Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

Gene C · 01-20-2014, 10:59 AM

Evidently someone out there was listening to us

http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/20/532684...lar-demand

RJNorton · 01-20-2014, 01:32 PM

I read on the web that Windows 9 will (hopefully) be to Windows 8 as Windows 7 was to Vista.

If true, I cannot wait for Windows 9.

JMadonna · 01-21-2014, 08:04 AM

I heard that the guy who launched Windows 8 has been signed to fix the health care website. Unfortunately that's not a joke.

LincolnMan · 01-22-2014, 07:28 AM

(01-21-2014 08:04 AM)JMadonna Wrote: I heard that the guy who launched Windows 8 has been signed to fix the health care website. Unfortunately that's not a joke.

Are you serious?
I've had Windows 8 for a year now and still have big problems with it. My next computer will be an Apple. I bought an I Pad- and love it!

RJNorton · 10-03-2014, 04:09 AM

I am making this post using the free beta version of Windows 10 released this week from Microsoft. The final version of Windows 10 will be in stores sometime in 2015. I won't bore with details other than to say it's a lot more like Windows 7 than Windows 8. Basically Microsoft has admitted Windows 8 was a dud, and I am very impressed with the way Windows 10 works and feels.

Gene C · 10-03-2014, 08:58 AM

This is confusing. Windows is bringing back Beta? I just switched over from VHS to DVD. Rolleyes

RJNorton · 10-03-2014, 09:49 AM

Sony is bringing back Beta, not Microsoft. Hope that clears things up, Gene.

LincolnMan · 10-03-2014, 10:56 AM

Was there a Windows 9?

STS Lincolnite · 10-03-2014, 11:05 AM

(10-03-2014 10:56 AM)LincolnMan Wrote: Was there a Windows 9?

No. When asked about it at the announcement, Windows chiefs Myerson and Belfiore lamely joked that "seven ate nine" (7 8 9). Who knows why they skipped 9. Probably some marketing strategy.

loetar44 · 10-03-2014, 01:15 PM

(10-03-2014 11:05 AM)STS Lincolnite Wrote:
(10-03-2014 10:56 AM)LincolnMan Wrote: Was there a Windows 9?

No. When asked about it at the announcement, Windows chiefs Myerson and Belfiore lamely joked that "seven ate nine" (7 8 9). Who knows why they skipped 9. Probably some marketing strategy.

You are right! It's all just marketing. The numbers given to Windows releases don't mean anything. Believe it or not, but we are still on Windows 6. I’m 70 and I remember well the good old days when I worked with Windows 3.0 (16-bit OS) in 1990. That was the first widely successful version of Windows and a real technical improvement. I’ve even worked with Windows 1.0 (1983), Windows 2.0 (1987) and 2.1 (1988), all not so successful versions. Windows 3.0 was the first "flawlesly working OS". After Windows 3.0 and 3.1 came Windows 95 and Windows 98 and Windows ME. This were all Windows 4.x versions (“flavors”, resp. 4.0, 4.1 and 4.9 and not 4.3!). Windows 2000, Windows XP and Windows 2003 were all Windows 5.x “flavors” (resp 5.0, 5.1 and 5.2). Windows Vista was Windows 6.0, Windows 7 was 6.1, Windows 8 was 6.2 and Windows 8.1 was 6.3.

Windows 10 will be in fact 6.4. The reason that Windows 9 is skipped is that with designation “10” people will more easily think that it is a complete new generation and “something really new”, but it’s still a Windows 6 …. As I said, just marketing.