Linked by Adam S on Wed 15th Oct 2008 12:02 UTC
Windows It was announced yesterday that the Microsoft OS code-named Windows 7 will be shipping as "Windows 7," exciting and surprising many. There was much question, even in our own piece, as to how Microsoft arrived at 7 for an OS likely destined to be version 6.1. Microsoft answered our question in a post called "Why 7?" on the Windows Vista Blog.
Thread beginning with comment 333825
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Only in Redmond ..
by kragil on Wed 15th Oct 2008 13:00 UTC
kragil
Member since:
2006-01-04

.. they name Windows 6.1 "Windows 7".

As always Marketing prevails.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Only in Redmond ..
by dagw on Wed 15th Oct 2008 13:22 in reply to "Only in Redmond .."
dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

they name Windows 6.1 "Windows 7".


Hardly "only in Redmond". Sun did a similar thing with both Java and Solaris. Slackware jumped from version 3 or 4 straight to version 7. Had this been anybody other than Microsoft no one would either care or notice.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: Only in Redmond ..
by Buck on Wed 15th Oct 2008 13:23 in reply to "RE: Only in Redmond .."
Buck Member since:
2005-06-29

Had this been anybody other than Microsoft no one would either care or notice.

Well does that come as a surprise to you.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Only in Redmond ..
by google_ninja on Wed 15th Oct 2008 14:00 in reply to "RE: Only in Redmond .."
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

Slackware did that jump specifically because of the version inflation that all the other distros have. Pat was kind of tired of having the oldest active distro still around with by far the smallest version number.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Only in Redmond ..
by leech on Wed 15th Oct 2008 15:44 in reply to "RE: Only in Redmond .."
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

Slackware did it to make fun of the version numbers of other Linux distributions, if I recall correctly.

It went something like this. Red Hat. "Ok, we're up to version 8, let's release Enterprise Linux 1.0. Oh wait, SuSE and Mandrake just released 9. Better hurry up and release 9 as well."

Slackware "what's wit all the version numbers? Screw it, let's jump the gun and say our version is 7!"

I think Debian is the only one who sanely is still at 4.0 (hopefully sooner rather than later, 5.0 will be out). They only change major version numbers if there is a core ABI / API update. The rest of the distributions used to do that, but look at Fedora. It only ever releases full numbers (1, 2, 3, etc). Suse releases 10, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 11.0, etc. Mandriva just does a year, then "spring" edition.

Really, shouldn't Windows Vista have been 6.0, then with sp1 it should be 6.1? Or would that be 6.0sp1 like Debian does their 4.0r4?

Slackware did the version jump because really, what difference does the version of release really make besides telling the users that there is a newer version out that has more up to date software.

Granted when you're talking about MS operating systems, a new version truly is a new version. Mainly because with the exception of the rather limited built-in games and built-in apps, the Operating System IS all the software you get.

I still maintain the ONLY good thing they did in Vista was FINALLY upgrade the Solitaire games (and included Mahjongg).

Reply Parent Score: 2