Windows 7 Gets Named: "Windows 7"

rated by 0 users
This post has 17 Replies | 2 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 26,190
Points 1,186,155
Joined: Sep 2007
ForumsAdministrator
News Posted: Mon, Oct 13 2008 9:51 PM

Since the codename for the next release of Windows was announced, many of us have wondered what the actual name would be.

Well, it turns out that the codename for the next version of Windows, Windows 7, is going to be the actual name for the product. And in what is somewhat of a passing of the torch, the announcement was made not on the Windows 7 blog, but on the Windows Vista blog.

In a few weeks we are going to be talking about the details of this release at the PDC and at WinHEC. We will be sharing a pre-beta "developer only release" with attendees of both shows and giving them the first broad in-depth look at what we've been up to. I can't wait for them to see it.

And, as you probably know, since we began development of the next version of the Windows client operating system we have been referring to it by a codename, "Windows 7." But now is a good time to announce that we've decided to officially call the next version of Windows, "Windows 7."
As Mike Nash, Corporate VP, Windows Product Managemet, said in the post, this is the first time he can recall a codename being used for a Windows release. So, why a number?

Well, according to the post, this is the seventh Windows release, and they didn't want to use another "aspirational" name like Windows XP or Windows Vista (or they didn't want to try as hard to come up with one, your choice).

So how did they come up with this as the seventh release? Well, if you assume they plug Windows 95 and Windows 98, and things like Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11 into the same "version category," and they exclude server versions, you could come up with:
  1. Windows 3.1
  2. Windows 9x
  3. Windows NT
  4. Windows 2000
  5. Windows XP
  6. Windows Vista
  7. Windows 7
Or if you just use members of the NT family, you could come up with:
  1. Windows NT 3.1
  2. Windows NT 3.5
  3. Windows NT 4.0
  4. Windows 2000
  5. Windows XP
  6. Windows Vista
  7. Windows 7
Or you could just say, "who cares?" and leave it at that. BTW, there wasn't any additional info in the post besides the name; we'll just have to wait for PDC and WinHEC for more.



  • | Post Points: 80
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 119
Points 1,405
Joined: Oct 2008
Jeremy replied on Tue, Oct 14 2008 1:20 PM

You guys have no sense of history. Microsoft has always counted and named their client side OSes separately from their server side counterparts. For the client-side versions of Windows:

1. Windows 1.0 (1985)

2. Windows 2.0 (includes 286/386 versions)

3. Windows 3.x

4. Windows 95 (includes 98 and ME)

5. Windows XP

6. Windows Vista

7. Windows 7

Yes, I still have a Windows 286 box in the basement somewhere.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 210
Points 2,845
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Kansas
shanewu replied on Tue, Oct 14 2008 2:33 PM

Good, I was actually kinda hoping they'd stick with something simple this go 'round.

"Everyone always wants new things. Everybody likes new inventions, new technology. People will never be replaced by machines. In the end, life and business are about human connections. And computers are about trying to murder you in a lake. And to me, the choice is easy." - Michael Scott (The Office)

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 5,053
Points 60,715
Joined: May 2008
Location: U.S.
Moderator
3vi1 replied on Tue, Oct 14 2008 3:22 PM

Give that man a cigar! I believe Jeremy has come up with the correct reasoning for the version.

At least, it beats my theory all to pieces: "Windows Se7en: You'll say a certain word 74 times."

What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

++++++++++++[>++++>+++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>+++.>++++++++++.-------------.+++.>---.>--.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 636
Points 9,140
Joined: May 2008
Location: Worcester, MA
SqUiD267 replied on Tue, Oct 14 2008 5:33 PM

I thought Cloud was the codename...

AMD Athlon X2 5000+ (Thanks to HH)

DFI Lanparty DK 790 FX

EVGA 8800 GT 512 mb

2 GB of G.Skill RAM

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 5
Points 55
Joined: Oct 2008
Dant replied on Tue, Oct 14 2008 5:57 PM

SqUiD267:

I thought Cloud was the codename...

 no, that was windows cloud, it was suppose to be a program that worked with Windows 7

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 150
Points 2,250
Joined: Sep 2007
Location: U.S.
mazuki replied on Tue, Oct 14 2008 5:59 PM

dant beat me to it :)

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,374
Points 80,315
Joined: Nov 2004
Location: United States, Arizona
Moderator

OO 3.1 and the good days of DOS.... how is miss thee

"Never trust a computer you can't throw out a window."

2700K

Z77 GIGABYTE G1.SNIPER

GIGABYTE GTX670

G.Skill Ripjaws X 16gb PC2133

Antec P280

Corsair H100

Asus Blu-ray burner

Seasonic X650 PSU

Patriot Pyro 128gb SSD

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,181
Points 90,135
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: United States, Virginia
Moderator

Jeremy:

You guys have no sense of history. Microsoft has always counted and named their client side OSes separately from their server side counterparts. For the client-side versions of Windows:

1. Windows 1.0 (1985)

2. Windows 2.0 (includes 286/386 versions)

3. Windows 3.x

4. Windows 95 (includes 98 and ME)

5. Windows XP

6. Windows Vista

7. Windows 7

Yes, I still have a Windows 286 box in the basement somewhere.

First off Awesome post! Welcome to HH forums. Thats a good run down of the versions. Second I'm glad that they are keeping it simple. Windows 7 looks good and improves on Vista which I like very much all ready. The menus are a bit weird in vista. That would be my biggest complant. 7 seems to be working on that.

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 12
Points 165
Joined: Oct 2008
lolWut replied on Wed, Oct 15 2008 3:12 PM

linux ftw!

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 119
Points 1,405
Joined: Oct 2008
Jeremy replied on Wed, Oct 15 2008 5:42 PM

Actually, now that I look into it a little more, this isn't actually Windows 7. The chronology I posted is correct, except for #7. "Windows 7" is actually Windows 6.5, or Vista 2.0 if you will. All the alpha builds have had 6.x build codes. Looks like Windows 7 will be to Vista what 98 was to 95. Oh well, 98 was my favorite Windows OS before XP hit the scene, hopefully 7 will be good as well.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 5,053
Points 60,715
Joined: May 2008
Location: U.S.
Moderator
3vi1 replied on Wed, Oct 15 2008 6:18 PM

Nice observation! And I agree: Win98SE was actually pretty good for it's day. Now, we might not remember it that way if it hadn't been followed by WinME... but still.

Win7 might very well be the equivalent of a 98. It's obvious from the Mojave experiment that Microsoft knows there's a stigma to the Vista name - they may have been partially influenced to not call this next version VistaSE to mitigate that.

What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

++++++++++++[>++++>+++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>+++.>++++++++++.-------------.+++.>---.>--.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 5,053
Points 60,715
Joined: May 2008
Location: U.S.
Moderator
3vi1 replied on Thu, Oct 16 2008 2:01 PM

I just had another thought. What if we're way off on this naming thing. Consider three points:

  1. It's an operating system.
  2. Operating systems are written by, and most used by, geeks.
  3. Geeks love Jeri Ryan.

I rest my case.

What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

++++++++++++[>++++>+++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>+++.>++++++++++.-------------.+++.>---.>--.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,747
Points 42,815
Joined: Sep 2006
Location: United States, California

I really need some advice and oppinions from you guys.

I'm still on XP and was just about to buy Vista home premium, but am wondering if it would be a waste of $ with the next OS seemingly right around the corner. What would be my best move?

I was thinking OEM for $99. That way even if it only lasts me about a year it's no big loss.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 437
Points 6,450
Joined: Jun 2007
Location: United States, New York
jtm55 replied on Thu, Oct 16 2008 6:00 PM

 

Hi All

I would definitely go with the OEM version Recovering. So long as you're not going to swap out the Mobo or the Proc you'll be fine. I have the OEM version of Vista Ultimate, and have had no issues whatsoever. In addition, when Windows 7 is released we'll have to wait & see what surprises if any that operating system has in stored for us.

ASUS Z7S WS

EVGA 295 GTX

 HITACHI Deskstar 7K1000 RAID 5

Intel Xeon E5420 Harpertown

HT Omega Claro

CORSAIR CMPSU-1000HX

mushkin 6GB 3 x 2GB) DDR2 800 (PC2 6400)

Harmon Kardon HK 3490 W/ Energy RC 10

LG W3000H-Bn

SILVERSTONE SST-TJ07

Plextor PX 755 SA

Windows 7 Ultimate

Areca ARC-1210

 

 

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,181
Points 90,135
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: United States, Virginia
Moderator

recoveringknowitall:

I really need some advice and oppinions from you guys.

I'm still on XP and was just about to buy Vista home premium, but am wondering if it would be a waste of $ with the next OS seemingly right around the corner. What would be my best move?

I was thinking OEM for $99. That way even if it only lasts me about a year it's no big loss.

If you have a freind that has a vista disk borrow it and install it to see if you like it. You can legally run it for a month without a product key.

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 5,053
Points 60,715
Joined: May 2008
Location: U.S.
Moderator
3vi1 replied on Fri, Oct 17 2008 2:49 PM

Or, if you're feeling adventurous, download Ubuntu 8.10 and play with it for a while.

If it's not your thing (i.e. you play games that don't quite work yet in Wine) by the time Windows 7 comes out, jump ship and sell your story to Microsoft for a new series of commercials!  You can legally run it for a month plus forever without a product key.

What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

++++++++++++[>++++>+++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>+++.>++++++++++.-------------.+++.>---.>--.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,181
Points 90,135
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: United States, Virginia
Moderator

3vi1:

Or, if you're feeling adventurous, download Ubuntu 8.10 and play with it for a while.

If it's not your thing (i.e. you play games that don't quite work yet in Wine) by the time Windows 7 comes out, jump ship and sell your story to Microsoft for a new series of commercials!  You can legally run it for a month plus forever without a product key.

Ubuntu and windows are in a race for my full time support. Ubuntu wins if my games ever run perfect under linux. Windows wins if I can ever get 3D support for linux in a VM.

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (18 items) | RSS