Windows 7/8 Question

Post by **squidward_** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:49 pm

You know the first leaked build of Windows 7 was referred to as NT 6.1, because it was starting to build off Vista, if there is a Windows 8 in the future, do you think that the first builds will be referred as NT 7.1?

Post by **Rob Jansen** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:56 pm

I think the Windows 7 is going to be NT 6.1 because the server 2008 is NT 6.0, just Build 6001, so logically its Windows 8 NT 7.0

Post by **Ludacris** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:21 pm

windows 2000 was a major release - 5.0
windows xp was a minor release - 5.1
windows server 2003 was a major release 5.5
windows vista was a major release - 6.0
windows 7 is a minor release - 6.1
windows 8 will be a major release - 7.0 (if it is nt based, if not it will be 1.0)

Post by **Thlump** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:30 pm

There may not be a Windows 8, because by then Microsoft Midori will be created, and that will supercede all of windows.

Post by **Rob Jansen** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:53 pm

Ludacris wrote:windows 2000 was a major release - 5.0
windows xp was a minor release - 5.1
windows server 2003 was a major release 5.5
windows vista was a major release - 6.0
windows 7 is a minor release - 6.1
windows 8 will be a major release - 7.0 (if it is nt based, if not it will be 1.0)

Windows Server 2003 wasn't an major release.
Its Version 5.2, not 5.5

Post by **Ludacris** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 11:16 pm

DjRob wrote:
Ludacris wrote:windows 2000 was a major release - 5.0
windows xp was a minor release - 5.1
windows server 2003 was a major release 5.5
windows vista was a major release - 6.0
windows 7 is a minor release - 6.1
windows 8 will be a major release - 7.0 (if it is nt based, if not it will be 1.0)
Windows Server 2003 wasn't an major release.
Its Version 5.2, not 5.5

whops - my bad

Post by **JollyRogers** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:20 am

I'm quite certain Windows 7 will be version 7.0 despite being only a minor release especially since he codename uses the number 7. I believe it's only not labelled 7.0 right now because it's pre-RTM.

Post by **Ludacris** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:52 am

JollyRogers wrote:I'm quite certain Windows 7 will be version 7.0 despite being only a minor release especially since he codename uses the number 7. I believe it's only not labelled 7.0 right now because it's pre-RTM.

Microsoft NEVER changed the Build number at a rtm build - they wont do it that time...

Post by **J.Byrne** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 2:59 am

It would make so sense for Microsoft to change the build number, simply so it looks good against the name, you average user will never see the build number, or even know it exists.

Also, way offtopic, But Steiner, it seems you have not enabled BBcode in your sig.

Post by **Thlump** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 3:16 am

I heard that in Aeroxp someone said when Windows 7 finally has MinWin the version number will start being 7.0.[build #]

Post by **J.Byrne** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 4:04 am

Thlump wrote:I heard that in Aeroxp someone said when Windows 7 finally has MinWin the version number will start being 7.0.[build #]

Windows 7 is a minor release, It will not have a new kernal.

Post by **davehc** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:29 am

jabster wrote:
Thlump wrote:I heard that in Aeroxp someone said when Windows 7 finally has MinWin the version number will start being 7.0.[build #]
Windows 7 is a minor release, It will not have a new kernal.

That is not strictly correct. It depends on how you would interpret a "new" kernel.
It is unlikely that programmers would start from scratch to write a new kernel. They would probably modify any existing material.
As I understand it, in spite of the rumours running rife on the web currently, Minwin is the original kernel, with most of the "addons" stripped out. It is purely interoffice and is only the basis for the Windows 7 kernel. By the time of the retail release (or Beta, perhaps) it will have a lot added to it but hopefully, this time, the bloat is being kept to a minimum.
Judge for yourself from the horse's mouth. No where does Traut state that Minwin is the complete and final product. Movie speech:
http://www.istartedsomething.com/200...dows-7-minwin/

Post by **J.Byrne** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:32 am

davehc wrote:
jabster wrote:
Thlump wrote:I heard that in Aeroxp someone said when Windows 7 finally has MinWin the version number will start being 7.0.[build #]
Windows 7 is a minor release, It will not have a new kernal.
That is not strictly correct. It depends on how you would interpret a "new" kernel.
It is unlikely that programmers would start from scratch to write a new kernel. They would probably modify any existing material.
As I understand it, in spite of the rumours running rife on the web currently, Minwin is the original kernel, with most of the "addons" stripped out. It is purely interoffice and is only the basis for the Windows 7 kernel. By the time of the retail release (or Beta, perhaps) it will have a lot added to it but hopefully, this time, the bloat is being kept to a minimum.
Judge for yourself from the horse's mouth. No where does Traut state that Minwin is the complete and final product. Movie speech:
http://www.istartedsomething.com/200...dows-7-minwin/

If I remeber that video correctly (and I should because I was reading a transcript of it an hour or so ago) he says that Minwin is a research project. Midori is also a research project, neither of which are intended for commercial use.

Post by **Thlump** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:41 am

Midori, will eventually be intended for commercial use, because it will supercede all of Windows. Of course it's just a rumor and nothing is confirmed because Midori is secretly being developed...

Post by **J.Byrne** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:46 am

Thlump wrote:Midori, will eventually be intended for commercial use, because it will supercede all of Windows. Of course it's just a rumor and nothing is confirmed because Midori is secretly being developed...

You really do believe in Midori, don't you?
Suppose we could do with a version of Windows named after an alchaholic beverage...

Post by **Raiker** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 6:29 am

JollyRogers wrote:I'm quite certain Windows 7 will be version 7.0 despite being only a minor release especially since he codename uses the number 7. I believe it's only not labelled 7.0 right now because it's pre-RTM.

Mary Jo quoted he source that Windows 7 will not be NT7. Here is the quote:

Furthermore, Windows 7, despite it’s rather pretentious sounding code name (a result of Sinofsky’s like of big round numbers) is NOT Windows NT 7, but rather 6.1(current builds are numbered 67xx as a direct continuation of the longhorn codebase). Put simply, it is not a big jump as a codebase revision and the new changes, on both the client and server, will be focused on user features, not core OS components. The big core OS changes are WDDM 2 and a kernel scheduler update to remove the simple bitmask enumeration of processors so that the OS can schedule more than 64 concurrent threads.

Post by **QuiescentWonder** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 8:00 am

Thlump wrote:I heard that in Aeroxp someone said when Windows 7 finally has MinWin the version number will start being 7.0.[build #]

That's just speculation.

This answer your question?

Also, no one knows anything about Midori. Do any of you realize that every version of Windows has been based off of it's predecessor? Up until the reset in Longhorn development the "Add Font" dialog box from Windows 3 was still around.

Post by **squidward_** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:51 am

Yes, all of this answers my questions thankyou. I heard that Vista, back when it was codenamed Longhorn, was supposed to be NT 5.5. Do you maybe think the first internal builds before even Build 3663 were NT 5.5?

Post by **Daniel** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:41 pm

Might be possible - the first Whistler builds had 5.00 as version number, so why shouldn't early Longhorn builds too..?

Post by **QuiescentWonder** » Mon Oct 06, 2008 7:45 pm

Honestly, the version number could be entirely arbitrary for all I care, it doesn't change the operating system.

Post by **motherboardlove** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 5:31 pm

QuiescentWonder wrote:
Thlump wrote:I heard that in Aeroxp someone said when Windows 7 finally has MinWin the version number will start being 7.0.[build #]
That's just speculation.

This answer your question?

Also, no one knows anything about Midori. Do any of you realize that every version of Windows has been based off of it's predecessor? Up until the reset in Longhorn development the "Add Font" dialog box from Windows 3 was still around.

Thats Windows 7. Microsoft always make the new OS based on the old OS. And on early betas/alphas, They don't change much. I really don't think Windows 7's build number will be 6.1 , because that's close to Windows Vista's. probably 7.

Post by **Namronia** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 5:37 pm

squidward_ wrote:Yes, all of this answers my questions thankyou. I heard that Vista, back when it was codenamed Longhorn, was supposed to be NT 5.5. Do you maybe think the first internal builds before even Build 3663 were NT 5.5?

Never any longhorn build was 5.5, very early ones are 5.2 because they were based on 2003 server, take eg. the 3551 and convert it with tweak nt to "professional", then youve got "longhorn 3551" (ok, not real one and it DOES NOT SHOW LONGHORN anywhere), but they really never jumped to 5.50. btw, NepTune was 5.50

Post by **hounsell** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:09 pm

motherboardlove wrote:I really don't think Windows 7's build number will be 6.1 , because that's close to Windows Vista's. probably 7.

I really do think the final Windows 7 will actually be NT 6.1
If they were going to change it, they would have done so by now.
Apparently, the '7' name is just because Sinofsky thinks people would be confused if it was a decimal number, or something crap like that.

Post by **fzajac** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:42 pm

Namronia wrote:
squidward_ wrote:Yes, all of this answers my questions thankyou. I heard that Vista, back when it was codenamed Longhorn, was supposed to be NT 5.5. Do you maybe think the first internal builds before even Build 3663 were NT 5.5?
Never any longhorn build was 5.5, very early ones are 5.2 because they were based on 2003 server, take eg. the 3551

There was no Longhorn before 3663.
Seriously...
I know you've found a lot of refferences in early Longhorn builds, like 3683... But now take some .NET 36xx builds and you'll propably find the same files with the same file version and those are .NET builds... I was looking at BAWiki's Longhorn page and then in Longhorn's 3xxx files and those builds are just 5.2.3551, 5.2.3555, 5.2.3557, etc. We all know that Longhorn 3663 was compiled basing on .NET 3663 and it had ALL files from .NET 3663, some files from .NET 3663 were not changed from earlier .NET builds so they showed build numbers starting with 5.2 version...

Post by **bns06** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:44 pm

hounsell wrote:
motherboardlove wrote:I really don't think Windows 7's build number will be 6.1 , because that's close to Windows Vista's. probably 7.
I really do think the final Windows 7 will actually be NT 6.1
If they were going to change it, they would have done so by now.
Apparently, the '7' name is just because Sinofsky thinks people would be confused if it was a decimal number, or something crap like that.

I'm close to 100% it will be, if they were gonna change it they would have by now