Think of it as something similar to the Y2K bug when we realized using
two digits to represent the year was going to suddenly cause computers
to roll back to the 1900′s.
Over the years, a lot of code has been written to identify two
particular versions of Windows, Windows 95 and Windows 98 by using only
the starting string. So instead of identifying Windows 95 and Windows 98 by
a rather long statement like this:
if (osName.startsWith("Windows")) {
isWindows = true;
if (osName.startsWith("Windows 95") || (osName.startsWith("Windows 98") ||
osName.startsWith("Windows Me"))
return; // win9x/Me cannot handle long paths
}
Programmers would use the following shorter code which would yield the
same results:
if (osName.startsWith("Windows")) {
isWindows = true;
if (osName.startsWith("Windows 9") ||
osName.startsWith("Windows Me"))
return; // win9x/Me cannot handle long paths
}
Unfortunately, this meant that calling the new Windows, Windows 9 would
make all the applications still running on this piece of code see
Windows 9 as either Windows 95 or Windows 98, not Windows 9.
.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I still say its because they're following the inverse star trek rule, and both windows 8 and 10 bite.
The kernel doesn't have a unique identifier beyond the retail name? Why did Windows ME self identify as Windows 9x and take 9x drivers on release day? Drivers that were for devices on CD's years old that had no way to predict Windows ME development? Same question for XP and 2000. I had at least 10 devices that weren't built into the extensive (for the time) XP driver catalog but loaded straight in when presented with a 2000 driver.
Also, are the folks at microsoft so dumb that they can't brand a product one thing and call it something else in code? Me thinks if they wanted to call this Windows 9, they would. They are likely taking a calculated marketing risk to convince the consumer that this version "is so advanced it's like two versions," or some such nonsense.
Sounds like b&@&+%@+, but may certainly be true. It doesn't much matter what it's called, really.
It still just doesn't get any better.
|
actually, OP is correct.
There are hundreds of third party products that use the quick and dirty method, which would break for "Windows 9"
yup, this bug lives inside a couple of thousand applications
lazar, can you at least set it to just point click bring up your programs and get out of your way?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
actually, OP is correct.
There are hundreds of third party products that use the quick and dirty method, which would break for "Windows 9"yup, this bug lives inside a couple of thousand applications
Some random redditer and a legacy code site aren't going to convince me that (1) Microsoft cares about 15-20 year old, 3rd party legacy code enough to do this, or (2) this isn't a marketing ploy.
I'm also unconvinced. The name on the box has little to do with the name referenced in the code. Also the implication that Microsoft is worried about code 16+ years old from 3rd party programmers, as others have pointed out, is pretty hilarious. When has Microsoft EVER shown that kind of concern for users/3rd party publishers?
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because Windows 7 ate 9.
I'm so, so very sorry.
Well, I think it doesn't bode well. If all the even versions of Windows stink...and the odds are good, doesn't it mean that MS is bypassing the good version so they can release yet another stinky one?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Windows 1.X
Windows 2.X
Windows 3.X
Windows 95
Windows NT 4.0
Windows 98
Windows 2000
Windows Me
Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7
Windows 8.X
Windows 10
They must be using a Pentium Processor to count Windows Editions.
I hear its because the Windows 9 they have been working on has been not just amazing but overly amazing. Too good to put onto the market for now so instead they shelved until a later date when they need it and instead went to another iteration they had also been working on...
Because Windows 7 ate 9.
I'm so, so very sorry.
Don't be :-)
Why are they going to 10?
Because 10 is higher than 9, making it more advanced.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because Windows 7 ate 9.
I'm so, so very sorry.
Don't be :-)
Why are they going to 10?
Because 10 is higher than 9, making it more advanced.
I think they should have called it Windows 11 and had Nigel Tufnel introduce it.
"This one goes to 11..."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Force people to get new programs, and they'll either keep using Windows 7, or jump ship. I hear linux, BSD and OSX are all happy to cater for them.
Sounds like a certain role-playing game I know.
Krensky, explain please?
Krensky, explain please?
Mostly what Krensky said. The only reason most use Windows I believe, is because it is cheap. By cheap, I mean, if you get a cheap computer, or even a mid-range computer, you always get Windows on it...
If they started including Linux, and put it on every computer that was sold you would see that people would soon migrate to Linux instead.
In the past, retail ONLY really sold items for Windows and occasionally Apple. Linux might be the cheapest operating system, but it didn't have some of the perk computer retailers put into a Windows install.
Hence, it got a reputation that if you had Linux, you had to be some sort of techie, and people normally don't want to take that type of investment.
Windows has been slowly loosing it's backwards compatibility. IF Linux gains more backwards compatilibity with windows programs then Windows does...it is possible that Linux, or even Apple, would gain the upper hand and become the majority.
Windows XP was probably the biggest threat and first threat to Windows losing Market dominance. Luckily, neither Apple nor Linux were any better at backwards compatibility at that time. In fact, they were much worse. MS also quickly rebuilt a compatibility base, and soon it was pretty much backwards compatible with a lot of programs that it initially was not.
Windows Vista was the next disaster. A LOT of what people complained about weren't actually bugs, but compatibility issues when you look at it. In addition, Linux and apple actually started to make large gains in market share at this time. I don't think this was an accident.
MS recovered quickly enough with Windows 7, but Windows 7 still has a LOT of the legacy compatibility problems that Vista had. It's saving grace was that it can be compacted into a smaller size if desired, AND, more importantly, it can boot much quicker than it's Windows predecessors.
Windows 8 is an unmitigated disaster and came at the wrong time for MS. It has a VERY small market share. They lost a LOT of backwards compatibility. I know over half my programs lost compatibility when it first came out. Windows 8.1 had a little more compatibility, and that's appreciated, but that wasn't the only problem. They got rid of what was familiar. It has all sorts of challengers coming at it now including a cheap OS like Google Chrome, and obviously Win 8 was a stab at the computer market gains that Apple's (and others) tablets have made into the market.
We'll see what happens when Windows 7 is discontinued in sales. I imagine since retailers still want Windows machines, the cheap and midgrade ones will continue to push Windows, but with the lack of Win 8 market penetration (which would be representative of MS's real current market and sales when Win 7 is discontinued) I think they'll see a massive dip in Windows sales for the next few months.
Windows 10 literally could save...or doom Windows in my opinion...and if Windows is doomed you'll see another OS take the lead in the next two years (my bet would be either Chrome or Mac OS...as people are still wary of Linux).
Of course, at this point, I think Linux actually has more backwards compatibility if you include ALL the programs I've had since the DOS days...and even more compatibility with windows programs of mine if you go back to Win 95/98 days. I'm still with the majority however, getting those compatibility programs to work...isn't exactly my cup of tea. If computer retailers started Linux installs with an Office program that had backwards compatibility with all the Windows programs (though I'm not sure if they can do Docx yet or not), AND made it so Wine and other backwards compatibility programs were already installed and working without having to tweak for individual programs....
Linux could actually take the lead if 10 bombs...then again...I don't expect retailers to do that with Linux. They could have done that the first time with Linux when Vista was bombing...and they didn't.
Of course this is in my opinion, but I know I've been extremely turned off by Windows 8 and from what I've seen of the graphs and other items showing Win 8 sales...I'm not the only one. It's just others aren't even buying computers with it, so are much more strongly opposed (for the record, I've bought three laptops thus far with Win 8 on them).
I don't care what they call it.
Did they abandon the awful tile system and put the start menu back in? :P
I don't care what they call it.
Did they abandon the awful tile system and put the start menu back in? :P
As Krensky said...
Yes. It's a start button which opens into a start menu. However, there isn't necessarily a list like Win 7 and previous, it can be a list of tiles...so the menu opens upwards, and then besides it on further menus beside each option, can be tiles.
It's versatile however with 10. If you unhook a keyboard and have a touchscreen, it reverts to tile mode.
If you attach a keyboard, it reverts to the desktop with start menu mode.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The reason most people use Windows is because it's what most computers have loaded and because Office is the standard in business.
BSD is the province of semi-embedded systems and, in its OSX form, Apple fans. Linux is popular on the server side, but not so much on the consumer on the PC side due to all sorts of usability issues. OSX is also far more expensive than Windows due to Apples inflated hardware prices.
People have been dating that Windows will loose market share due to major revisions for a decade. They've also been wrong for a decade.
I built my computer and I run Win 7. It wasn't pre-loaded or packaged with my machine, but I want to be able to play games on it other than solitaire. Though I hear Mac is getting Diablo II soon.
I also don't use office suite, I use open office.
I really like linux. I like the open source ideology and the fiercely loyal and talented community. But the first time I try to put a game on my machine and it fails to work, I *flip table* and install Windows, because ain't nobody got time for that.
The reason most people use Windows is because it's what most computers have loaded and because Office is the standard in business.
BSD is the province of semi-embedded systems and, in its OSX form, Apple fans. Linux is popular on the server side, but not so much on the consumer on the PC side due to all sorts of usability issues. OSX is also far more expensive than Windows due to Apples inflated hardware prices.
People have been dating that Windows will loose market share due to major revisions for a decade. They've also been wrong for a decade.
I built my computer and I run Win 7. It wasn't pre-loaded or packaged with my machine, but I want to be able to play games on it other than solitaire. Though I hear Mac is getting Diablo II soon.
I also don't use office suite, I use open office.
I really like linux. I like the open source ideology and the fiercely loyal and talented community. But the first time I try to put a game on my machine and it fails to work, I *flip table* and install Windows, because ain't nobody got time for that.
Been there done more or less that...
Also Ubuntu failed to install on my old computer for some reason (I think that one driver failed crashing down the whole installation process) and was only able to run from bootable CD...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm also unconvinced. The name on the box has little to do with the name referenced in the code. Also the implication that Microsoft is worried about code 16+ years old from 3rd party programmers, as others have pointed out, is pretty hilarious. When has Microsoft EVER shown that kind of concern for users/3rd party publishers?
Lot of people still play/run things made in the 1990's and early 2000's. The RPG Maker, Fighter Maker, etc Maker from those times are still used.
...
Will Windows 10 have an Omnitrix?
I'm also unconvinced. The name on the box has little to do with the name referenced in the code. Also the implication that Microsoft is worried about code 16+ years old from 3rd party programmers, as others have pointed out, is pretty hilarious. When has Microsoft EVER shown that kind of concern for users/3rd party publishers?Lot of people still play/run things made in the 1990's and early 2000's. The RPG Maker, Fighter Maker, etc Maker from those times are still used.
...
Will Windows 10 have an Omnitrix?
Estimate for me the % of recent PC's (manufactured/assembled within 4 years) with windows on them that you think are used to play games that were published in the mid-90's.
I'd wager that it is currently at a peak of 0.5% (of the overall trend during those same 4 years), because of a recent revival because of sales on places like Steam and GOG.
Combined with the fact that the language in the code DOESN'T HAVE TO MATCH the picture on the front of the box and I'm pretty sure that ensuring that Windows 10 can still run SimCity (the original, or other similar games) was not the primary concern behind the name choice.
Scenario 1 - The programmers showed up to a meeting with marketing and said "There's a problem in the code, we need to change the name of the OS"
Scenario 2 - Marketing came to the meeting "We need to call it 10 because of these reasons... find us a technical reason so people don't call us on our b$!$&&#+"
Scenario 2 seems much more likely to me.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If folks are interested.
First Impressions of Windows 10
Current Use Time 2hrs
I downloaded the tech preview Edition this morning to run some evaluations on it.
My initial impressions are that they definitely went in the right direction with this release.
Installation was simple though I don't recommend letting it do it's "easy install" as it turns on a bunch of reporting in the background that will track pretty much everything you do in every application. Custom install lets you turn all of that off.
The Start Menu is back, though a bit different than the old one but much more useable than the metro screen. It boots directly to desktop instead of the launch screen which is nice.
Apps still launch in full screen mode but you can use restore to get a windowed version so you don't have to keep flipping back to the desktop to change applications.
The new Task view (which Linux has had for years) is useful for multitasking and easy to use. I've run a couple of things that are everyday use programs and so far it seems to be handling them well.
I've gotten some minor hangups but I imagine this is due to this being a beta and quite a few bugs still being left to work out.
So after two hours it seem to be much improved over windows 8. But we'll see how that goes after a few more days.
Because seven ate nine?
Because seven ate nine?
Because seven ate nine?You're late.
Sigh... That's what I get for skimming. Call it a two for one bargain.
My understanding now is one reason for the jump is to avoid the Chevy Nova award. In short they couldn't release a international version of windows nine since the version released In Germany would essentially have been branded "Windows No".
Sigh... That's what I get for skimming. Call it a two for one bargain.Because seven ate nine?You're late.
2 4 1???
|
If folks are interested.
First Impressions of Windows 10
Current Use Time 2hrsI downloaded the tech preview Edition this morning to run some evaluations on it.
My initial impressions are that they definitely went in the right direction with this release.Installation was simple though I don't recommend letting it do it's "easy install" as it turns on a bunch of reporting in the background that will track pretty much everything you do in every application. Custom install lets you turn all of that off.
The Start Menu is back, though a bit different than the old one but much more useable than the metro screen. It boots directly to desktop instead of the launch screen which is nice.
Apps still launch in full screen mode but you can use restore to get a windowed version so you don't have to keep flipping back to the desktop to change applications.
The new Task view (which Linux has had for years) is useful for multitasking and easy to use. I've run a couple of things that are everyday use programs and so far it seems to be handling them well.I've gotten some minor hangups but I imagine this is due to this being a beta and quite a few bugs still being left to work out.
So after two hours it seem to be much improved over windows 8. But we'll see how that goes after a few more days.
Microsoft seems to have fallen somewhat unintentionally into a "tick-tock" development model, similarly to what Intel did intentionally with their processors. Barring Windows 1.x/2.x/3.x, which was a simple shell over MS-DOS, Windows 95, ME, Vista, and 8 have been the "tick" iterations - the ones that pushed Windows' technology forward at the cost of kludgy implementation and problematic misfeatures. Windows 98, XP, and 7 have been, and 10 appears to be, the "tock" iterations - where the genuine technology improvements of the last iteration gain polish and helpful features (Windows 2000 is the problem child in this analysis, but Windows 2000 is really an iteration of Windows NT, which has always been a different beast from mainline Windows entirely, and the popularity of Windows 2000 as a consumer OS relates entirely to the extremely buggy nature of Windows ME).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just assuming the marketing department wants .
They wanted the Wolverine tie-in.