Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 30th Nov 2012 11:55 UTC
Permalink for comment 543740
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-08-22
Before Vista, there was a new Microsoft OS every two years. "
No, every 3 years.
The Vista cycle was an abnormality, but one that came because of the state of the code and the fact that they had to restart development.
Yes, after WinXP (2001) there was another version of Windows (2004) that was not released - tossed out because of performance, etc - development was restarted and 3 years later they had Vista (2006/2007). So even then it wasn't really an abnormality, they just didn't release what they had developed to the public.
Of course, that mishap also caused them to re-evaluation how everything is interconnected in Windows and start working towards a simpler architectural implementation - which is why Win7 came a little earlier, and Win8 a little earlier, and why Win Blue will be so early and potentially able to do yearly releases.