Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Feb 2007 16:54 UTC, submitted by Adam S
Windows "Future versions of Windows are going to bear little resemblance to what we've heard so far officially - and unofficially - from Microsoft and the individuals who love to leak tidbits about the company. In fact, according to one of my reliable tipsters, the new and reorganized Windows organization, led by Senior Vice President Steven Sinofsky, is trying to wean folks completely off the Windows code names they have been using for the next couple of releases of Windows. Welcome to the brave new world of 'Windows 7' (a boringly named complement to 'Office 14', the successor to Office 2007)." More here.
Thread beginning with comment 208740
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by NeoX on Sat 3rd Feb 2007 17:29 UTC in reply to "RE"
Member since:

And one more thing they could do is stop putting the year in their releases. Windows Server 2003 R2 is the latest greatest server, yet it sounds old and out dated... At least with XP (to a degree) and Vista they did not do this so prominently.

Reply Parent Score: 2

by butters on Sat 3rd Feb 2007 21:24 in reply to "RE"
butters Member since:

But on the other hand, the trend in operating systems and middlewear is moving from feature-based releases to time-based cycles. Features don't really excite people anymore. The aspect of Vista that the media really keyed in on the most was how long it took to release.

When you have a mature product, which describes most of the OS and middlewear products in production deployment today, the promise of consistent updates is way more valuable than that of whiz-bang features. If you can plot your next 2 releases on a calendar to within a month, then businesses and OEMs will be much more comfortable planning their IT strategy around your products.

With this and your point about "dating" in mind, I like Ubuntu's scheme. Everyone knows the next release will be called 7.04, and hence will come out during April 2007. But when it's 2010 and some customers are still on 6.06 LTS, it doesn't inherently sound as dated as if it were called Ubuntu 2006.

I disagree with moving away from catchy codenames. Today, software is about community. Even the biggest shops rely on their ability to cultivate a community of enthusiastic developers and beta-testers. Fun codenames get people interested. Again, consider Ubuntu.

Reply Parent Score: 2