Too good for a number scheme, Windows 10 announced for 2015

[MrPopo]

So, I was talking with a developer friend about Windows 10, and she told me something interesting. Apparently, the reason they named it 10 instead of 9 was because a lot of 3rd-party programs that could run on Windows 95/98 simply shortened the reference check for the system to "Windows 9". This would obviously cause a big problem if people try to run these programs on another OS that was actually called Windows 9. Thus, it was skipped.

I heard that too, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Programs don't care what's on the box/logo, and technically, Windows 95 is Windows 4.0, and Windows 98 is 4.10. For comparison, WIndows 8.1 is 6.3.59, and the Windows 10 developer preview is 6.4.9841.

Could be that they're pulling the information from somewhere other than the 'ver' command though.

Every time you assume someone does something properly you are setting yourself up for disappointment. There is a massive number of app compatibility shims in Windows because of all the terrible things developers have done and Microsoft wants to maintain backwards compatibility as much as possible.

[ZeroAX]

Every time you assume someone does something properly you are setting yourself up for disappointment. There is a massive number of app compatibility shims in Windows because of all the terrible things developers have done and Microsoft wants to maintain backwards compatibility as much as possible.

backwards compatibility for 15+ year old apps? Where's that south park "you're going to have a bad time" meme when you need one?

[Hobie-wan]

If I use a Windows 7 PC now I find the menus slow to use...

http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/73 ... -time.html

Also disable Aero or the fade in nonsense.

[bmoc]

I've been playing with the Technical Preview for about an hour and it is definitely a huge improvement over 8. Though I didn't have a problem with 8 with Classic Shell installed.

[8bit]

I am so bored by Windows OS releases. They did okay with 7, 8.0 is a mess (haven't tired 8.1 or know much about it), and 10 looks like what they should have done with 8 to begin with. Regardless there are no big wow features for me. I'm sure ill try it eventually but I sure as hell won't be buying it.

[Frag Mortuus]

I will be getting it at some point. I too am interested to see W10 resource usage. Vista was a resource hog, but 7 fixed that and 8 refined it even more. Other than the terrible UI, 8 is actually a pretty solid OS, the Metro Apps or whatever they are called that had to run in full screen and couldn't be launched from the desktop was an absolute terrible idea. But other than that it's a great OS.

[darsparx]

I am so bored by Windows OS releases. They did okay with 7, 8.0 is a mess (haven't tired 8.1 or know much about it), and 10 looks like what they should have done with 8 to begin with. Regardless there are no big wow features for me. I'm sure ill try it eventually but I sure as hell won't be buying it.

That's the thing though with their releases though:

ME - Bad
XP - good
Vista - bad
7 - good
8/8.1(I don't distinguish here it's not a major update in any way) - bad
so maybe 10 is good? I think I'll pull out parallels and try the preview in it and see if I still have the same sentiments towards windows that I've had since 8....

[ZeroAX]

Guys I hardly believe it's an actual business strategy of Microsoft's to build one bad and then one good version of windows. Windows 95 was good and then 98 was even better. They just took bad decisions every time they wanted to try something different.

[darsparx]

Guys I hardly believe it's an actual business strategy of Microsoft's to build one bad and then one good version of windows. Windows 95 was good and then 98 was even better. They just took bad decisions every time they wanted to try something different.

It's not business strategy it's how things have worked out and the general opinions most have on the versions(8/8.1 proves it to some extent since we know 7 was considered good, and not a lot of people were ready to adopt a OS without the start menu...and to be honest to me 8 felt clunky and horrible visually just like vista ). It's been a going pattern that honestly hasn't been wrong to me since I really started with windows back in the XP days...(I don't count the few years I messed around on 95/98(can't recall which ))

[ZeroAX]

Yeah I understand why this came to be, I'm just saying it's not deliberate so when windows 11 comes along give it a chance, it might be able to break the curse