Windows 10 TP working great with latest PA version

As I heard it 8.1 will get a free update and become 9.

The next proper OS is going to be Windows 10. There is already a technical preview out:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/preview-iso

To be honest the last 3 Windows had the same Kernel, boot loader and setup - some new features, but the core is still the same. Most often you can even use the same drivers/Virtual machine simulated hardware.
The internal version numbers have been:
6.0: Vista
6.1: Windows 7
6.2: Windows 8, 8.1 and propably becomming 9 now.
6.3: is propably going to be 10.

It is actually somewhat nice that they keep core things the same for once. Not so much relearning about setup and deployment to do.

What was to be 9, is 10. There won't be a 9 at all.

Minor correction on the kernel versions:
6.0: Vista
6.1: Windows 7
6.2: Windows 8,
6.3: Windows 8.1 (it's actually a different kernel version)
6.4: Windows 10.

I remember reading somewhere the reason they're skipping nine is because there's a programming... API... kernal...thingy... that looks for 9s in the OS name to check if the OS the program was running on was Windows 95/98. So rather than break all that they said "F*ck it, Apple's already up to ten. Let's cheat".

That seems likely. A simple OS Version check would be look to for a '9' character in the OS name.
It would not react to 3.X and NT. As well as Vista, 7 and 8. But a "Windows 9" might jsut trip it causing a lot of issues.

https://searchcode.com/?q=if(version,startswith("windows 9")

Another mystery of life solved.

if you hand that to me I'll take it. Yes, windows 7 and vista WAS the same to me. I said the contrary as a cautionary measure. Same way I tread cautiously around saying to people windows 8 is the best OS microsoft ever made, and is even better than 8.1, even though I know my stuff. People are just too touchy on the topic. For windows Vista -> 7 they simply fused quick launch icons and the taskbar and minimode all in one (wich was a step foward but I've always believe windows vista was the misunderstood prise jewel of microsoft. It had a polished everything except driver support. That hit microsoft square in the nose. I don't think they'll ever forgive us for dismissing their prise jewel like that).

I am sorry to tell you but you have just woken up from a coma and the most significant change you will notice is that the corporate giant Mcdonald's international now runs everyones Governments with policies regarding employment levels to distribution of industrial stone cleaners : \

Sorry i asked

General Consensus regarding teh Vista/7/8/10 question in my Computerclub is:
7 is propably going to be the new XP, so the OS that is going to be supported the longest from it's release because it is becomming the new standart for Corporate world.
10 might be annother candidate, but I am going to wait how it works out (they need something very interesting to make it more relevant then 7).
So far one rule about Windows releases that has held true is:
Every 2nd is better left alone. Because with those they do a lot of experiements and the end result is usually not that pretty. The one afterwards they have gotten around most of the experiment problems.
You can work with them. But it is usually better to wait for the next one that is comming.

3.X -> okay
95 -> not good
98 -> good
ME -> not good
NT -> Okay
2k -> not so good
XP -> good
Vista -> not good
Seven -> good
8 & 8.1 -> not so good

10 could mean it is the next good one. Or because they skipped 9 it could be the next bad one. We see how many experiements they are going to make this time around and how much they learned from the "Tile" experiement.

@zgrssd that' is not an actual rule and not to be taken seriously, it's actually a meme.

it's bullshit because it classifies ME as bad when it was better than XP by a mile.

basically all of XP's functionality without the goofy skins and clippy the papperclip and search dog.

as I predicted ...touchy subject...

Trust me I know my stuff. I've actually used on a day to day basis more different oses than you probably have. I've run mac as my main, during my teens ubuntu was my main and I'm back on ubuntu as of not so long ago.

This is so very much NOT true. Seriously. How you arrive at that conclusion I have no idea . ME is built on Windows 98. XP is built on 2k.

I used ME for a long time, so I have experience with this. Win98 USB support was horrible. Look at this Magic USB stick! It can restart a ME PC just by plugging it in! Bonus BSOD! But there's so many more issues. For example - Win98 mostly assumes a single user. You can add multiple users, but the file structure etc. is really not designed for it. Also, ME was the most unstable mainstream windows OS released by far, and was clearly rushed. I can go on. And on. And on.

If the visuals were the main issue, it was incredibly easy to make XP look like 2k/98.

ME had tons of bugfixes over 98, it was very much not the same os.

It's still pre-NT, and built on the same base as 98. Yes, it had changes over 98, but it was more unstable than it. And vastly inferior to XP & the NT kernel.

Windows 98SE was good back in the day, as was XP, especially after a few service packs. Windows 8.1 is fine now, certainly very stable and at 'just works' status. Windows ME was not good from my experience.

For me it is peer revived experience, gathered over 20 Years inlcuding every OS except NT.
I started with DOS/3.X. I am at Win 10 TP. And I even did some Linux on the side.
And I repaired or reisntalled somewhere in the 100 Windows OS (guess value. It's a lot).

ME had a bunch of nice features over 98. I used it myself for quite some time. But I prefed XP over it every day of the week, both as admin and personal user (nowadays I just prefer using Windows Seven).
Getting the home OS onto NTFS was a way overdue step. While it rarely has soem right issues, it is so much more robust. NTFS compares to FAT like a proper Transactional DB to a CSV file.

Alright you got me with ME. but that's basically my point there's so many things with wich Windows is such a feature cock-block. God only knows why! We're left to assume it's because the whole microsoft infrastructure is so big that everything gets clogged up.

It's the reason I'm so forgiving with win 8, because to me it represents moving foward with DECADE-old features : (ok maybe not decade but you get the point)

• iso (and other formats) mounting
• the task manager (god DAMN that was a long time comming... from ME to se7en... same damn one. Finally a task manager that even ubuntu can drool over)
• the startup time. (though, admiting a cheat using hybernate as an under-the hood replacement for power down and the problems that creates)
• the god damn freakin pause button on file transfer (with also an overhaul to the file transfer UI and the info it delivers) God daaaaaaaaamn that one was a long time comming.
• the abandonment of superfluous easthetics in favor of better performance. (not so hot on that one, I usually have a beefy PC)
• and the introduction of synapse-style program execution (You can't hit "start"+"S"+"Enter" in quick succession and expect skype to start in windows 7. It'll just be stuck at the start menu that's still loading.)

there were of course tons of unforgivables with win8 (namely the incredibly EVIL attempts at making you login with an email rather than create an unatended account during first startup) but these goods I'd waited for for so long were so well... good, that I was ready to overlook it all.