Windows Seven

[KaptainKrap]

So what does everyone think about the new Windows 7. 

[linear]

i have two 250gb harddrives, slackware is on disk0 and disk1 is unused.

the windows installation recognized disk1, but when i select to install on that disk it just says it can't and to see the log file. i don't see any god damn log file.


WAAAAAAAAAAH!
 

[linear]

also, why the fuck is it called Windows 7?

I've tried to make this work out many ways and they all fail... Someone at Microsoft can't count.

[Godot]

Windows NT went up to version 4.0.
NT 5.0 was Windows 2000.
NT 5.1 was XP.
NT 5.2 was Server 2003.
NT 6.0 was Vista and Server 2008.
Seven would be 7.0, right? Nope.
According to Microsoft 6.1=7.

[linear]

that's what i'm saying!

[Magus]

Windows NT went up to version 4.0.
NT 5.0 was Windows 2000.
NT 5.1 was XP.
NT 5.2 was Server 2003.
NT 6.0 was Vista and Server 2008.
Seven would be 7.0, right? Nope.
According to Microsoft 6.1=7.

If they skipped from NT 5.2 to NT 6.0, why can't they skip from NT 6.0 to NT 7.0?
Or am I missing something?

Also, I vote that Microsoft should change the name to Windows Se7en. That would be so 1337.
Oh, I know! They should call their next one Windows 1337. That would rule.

[m0rdekai]

Windows NT went up to version 4.0.
NT 5.0 was Windows 2000.
NT 5.1 was XP.
NT 5.2 was Server 2003.
NT 6.0 was Vista and Server 2008.
Seven would be 7.0, right? Nope.
According to Microsoft 6.1=7.

If they skipped from NT 5.2 to NT 6.0, why can't they skip from NT 6.0 to NT 7.0?
Or am I missing something?

Also, I vote that Microsoft should change the name to Windows Se7en. That would be so 1337.
Oh, I know! They should call their next one Windows 1337. That would rule.

se7en was a movie.
windows 1337 couldnt be windows 1337 unless someone stole the OS code and made it publicly available.  They would also need to make it a security distro.

[KaptainKrap]

Microsoft's Mike Nash announced the name this way: "Simply put, this is the seventh release of Windows, so therefore 'Windows 7' just makes sense." We're betting that Microsoft execs are hoping that number 7 will deliver on its promise of luck--they could sure use a win after Vista.

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=107112&pn=3

[jx]

Why would they need to know how to count when they have computers that can do it for them. 

[rbcp]

Windows 3.1 = #3
Windows 95 = #4
Windows 98 = #5
Windows 2000 = #6
Windows XP = #7
Windows Vista = #8

Yeah, still doesn't work.  Maybe they're not counting 2000 and Vista because those were complete shit.  Maybe that's the reason for #7 - so they can pretend those two never existed and maybe someday we'll forget about them.

I love XP and don't see any reason at all to upgrade my OS even though Windows 7 has been getting pretty good reviews so far.  If I do upgrade it'll be at least a year after it's released, just to make sure they don't pull another Vista on us.  But in all the reviews I've read of 7, I don't really see what it does that XP doesn't do, other than maybe eat up a little more memory.

[m0rdekai]

Microsoft's Mike Nash announced the name this way: "Simply put, this is the seventh release of Windows, so therefore 'Windows 7' just makes sense." We're betting that Microsoft execs are hoping that number 7 will deliver on its promise of luck--they could sure use a win after Vista.

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=107112&pn=3

lrn2forums

Why would they need to know how to count when they have computers that can do it for them. 

<3

Windows 3.1 = #3
Windows 95 = #4
Windows 98 = #5
Windows 2000 = #6
Windows XP = #7
Windows Vista = #8

Yeah, still doesn't work.  Maybe they're not counting 2000 and Vista because those were complete shit.  Maybe that's the reason for #7 - so they can pretend those two never existed and maybe someday we'll forget about them.

I love XP and don't see any reason at all to upgrade my OS even though Windows 7 has been getting pretty good reviews so far.  If I do upgrade it'll be at least a year after it's released, just to make sure they don't pull another Vista on us.  But in all the reviews I've read of 7, I don't really see what it does that XP doesn't do, other than maybe eat up a little more memory.

Its technically the seventh release under the 'name' of windows.  Its not the seventh release by microsoft obviously.  I dont like the name any more than any of y'all, but it is technically accurate.

I played with 7 for a little bit.  Meh.  its not exciting.

[linear]

Its technically the seventh release under the 'name' of windows.

but it's clearly not. in fact  rbcp just showed that in the very reply you quoted.

If they skipped from NT 5.2 to NT 6.0, why can't they skip from NT 6.0 to NT 7.0?
Or am I missing something?

they COULD, but they're not. They're releasing Windows 7 as version 6.1.7000 (.7000 is the beta)

[handl3r]

They're hoping that 7 will be their lucky number. NO WHAMMYS NO WHAMMYS!

[Nod]

[rbcp]

Its technically the seventh release under the 'name' of windows.

but it's clearly not. in fact  rbcp just showed that in the very reply you quoted.

Unless they're calling Windows 3.1  #1.  Was there even a Windows 1 or Windows 2?  Cause I'd never heard of them.  I went straight from using DOS 6.1 to Windows 3.1.  Then again, I was a smelly bum without a computer for most of the early 90's so maybe I somehow missed the early Windows versions.