So why is MS skipping 9? And going to 10?

[Mike Gibson]

Our company's local Microsoft rep was in today and gave us the scoop on this.

Apparently, Windows Vista *was* supposed to be seven, and they released what should've been Windows 8 as Windows 7. From what he said, Windows 10 was them fixing a long running issue in the naming.

I think the MSFT rep was pulling your leg. There's no built up tension in the product naming that had to be released by skipping a version number. Personally, I think MSFT is continuing their AAPL obsession and want to call it WinX to compete with OSX (AAPL has stuck with the 10.x convention for a decade and it sounds like MSFT is going to stick with a single major version for an extended period of time, too).

 

[Christian Kallevig]

Yeah, this is kind of what I think too.

 

[jlzimmerman]

Is this why Microsoft named it Windows 10? - CNET


Also, there is this theory from one of the comments.

Windows 10 is actually the 10th version.

1) Windows 3.1

2) Windows 95

3) Windows 98

4) Windows ME

5) Windows 2000

6) Windows XP

7) Windows Vista

8) Windows 7

9) Windows 8

10) Windows 10

 

[anon(9057135)]

Is this why Microsoft named it Windows 10? - CNET


Also, there is this theory from one of the comments.

Yours I'd a very good theory. This one makes since.!

 

[t.mehoves]

Is this why Microsoft named it Windows 10? - CNET


Also, there is this theory from one of the comments.

Windows 1.0, 2,0, 2.1x, 3.0 are missing from that list as well as NT.

Since everyone has their own theory, I am going to start a new untrue one. Only count the OS' that didn't suck...

1) Windows 1.0
2) Windows 2.0
3) Windows 3.0
4) Windows 95
5) Windows 98
6) Windows XP
7) Windows 7
8) Windows 8
9) Windows 8.1
10) Windows 10

 

[TLRtheory]

I think the MSFT rep was pulling your leg. There's no built up tension in the product naming that had to be released by skipping a version number. Personally, I think MSFT is continuing their AAPL obsession and want to call it WinX to compete with OSX (AAPL has stuck with the 10.x convention for a decade and it sounds like MSFT is going to stick with a single major version for an extended period of time, too).

Windows 10 is actually the 10th version.

1) Windows 3.1

2) Windows 95

3) Windows 98

4) Windows ME

5) Windows 2000

6) Windows XP

7) Windows Vista

8) Windows 7

9) Windows 8

10) Windows 10

 

[mmcpher]

Numbers are magic. Windows wanted to differentiate from the tainted 8. They have time before the official release. To my mind, skipping 9 allows them a little more leeway in charging for an upgrade once it comes next year, maybe some fee for going up from 7? Or not.

This is supposed to be the last Windows update of this kind. Who knows how it will work out but in the future there is supposed to be rolling, more frequent, incremental updates. So there isn't to be a Windows 12, if all goes as planned. On the Office side, we subscribe to Office 365 instead of Office 2014. We roll over our subscription. Updates arrive while it remains Office 365. We begin to forget when it first became Office 365 in a way we would not forget when it became Office 2013. I like the idea of continually updated subscription-based Office suite (which I have at home). In work, we are stuck on the aging Office 2007. Subscription pricing is common already with our ancillary software and services. We do have some older legacy, traditionally licensed software and service, and there, the support is dwindling to nonexistent and we are waiting for it to fail and then we will replace it with a subscription product. So if this is the start of a different pricing model, then going up to 10 makes sense, as it has a more epochal ring to it than 9.

 

[awilliams1701]

The 95/98 thing is bs as the version reported is 4.x.....
The even more fun thing is that 8.1 is actually 6.3. I forgot to check 10 last night, but I suspect its 6.4.

I'm sticking with skipping a number causes speculation and therefore hype, and the fact that everyone is talking about it, it appears to be working.

 

[awilliams1701]

No windows 7 was going to be the last, then windows 8, now you are saying windows 10? I couldn't even stand installing windows 7 in 2011 because of how outdated it was. No they will continue to update windows. I personally would love a new version every year just because after a year or two its just too much a pain in the *** to install on a new machine.

Numbers are magic. Windows wanted to differentiate from the tainted 8. They have time before the official release. To my mind, skipping 9 allows them a little more leeway in charging for an upgrade once it comes next year, maybe some fee for going up from 7? Or not.

This is supposed to be the last Windows update of this kind. Who knows how it will work out but in the future there is supposed to be rolling, more frequent, incremental updates. So there isn't to be a Windows 12, if all goes as planned. On the Office side, we subscribe to Office 365 instead of Office 2014. We roll over our subscription. Updates arrive while it remains Office 365. We begin to forget when it first became Office 365 in a way we would not forget when it became Office 2013. I like the idea of continually updated subscription-based Office suite (which I have at home). In work, we are stuck on the aging Office 2007. Subscription pricing is common already with our ancillary software and services. We do have some older legacy, traditionally licensed software and service, and there, the support is dwindling to nonexistent and we are waiting for it to fail and then we will replace it with a subscription product. So if this is the start of a different pricing model, then going up to 10 makes sense, as it has a more epochal ring to it than 9.

 

[MikeSo]

Hello,
the reason is clear to me:
xp: good
vista: worse
win7: very good
win8/8.1: so bad for me, i will never install
win 9: should be good, but it can?t exist
win 10: bad again?

I was using all from xp to 8.1, so i found out the hard way: one good, one bad, one good ...
regards -

Thinking that Win8 and 8.1 are the same makes me wonder if you've actually used them.

 

[Patrick van der Vliet]

Windows 8/8.1 aren't terrible. I've been using Windows 8 since It's preview release and I have to be honest that it needed to take time to get used to. But the OS isn't terrible. People are afraid of changes. The ones that couldn't get used to Win8/8.1, hopefully get used to Windows 10.

 

[Pete The Penguin]

Windows 8/8.1 aren't terrible. I've been using Windows 8 since It's preview release and I have to be honest that it needed to take time to get used to. But the OS isn't terrible. People are afraid of changes. The ones that couldn't get used to Win8/8.1, hopefully get used to Windows 10.

I find that people don't like how Windows 8/8.1 handles the switching between the desktop and the start screen.
I find if I explain that treating the desktop as another "app", folks have little trouble accepting Windows 8/8.1.

 

[Jan Tomsic]

Hello,
the reason is clear to me:
xp: good
vista: worse
win7: very good
win8/8.1: so bad for me, i will never install
win 9: should be good, but it can?t exist
win 10: bad again?

I was using all from xp to 8.1, so i found out the hard way: one good, one bad, one good ...
regards -

There's only one problem...
XP was good at the time, but far from best.
Vista was bad.
7 good
8 wow, this thing is FAST!
8.1 nice, fastest windows ever with all the things of windows 7 + much improved various tools, like improved task manager and graph while copying stuff, more devices work out of the box, wifi and LAN mostly work by default, without additional drivers needed, and so does audio. Improved multi monitor support with a task bar on each monitor with extra settings, ability to open start on the current screen, not only on default screen, access to administrative tools from right clicking the start button, and OneDrive integration is pretty great, and if you have one screen portrait and one landscape, it chooses appropriate wallpaper for each screen so you can have a nice slideshow of different wallpapers on each screen.
I don't know exactly why you needed start on windows 7, because pressing start and typing to search what you want works the same as before.

And windows 10 looks like further improved 8.1 so it's gonna be awesome.

 

[Hotvak123]

The number 9 is bad luck in japan, from a marketing stand point its best not to use something that's bad luck.

 

[Reflexx]

Maybe MS just wanted everyone talking about Windows.

 

[thatguy97]

Probably because some applications check your Windows version and can misdetect it for Windows 9x and 9x can stand for win95 or 98 or 98SE or ME I guess it would really only be a problem if you were installing some ancient apps. If that's not it its gotta be something technical also Windows 4.0 is technically Windows 95

Posted from my Samsung galaxy S5

 

[TLRtheory]

I find that people don't like how Windows 8/8.1 handles the switching between the desktop and the start screen.
I find if I explain that treating the desktop as another "app", folks have little trouble accepting Windows 8/8.1.

I do this at my job as well.

What I've found though is that most of the people proclaiming their hatred for Windows 8 don't even know they can use the classic desktop! They seriously have formed their definitive opinion without doing the slightest bit of research... and SO MANY people have been this way that it's MINDBLOWING!

 

[AvatarEW]

Naming conventions for public releases from Microsoft have no technical basis. Internal builds do follow a logical naming convention but those are not for public view.

This is marketing decision..

 

[thatguy97]

Naming conventions for public releases from Microsoft have no technical basis. Internal builds do follow a logical naming convention but those are not for public view.

This is marketing decision..

Who are you replying to

Posted from my Samsung galaxy S5

 

[AvatarEW]

Who are you replying to

Posted from my Samsung galaxy S5

If there is no specification (sometimes preceded or succeeded by a quote), a thread reply is always to the original poster.