Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 4th Aug 2012 02:12 UTC, submitted by KLU9
Microsoft Eh. Microsoft has instructed its employees to drop the name 'Metro', due to a trademark conflict with an 'an important European partner'. The Verge has learned that Microsoft plans to unveil a new name next week. Considering Microsoft has been beating the Metro drum for quite a few years now, this all seems a bit silly. The European partner in question is believed to be Metro AG, a huge collection of electronic retail stores covering several different chains (I've got a few within a few kilometres of my middle-of-nowhere hick hometown). Depending on what they come up with, I will continue to use the Metro name. I like it, and I don't give a rat's bum about trademark disputes.
Thread beginning with comment 529718
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Just call it what it is
by Laurence on Sun 5th Aug 2012 00:58 UTC in reply to "Just call it what it is"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

Why not just call it what it really is instead of fooling the less intelligent with all this marketing.

Windows 6.2


You're wrong on all counts:

Windows 8 is definitely version NT 8 for the following reasons:

Windows 7 is actually Windows 7 (the internal version number of 6.1 was purely for compatibility reasons: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2... ). Win 8 is a much more significant break from Win7 and 7 was from Vista so it seems fair that Win 8 would be a major version number up as well (thus Windows 8).

Furthermore, Metro is just a shell and not an OS. So calling it "Windows n" would just be ignorant anyway. It would be like calling Explorer.exe "Windows 95" or progman.exe "Windows 3.x".

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Just call it what it is
by Laurence on Mon 6th Aug 2012 11:08 in reply to "RE: Just call it what it is"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I really do with that the peers who feel compelled to negative vote would at least have the balls to provide a technical explanation why.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

Careful, commenting about another poster's balls might land you jail time in Italy, in the near future. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Just call it what it is
by btrimby on Mon 6th Aug 2012 17:38 in reply to "RE: Just call it what it is"
btrimby Member since:
2009-09-30

Um... it's running on Windows NT 6.2 At least the release preview.

I'm pretty sure that's what he meant.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Um... it's running on Windows NT 6.2 At least the release preview.

I'm pretty sure that's what he meant.

I know that's what he meant and I was stating that it's not NT 6.2. If you read the link I posted you'd see that the version number is only stored as 6.2 for compatibility reasons but it's still regarded as v8.

I agree it's a completely retarded approach to version numbering, but that's MS for you :p

Edited 2012-08-06 20:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Just call it what it is
by zima on Sat 11th Aug 2012 22:45 in reply to "RE: Just call it what it is"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Windows 8 is definitely version NT 8 for the following reasons:
Windows 7 is actually Windows 7 (the internal version number of 6.1 was purely for compatibility reasons: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2... ). Win 8 is a much more significant break from Win7 and 7 was from Vista so it seems fair that Win 8 would be a major version number up as well (thus Windows 8).

I don't know... Win7 is, for practical purposes, not far from Vista SE 'let's use a PR trick of "lucky 7"' - there's hardly any reason to upgrade to 7 from service-packed Vista (and IIRC the 64bit versions even basically share the kernel now)

PS.
I agree it's a completely retarded approach to version numbering, but that's MS for you :p

Give them some slack, their versioning is not so bad. Not when compared to the recent inflation of browser numbers, or of ~early Linux distros ( http://slackware.com/faq/do_faq.php?faq=general#0 ), or the change from long-standing Linux 2.6.x to 3.x.

Edited 2012-08-11 22:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2