Vista’s successor now known as 7, due out within three years. Why seven and not EIGHT?
Although Vista still seems fresh as a daisy, that hasn’t stopped Microsoft from planning their next major OS release, and it looks like a part of the plan is changing the internal codename from Vienna to “7.” The switch was disclosed at at a Microsoft sales training conference in Orlando this past week as part of the company’s new “iterative” information-sharing plan, which aims to provide customers and partners with more and more info as part of a predictable release schedule. Microsoft also confirmed that 7 is scheduled to be in development for three years, which we kinda-sorta already knew. No word on when we might ever see Vista SP1, of course, but we bet all those customers and partners are still pretty psyched to know the new codename for a product that’s three years out. [Engadget]
Do ypu remember all the windows versions of yesteryear? We do and here they are
- Windows for workgroups
- Windows 95
- Windows 98 and se
- Windows me
- Windows 2000
- Windows xp pro and home
- Windows vista
So that makes this eight unless we aren’t counting windows for workgroups. Anyone know? Hit us up in the comments!
| Print article |
about 4 years ago
I think they are trying to ignore that Mistake Edition ever happened.
about 4 years ago
i always said me was the MiddlE between 98 and 2000
about 4 years ago
Maybe they don’t count Vista since is such a disaster?
Seriously though, Vista was a good effort, but try and do the security thing more in the background than effecting my productivity every minute with a request to run a program.
Linux and MacOSX do a fine job of this, they should adopt some of the competitions techniques:)
about 4 years ago
ahh yes my Penguin loving friend Vista pre sp1 is just as bad as XP pre sp1. Now XP sp2 is a mature product and what all my corp desktops run.
Vista UAC prompts can be disabled see our post here.
MacOsx is a glorified version of linux after all aint it?
about 4 years ago
:)
The problem with turning off UAC is that if there is a rouge app it can execute without you knowing, you cant silence the security within Vista or your just running a glorified XP box:(
I do love MacOSX, like you said it is a glorified version of Linux, but what glory it is!:) Slick and smooth, I am tempted to run OSX on my laptop, since the hack is compatible with it, but I think I am pushing my luck running Gutsy let alone a hacked foreign OS like OSX:)
about 4 years ago
Windows 2000 Pro is still the best desktop OS that MS has ever put out.
Although MS Bob is a close second! ;-)
about 4 years ago
I agree Slothman, Seemed the most stable, no bling, just functionality.. I know loads of people who still run Windows 2000 server and will continue to do so..
about 4 years ago
i myself still have more than a dozen production machines running 2000 server, advanced server and datacenter. the only issue with that is the end of its life cycle and lack of new updates.
new boxes get built and 2003 server is my os of choice i dont have any issues with it. but as i said xp sp2 all the way for the workstation. but with great hardware if you have sub standard equipment then yes 2000 pro is great with much less overhead. especially if you turn off most of the services you dont need.
but then again you can do it to xp as well it just takes some more skillz.
theAdmin via mobile
about 4 years ago
I love 2000 professional for the desktop but to the guy above: After u turn off uac dont log in as an admin log in as user. run decent anti virus with heuristcs and u r golden.
about 4 years ago
@psymon : rouge program? not on my machines. not behind all my ids heuristics scanning engines at the router level and the os. no removable media access or plug and play so that hasnt happened in a long time.
about 4 years ago
Karl said:
@psymon : rouge program? not on my machines. not behind all my ids heuristics scanning engines at the router level and the os. no removable media access or plug and play so that hasnt happened in a long time.
—————————–
There is lies the added TCO that is REQUIRED when running a Winblows based network that MS wont talk about when they do their anti-Linux TCO analysis.
If the OS was stable and secure, you wouldn’t need thousands of dollars for extra hardware and software just to keep it working 99.9% of the time. Linux server environments might take a little more manpower to get up and running, but the overhead of all the added stuff is in many instances not 100% necessary, although I would argue to have it anyway.
As far as MS Server OS, 2003 all the way. It is to Windows Servers what NT4 was back in the day. A totally new direction and done VERY right. Ironically it was done so because they started taking cues from the Linux world on how an OS should be out of the box.
about 4 years ago
i dual boot vista and osX off my mac book pro. i have a better time with vista then osX. since my last update i have all sorts of wifi problems.
i really like vista and aero and the sidebar very pretty and functional. you need a good processor and loads of memory. i was also a big 2000 pro fan until 2yrs ago.
about 4 years ago
Karl, Slothman does have a point, all those things running to make sure you can run an MS Product?:)
Seriously though, no matter what you run, you should have an IDS. There are plenty around, Try Snort http://www.snort.org, you can even get it as a Vmware image, with the help of Linux /cough/ as a router you can even block packets signatured as potentially harmful. I have never did this, but it is viable.
about 4 years ago
It will be windows version 7. Windows 2000 was 5, XP was 5.5, Vista was 6.0 and the new one will be version 7.
about 4 years ago
It’s like they let a new person name each new OS
___________
http://www.FreeOpenMoko.com
about 4 years ago
@ Psymon:
I never understood the use of Snort.
By its nature, it lets you know that someone has been there. I ask…what’s the point? They got what they wanted, and did whatever damage they wanted and left, now you have to come and pick up the pieces and figure out who it was and what they took!
Reactive.
In my book, reactive is bad!
Proactive on the other hand, is the right idea. Sure we cannot be on top of every single zero day exploit or attack, but we can pay someone to do so. ISS, now owned by IBM has some great IPS systems which are proactive on finding exploits as close to zero day as possible.
Sure it is costly software/service, but for my money, I want them stopped at the moat, not after they got in, raped my gold, and pillaged the princess and got off with all of it because my money is still knocked up and my daughter will be poor and I just can’t live that way. ;-)
about 3 years ago
If you had counted even better, then you’d know that windows for workgroups was in fact windows 3.1 (my first version:)
about 1 year ago
They probably didn’t count Windows 2000 because it was mainly a business/enterprise OS. The other OS’s were installed on/sold to the general public.