Why Microsoft Skipped Windows 9 and Went Straight to 10

There are 7 replies in this Thread. The last Post () by EJLarson.

  • Rumor has it that the reason was much more pedestrian. It appears "Windows 9" would cause compatibility problems for older software that would think that it was in fact running on Windows 95/98:


    if(version.StartsWith(“Windows 9”))

    { /* 95 and 98 */ } else {


    and that this was the pragmatic solution.

    I do airline tickets, car rental, hotels, cruises, insurance, and all-inclusive packages.

    If you want great service and low prices, look no further.
    I also sell local SIM cards for several countries.
    ben@kanfeinesharim.com

  • That makes excellent sense, akin to the Y2K kerfuffle (programs that tested for year dates by only looking at the last two digits, e.g., “75” vs “1975,” becoming ambiguous in the year 2000: “01” could be interpreted as 1901 or 2001). In the old days of programming, short was always better than long, so any programming bytes saved made the program run faster and better.


    Microsoft has done a very good job of allowing old, really obsolete, programs to be usable still by letting them run in “compatibility shells” that emulate older Windows versions, e.g., 95 and 98.

  • Microsoft has done a very good job of allowing old, really obsolete, programs to be usable still by letting them run in “compatibility shells” that emulate older Windows versions, e.g., 95 and 98.

    At the expense of moving the platform forward. For an excellent rundown of the costs of that approach, read this circa-2008-but-recently-revived series.


    Parts II and III here.

    I do airline tickets, car rental, hotels, cruises, insurance, and all-inclusive packages.

    If you want great service and low prices, look no further.
    I also sell local SIM cards for several countries.
    ben@kanfeinesharim.com

  • At the expense of moving the platform forward.

    On the contrary; for being loyal to those who have been using Windows since the beginning and still wish to run older programs on newer OSs. Neither does it matter what that older program may be. Be it a game or an old accounting program, you can be sure there's a way to get it going.

    For me it's games and I still run older games made for Win 95 because I want to and Windows compatibility mode makes that possible.

    The platform has moved forward considerably, even since Win 7, so I don't know where you get this notion from ben .

  • The platform has moved forward considerably, even since Win 7, so I don't know where you get this notion from ben .

    My question also. What more would you have it do? Your link is to a ten-year-old critique of Windows by a developer who says, essentially, "I prefer how Apple does things." Fine, but he never says "and Windows can't do those things." Just that he prefers OS X. Lest we forget: Apple's PC market share is 6.5%, with zero hardware/peripheral flexibility because of their proprietary, totally-controlled platform.


    It's a red herring anyway: who cares how Apple does things if we're evaluating Windows? Apples and Pomegranates (pun intended). The basic issue is: will Windows do what you want, with acceptable performance and security, and does it host the software you need?


    Please explain where Windows should be, if you think it's somehow stagnated?

  • OK, so:

    1. I thought I was clear enough that the article was a rehashed one. That's what "circa-2008-but-recently-revived" was supposed to mean.
    2. The main critique, that the app ecosystem on the Mac is an order of magnitude more pleasant to use, more intuitive, more pushing-the-envelope, than that on Windows, still stands.
    • Example: I wanted to find an email program to suggest to someone. There are a ton of great ones on the Mac, each with its strong suits, and depending on your style odds are you can find one you won't like but love.
      I was sure that Windows, with over 90% of the PC market, would have if not as many, then at least a few good options; the best I could find was Thunderbird. (If anyone knows something better, please do let me know).

    I never wanted to turn this into a new OS war. There are a bunch of things that Windows does better, and if those are more important to you than the things Apple brings to the table, then Windows is definitely for you. For example: compatibility. (Though these days installing a VM with an old OS is nearly trivial, on any machine). Or: games. Or: hardware/peripheral flexibility (though lack of peripheral choice is fast becoming, or has already become, a thing of the past).


    I just pointed out that MS's famed reluctance to let the past go has historically had trade-offs. Nothing more than that! I am hearing that Win10 is substantially improved. I didn't stick around for that, though; though I am a Windows user since MS-DOS 5.0 and Win 3.11, and could cobble together sophisticated enough batch scripts, Windows 8 was the last straw for me. So I have no opinion re Win10.

    Peace!

    I do airline tickets, car rental, hotels, cruises, insurance, and all-inclusive packages.

    If you want great service and low prices, look no further.
    I also sell local SIM cards for several countries.
    ben@kanfeinesharim.com

  • OK, so:

    1. I thought I was clear enough that the article was a rehashed one. That's what "circa-2008-but-recently-revived" was supposed to mean.
    2. The main critique, that the app ecosystem on the Mac is an order of magnitude more pleasant to use, more intuitive, more pushing-the-envelope, than that on Windows, still stands.
    • Example: I wanted to find an email program to suggest to someone. There are a ton of great ones on the Mac, each with its strong suits, and depending on your style odds are you can find one you won't like but love.
      I was sure that Windows, with over 90% of the PC market, would have if not as many, then at least a few good options; the best I could find was Thunderbird. (If anyone knows something better, please do let me know).

    I never wanted to turn this into a new OS war. There are a bunch of things that Windows does better, and if those are more important to you than the things Apple brings to the table, then Windows is definitely for you. For example: compatibility. (Though these days installing a VM with an old OS is nearly trivial, on any machine). Or: games. Or: hardware/peripheral flexibility (though lack of peripheral choice is fast becoming, or has already become, a thing of the past).


    I just pointed out that MS's famed reluctance to let the past go has historically had trade-offs. Nothing more than that! I am hearing that Win10 is substantially improved. I didn't stick around for that, though; though I am a Windows user since MS-DOS 5.0 and Win 3.11, and could cobble together sophisticated enough batch scripts, Windows 8 was the last straw for me. So I have no opinion re Win10.

    Peace!

    Oh it’s no war, and couldn’t be. I don’t get that fired up about what’s under the hood anymore.


    Any survivor of Win8 has all my sympathies - including my own self-pity. That’s why I genuinely wanted to know what it was you felt that Win10 lacked. It always takes them waaaaay too long to figure it out, but they finally did it with 10 (actually, 7, but then they fucked that up totally with 8).


    I didn’t intend to sound confrontational - I admire Apple but don’t want to give up the flexibility in options that I get with Windows - in other words, I accept I’ll have to work a little harder on the front end. To that end, I wanted your take on what Windows downsides were.


    Don’t know what your email needs are but I’ve been completely satisfied with gmail on Chrome for many years now.