol).
Posted by outpostprime (23 comments )
Link Flag
The hope it will be lucky number 7....
but it is actually 9.

3.1 = 3
95 = 4
98 = 5
2000/ME = 6
XP = 7
Vista = 8.

While the math is a little askewed, I wonder if vista will have the new WINFS or will it be installed in "7" or later in some other windows?

But, as an item for the wishlist....Please change the security of vista so that an administrator IS viewed as an administrator?? Please??? The security popups are worse than anything!!!
Posted by tuarim (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Idiot...
OMG... Funniest thing I've seen all week. Sorry dude, but Wikipedia is your friend. Learn about NT version history.
Posted by appleweek (2 comments )
Link Flag
You can turn off the warnings, you know...
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/disable-user-account-control-uac-the-easy-way-on-windows-vista/" target="_newWindow">http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/disable-user-account-control-uac-the-easy-way-on-windows-vista/</a>

I'm always a fan of people who bag on things that they don't understand and don't even bother to Google. It would have taken you less time to figure out this solution than to type your post.

Helpful tip: if you don't like the default colors and background images, you can change them too. ;)

-Mister Winky
Posted by Mister Winky (301 comments )
Link Flag
Wouldn't count on it...
I wonder if vista will have the new WINFS or will it be installed in "7" or later in some other windows?

If Microsoft does what they've always done...you will never see this or other new features promised for Vista...Longhorn or whatever they call it. Their ability to overshoot features in their products is legendary. Prime example is multitasking with DOS. Many more examples are available in their literature of the past.
Posted by furball123A (124 comments )
Link Flag
I hope it will be lucky number Sleven!
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0425210/" target="_newWindow">http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0425210/</a>
Posted by Troll Hard (182 comments )
Link Flag
Why 32 bit
Why in the world are they still going to push 32 bit... time to embrace the future and force everyone to take advantage of the 64 bit chips they will definately have in their PC in 3 years... stupid move.
Posted by gotzmadskillz (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
My name is Forrest Gump. People call me Forrest Gump
Forcing as you put it equals antitrust suit. They have too much cash anyway, why not give some back to the government.

Releasing 64bit only prevents over 60% of the current install base from upgrading. There goes billions of revenue dollars.

How about that device you have now that does not have a 64 bit driver? Chuck it and buy a new one.

Stupid is as stupid does.
Posted by NewsReader_ (280 comments )
Link Flag
32 bit?
Yup, that puzzled me too. I'm sure I saw a Micro$oft press release saying that Vista was going to be the last version of the OS to support 32-bit.

Oh, wait... That would leave a lot of "Legacy" PCs out there being converted into Linux boxes, wouldn't it? They wouldn't want that, now, would they...? ;-D
Posted by Peet42 (42 comments )
Link Flag
64 bit is not backward compatable
many new computers are still 32 bit

On 64 bit computers I cannot run cmd, ping, tracert, or ipconfig!!!
Some 32bit programs will not work properly
Posted by tagno25 (20 comments )
Link Flag
I think you will find...
That the jump from 32-bit to 64-bit is at least a decade away. Why? Not because of the lack of an OS or the lack of 64-bit hardware drivers (though hardware drivers for some things will be an issue). The problem is that to take an application from 32-bit to 64-bit isn't going to be easy, cheap or fast.

Adobe has stated publically that a 64-bit version of Photoshop is 5 to 10 years away because they will have to write Photoshop 64-bit from the ground up. You can't do a simple port, too many things need to be changed, calibrated, adjusted and designed for the 64-bit platform and that is not something that can be done simply by making a few changes to the program.

Memory management and scratch disk management alone is going to require a complete re-write.

While other applications maybe easier it isn't going to be fast. Companies want to make sure that there is enough market and that that is really where computing in business and in the consumer market is going before they make sure a large investment. This is very similar to putting out Linux versions of products.

Robert
Posted by Heebee Jeebies (632 comments )
Link Flag
RE: Why 32 bit
Because with ~90% of the install base still running 32-bit forcing the world to go to 64-bit would be a complete disaster. The number of people complaining would be deafening.

Transistions like that need to be done slowly. The stupid move would be to do what you suggest and force it upon everyone.
Posted by viper396 (2032 comments )
Link Flag
3 Years...Just Like Vista's 3 Years....
Unless MS comes out with a Vista ME or Vista BOB then I have about as much confidence in their timeline as I do in our President. : ) Not much.
Posted by fred dunn (793 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Agreed!
Agreed. They should only issue a 64 bit version. Sure, they'll lose out on money with people who would like to update their existing computers, but in the long run it'll save them time and effort. That's one of the problems that Microsoft has that Apple does not. Their userbase is too big. There's too many variables that could go wrong. If they were to eliminate support for 32 bit, then they don't have to worry about making an OS for the lowest common denominator. That way we can eliminate a OS version like Vista Home Starter.
Posted by jaximflash (236 comments )
Reply Link Flag
version 7 - a rip off from leopard ?
No doubt that vista resembles tiger. Will this new version of
windows resemble leopard or will it be even smarter than that.
Well 3 years or more will show where does microsoft stand for its
PC consumers. Or will in these 3 years more people will switch to
Mac.
Posted by gjosh (20 comments )
Reply Link Flag
They copy each other, fanboy
They copy each other and copy others. Who cares?! In the long run, the consumer is the one who wins out. We get a better product.
Posted by jaximflash (236 comments )
Link Flag
RE: version 7 - a rip off from leopard ?
Everytime there is a discussion about Mac's vs. Windows some idiot always has to interject some lame statement about Microsoft ripping off Apple or some comment about who innovated first.

Does that "Microsoft ripped off Apple" argument ever work? Does it ever convince anyone to switch to a Mac? If some newbie walking into a computer store and spoke to a saleman do you really thing a "Apple Innovated first" argument is actually going to sell them? It hasn't worked in the last 25 years, why would it work now?
Posted by viper396 (2032 comments )
Link Flag
ONE version!!
I wish Microsoft would do away with the multiple versions. Vista currently has 5 version, when only 1 is necessary.

Vista Home Starter - If you can't meet the demands of Vista, then you should stick with using XP or get a new computer.

Vista Business and Vista Enterprise - Is there really necessary to have two different versions? It's just about the same userbase that would want either of these.

So that leaves us with 3 versions: a Business/Enterprize version, Home Premium, and Ultimate. I say give everyone Vista Ultimate. Some users may not ever use some of the features in Ultimate, but the few features that are not in the lower versions doesn't warrant the big price difference. Allow business users to optionally load Media Center during installation, if you don't want your employees running Media Center.

Otherwise, I think Apple has it right. There should only be ONE.

Plus, that goes for 32 and 64 bit versions. It should run as a 64 bit OS that can run 32 bit programs.
Posted by jaximflash (236 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Agreed...
I totally agree! One version is good enough.... and far less
complicated. (Plus, it may save MS some cash, since it's less
SKUs to manage.)

If they MUST release two versions, then it should only be
Windows 7 Business and Windows 7 (for home users). I won't
give them crap for making a super basic version for developing
countries, though, since that's kinds of cool.

And for Pete's sake, don't lower your standards to 32-bit.
Posted by toosday (343 comments )
Link Flag
I agree too.
I hope we see not more than Windows 7 for 32 bit and 64 bit.

It should include more options to install/remove components to service our needs - does it really matter home or business? As long as, it support all components from min to max.
Posted by ora410 (3 comments )
Link Flag
Almost agree
I almost completely agree, but since there are people with processors that can't run 64 bit OSes, and people aren't going to want a new computer just to run the new OS shouldn't be excluded if otherwise their computer works fine.
Posted by Hardrada (359 comments )
Link Flag
What's really interesting....
What I find amusing... is the way some people complain that Windows is bloated and monolithic, and thus, no good... while other people complain that there are now too many tailored versions.

Bah... who needs consistency? Make up more arguments!
Posted by David Arbogast (1709 comments )
Link Flag
Agree 100%
They are just shooting themselves (MS) by putting out all of the "fractional" versions, just give the who;e thing to the users or let them decide to stay back at XP.
Posted by fred dunn (793 comments )
Link Flag
Redmond is moving its OS developers to Cupertino! hot news!
And pigs can fly!
.... MS is not Apple. "They have NO CLASS".
5 x 2 (32 and 64 versions) amount to confusion, sales, and
gravity.
It makes the CIO look VERY SMART to the CEO... more geeky.
Remember, MSCE's by the tonload.
Apple, they want to do away with the 'admin'. They of course
have not gotten there yet, but are quite closer than anyone else.
It's all about what you believe. MS believes in SALES and MONEY.
Are MS doing that great in Xbox sales, or keyboard and mice? I
doubt the numbers. Are they doing good in MS Office Upgrades?
Yes. OS upgrades ? maybe not.
JOE CLUELESS CONSUMER buys new laptop at Staples ? yes, they
are doing good.
Posted by sergiovf (11 comments )
Link Flag
Whatever happened to Black Thorn??
We had "Long Horn" and "Black Thorn" (I believe) as the 2 Windows Versions in Development to follow XP. I guess Long Horn became Vista - but whatever happened to the "Black Thorn" development project. Was it canned officially, or just changed development names??
Posted by WWIDE2 (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Like Apple Copeland
it got trashcaned for a better version.

Remember Apple Copeland, it was supposed to take Mac OS 9 and add in true preemptive multitasking, crash protection, better security, faster performance, etc like AmigaDOS/AmigaOS had in 1985. Even the Amiga series outran a Mac OS 9 system, because OS 9 was bloated and couldn't adapt to changes in the marketplace.

Apple bought out Next and got Steve Jobs back and went the Unix route with the Mach Kernel and using *BSD Unix source code to write Darwin and OSX with. Without Unix, Mac OS would have been a joke because even heavy duty Java programs tended to lock it up and it couldn't support multiple threads like a modern OS could. Mac OSX is Unix based and so it has the advantages of Unix.

If you don't want to run Mac apps, and don't care for the Aqua eye candy, Linux or OpenBSD will work just fine on your PC, provided you have drivers for your hardware devices. You might have to buy a new modem or wireless card, but that is cheaper than even buying a Mac Mini.
Posted by Troll Hard (182 comments )
Link Flag
vistink just out and ---ALREADY new version?!?
That means I can keep using XP until then. 3 years and I'm sure most of the software/stuff I buy will stay running under XP with any PC I load it on.
Posted by SteamChip (594 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Damned if they do, damned if they don't
So, MS announces an OS roadmap in advance and that's a bad thing?

Most releases of Linux and OS X are updated every 12-18 months.

-Mister Winky
Posted by Mister Winky (301 comments )
Link Flag
Many Versions is Good
There is an economic reason to have many versions. Microsoft needs to make a certain profit to please their shareholders and compete. I enjoy paying a low price for computers that come with Vista. Sometimes there are deals where a computer with Vista is $150-$300 after rebate. That would not be possible if Microsoft had to sell the Vista on those computers for the same amount it had to sell Vista for corporate workstations.

So here is what they do. Fortune 500 corporations and Early Adopter High Tech Junkies have the most money, so they sell Enterprise and Ultimate for the most. The only extra features in Enterprise relate to giant managed networks and ultra high security and encryption needs. Most small business owners are probably glad to pay less than Citibank or Exxon pay for the OS. The only way to exclude Citibank and Exxon from just buying Business Edition is to exclude a feature they need. Now for a basic home user, you have Home Basic Edition, which excludes some features medium/small businesses need. Home Premium Edition is more of a price issue than a need issue. If people will pay more for some bells and whistles, why shouldn't they? People getting a fancy computer more designed for multimedia can pay an extra $30 for that computer and Microsoft can afford to charge less to others. Ultimate provides a further level of this. Now, why shouldn't Microsoft just 'give' all home users Premium or Ultimate. Why? Because some dont need it and some will pay extra for it. So, it is the same reason they dont bundle Office Professional with every computer. Seperating products allows people to save by buying only what they need. The people who need everything might pay a higher price, but they dont deserve to get a discount due to making everyone else buy what they dont need.

Also, there may be a licensing issue. Technologies in Windows Enterprise and Ultimate may be licensed from other companies. If Microsoft put those technologies in every copy of windows, they might need to pay those license costs for every copy, thus excluding the possibility of licensing certain technologies for the customers that need them.

I think Home Starter Edition is mainly a third world product. Microsoft wants its OS to be an option in some very poor countries where Linux and pirating have dominated and cheap hardware is common, but it does not want this nearly free option to be used by people who could afford more, like wealthy people and high tech businesses in those countries, so it sets many limits on the OS making it work best on low end computers and simple home use.

It would not be good to just stick with XP as the default for low end computers. Microsoft does not want to support XP forever and deal with 2 different worlds of security issues.

Apple can stick with one OS because Apple's users are much less diverse: Middle to Upper Class Home Users and the Graphics Business. These people have similar needs. Graphics pros are much like home users because they are not likely to need coroporate databases and massive shared file servers etc. If you are poor, you probably dont buy Macs. If you are a big business and network a bunch of computers, those computers are probably not Macs. If you are a third world country, you dont use many Macs. And Mac computers are not marketed on price and not in direct competion with other Macs from different manufacturers, so $30 here or there in the price point is not important.

So, if you want Vista to have just one edition, you want to pay the same for Vista as Citibank and Exxon due, you want bloated Encryption software that may have cost you $20 in licensing fees, and you want the Citibank employee to be able to connect a usb tv tuner to their workstation and watch HDTV at work so they can get distracted and let a hacker get your SSN.
Posted by marccooper (23 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Are you on drugs?
Your post is utterly stupid for more reasons then I can come up with. Is this what you believe? Are you implying that Linux is only for poor countries? You must not work or deal with computers much.
Posted by netned (1 comment )
Link Flag
Linux for poor countries????
Your entire post makes no sense. I see Linux as the operation system for smart people and Microsoft as the operating system for morons.
Posted by camelot1968 (2 comments )
Link Flag
I would like to add that the reason why linux isn't everywhere, and people can make money off of this stuff, is not because it is for the poor. It's because people are too lazy to learn. They just want to point and click. It's like that movie WALL-E, they want to live in a little spaceship and float around cause noone needs to walk. Not saying that is you, it is just the reason why Windows makes so much money. Mac isn't easier either, just prettier, they've taken enough cue from windows now to make things easier for their clients. I can't say I like wasting the clock cycles on pretty. Not when I have real work to do. I want power. I don't care about chrome wheels on a pick-up truck either. Nor do I own a pick-up truck either. I don't haul stuff around, if I do I rent. Functionality is where its at folks.
Posted by stoptakingmyusername (1 comment )
Link Flag
Just 3 years?
I think they are in rush to stay ahead of Linux, which is roughly about as friendly and sharp looking as Windows 386 now and catching fast.

More likely they will add 1) all sorts of virtualization, and 2)all sorts of off-desktop functionality (more MS Groove-like and Sharepoint-like functions).
Posted by sal-magnone (162 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Better off getting a Mac+Leopard
I personally think we would all better to get a Mac and run soon to be released Leopard, it just better.

Check out my Tech Biz blog: Boldinvestors!
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.boldinvestors.com/" target="_newWindow">http://www.boldinvestors.com/</a>
Posted by YHO12 (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Yeah Right, And Have No Choice of Hardware
Maybe while we are at it, we should all move to Cuba and join the communist party. Apple supports only itself as a computer manufacturer for its OS, has limited support for peripherals, loves DRM, etc. Apple switched from CPU's only made by an IBM/Motorola joint venture to CPU's only made by Intel and has never had future roadmaps supporting competition. Competition drives progress and Apple has depended on Microsoft to provide all that competition for decades and has struggled as Microsoft drove prices down for consumers. A great example of Apple's anti-people policies is audio books. Microsoft licensed its windows media audio technology to several companies which are paid by libraries to provide library cardholders with free digital audiobook downloads. Apple made a partnership with the major paid audiobook download service to license the Apple drm technology to them, and did not allow libraries to use Apple drm, excluding iPod and Mac users from the library download option. Apple is against competition, against libraries, against anything but profit by cooperating monopolies. In essence, Steve Jobs believes in the same economic structure as Lenin and Stalin believed in, where there is no competition and monopolies control consumers. Microsoft is something of a monopoly, which is hard to avoid in the operating system market where standards and compatibility have great value, but at least they have fostered competition in some other areas, driven costs down, and kept almost all component commodities as competitive markets. All indications are that Apple would be much worse as a dominant market leader.
Posted by marccooper (23 comments )
Link Flag
The windows 7 release Date.
yep ok so whats the truth as to these claims.
Well to get some jist of how long the development will take you have to look developments.

First Graphics
For now the new maths potential shoulden't that much an issue and therefore adoptable into the system without to much hassle.

Also the manufacturers aren't having to great a problem with all the standard medi application enhancements.

Next the kernel.
Although some improvments will be needed for this model a lot of the ground work for making a system into a multi-core environment.
There will however be considerable developing issues with virtuilisation which may cause some delay.

Ok now for newer areas like memory drives.
This ideed will take some time and could cause some delay but not to bad.

thid is so for the small business and consumers editions but for the cloud systems there it will take time for that to absorbe it's way into the market but should make for a great benefit to the world of technilogical development potential and collaberation aswell as eventually helping people to work and play more perficiently.

Although for version 7 vertualisation issues may cause a small delay after that we could be looking at some major development and hence bigger delays most lightly for a good few years.

So the bottom line is that although you may get a slight delay your probablly looking at A more perfected system in a lot of areas.

I would advise microsoft to work on issues relating to backwards compatibility with this one in relation to all the wide range of perifiral companies for essential equippment and large consumer equippment.

Some solutions might invlvolve 3rd party driver emulation technology and even special arrangements for returning old models in preperation for better electronic waste management.

However for the consumer and small businness i reckon this one should be a good moment.

Remember also it's not always a failing to move forward even if it does require more collaberation and more effective collaberation.
For more effective collaberation more 3rd party people getting involved in keeping everything working and microsoft would be wise to discount people who really help the process more effectivly to ensure wide involvement as opposed to the more highlighting elleitist approach that exsist more today. Istead a more fuctional and pratical elite model to ensure that alongside a great effort to get everything looking good the essence is more functional too.
Posted by wildchild_plasma_gyro (296 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I think I will skip the next windows!
Not like I haven't before, skipped windows 95 totally, skipped windows nt, skipped windows 98, but did get windows 98 SE, skipped windows 2000/me, skipped the windows xp without service packs, skipped windows xp service pack 1, and went directly to windows xp service pack 2, and 2 mths ago went directly after buying a new computer for the first time (not refurbished one as I had before) for better graphics, ram, and a bigger harddrive, to windows vista home premium.

Everything working fine, just thinking about adding a another gb of ram all though for a little faster performance. But I will not be going to windows 7 or what ever it will be called if it's released in 3 yrs. If it takes longer like Vista did, perhaps I'll rethink it and decide. Til then, I am not giving Microsoft another $200 for a new oversize if it's released in 3 yrs as I happy with Vista for now.

Could use some tweaks, and I tweaked it with different suggestions around. But I hope the service pack 1 or even if two should come out, will help it making it as good as xp. Which I kind of miss because of the speed I get with it.
Still not going back to xp, I paid good money for vista and I'm happy with it, just want it a little bit more powerful and faster.
Posted by Robynsnest613 (12 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I will skip Windows Vista then.
I used to have Windows 95 with lots of blue screens, skipped 98, 98 SE, ME but I did get Windows 2000 at work. Finally, I got extra used PC - DELL Precision Workstation 450 with Dual Xeon 2.4, 2G RAM, 147 U320 SCSI with Windows XP. I have tried Vista RC 1 and 2 on it though. It's like racing between a snail and a rabbit. I guess nVidia FX1000 is not good enough, pitty! I don't play game. I won't upgrade it to Vista unless my work forced me to do so. Anyway, is it call upgrade or makeup over looks? Well, I will skip Vista wait for whatever next Windows named (7).

BTW, I hope MS sticks with numeric numbers instead of strange names - anyone see value out of those names. Windows 7 sounds great than Windows Vista+. Office 2007?? come on, doesn't it version 12 better?

At least, I agree I will skip one.
Posted by ora410 (3 comments )
Link Flag
RE: I think I will skip the next windows!
Who really cares about what YOU will do?

Companies are in business to sell products or services. That means finding ways to get people to upgrade and buy new product. They don't make money standing still and progress is not going to stop just because you don't want to pay for it.
Posted by viper396 (2032 comments )
Link Flag
Cupertine, start your copying machines
Don't demo any features too early. We might see them appear later in Mountain Lion or Meerkat. Specifically, I'm talking what Apple calls Spot Light. Then, of course we all know about Spaces, Fast User Switching, Time Machine, etc...
Posted by frankwick (413 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Actually Apple copies from Unix
and *BSD Unix, Linux, and other Unix operating systems who have had special effects and transparent windows, etc as themes before OSX was even developed.

Heck the dock and sidebar were part of IBM OS/2 Warp as far back as 1995. Apple decided to copy it.

Just look at what Ubuntu, Red Hat Fedora, Linspire, and Xandros are putting out and some of those features will appear in the next release of OSX.
Posted by Troll Hard (182 comments )
Link Flag
Who's copying whom
Spaces is a copy of UNIX functionality and still doesn't really
exist the same way in Windows. Fast User Switching did appear
in Windows first. Time Machine doesn't exist in any other OS
anywhere-- it's completely new. (Yes, other OSes have file
backup, but no one has the information *retrieval* that Time
Machine has. The ability to use an application's own UI to
search back through time for records and restore individual
records to the present... that's new.)

Everyone builds on each other, but Apple is certainly more
innovative than most, and more innovative than Microsoft in
particular.
Posted by samkass (310 comments )
Link Flag
Windoze OS doesn't have Spaces or Time Machine
There may be third party app.s for Windoze - add-ons. You pay
for them. And the implementations usually pale in comparison
due to the fact that they emulate the Windows lowest common
denominator approach to interface and app. design. And that's
not "design" as in "pretty", it's design as in _Engineering_.

The things Apple has "copied" from Windows are??? Why the
heck would they want to?! It's horrible!
You are misinformed and you don't use a Mac so your opinion is
worthless bigotry.
Posted by technewsjunkie (1265 comments )
Link Flag
Darn!
And I thought that after the Vista debacle, Microsoft was going out of business.
Posted by Xenu7-214951314497503184010868 (153 comments )
Reply Link Flag
OS Versions
NT 4
Win 2000 - 5
XP - 6
Vista - 7
??? - 8
Posted by Kyklist (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
version numbers
If you simply do this in XP:

1. Click Start
2. Click Run...
3. Type "winver", and hit OK

You would see that XP is Version 5.1 *******.
Posted by achimera (2 comments )
Link Flag
CORRECT OS Versions
Windows 1.0
2.0
3.0
3.1
3.11
Windows NT 3.1
NT 3.51
NT 4.0
Windows 2000 = 5.0
XP = 5.1
Vista = 6.0
Posted by eduwebtech (3 comments )
Link Flag
Subscription Model
Now that made me laugh...

I will switch totally to Ubuntu, before I pay for a windows subscription...

Though I do have an x-box live subscription... I know I'm a hypocrite!!!
Posted by SiXiam (69 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Software Assurance Program a crock!!!
SA is nothing more than Microsoft's efforts to guarantee revenue upfront. They use the fear of paying potentially higher software upgrade costs to sell this "insurance program" that guarantees upgrades with a 3 year cycle. Long gone are the volume license discounts that businesses once negotiated.

There was no compelling reason to rush to upgrade your corporate network clients from Win2K to XP, esp if you had the perimeter secured with firewall, antivirus, spam and central workstation management. There has been no compelling reasons to upgrade Office ever since Office 97. Microsoft knows this, but like a good monopoly, they use their dominant market position to secure your revenue upfront, without showing you any potential value.

Say NO to Software Assurance! Teach Microsoft to earn money the old fashioned way... by showing us the value of upgrading their products.
Posted by mike.gw (942 comments )
Reply Link Flag
achimera
If you simply do this in XP:

1. Click Start
2. Click Run...
3. Type "winver", and hit OK

You would see that XP is Version 5.1 *******.
Posted by achimera (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
if Apple does copy
at least theirs makes it to market. I use Windows XP at work and
the boss just upgraded to Vista. What a complete joke.
Posted by there can be only one (19 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I've i got a name for it.
Windows Cryonus

The name is because more than just being expediend or working a vista It can habor technology well for the developments in the future infastruction of computing application and allow the user to take advantage as it unfolds.

then the one after that the next one can be a little longer in the waiting while every one is getting fully developed in the expanses of what will be capable.
The name for that windows
Windows Rapture

Oh well at least i had a go
Posted by wildchild_plasma_gyro (296 comments )
Reply Link Flag
MS says within 3 years
so based on the vista timeline it will ship in....

...carry the 3....

.....2037?
Posted by shane--2008 (343 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.