The Reason Behind The Windows 10 Name

I do wonder if they decided to name it Windows 10 because they finally purged the last of their legacy DOS code? :D
 
They could have easily labeled or branded the OS Window 9 externally
and then just internally identified the OS as version 10
No one would really care except for a few
 
erexx said:
They could have easily labeled or branded the OS Window 9 externally
and then just internally identified the OS as version 10
No one would really care except for a few
Click to expand...

And why does anyone care about what the external branding is? It's not like Windows version brands have forever and always perfectly sequential numbering schemes. It's a hell of a lot better than those that though that this would just be called "Windows". Seriously, who in their right mind would think that this version of Windows would be called "Windows". No one that ever wrote software that people actually use and that gets updated, that's certain.
 
Welcome to Windows OS 10 we like to refer to it as "OSX" pay no attention to the similarity to Mac OS X it's not at all related. On launch day this release will be known as "NotCheetah"
 
a104375 said:
Welcome to Windows OS 10 we like to refer to it as "OSX" pay no attention to the similarity to Mac OS X it's not at all related. On launch day this release will be known as "NotCheetah"
Click to expand...

Except when has anyone ever referred to Windows as "Windows OS"? 25 years ago maybe? Windows 10. OS X Yosemite. If one is seeing a similarity in those brands, a computer might be too dangerous a thing for them to operate.

On a more logical footing, it is pretty obvious that Microsoft "copied" Spaces and Expose with their implementation of virtual desktops and task view. I said quoted "copied" simply because 3rd parties have been adding these features for some time. Indeed clones of Expose is something that used to be in a lot of Microsoft mouse drivers. But at any rate, these features have been in OS X and yes Linux out of the box for some time so at least from that perspective these features were copied by Microsoft.
 
Might as well call it Windows 2015. Or Broken Windows, if it's as bad as windows 8
 
Too bad they just didn't go for it all the way with Windows Mojave! :p

Looks like I'll be picking up this OS when released. Is working very well for me in VM's.
 
I wonder if there's some legacy code out there that checks for Windows 1?
 
You should be amazed at the same people who did.....Xbox> Xbox 360>XBoxOne?
 
captainyarr said:
It sounds stupid, but the proof is easy enough to find.
https://searchcode.com/?q=if(version,startswith("windows+9")
Click to expand...

WillC310 said:
Yep.. JAVA code:

https://searchcode.com/codesearch/view/60696206/

public class WindowsAttachProvider extends HotSpotAttachProvider {

public WindowsAttachProvider() {
String os = System.getProperty("os.name");
if (os.startsWith("Windows 9") || os.equals("Windows Me")) {
throw new RuntimeException(
"This provider is not supported on this version of Windows");
Click to expand...

Given some of the shitty java programs and just programs in general I have tried to run I could see some people using this.

While this is being wrote off as a rumor or just plan BS. I have to wonder if that might not be something that they ran into with some of their testing and decided they needed to work around.
 
oh and mind you this should really be called

Windows 8.11 for Workgroups
 
Wouldn't it be simpler to just name the Windows releases by year like they do for their Office/Server products? It's not like the version numbers have anything to do with anything anyway. Windows 7 is kernel version 6.1, Windows 8 is kernel version 6.2, etc.
 
MrCaffeineX said:
Wouldn't it be simpler to just name the Windows releases by year like they do for their Office/Server products? It's not like the version numbers have anything to do with anything anyway. Windows 7 is kernel version 6.1, Windows 8 is kernel version 6.2, etc.
Click to expand...

This is what I wish they'd move to. Pretty much all of their other major products already follow this naming convention - Office, Server, Visual Studio, etc.
 
MrCaffeineX said:
Wouldn't it be simpler to just name the Windows releases by year like they do for their Office/Server products? It's not like the version numbers have anything to do with anything anyway. Windows 7 is kernel version 6.1, Windows 8 is kernel version 6.2, etc.
Click to expand...

To a degree I actually like server and desktop having different names. Causes less confusion. Before you had programs that were supported on 2000 Pro, but not server or vice versa. Now if you see Support for windows 7 you know it means that desktop, if you see 2012 you know it is the server.
 
I guess I always thought that was what the Home Edition/Home Premium, Business/Professional, Ultimate, and Server designations were for. That was what used to differentiate feature sets, which were based at least to some degree on expected workload(s).
 
I saw this and I still had a problem believe it. It looks like it's looking for the OS VERSION not the OS NAME which is completely different.

The next is why should Microsoft care? There are many things broken from back then if ran now. Not tons like Apple seems to have done a few times but many.

Lastly it would be a boom to their partners and third party developers. Sure some might complain they have to look for and fix their errors but it makes customers pay for support and or new versions.

I don't buy it, but I don't really care.
 
MrCaffeineX said:
Wouldn't it be simpler to just name the Windows releases by year like they do for their Office/Server products? It's not like the version numbers have anything to do with anything anyway. Windows 7 is kernel version 6.1, Windows 8 is kernel version 6.2, etc.
Click to expand...

Agree with this very much. I know that most who know their stuff don't confuse the latest Windows Server version versus the latest OS. But it would be nice if Windows Server 2012 matched Windows 2012, as opposed to having to know that Windows 8's server counterpart is Windows Server 2012... But then again, maybe the general client OS market shouldn't be involved at all with the server OS market? Who knows...
 
They moved away from year naming conventions for a reason.....
 
Dimethyltryptamine said:
If true, Windows has straight became spyware and I will finally (damn it) be forced to move to Linux. I highly doubt they'd stop doing it with a retail copy. Power corrupts...
Click to expand...

It's only for the preview, which is development software. It goes away when released. I agree it's discouraging and would certainly limit how I tested the software, but the reality is that I don't generally use beta software as my main OS. I try it out for a bit then I go back to my regular OS. I had enough problems with Dual Booting Win 7 Beta and/or RC (kept corrupting my main OS), that I just waited for the RTM (ah the days of Tech Net).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top