And soon to be released is Windows 7, Obviously it's the 7th version of windows, but count again.
There are actually 9 including Windows 7, so what about the other 2... Well, Windows ME was an utter failure, between frequent dying and security issues. And Vista was crap, well... Thats 2. I think Windows is showing their distaste for failure....
Actually there are even more - earlier versions than 3.1 (1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 3.0) and server/enterprise versions (NT 3.1, NT 3.5, NT 3.5.1, NT 4.0, 2000) and the more modern server versions 2003 and 2008. They're even related in unexpected ways, as XP (and Vista and 7) is based on the NT line, completely abandoning the DOS based versions of Windows. If they mean the seventh generation of Windows, that's hard to tell too, since 7 must share a generation with Vista (and even XP, which "started" the modern generation).
It started as a graphical shell on top of DOS with the numbered versions, the 9x versions integrated Windows and DOS but was still DOS based, meanwhile the then-enterprise only NT was developed on the side with it's own unique Windows core doing away with DOS lineage, the two lines merged into XP, bringing NT based Windows to the consumer but with a 9x-like user interface and backwards support for its apps, and the modern server versions continued to be made separately, Vista and now 7 are advancements over XP.
So it's hard to count in a couple of ways: MS has had more than one line at a time, and then once XP came out the lineage got blurred as XP was not a descendant of 98, 2000, ME, and other previous consumer releases (in code base)
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wonderous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross... but it's not for the timid." Q, Q Who
I think you raise a very good point about the failings of the Windows line and - OMG CUTE OVERLOAD! Wait, wha...? JERRY SEINFELD! Well that's settled, Gates and Ballmer have convinced me.
"There was also a large horse in the room, taking up most of it."
[by Windows standards] XP wasn't all that bad actually; it's biggest problem now is just that it's out of date, going on a decade old already. Thus it lacks modern features and it's interface is fairly basic by modern standards.
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wonderous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross... but it's not for the timid." Q, Q Who
Though I did have to work with a really, really, really old laptop running Win 95 (!!!!!) a month or two ago at the shop, and now THAT is truly basic to the modern eye.
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wonderous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross... but it's not for the timid." Q, Q Who
Captain Picard's Hair wrote:[by Windows standards] XP wasn't all that bad actually; it's biggest problem now is just that it's out of date, going on a decade old already. Thus it lacks modern features and it's interface is fairly basic by modern standards.
It isn't outdated, not unless Vista was updated to be workable for programmers, thats why XP is still being used, the instability of Vista makes it horrible to do much of anything on, especially programming...
Captain Picard's Hair wrote:Though I did have to work with a really, really, really old laptop running Win 95 (!!!!!) a month or two ago at the shop, and now THAT is truly basic to the modern eye.
I am currently looking to find a Windows 3.1 release... just for kicks...
Have an old machine to run it on? I just wonder if 3.1 could possibly have driver support for anything resembling modern hardware (even at the CPU level!)
Yeah, XP can still hack it today, but it still looks basic compared to more modern offerings - much as (in the case of Vista) those modern offerings also slow the computer to hell. I started to like Linux for offering a much more advanced and modern interface and feature set than XP with much greater speed than Vista.
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wonderous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross... but it's not for the timid." Q, Q Who
Captain Picard's Hair wrote:Yeah, XP can still hack it today, but it still looks basic compared to more modern offerings - much as (in the case of Vista) those modern offerings also slow the computer to hell. I started to like Linux for offering a much more advanced and modern interface and feature set than XP with much greater speed than Vista.
Yes, I love Linux, I almost feel like putting it on my Vista machine I use reguallarly... It would be quicker for internet use...
Lazar wrote:I think you raise a very good point about the failings of the Windows line and - OMG CUTE OVERLOAD! Wait, wha...? JERRY SEINFELD! Well that's settled, Gates and Ballmer have convinced me.
OMG, I think I'm going to puke... that's so cringe-worthy.
Lazar wrote:I think you raise a very good point about the failings of the Windows line and - OMG CUTE OVERLOAD! Wait, wha...? JERRY SEINFELD! Well that's settled, Gates and Ballmer have convinced me.
OMG, I think I'm going to puke... that's so cringe-worthy.
Yeah, we Americans have had to put up with this crap from Microsoft when we turn on the Tube.
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wonderous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross... but it's not for the timid." Q, Q Who
Captain Picard's Hair wrote:[by Windows standards] XP wasn't all that bad actually; it's biggest problem now is just that it's out of date, going on a decade old already. Thus it lacks modern features and it's interface is fairly basic by modern standards.
If Vista is MS's idea of modern interface then god help the world. It's awful. XP is just about usable, once you disable some of the more 'modern' rubbish, like the new start menu. You also have to disable the stupid "Teletubbies" desktop and the gross jellybean interface. Could they not afford a decent graphic designer?
