Windows 9 has an official name: Windows 10?

[Valentyn]

I can't see a use for that, but I'm not a "power user"......yet (taking IT classes)

 

Makes multi tasking, and productivity a wonderful thing. Especially compared to either manually looking through open windows on Windows, or alt-tabbing through them.

 

One button click, you see it, you click it done.

 

It's also been in Linux for years. 

 

It's great Windows finally has it, and looking from the photos it's a good implementation as well.

 

Also now being able to finally ctrl-v paste into the CMD, it's glorious.

[Trik'Stari]

Makes multi tasking, and productivity a wonderful thing. Especially compared to either manually looking through open windows on Windows, or alt-tabbing through them.

 

One button click, you see it, you click it done.

 

It's also been in Linux for years. 

 

It's great Windows finally has it, and looking from the photos it's a good implementation as well.

 

Also now being able to finally ctrl-v paste into the CMD, it's glorious.

Does it work with multi display?

[kpsl808mg]

From memory...

... versions of Windows.

hehe...a+ for effort...but i just aimed at 'there are 10 kinds/types of people' ^^

[StingBull]

I would imagine 3.51 just beeing a x.x1 update that they don't count it as a major one.

They had this reasoning for nameing Windows 7, 7. So if that reasoning fails if they count 3.51

 

If 3.51 is NOT counted Windows 7 is the 8th NT installment, if it is counted it is the 9th NT installment.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT#Releases

[Real_PhillBert]

Hmm I really like what I see so far! Although I really dont have any major issues with 8.1. 

[Technous285]

I would imagine 3.51 just beeing a x.x1 update that they don't count it as a major one.

They had this reasoning for nameing Windows 7, 7. Så it that reasoning fails if they count 3.51

Except NT 3.51 was the third release of the NT line, 9 months after NT 3.5 (and 3 months before Win95).

So NT 3.1 (brand extension of the similar Windows 3.1), NT 3.5, NT 3.51, NT 4.0, NT 5.0 (Windows 2000), NT 5.1 (32-bit XP), NT 5.2 (64-bit XP/Server 2003/RS & Home Server), NT 6.0 (Vista & Server 2008), NT 6.1 (Win 7, Server 2008 R2 & Home Server 2011), NT 6.2 (Win 8 & Server 2012), NT 6.3 (Win 8.1 & Server 2012 R2).

 

hehe...a+ for effort...but i just aimed at 'there are 10 kinds/types of people' ^^

Ahh, Binary jokes. Especially written down like that, they slip past a LOT of people!

[Heisenbleurgh]

Looks like Windows went to the Nvidia school of skipping numbers.

[Guest]

It's sad that Microsoft has succumbed to the 'all software is now called "apps" ' idiocy.

[Valentyn]

Does it work with multi display?

 

Oh certainly, each desktop can also have it's own "Mission Control", and you can set which desktops are simply extensions of your main one, or if they're entirely separate entities with their own open applications running.

 

If Windows 10 can do it in a similar fashion, it'll be wonderful. 

[ThreePinkApples]

If 3.51 is NOT counted Windows 7 is the 8th NT installment, if it is counted it is the 9th NT installment.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT#Releases

I am obviously ignoring 5.2 since i wasn't a real major releases

 

Except NT 3.51 was the third release of the NT line, 9 months after NT 3.5 (and 3 months before Win95).

So NT 3.1 (brand extension of the similar Windows 3.1), NT 3.5, NT 3.51, NT 4.0, NT 5.0 (Windows 2000), NT 5.1 (32-bit XP), NT 5.2 (64-bit XP/Server 2003/RS & Home Server), NT 6.0 (Vista & Server 2008), NT 6.1 (Win 7, Server 2008 R2 & Home Server 2011), NT 6.1 (Win 8 & Server 2012), NT 6.3 (Win 8.1 & Server 2012 R2).

 

I am just saying what was said when Windows 7 was released. They can use the same logic here to explain why 10 instead of 9.

But on stage they chose to just say "When you see it finished you would agree it is that big of a step" or something like that d:

But still, it makes sense if you accept Windows 7 and Windows 8 naming

 

 

I also suspect it to be kind of a marketing trick. Normal users will just hear 10 and think 10 >> 8 and "Ooh, it much be really updated/better then"

[Technous285]

I am obviously ignoring 5.2 since i wasn't a real major releases

 

 

I am just saying what was said when Windows 7 was released. They can use the same logic here to explain why 10 instead of 9.

But on stage they chose to just say "When you see it finished you would agree it is that big of a step" or something like that d:

But still, it makes sense if you accept Windows 7 and Windows 8 naming

 

Except 5.2 WAS a major release - for Windows Server. Sure 64-bit XP didn't make a big splash on desktops/workstations back in the day but until Server 2003/R2 (NT 5.2) the last Server version of Windows was Windows 2000 Server (NT 5.0).

[ThreePinkApples]

Except 5.2 WAS a major release - for Windows Server. Sure 64-bit XP didn't make a big splash on desktops/workstations back in the day but until Server 2003/R2 (NT 5.2) the last Server version of Windows was Windows 2000 Server (NT 5.0).

 

Yes yes, for the enterprise marked. So it is a bit weird that they didn't count it. But then again, the server version of Windows have since server 2003 had a separat name from the consumer version. Which then again gives them a reason to ignore a update that was only big for enterprise : D

[Guest]

 Isn't The Verge just awesome?

Is that sarcasm? Cause it really isn't.

It's the pole bearer for sites that strive to become popular by talking about software and hardware in terms tech illiterates understand.

Admittedly, they get a lot of discussion done, but they also dumb it down to a point where it does more harm than good.

[StingBull]

I am obviously ignoring 5.2 since i wasn't a real major releases

 

How was 5.2 not a major release? It added x64 support.

[ThreePinkApples]

How was 5.2 not a major release? It added x64 support.

 

 

Yes yes, for the enterprise marked. So it is a bit weird that they didn't count it. But then again, the server version of Windows have since server 2003 had a separat name from the consumer version. Which then again gives them a reason to ignore a update that was only big for enterprise : D

  

           ^ 

[StingBull]

           ^ 

 

The entire thing falls apart if we stop counting enterprise only versions of NT. Forget from 3.1 through 4 and ignore the 5.2 also which would mean that Windows 10 is the 7th version.

[bcredeur97]

"You can now Ctrl+V in command prompt"

 

This.

[ThreePinkApples]

The entire thing falls apart if we stop counting enterprise only versions of NT. Forget from 3.1 through 4 and ignore the 5.2 also which would mean that Windows 10 is the 7th version.

 

Yeah, I saw that my self shortly after posting..

 

Ehm, the reasoning could be here that there were no real consumer version of NT until XP (2000 wasn't meant to be for consumers, but ME was crap so..), and therefore you could count them since they just weren't used for anything else yet

 

I don't know... Just trying to use Microsofts own arguments here (sort of)

Anyways, if you accept the naming of 7 and 8, then it shouldn't be hard to see that 10 fits, but at the same time 9 could also fit

[Alec Harpers]

Is that sarcasm? Cause it really isn't.

It's the pole bearer for sites that strive to become popular by talking about software and hardware in terms tech illiterates understand.

Admittedly, they get a lot of discussion done, but they also dumb it down to a point where it does more harm than good.

It wasn't sarcasm, I was talking abut their live coverage of events. It's excellent.

Also, relax, The Verge is a casual tech/pop culture site. It's not supposed to be in-depth and overly technical.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

yup , windows 10 

[EChondo]

Damn, I guess Windows 8/8.1 was so bad that they had to skip a number just to get so far away from it!

[nicholaswillems]

New trend: skipping 1 part of a normally logical naming scheme.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

Damn, I guess Windows 8/8.1 was so bad that they had to skip a number just to get so far away from it!

or they wanted to avoid all those Windows Nein memes lol 

[Sharkyx1]

Jus me or does the co-ordination of presentation seam a bit odd? Just straight into showing off the desktop after talking aboput enterprise, why not talk about the features, whats new etc?

It's because a lot of idiots just want windows 7, so telling them the start menu is there will make them happy

[Technous285]

Yeah, I saw that my self shortly after posting..

 

Ehm, the reasoning could be here that there were no real consumer version of NT until XP (2000 wasn't meant to be for consumers, but ME was crap so..), and therefore you could count them since they just weren't used for anything else yet

 

I don't know... Just trying to use Microsofts own arguments here (sort of)

Anyways, if you accept the naming of 7 and 8, then it shouldn't be hard to see that 10 fits, but at the same time 9 could also fit

When it came to Win 98/SE Vs. ME Vs. 2000, 98SE basically thumped ME in terms of practically everything on a consumer level (even though it was "older"), and you didn't really need 2000 unless you were doing one hell of a home LAN (NT's networking capabilities have always been better than the 16/32-bit home versions of 3.1x to ME. heck, most of the improvements in 98SE over 98 in terms of networking and such came from NT 4).

When it came to XP Home Vs. XP Pro though, if you had more than 1 system in the house 95% of the time you were better off shelling out for XP Pro. Even now with 7, 8 & 8.1 if you want better networking and finer control over such things; the Pro version (or heaven forbid Ultimate version for 7, if you need multi-lingual support and capabilities) is still your best bet even for a "home" consumer and for prosumers.