Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 4th Aug 2012 02:12 UTC, submitted by KLU9
Thread beginning with comment 530784
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.



Member since:
2005-07-06
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.
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