# Windows 10 on its way



## Brian G Turner (Oct 7, 2014)

Not arriving just yet, but already well under development:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-29431412

By the sounds of it, their first job is to make it more like Windows 7 than 8. 

And strange how they missed out 9.


----------



## J Riff (Oct 8, 2014)

No. 9.... No. 9... oops... No. TEN.  7 is OK, it still fits on older laptops. 8 is an octopus in a bad mood.


----------



## Vince W (Oct 8, 2014)

It's really 9.9999999, which is close enough to 10.


----------



## Lenny (Oct 8, 2014)

Brian Turner said:


> And strange how they missed out 9.



Rumour has it that they didn't name it "9" to avoid the problems caused by bad coding in third party programs that identified Windows 95 and 98 by checking to see if the Windows version started with a "9".

EDIT:


----------



## Vertigo (Oct 9, 2014)

I wondered if they were trying to get over their record (like Star Trek) of every other release being a dud. But since 7 was good and 8 was a dud I guess that would have been the wrong one to skip. Or maybe it just means this one is going to be a dud too!


----------



## Vince W (Oct 9, 2014)

Windows 10: The Final Frontier


----------



## Ray McCarthy (Oct 9, 2014)

10 is a Franken mess.
XP will be my last version. Legacy apps that don't run on WINE, in an XP  VM machine. I was running Windows Servers from 1994 to 2012, Debian Linux server now.

The alternate "dud" thing is a myth really. The Win7 should have been free to Vista users, it was only a bug fix and finish of Vista.
I have 3 laptops, one XP and one Linux Mint. One is for legacy applications in Workshop (has 3 OS on it)
2 x Linux Servers (main one is 32bit OS, test server is 64bit OS)
1 x Media system (XP Pro 32 bit, the Media editions are USELESS for European Digital) with 2 x Satellite cards and DVB-T USB in workshop feeding USB, remote, HDMI and audio to living room via Cat5 and USB repeater cable.
I've used Mac OS 7 to 9, OS X, CP/M, UNIX, AS/400, Cromix, DOS, DR Multidos, CP/M86 DRDOS etc
DOS /Win 16/32 hybrid Win 3.0, 3.1, WFWG 3.11, Win9x, Win ME
True 32bit Win NT 3.5, NT3.51 server, NT 3.51  WS with Explorer preview, NT 4.0 (WS and Server) , Win2K (WS & Server), XP, Win 2003 Server,  Vista, Win 2008 Server, Win7, Win 8.x.
After Zune and Win2003, MS has totally lost the plot.
I've used 64bit NT4.0 on Alpha. 
The "Ribbon" is a garbage idea..
One GUI & Windows for every kind of thing was stupid in Win95 & WinCE days and stupid now to go the other way and plaster Touch & Zune/WinPhone on Desktop.
.Net is a good idea done badly. VB.net is pointless. I use VB6 or C# if .net is required.  Or Modula2 or C++ if no GUI needed. I use Java for cross platform GUI apps.


----------



## Ray McCarthy (Oct 9, 2014)

Lenny said:


> they didn't name it "9" to avoid the problems caused by bad coding in third party programs that identified Windows 95 and 98 by checking to see if the Windows version started with a "9".


Probably true 
But as long ago as 2001 MS in MSDN was telling Devs to check for FEATURES never an OS. So no USB drivers would install on USB enabled NT4.0! They all ran if the OS was kludged to report Win 5.0 (=Windows 2000, XP is 5.1, 2003 is I think 5.2,  Vista, Win7 are both actually Win 6.x) or if manually installed.

But MS Word for windows did mad version number skips


----------



## markpud (Oct 9, 2014)

Version numbers have been killed by Marketing folk, RIP!

I'm in the minority who like Win 8.1 on my PC, the start screen gives me a great dashboard for emails, facebook, news, sport, weather etc. plus my apps. But of course I mostly just hit that Firebox icon and get on with using my PC in desktop mode 

W10 previews show an option to keep the start screen if I recall rightly, so I probably will... although I do think windowing the "metro" apps is necessary and should have been done from the start for desktop versions.


----------



## Ray McCarthy (Oct 9, 2014)

markpud said:


> Version numbers have been killed by Marketing folk, RIP!


Indeed.
Apple went from 9 to 10 about 15 years ago (or is it 16 now?) and stopped incrementing it as they loved that Roman 10, "X", so the bit after dot is the version number now.


----------

