What's up with Windows OS Naming Conventions?

I find it odd how Microsoft constantly changes the marketing name of their products, namely OS's.

I recall back to the days of MS-DOS, at least it was always a version number MS-DOS 6.22.

Then Windows version 3.1

Then year: 95, 98 and then ME, huh? I guess it would be confusing since there was already Windows 2000 out there.

Which gets us to Windows NT, then Windows 2000.

Oh, then we go with XP, which means nothing (well "eXPerience")

Then Vista.

Now back to versions again? Windows 7.

 

Actually, Windows 7 has (or had) its codenames as well, Blackcomb and Vienna.

 

Well, codenames, but marketing names is what I'm referring to.

Speaking of which, thanks to the brilliant site Wikipedia, here's all the Microsoft codenames. Interestingly, and off-topic from this a bit, is a Microsoft Blu-Ray player for the Xbox 360 called "Underwater". Wonder if they still plan on a BR addition like the HD-DVD drive (that I bought, gee, thanks).

edit: D'oh! Forgot to add link!

 

7 is not the version number. It's just a marketing name. The actual version is 6.1 -- you can see it if you run winver. Hope that helps.

 

An apt designation, too: Windows 7 really is a point release of Windows Vista (version 6.0).

 

I thought 7 was just a beta name, didn't think it would be final, sounds too boring to meh, I mean Vista was a good name.

 

I think it just comes down to what their marketing teams think has the most possibility. Calling it by its year made it sounds cutting edge. Then ME came along. Millennium Edition sounded majestic. XP, Vista and 7 don't sound cutting edge or majestic, but they marketed well. I wonder how much money they spend determining which meaningless name is best.

 

yeah Windows 2010 would've been cooler than 7

I mean cmon 7? where is 6, 5, 4, etc....?

makes no sense.......they're just too confused that they're coming out with rubbish names now

 

At least it's a decent OS after Vista. But yeah, Windows 7 doesn't sound as decent as XP & Vista.

 

i found an article that says that microsoft increase the Number (just the number )of its version to make customers feel that they released more versions than apple or so , i am sure u can find this article somewhere maybe www.engadget.com ,

 

No doubt about Windows 7 being the best OS to date, we're just talking about the naming conventions

 

well.. almost all OS names are random.
E.g. Tiger, Vista, XP, Jaunty

 

I always liked the codenames more than the final names
especially the british columbia themed ones like whistler, blackcomb, longhorn

 

longhorn is british columbia theme? What is longhorn? A place somewhere near whistler?

 

To what I remember, 95, 98 and ME is 4.x, 2000 is 5.0, XP is 5.1, and Vista is 6.0.

Just curious what Windows 8's (assuming MS will be going with numbers instead of names like XP) real version number will be.

 

I doubt the next OS will be Windows 8...more likely it will be Windows IIX.

 

I wonder when they get to version 10 if they will call it OS X?

 

Guess why the Xbox 360 is called Xbox 360 instead of Xbox 2. Hint: Playstation 3.

 

Shouldn't that be Windows VIII?

 

I think they named it Windows 7 to distance itself from Vista and give customers the false idea that it's radically different than Vista. Yes, much of the kernal is re-written, but it's still Windows 6.x

I'm not saying W7 is bad - I quite like it. On the contrary, I'm saying that because Vista got such a bad rap, MS is trying to separate W7 as much as possible from Vista.

 

i think it's supposed to be named after a saloon there

 

Yup. According to the Wikipedia article on the Development of Vista,

 

Well, except Mac and Ubuntu have patterns. So your "almost all" sort of boils down to Windows names, which was sort of the point of the thread, eh?

Mac - cat family:

* 10.0 Cheetah
* 10.1 Puma
* 10.2 Jaguar
* 10.3 Panther
* 10.4 Tiger
* 10.5 Leopard
* 10.6 Snow Leopard

Ubuntu - alliterations combining an awesome adjective with the name of some rad animal; also given numerical sequencing:

* Ubuntu 6.06.2 LTS (Dapper Drake)
* Ubuntu 6.10 (Edgy Eft)
* Ubuntu 7.04 (Feisty Fawn)
* Ubuntu 7.10 (Gutsy Gibbon)
* Ubuntu 8.04.2 LTS (Hardy Heron)
* Ubuntu 8.10 (Intrepid Ibex)
* Ubuntu 9.04 (Jaunty Jackalope)

I think you're right.

 

i found a similar article to what i stated ( that companies skip some versions to catch up with other companies and gain consumers )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning
read the part called Keeping up with competitors

 

"constantly"...

In the DOS days, app versioning was a geek thing. Programmers needed to know versions. Tech heads needed to know versions. These were the people running the programs. Version numbers were an effective way to differentiate version 1 from version .. uh.. 1.5. When computer software became a true consumer thing in the 80's with the PC, version numbers were what the companies knew, so that's what they marketed. One thing to understand here is that in the early 80's, selling computers and software to people that didn't know much about computers and software was a new thing, and as an industry taking off at light speed there wasn't a lot of time to sit in board rooms and waste time with meetings to determine names for things. Computers were dull grey boxes with monochrome screens. They weren't exactly "exciting" by any means. OH WOW LOOK AT LOTUS SUM THOSE TABLES.. That's not "big name" worthy. It's "Lotus 1-2-3 v2.3" worthy.

OS naming ideas coincidentally started around the time of the multimedia revolution. Remember, your typical Windows 3.0 box of the day didn't necessarily have a sound card or a CD-ROM drive. VGA was still cleaning up the lingering CGA and EGA monitors left over from the 80's. As users started to do things outside the scope of summing tables in Lotus, like play King's Quest off a CD-ROM or set their Windows startup sound to a darth vader .wav file, version numbers became sort of old school "back room programmer" type things. The year naming was a little odd, but it was an interesting change. "Windows 95" was a little more "in your face and new" compared to something like "Windows 4." Nevermind that it didn't ship until the second half of 1995 anyway -.-;

The naming with NT and 9x was muddled and yeah, they could have made it a little more distinct. One botch was that Windows 2000 was originally intended to be the "all encompassing" home and work OS, so the naming scheme was meant to follow Windows 98, but at the last minute they sort of bailed on the strong home push and focused it in a business direction. They still kept the Windows 2000 name though which caused some confusion. Throw in WinME, which came out not long after Win2K and it just gets worse. One goes from two letters to numbers, the other goes from numbers to two letters. Brilliant!

The XP naming was intended to get off the year thing, since the year thing was now meaningless beyond release date, since there were year-based OS's on the DOS side and on the NT side now. XP was the "reset" to bring home users under the same architecture as business, while convincing each that they were getting something new.

Vista gives Windows a "name" beyond just Windows. XP isn't a name, it's a dead guy with his tongue out sideways. Vista sparks a vision, it prompts immediate mental imagery of some fantastic outdoor view of a mountain or other majestic scene. Is it no wonder why Vista defaults to a color scheme with a lot of natural green shades? The name is designed to grab the trendy Whole Foods card-carrying mountain bikers.

Well, 7 is a lucky number. It's also practical. The soccer moms and grandmas of 2009 are typically more computer saavy than the previous generation, relatively speaking. They are more immersed in technology, and version numbers are no longer "back room" and scary.. It's finally something the consumer actually wants to know and doesn't mind seeing. These are consumers that now own an array of items from smartphones to ipods to cars that have "versions". Numbers make sense to consumers now.

You're not looking at MS just randomly throwing names and numbers on things for decades. The whole computer industry has evolved, greatly, since we sat around on our PC/ATs and did WordPerfect on green monochrome screens. The equipment and software has changed dramatically, and so has the expectations of the consumer. Marketing has simply evolved along with everything else.

 

Yes, true. But why not opposite of Vista - Windows Tunnel... or just call it "Wind Tunnel"