Windows 7 due out in 2010.

Filed under: OS Updates, Windows, Microsoft

Windows 7 due out in 2010.

by Brad Linder Jul 21st 2007

If you're like most Windows XP users, you're perfectly willing to wait for Windows Vista Service Pack 13 to be released before upgrading. Well, there's good news. If you can hold out for three more years, you can skip over Vista entirely and get the next version of Microsoft's operating system, which the company is internally referring to as "Windows 7."

The announcement came at a sales force conference in Orlando this week. Microsoft plans to get back to releasing Windows upgrades on a regular schedule. Windows Vista was released more than five years after the last operating system, Windows XP.

But we kind of knew all that. So the only real news to come out of this sales force meeting is that Windows is no longer using the codename "Vienna" for the next operating system. The nomenclature behind "Windows 7" is a bit unclear though. The way we see it, the new OS should be called Windows 11. Or if you take out NT, Windows 10. Perhaps OS 10?

Windows 1.0
Windows 2.0/2.1
Windows 3.0/3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows ME
Windows NT
Windows 2000
Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7

Okay, so Microsoft's probably pretending that Windows 1 - 3.11 and NT don't count. But the company's got three years to come up with a snappier name than "Windows 7." Best get started soon.
[via Engadget]

Tags: vienna, windows 7, windows vista, Windows7, WindowsVista

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Brandon Smith said 1:11PM on 7-21-2007

They are counting from NT on:

1. NT 3.1, 3.5, 3.51
2. NT 4
3. NT 5 == Windows 2000
4. NT 5.1 == Windows XP
5. NT 5.2 == Windows 2003
6. NT 6 == Windows Vista
7. NT 6.1 == Windows Server 2008

NT's first release started at 3 so market perception wouldn't discredit it because the crappier 9x DOS-based codebase had a higher number (already at 3.1).

chalkley said 1:11PM on 7-21-2007

Windows: Lucky 7's Edition.

pmow said 1:11PM on 7-21-2007

Then what about 2003? I thought they counted only the non-server OS:

1. Windows 1.0
2. Windows 2.0/2.1
3. Windows 3.0/3.1
4. Windows 95
5. Windows 98
6. Windows ME
7. Windows XP
8. Windows Vista
9. Windows 7

Laydros said 1:11PM on 7-21-2007

I think the numbering even works from non-NT.

Before XP, NT and Windows were different products, they didn't follow each other. So there was Windows 1 and 2, then NT came out and it got the number 3 because Windows was 3. I might be wrong but I'm pretty sure 95, 98, and ME were all 4.x. 2000 was NT 5, and XP was so similar, it was still NT5. Windows and NT merged with XP so that was when Windows got a version 5. Then Vista was 6.

Dennis said 1:12PM on 7-21-2007

Also. Windows ME doesn't count. that was more a bastard child made my some retarded interns...

Emceay said 1:12PM on 7-21-2007

Ah hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Wait three years for the next windows? And have them tell me they're cutting out the real upgrade in an effort to make the 2010 release date? Or, maybe it'll just end up taking them until 2012. Ubuntu will be on v10~12 by then poised to steal market share.

LordDaMan said 1:12PM on 7-21-2007

It's based on the version of the kernal

windows 1, 2 and 3 had kernals with teh same numbering

Windows 4 was 9x . win95 was 4.00.950, win98 was 4.10.1998, and ME was 4.90.3000

Since NT adopted the mioanstream numbering: NT 3.1 was 3.1, NT 3.5 was 3.5, NT4 (and server) was 4.0, win2000 (and server) was 5.0, XP was 5.1 (more of a chnage here then any of the 9x series), server 2003 was 5.2 (another big jump), Vista is 6.0, and Windows seven is of course 7.0

pjcamp said 1:33PM on 7-21-2007

Windows Linux???

asurroca said 2:54PM on 7-21-2007

Thank you LordDaMan... I thought it was common knowledge that Windows 95, 98, and Me were all 4.x versions. Windows 95, Windows Vista, Windows 2000, those are all just brand names and have nothing to do with the software version...

So, the list looks something more like this...

1. Windows 1.0
2. Windows 2.0/2.1
3. Windows 3.0/3.1/NT 3.x
4. Windows 4.x (95/98/Me/NT)
5. Windows 5.x (XP/2000/2003)
6. Windows 6.x (Vista)
7. Windows 7.x

gopanthers said 8:35PM on 7-21-2007

Windows 7 is right. They're only talking about consumer non-enterprise versions. NT and 2000 were never for the home user.

#1 - 1.0
#2 - 2.0
#3 - 3.0
#4 - Windows 95
#5 - Windows 98
despite the funny joke earlier, it's true that Me doesn't count. It was always technically known as "Windows 98, Millennium Edition" and not a fully new version.
#6 - Vista
#7 - The next P.O.S.

Ed said 10:41PM on 7-21-2007

Microsoft is right on this one (they should!). Windows 95 through ME are Windows 4.x (NT3 and NT4 being parallel, special flavours of Windows 3 and Windows 4). Windows 2000 (NT5), XP, 2003 are Windows 5's (NT being merged with the regular Win-over-DOS versions). Vista is Windows 6.0.

Confusing? Yes. But try opening the Comand Prompt and typing the command 'ver'.

dg10050 said 9:11AM on 7-22-2007

@#3
"Confusing? Yes. But try opening the Comand Prompt and typing the command 'ver'."
I tried that but all I got was "bash: ver: command not found"
:P

catchwa said 9:12AM on 7-22-2007

Just a little bit of research would have negated the need for half of this post...

The Steven said 8:19AM on 7-23-2007

You forgot Windows for 286, Windows 386, Windows For Workgroups (3.11)

Bill Williams said 8:19AM on 7-23-2007

7?!? George Constanza has that name reserved for his firstborn. Once again, M$ steals from thought leaders

Yayaja said 9:08AM on 7-23-2007

To anyone considering upgrading to Vista, I would highly recommends waiting it out. Vista is NOT worth it right now and if it wasn't for the fact that i had to buy a new computer because my old one suffered from a case of explosive diarrhea, I would still be using good ole' XP.

Rainman said 9:10AM on 7-23-2007

So where does Microsoft Bob fit into all this?

John Kelly said 12:57PM on 7-23-2007

@gopanthers - I tried to leave out the corporate versions but did decide to include XP

Wordfromthe Wise said 11:08AM on 7-24-2007

or is it LUCKY NUMBER SEVEN ?? ^^ lol

Techticles said 10:46PM on 7-30-2007

Windows 7 may be delayed and IT decision makers would not want to wait for ten to 12 years before upgrading their OS from Windows XP.

| 1 | 2 | Most Recent | Next 20 Comments

Featured Time Waster

Civiballs is a beautiful, soothing physics puzzle Time Waster

I have an absolute weakness for physics games, and while Civiballs isn't the strongest physics-based game, what it lacks in the physics department it makes up for a few times over in style and fun.

In Civiballs, you are presented with a few colored balls, and your goal is to get those balls into the same-colored urn on the level. The "civi" part of Civiballs is that there are 3 sets of levels to play, each representing a different civilization. While the civilization doesn't affect gameplay, the artwork for each level is beautifully themed to it's appropriate era.

To play the game, you are given only one tool - a sword with which to cut the chains that are holding the balls. The puzzle part of the game is in figuring out what order, and with what timing to cut each chain. Do it right, and all the right balls end up in the right urns, with no stray balls entering an urn (a no-no). Do it wrong, and you get to start over again.

Civiballs is not terribly deep on gameplay; the entire game can be completed in about 15 minutes. But if you enjoy this type of game, it will be a very enjoyable 15 minutes.

View more Time Wasters