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

[fastbilly1]

Pretty much the bulk of what we heard for Windows 9 is now Windows 10:


Out of everything showcased I only care about two parts:
1. Multiple Desktops. For my browsing pc I do not need this, but for my editing pc this is a amazing. One desktop for photo, one for video. Really it just means I can be sloppy... And yes I have used it for the last decade on linux.
2. Everything runs in a window. Finally those damn "desktop apps" work like programs and you can close them via the title bar buttons.

Thoughts from the world at large? Isiolia and Hobie, I know you are out there.

[jinx]

Looks like a big improvement over 8. Silly name though...

Also: Windows FINALLY gets multiple desktops!

The Linux user will now leave this thread...

[isiolia]

New command prompt looks nice too, though to a point we already have Powershell.

Preview build will be interesting to grab once they put it up later today.

[flojocabron]

There will be a windows XP mode for the uncouth masses

[lisalover1]

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.

[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.

Not to mention the depressingly large number of people who run Windows 95, would see on the box "Windows 9" and assume it works on their machine.

[BRIK]

Damn it, Microsoft. I've come too accustomed to Windows 8. If I use a Windows 7 PC now I find the menus slow to use...
Oh well. I work in a tech store. No doubt I'll have this close after release.

[marurun]

This does a little bit smack of, "our customers like Windows 7 so much more than 8; let's just sell something that's a lot like 7 again so they'll stop boycotting 8."

[isiolia]

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.

[darsparx]

And yet it still doesn't make me want to go run out and buy it next year...I mean it's nice to have the start menu back(officially), and multiple desktops(something linux and mac have had for years). But "modern ui"(or whatever they call it now) is still too rampant in the design...on windows it looks ugly no matter how much lipstick they put on that pig. The start menu is nice to have back but the UI for the whole thing is still ugly to me...