Windows 7?

[bastian]

Windows 3.11
4. Windows 95
5. Windows 98/98SE
6. Windows 2000/ME
7. Windows XP
8. Windows Vista
9. Windows 7?

Am I that bad at math, or did M$ calculate what version they were on using a 1st Gen Pentium chip?

Truthfully, I know nothing about Windows 7. Specifically why they named it that.

Comments

[protocollie]

Far be it for me to overextend my understanding of their naming here, but I -think- they wanted to bring it closer to in sync with windows mobile so there's more platform consistency, I know winmo7 is nearing release.

[welovevegex]

This also makes a bit of sense.

It's all in the presentation.

*rolls eyes*

Still dosnt help your math, does it?

[welovevegex]

Windows 3.0
Windows 95b
Windows 98 and windows 98se really count as two especially if you start at windows 3.11 (with network support)
Windows 2k and Windows ME are totally separate operating systems
And among a few other super geek version of Windows (Like the most recent version, released with 7, Windows Server 2008), you forgot the almighty Windows NT.

Also contrary to popular belief once upon a time there was such a thing called Microsoft Windows, without any number dot number after it, and I think there were... checks... yes there were 2 iterations of version 2.

It still probably wont help your math any but you'll probably see the marketing pattern that leads to this version being #7 easily enough if you check out this link...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Microsoft_Windows

[kwik]

Windows has 2 branches from 3.11 95/95b/98/98se/Me and the NT line
The NT line is what we continue to use today, and started with 3.51. While the branding of the OS changed, the underlying numbering didn't. (try opening a cmd window on on your win os and typing in ver and hitting enter)

Windows for Workgroups 3.11
Windows NT 3.51
Windows NT 4.0
Windows 2000 (NT 5.0)
Windows XP (NT 5.1)
Windows Vista (6.0)
Windows 7 (wanna guess?)

Hope that helps :)

[bastian]

Ahhhh! So they're counting it as an NT product because it's based off the Business line (With NTFS and the non-DOS stuff) rather than off the home line. But then where do Windows Server 2003 and 2008 fall in?

I still think they should have just kept the original naming scheme all the way through from 1 to 3.11(My first windows) and beyond.

Fuckers.

[kwik]

the naming is actually stemming from the Kernel revision. Server, for the most part runs on the same Kernel, but with additional services, and some limitations removed (like total number of processors allowed). Server has classifications based on the limitations in place, Standard, Enterprise, Datacenter... as well as some specialized ones.

NT3.51 Workstation / Server
NT4 Workstation / Server
Windows 2000 / Server 2000
Windows XP / Server 2003
Windows Vista / Server 2008
Windows 7 / Server 2010

[joeypoey]

Only in a world this shitty could you even try to say these were innocent operating systems and keep a straight face. But that's the point. We see a blue screen of death on every street corner, in every home, and we tolerate it. We tolerate it because it's common, it's trivial. We tolerate it morning, noon, and night. Well, not anymore. I'm setting the example. What I've done is going to be puzzled over and studied and followed... forever.

[gedrean]

Not that bad at math.

Keep in mind that Windows 1.0 through 3.11 were the same Windows. Other than background feature changes and a few functionality improvements (the program manager looking nicer) there were no real feature changes, so they all qualify as windows 1. Thus 95 is 2, 98/98SE/ME are 3, 2000 is 4, XP is 5, Vista 6, 7=7.