Windows Numbering

damo24

Is it me or should the new version of Windows not be called "Windows 7"? The last version of Windows to have a number was 3.1. Since then there has been Windows 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP and Vista so shouldn't this version be called Windows 10?

[Deleted User]

It's the 7th iteration of Windows NT..

Inactive

They can call it what they like, as long as it is better than Vista.;)

benjus

In 1993 Microsoft started Windows NT, based on the current version number of Windows at the time. Windows NT became the "Professional" version, while ordinary Windows became the "Consumer" version. The two streams were brought back together in Windows XP.

Windows NT version numbers:
3.1 (look-and-feel of Windows 3.1)
3.5
3.51
4.0 (introduces the look-and-feel of Windows 95)
5.0 (Windows 2000)
5.2 (Windows XP/Windows Server 2003)
6.0 (Windows Vista/Windows Server 2008)
6.1 (Windows 7 Beta release)

Windows (non-NT) Version numbers (starting at 3.0):
3.0
3.1
3.11 (Windows for Workgroups)
4.0 (Windows 95)
4.1 (Windows 98)
4.9 (Windows ME)

Note that Windows 7 is actually version 6.1 (as far as the Beta releases go, anyway). I'll leave you to google for further information if you're interested.

[Deleted User]

benjus wrote: »

5.0 (Windows 2000)
5.2 (Windows XP/Windows Server 2003)

The majority of XP editions were 5.1, with WS2003 and the x64 version of XP Pro being 5.2.

damo24

Thanks for clearing that one up, at least I know I'm not going mad.

danmanchester

Inactive wrote: »

They can call it what they like, as long as it is better than Vista.;)

Well, never having had any problems at all in almost 3 years with Vista I'm not sure how much "better" or different from Vista Windows 7 actually is to justify Microsoft calling it a new OS really.

I've been using 7 since January and the only real differences from Vista that I've noticed are: UAC is much easier to control, no sidebar as default, it does seem faster and more responsive than Vista, less CPU % and a new aero/taskbar funky makeover.

Perhaps it's really Vista SP2 disguised as a new operating system :rolleyes: or maybe I'm just a cynic !

[Deleted User]

danmanchester wrote: »

Perhaps it's really Vista SP2 disguised as a new operating system

SP2 for Vista has already reached RTM..