Windows 10

moemoe02 · Postby **moemoe02** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 5:12 pm

I have just recently heard that Microsoft is making a new Windows called "Windows 10". and I just don't even get why it's titled to be the tenth Windows OS, the previous version of Windows was 8.1 and just making it look like Microsoft does not even know how to count. The number after 8 is 9, why would Microsoft even skip count the OS to 10. And I also saw images of the new Windows OS and Microsoft is bringing back the start menu from previous versions before Windows 8, and I'm so glad that Microsoft bought that feature back in the new OS, I never liked having the start menu becoming a start screen in 8. I'm not even lying about the new OS Microsoft announced, google Windows 10 and you'll see that it's true that Microsoft is making it and bring back the start menu.

Postby **Julia Pseudo** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:51 pm

I've heard that the bizarre naming has like two reasons behind it:
• It's supposed to be a "big step" for Windows in terms of features or something. I think this reason is full bullshit.
• Apparently the OS would run into low-level problems if it was called "Windows 9" thanks to the previous Windows 95 and 98. You'd think that they could've found some way around this but apparently not.

Zeldamaster12 · Postby **Zeldamaster12** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:52 pm

Windows 8 to Windows 10.

Seems pretty legit to me.

Vinyl Scratch · Postby **Vinyl Scratch** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:09 pm

Still better than Mac

zioy · Postby **zioy** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:10 pm

Guys, does it really matter what they call it? IMO it looks amazing, and I agree with not naming it Windows 9.

Microsoft doesn't have to name everything in order by number.

EXAMPLES:
Windows '95
Windows '98
Windows XP
Windows Vista

See? I think the number 9 just feels unprofessional idk.

Postby **Julia Pseudo** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:12 pm

Well yeah but it's a number either way. If they're going to give the OS version a number that approximately fits in with the numbering scheme of the past few versions, it should be the number that follows the last.

zioy · Postby **zioy** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:13 pm

Pseudo-dino wrote:Well yeah but it's a number either way. If they're going to give the OS version a number that approximately fits in with the numbering scheme of the past few versions, it should be the number that follows the last.

So? 10 is a larger number than 8, and to be totally honest the name of an OS doesn't matter.

Zeldamaster12 · Postby **Zeldamaster12** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:38 pm

Windows '95 and Windows '98 were representing years. Windows 9 doesn't even sound near like those two, it's simply a version higher than Windows 8.

Postby **Magna** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:40 pm

Vinyl Scratch wrote:Still better than Mac

At least you don't have one. I'm sad to say I'm a Mac peasant.

XerX · Postby **XerX** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 10:15 pm

They didn't go with Windows 9 for various reasons. One reason being that some programs look at Windows 9 and see Windows 95, so there would be conflict in some sort of fashion. (This is what I have heard). Also, Windows 10 sounds a lot better anyways :>

Zeldamaster12 · Postby **Zeldamaster12** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 10:21 pm

But it's literally skipping a number, which is just weird.

I can understand what you're saying though. If Google searching for Windows '95 or something, you'd get a lot more results for Windows 9. But who uses Windows '95/98 nowadays?

zioy · Postby **zioy** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 10:39 pm

XerX wrote:They didn't go with Windows 9 for various reasons. One reason being that some programs look at Windows 9 and see Windows 95, so there would be conflict in some sort of fashion. (This is what I have heard). Also, Windows 10 sounds a lot better anyways :>

My opinions essentially

XerX · Postby **XerX** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 10:56 pm

Zeldamaster12 wrote:But it's literally skipping a number, which is just weird.

I can understand what you're saying though. If Google searching for Windows '95 or something, you'd get a lot more results for Windows 9. But who uses Windows '95/98 nowadays?

That's not the full problem (and thats backwards on how they were thinking). From what I remember, and example they used is Java. Java reads "Windows 9" as "Windows 95/98", hence problems.

FallingSnow · Postby **FallingSnow** » Sat Oct 18, 2014 1:35 am

It's not a Windows problem. It's a program problem.
They're trying to avoid all of the problems that they experienced throughout development with various programs because of the way they treated the name of the operating system. If anything, naming it 10 makes life easier for a ton of people.

MistakesWereMade · Postby **MistakesWereMade** » Sat Oct 18, 2014 1:49 am

Hello kids! My name is bill gates, i shall teach you:

HOW TO COUNT TO 10

1, 2, 3, NT3, 95, NT4, 96, 97, 98, 2000, ME, XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10

Ontopic: yeah, i agree with snow, naming it 10 is just a lot easier, who cares about the number continuity at this point

Danny · Postby **Danny** » Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:13 am

Pseudo-dino wrote:• It's supposed to be a "big step" for Windows in terms of features or something. I think this reason is full bullshit.

But they said literally the same damn exact thing about Winderps 8 and, whoops, guess it turned out to be quite shit, didn't it? I can only imagine how this one will turn out.

Why do they have to name it Windows 10?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Why can't they name it like, Windows Galaxy, or something cool, why Windows 10?

The only way they can make a "big step" in features is if they either revisit and modernize XP or if they just copy Windows 7 and smack down zero new features. They should make Windows 7+ or Windows XP Elite (Windows XPE). Windows 8.1 was released not too long ago and they're already thinking of upgrading to a new OS? To me it seems like a cashgrab.

Until Microsoft gets their shit together I'm sticking with XP and 7.

XerX · Postby **XerX** » Sat Oct 18, 2014 10:22 pm

8bitmushroom wrote:
Pseudo-dino wrote:• It's supposed to be a "big step" for Windows in terms of features or something. I think this reason is full bullshit.
But they said literally the same damn exact thing about Winderps 8 and, whoops, guess it turned out to be quite shit, didn't it? I can only imagine how this one will turn out.

Why do they have to name it Windows 10?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Why can't they name it like, Windows Galaxy, or something cool, why Windows 10?

The only way they can make a "big step" in features is if they either revisit and modernize XP or if they just copy Windows 7 and smack down zero new features. They should make Windows 7+ or Windows XP Elite (Windows XPE). Windows 8.1 was released not too long ago and they're already thinking of upgrading to a new OS? To me it seems like a cashgrab.

Until Microsoft gets their shit together I'm sticking with XP and 7.

Another reason it's called Windows 10 is because they can also call it Windows X.

To compete with Mac OS X (Mac OS 10)

FallingSnow · Postby **FallingSnow** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:34 pm

I think that's just a coincidence.

XerX · Postby **XerX** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 7:11 pm

FallingSnow wrote:I think that's just a coincidence.

It may be.

TLtimelord · Postby **TLtimelord** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:57 am

8bitmushroom wrote:
Pseudo-dino wrote:• It's supposed to be a "big step" for Windows in terms of features or something. I think this reason is full bullshit.
But they said literally the same damn exact thing about Winderps 8 and, whoops, guess it turned out to be quite shit, didn't it? I can only imagine how this one will turn out.

Why do they have to name it Windows 10?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Why can't they name it like, Windows Galaxy, or something cool, why Windows 10?

Because Samsung would go all apeshit about copyright issues since they have their badass Samsung Galaxy S5.