Why is it Windows *7*?

[STAN STARINSKI]

Because all versions before 3.0, or actually 3.1 were commercially unfit.
Sort of experiments, computers were weak and I do rememeber suffering even
in Windows3.1 with endless GPF errors, let alone Windows 1.0!!

 

[STAN STARINSKI]

Because all versions before 3.0, or actually 3.1 were commercially unfit.
Sort of experiments, computers were weak and I do rememeber suffering even
in Windows3.1 with endless GPF errors, let alone Windows 1.0!!

 

[STAN STARINSKI]

the first version of Windows regular, not NT was also 3.1

 

[STAN STARINSKI]

Nonsense.
ALl Windows were OS's

 

[STAN STARINSKI]

Either you trying to be funny or pretending to know what you DON'T.

A Hexadecimal for 10 is letter "A":
Please know the subject before you post assumptions.

 

[Rick Rogers]

Wrong family.

WinNT (vers. 1-3)
WinNT4/Win2K (vers.4)
WinXP (ver.5)
WinVista (ver. 6)

Wins 3.x, 95, 98, and ME were part the now-dead 9x line built on MS's
orginal DOS. Win7 is from the WinNT line.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

 

[Gordon]

It is the seventh version of Windows NT.
Windows 1, 2, 3, 95, 98, and ME are not based on Windows NT. Hence,
whatever their internal name may be, they don't count.

NT 1, 2, 3, and 4 were never available to the general public for use on a
PC.
Windows NT5 was called Windows 2000
Windows NT5.1 was called Windows XP
Windows NT6 is called Windows Vista
Windows NT7 is called Windows 7.

Err no. Winver in my 7 Home Premium tells me it's build 6.1.......

 

[Gordon]

Nonsense.
ALl Windows were OS's

Nope. The early versions were a GUI on TOP of DOS.....

 

[Gordon]

A statement many people make, but one with which I thoroughly
disagree.

They *are* operating systems. Read here, for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_operating_systems#Microsoft

I disagree both with Wikipedia and your good self.
How can a GUI that exists on TOP OF, or as a front end of, the actual OS be
called an "OS"?
The Windows 3.x and 9.x were a GUI ON TOP OF the DOS operating system. It
was DOS that actually ran the machine, not the Windows front end....

Just like the Gnome and KDE desktops are GUIs on TOP of the Linux Kernel.
The Desktops are not the operating system.

 

[Jim]

There is nothing quite like being consistently inconsistent.


Jim

 

[Gordon]

Wrong family.

WinNT (vers. 1-3)
WinNT4/Win2K (vers.4)
WinXP (ver.5)
WinVista (ver. 6)

And according to my Winver, I now have Build 6.1.......Windows 7 HP.....

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

I disagree both with Wikipedia and your good self.
How can a GUI that exists on TOP OF, or as a front end of, the actual OS be
called an "OS"?
The Windows 3.x and 9.x were a GUI ON TOP OF the DOS operating system. It
was DOS that actually ran the machine, not the Windows front end....

Feel free to believe whatever you want, but operating systems have
often run on top of other operating systems for many years. In the
mainframe world, for example, MVS is universally considered to be an
operating system, but it can, and sometimes does, run on top of VM.

 

[Saucy]

Right, Windows 7's NT kernel is version 6.1, not 7.0.

As far as I can remember though, it was supposed to be a 7.0 kernel but
things didn't work out that way. The beta got called "Windows 7" and when
they (the Microsoft people) went to decide on a 'retail' name for it they
found that everyone had already warmed to calling it Windows 7. So in an
untraditional move, the beta codename is the same as the RTM name: Windows
7.

Saucy

 

[Gordon]

OK it's a matter of terminology.

No it's a matter of fact. You could run all your apps and do all your work
in Windows 3.x without using the GUI.....the GUI in this case is a Desktop,
NOT an OS.

 

[STAN STARINSKI]

OK it's a matter of terminology.
GUI running atop of a previously command-driven OS is still an OS when
complete DOS+GUI system is considered.

Early Windows were not using protected modes already available in x86
uProcessors of that era, which I remember using with own hands (and true
multithreading was only reality for highend server processors) but since DOS
is an OS, a GUI shell for it together with DOS is an OS.

Whatever... it's 2009, lets get over history, except it brings sweet
memories of a squirrel who visited my windows during long winter nights I
was doing college work on thgat computer that was as slow as molasses so
while it was taking a 15-minute break to complete some application startup,
I'd feed that squirrel - a great time killer.

 

[Guest]

There is nothing quite like being consistently inconsistent.


Jim

6+1=7?

 

[Strych Nine]

6+1=7?

Is that how Microsoft decided? They spent all those millions on researching
the name when you have it in one sentence? Amazing.

 

[Strych Nine]

yes you corrected us properly

Who are you posting about? Please include a "snippit" of the post or is
that beyond your abilities?

 

[STAN STARINSKI]

OK.

 

[STAN STARINSKI]

P.S. I still indulge in command-driven OS under WinXP/Vista/7, in Vista it's
PowerShell or regular Shell, it's still there, still works, except for
system functions mostly, application won't be running outside of windows...
yes, but I am tired.
It's time to eat.