|
Colborne_Greg wrote: It would be a waste of money to have all that windows 8 product in stores to go
to waste buy releasing a new version of windows
Ahem. Windows Vista.
|
|
|
|
|
Windows Vista had 20% of the Windows OS market share up until Windows 8, is the basis for windows 8 and is the basis for the future of Microsoft, Vista is still making Microsoft Money.
|
|
|
|
|
Not the point.
The point was Microsoft DID get Windows 7 out as fast as possible to get rid of Vista because everyone (except you probably) hated it, leaving all those copies of Vista on the shelf to be wasted.
It's happened before and it will happen again. Oh, that's right, it already did and it's called Windows 8. Everyone HATED it and the rush was on to get 8.1 out the door.
|
|
|
|
|
Windows 8 was the year after Windows 7 and by that logic windows 7 was a failure.
|
|
|
|
|
Windows 7 was released in 2009
Windows 8 was released in 2012
That's not one year, that's three.
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry Vista (2006) to Windows 7 (2009) was 3 years like Windows 7 (2009) to Windows 8 (2012)
I knew they were the same time frame just didn't remember how long.
But still proves my point dick.
|
|
|
|
|
Forgetting the fact that you seem to contradict yourself on every post, calling me a dick is immature and uncalled for when I simply corrected a factual mistake without comment.
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
Oh I didn't say any version of Windows was a failure. YOU DID.
All I said was Microsoft has in the past abandonded a ton of copies of Windows on store shelves to release the next version, regardless of the reason they did it.
Thank you for demonstrating my point.
|
|
|
|
|
So you admit this wasn't you "out as fast as possible to get rid of Vista because everyone (except you probably) hated it, leaving all those copies of Vista on the shelf to be wasted."
And no I said by that logic Windows 7 was a failure, or do you not understand what you said.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh I understand perfectly. Where in that quoted statement did I say that "Vista was a failure"? Yeah, it got to 20% share. What did XP have at the time?
|
|
|
|
|
XP and Windows 7 are copies of Windows 95 and 98 with added features.
Windows Longhorn, Windows Vista, Windows 8 and Windows Threshold, are all based on the dot net framework, a completely different paradigm.
Both Windows 3.11 line which became NT 4.0, and Windows 3.1 which became Windows 95, were able to mix easily back into Windows XP aka Windows Experienced - which was the end all be all of that era.
This era needs to die and keeping it around to keep people like you happy is the dumbest thing ever.
Windows Threshold is a feature release of Windows 8, and unless they are out to piss people off they will make it Windows 8.2.
Furthermore my point with all of this is that the Code Project I first saw as an official source of news, and yet officially Windows 9 has not been declared by Microsoft.
|
|
|
|
|
Colborne_Greg wrote: XP and Windows 7 are copies of Windows 95 and 98 with added features.
Now I KNOW you're smoking something funky!
Windows 7 is based on Windows 98?!?! Are you f'ing kidding me?? Windows 7 is an overhauled and fixed version of Vista, REMOVING a bunch of the dependency on the .NET Framework because of performance problems.
Colborne_Greg wrote: and yet officially Windows 9 has not been declared by Microsoft.
NOBODY "officially" called it Windows 9. That's just what everyone defacto called it. AGAIN, you're not listening, you're preaching.
|
|
|
|
|
Windows 7 has the dot net framework installed on top of it, which is Windows XP which is Windows ME and Windows 2000, which was Windows 98 and Windows NT.
Metro is the only operating system to be the dot net operating system.
Longhorn and Vista have the dot net framework intergraded into the shell
|
|
|
|
|
Colborne_Greg wrote: Windows 7 has the dot net framework installed on top of it
WOW! How wrong are you? You don't even know what the .NET Framework IS!!
Colborne_Greg wrote: which is Windows XP
Which has nothing to do with the .NET Framework!
Colborne_Greg wrote: which is Windows ME and Windows 2000, which was Windows 98 and Windows NT.
Which is utterly irrelevent.
Colborne_Greg wrote: Metro is the only operating system to be the dot net operating system.
There is no .NET "operating system".
There are parts of Windows that are written using the .NET Framework, but the .NET Framework is itself NOT an operating system, nor part of one.
Colborne_Greg wrote: Longhorn and Vista have the dot net framework intergraded into the shell
No, they have parts of the Shell written using the .NET Framework.
I'm done with you. You obviously have no clue what you're talking about nor do you want to hear that you're wrong about certain things. Also, you don't even know how to listen to people who are trying to have a converstation with you. All you know how to do is tell everyone "YOU'RE WRONG! IT'S MY WAY".
|
|
|
|
|
Windows RT is the dot net framework as an operating system.
The reason it was called a framework is because it is a structure on top of the old.
|
|
|
|
|
Just stop now, you're playing with an idiot, probably a 15-year-old still wearing diapers.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Cut and pasting a large block of fairly meaningless text in multiple replies to multiple messages with only a slight change is very close to being classed as spam.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colborne_Greg wrote: windows 9 will exist in 2022.
Which is I am correct will go to show
how full of sh*t the average programmer is.
And when you're wrong? What does that say about YOU?
|
|
|
|
|
Well actually I am doubting that the next operating system will be windows 9 as well, it will probably have a name like vista or XP, if its not windows 8.2 so I guess I am already decided that was wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Now you're just splitting hairs as to what it's name is going to be.
NOBODY GIVES A SH*T!
But, everyone considers it to be Windows version 9, just possibly with a name other than "9". This is the distinction that's making you look like a fool.
|
|
|
|
|
Windows 8 is actually Windows 6.2.
The way people are putting up a stink by talking reality is proving that most programmers that follow the code program are full of sh*t, high on themselves, and trolls for insulting a person for pointing out that not even Microsoft is talking Windows 9.
|
|
|
|
|
"windows 9" is generally understood by everyone except, perhaps, you, to refer to the next major release of Windows.
It's internal version will presumably be 6.3
It may be called Windows 9 or it may be called Fred - whatever, i'ts easier to say "Windows 9" than "The next major release of Windows regardless as to what it's called"
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
|
Only self proclaimed computer experts are saying Windows 9.
Windows 8.1 was the next major release of windows after windows 8 and they are purposely not saying windows 9 they are saying the next major release of windows, I wonder why!!!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
