Windows 7 To Be Called ... Windows 7

An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft's Mike Nash came forward today in a blog post on the Windows Vista Blog and revealed the official name for Windows Code Name '7' as simply 'Windows 7.' The reasoning, by Mr. Nash, is that Windows 7 is 'the seventh release of Windows.' As much wonderful sense as this makes on first glance, it seems as if Microsoft's marketing teams pulled this number out of thin air: the Windows 7 kernel is version 6.1, and there's no way Windows 7 adds up as the seventh release of Windows anyway."

Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

the Windows 7 kernel is version 6.1

Perhaps they simply wanted to avoid the inevitable Windows 6, SP 6, Revision 6 ... of the beast?

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

I dunno, it works out if you do consumer OSs:
Win 3
Win 95
Win 98
Win ME
Win XP
Vista
Win 7

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

Per the wiki, Win 95, 98, and ME are all revisions of version 4, which makes xp 5, vista 6, and 7 7.

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

They called it Windows 7 because 7 is a lucky number, and they need all the luck they can get.

Isn't There a biblical passage For This?

"...and on the seventh day he rested".

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

Actually it made me more think of Windows Seven [imdb.com], but that's just me. A few parts bloat, some OS X envy and some lust for world dominance and you're pretty much there.

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

No, no, NO! They called it Seven because they saved it from the collective, and it no longer needs the full name Seven of Nine. So just Seven for short.

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

You forgot Windows 2.1. Yes it existed... I have a copy.

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

Is that you Bill?

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

Was that the one called "Windows 386" that had the terrible rapping-office-chick promo video?

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

I dunno, it works out if you do consumer OSs:
Win 3

There were two versions of Windows before Windows 3, that's why they called it Windows 3. And Windows 3 wasn't an OS, it was a shell that ran on top of DOS. Some people say that Windows 3 was an OS because it had drivers for certain pieces of hardware. I disagree, unless you are willing to call all the contemporary games with Soundblaster drivers "operating systems" too. The first consumer OS Microsoft produced was Windows 95. It still used DOS as a makeshift bootloader, but that's about it.

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

I know they sucked and hardly anyone used them, but that kind of overlooks Windows v1 & v2. I think it makes more sense if you go with the major steps of the UI:

1. Windows 1 - Initial release.
2. Windows 2 - Now with over-lapping Windows!
3. Windows 3 - And pseudo 3D effects!
4. Windows 9x (& ME) - Look Ma, we can multitask without... Oh, never mind.
5. Windows XP - So easy a toddler could use it... Which might explain why it looks a lot like Duplo.
6. Windows Vista - UAC: Making your PC more secure by training you to click "Yes" to everything!
7. Windows 7 - What do you want us to fsck up today?

Re:Isn't There an Iron Maiden Song For This?

There's something (XP), missing (XP) from your list (XP).

I wonder (XP) what it could be (XP)?

Hmmm

I will wait for Windows 7.11 for Workgroups

Re:Hmmm

Windows Vista XP 2009 Me SE Professional sounds catchier.

version?

If the version is 7 and the kernel version is 6.1, maybe they should compromise and call it Windows 6.66

(blinks)

Does...anyone really care? It's just a name.

Frigging *pick* one and get back to work.

not counting vista

Maybe Microsoft isn't counting Vista. And Windows 7 sounds way better than Windows Vista Do-Over Edition.

check the count.

1.) November 1985 Windows 1.01
2.) November 1987 Windows 2.03
2.) March 1989 Windows 2.11
3.) May 1990 Windows 3.0
3.) March 1992 Windows 3.1x
3.) October 1992 Windows For Workgroups 3.1
4.) July 1993 Windows NT 3.1 NT 3.1
3.) December 1993 Windows For Workgroups 3.11
3.) January 1994 Windows 3.2 (released in Simplified Chinese only)
4.) September 1994 Windows NT 3.5
4.) May 1995 Windows NT 3.51
5.) August 1995 Windows 95
6.) July 1996 Windows NT 4.0
7.) June 1998 Windows 98
8.) May 1999 Windows 98 SE
9.) February 2000 Windows 2000
10.) September 2000 Windows Me
11.) October 2001 Windows XP
11.) March 2003 Windows XP 64-bit Edition
12.) April 2003 Windows Server 2003
11.) April 2005 Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
13.) July 2006 Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs
14.) January 2007 (retail) Windows Vista
15.) July 2007 Windows Home Server
16.) February 2008 Windows Server 2008
17.) 2010 (planned) Windows 7

It's just release date phobia

If they tacked on a year to the product name, they'd be bound to that date and would never hear the end of it when it's late.

Windows Spinal Tap

Mike Nash : The OSes all go to seven. Look, right across the board, seven, seven, seven and...
PHB : Oh, I see. And most OSes top off at Vista?
Mike Nash : Exactly.
PHB : Does that mean it's better? Is it any better?
Mike Nash : Well, it's one better, isn't it? It's not Vista. You see, most blokes, you know, will be using Vista. You're on Vista here, all the way up, all your CPUs burning, all the way up, you're on Vista on your PC. Where can you go from there? Where?
PHB : I don't know.
Mike Nash : Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
PHB : Put it up to seven.
Mike Nash : Seven. Exactly. One better.
PHB : Why don't you just make Vista better and make Vista be the top number and make that a little better?
Mike Nash : [pause] These go to seven.

They need to be cool like Apple.

Apple names their versions after cats and what chases cats?
So Windows CE/Mobile will be called Windows Poodle.
Windows 7 will be Windows Jackal.

Too obsessive

I know that slashdotters don't like Microsoft, but isn't it a little too obsessive to be criticising them for their version numbering scheme? Isn't that like hating someone because their hair is just the wrong shade of brown or the daiameter of the buttons on their shirt are a millimetre too small?

Re:What happened to Windows 6?

You are _happy_ with Windows and you ask what's wrong with you? On Slashdot? You must be new here.

Re:Lets count:

*sigh*

No, Windows 1.x, 2.x and 3.x aren't part of the NT line. TFA and everyone are conflating two completely different operating systems just because they all happen to be named Windows:

1 = Windows NT 3.1
2 = Windows NT 3.5
3 = Windows NT 4.0
4 = Windows 2000
5 = Windows XP
6 = Windows Vista
7 = Windows 7

So, you see it makes perfect sense.

Now someone tell me why I'm defending Microsoft because I have no idea.