10-03-2014 08:35 AM
80 1234
tools
  1. a5cent's Avatar
    That is actually really clever... And would go right over the heads of most people.

    Still, I like it personally at least. Even if it would be silly
    I started this rumour here at WPC, but really, I was just kidding. I have no idea what is behind the jump in version number, other than what was already mentioned by MS themselves.

    My veiled point was that even abstract numbers may have a different meaning than one might think, so obsessing over decimal 10 may really just be a waste of time.

    If I had to speculate, I'd say MS is just trying to get as far away from the Windows 8 name as possible. No more, no less.

    Either way, the name comes from MS' marketing department and has nothing to do with engineering, so at least all the theories about kernel versions and such are most definitely bogus.
    Last edited by a5cent; 10-04-2014 at 07:34 AM. Reason: formatting
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    10-02-2014 01:12 AM
  2. wuiyang's Avatar
    cause most programmer did this:

    if( version.StartWith("Windows 9") )
    { print("you are using Windows 95 or Windows 98"); }
    10-02-2014 01:45 AM
  3. a5cent's Avatar
    cause most programmer did this:



    if( version.StartWith("Windows 9") )

    { print("you are using Windows 95 or Windows 98"); }



    You'd better not be serious. Not always easy to tell...

    ;-)
    10-02-2014 02:30 AM
  4. Andrew Kerr2's Avatar
    yeah its weird
    10-02-2014 05:50 AM
  5. Letros's Avatar
    This is probably true, there is a lot of third party software that would have to be recoded if Windows 9 was read as the version.
    10-02-2014 05:58 AM
  6. a5cent's Avatar
    This is probably true, there is a lot of third party software that would have to be recoded if Windows 9 was read as the version.



    Really, no software program on earth determines the Windows version number in the way implied above. Win32 doesn't even report it that way.

    It's BS.
    10-02-2014 07:06 AM
  7. ygtgngr's Avatar
    Really, no software program on earth determines the Windows version number in the way implied above. Win32 doesn't even report it that way.

    It's BS.
    He is saying that developers calls 95 and 98, 9x thats why when their code sees 9 it decides it's either 95 or 98.
    10-02-2014 07:09 AM
  8. wuiyang's Avatar
    Really, no software program on earth determines the Windows version number in the way implied above. Win32 doesn't even report it that way.

    It's BS.
    cranbourne comments on New Windows Version will be called Windows 10

    most company developed application/program way decade ago, they still have some very old code like those
    10-02-2014 07:11 AM
  9. TLRtheory's Avatar
    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.
    10-02-2014 07:13 AM
  10. a5cent's Avatar
    cranbourne comments on New Windows Version will be called Windows 10

    most company developed application/program way decade ago, they still have some very old code like those


    A lot of old code may still be in use, but Win32 never supported the idiotic method of version checking that is being implied here. It never worked that way, so that type of mistake could never have been made. That is why it's BS. You don't have to believe me. Look up the APIs used 15 years ago. They never were that stupid.
    Last edited by a5cent; 10-02-2014 at 03:52 PM.
    10-02-2014 07:19 AM
  11. Mike Gibson's Avatar
    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).
    10-02-2014 07:58 AM
  12. Christian Kallevig's Avatar
    Yeah, this is kind of what I think too.
    10-02-2014 08:30 AM
  13. jlzimmerman's Avatar
    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
    Brad Lambert likes this.
    10-02-2014 08:58 AM
  14. anon(9057135)'s Avatar
    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.!
    10-02-2014 09:42 AM
  15. t.mehoves's Avatar
    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
    thatguy97 likes this.
    10-02-2014 09:44 AM
  16. TLRtheory's Avatar
    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
    10-02-2014 10:47 AM
  17. mmcpher's Avatar
    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 likes this.
    10-02-2014 10:59 AM
  18. awilliams1701's Avatar
    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.
    MikeSo and a5cent like this.
    10-02-2014 02:14 PM
  19. awilliams1701's Avatar
    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.
    10-02-2014 02:15 PM
  20. MikeSo's Avatar
    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 cant 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.
    10-02-2014 02:21 PM
  21. Patrick van der Vliet's Avatar
    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.
    TLRtheory likes this.
    10-02-2014 02:27 PM
  22. Pete The Penguin's Avatar
    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.
    10-02-2014 02:35 PM
  23. Jan Tomsic's Avatar
    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 cant 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.
    MikeSo likes this.
    10-02-2014 02:40 PM
  24. Hotvak123's Avatar
    The number 9 is bad luck in japan, from a marketing stand point its best not to use something that's bad luck.
    10-02-2014 02:56 PM
  25. Reflexx's Avatar
    Maybe MS just wanted everyone talking about Windows.
    Jan Tomsic, MikeSo, a5cent and 1 others like this.
    10-02-2014 03:21 PM
80 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Windows 10 a disapointment, hybrids and tablets are dead
    By rodan01 in forum Windows 10 Insider Preview
    Replies: 243
    Last Post: 10-11-2014, 10:32 AM
  2. What if the Windows 10 ISO contains the phone files?
    By someone2639 in forum Windows 10 Insider Preview
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-03-2014, 04:10 AM
  3. Should I get the tech-preview of Windows 10 for my laptop?
    By GelvinGSM in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-30-2014, 06:21 PM
  4. Windows 10 'Continuum' mode for hybrid notebook-tablet devices shown in video
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-30-2014, 05:42 PM
  5. Our new Windows 10 forums are now open!
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-30-2014, 05:30 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD