Windows 7 has an official name.

[CurseoftheGods]

Windows 7!

Introducing Windows 7

Hi there, Mike Nash here.

For me, one of the most exciting times in the release of a new product is right before we show it to the world for the first time. And that time is right now.

In a few weeks we are going to be talking about the details of this release at the PDC and at WinHEC. We will be sharing a pre-beta "developer only release" with attendees of both shows and giving them the first broad in-depth look at what we've been up to. I can't wait for them to see it.

And, as you probably know, since we began development of the next version of the Windows client operating system we have been referring to it by a codename, "Windows 7."  But now is a good time to announce that we've decided to officially call the next version of Windows, "Windows 7."

While I know there have been a few cases at Microsoft when the codename of a product was used for the final release, I am pretty sure that this is a first for Windows. You might wonder about the decision.

The decision to use the name Windows 7 is about simplicity. Over the years, we have taken different approaches to naming Windows.  We've used version numbers like Windows 3.11, or dates like Windows 98, or "aspirational" monikers like Windows XP or Windows Vista.  And since we do not ship new versions of Windows every year, using a date did not make sense.  Likewise, coming up with an all-new "aspirational" name does not do justice to what we are trying to achieve, which is to stay firmly rooted in our aspirations for Windows Vista, while evolving and refining the substantial investments in platform technology in Windows Vista into the next generation of Windows.

Simply put, this is the seventh release of Windows, so therefore "Windows 7" just makes sense.

We are very excited about the opportunity to tell you more about Windows 7 in the coming weeks, and show you how we have continued to build on investments begun in Windows Vista to deliver on the next release of the Windows operating system.

I look forward to sharing more with you in the coming weeks and months.

--Mike

http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/13/introducing-windows-7.aspx

Set for 2010.

[cool breeze]

Call it Windows Mohave.

[Himu]

what the fuck, already?

[Don Flamenco]

    I guess vista isn't doing so hot.

[Rman]

what the fuck, already?

.

Way too soon. 

[MCD]

Vista was released in November 2006.

[Tabasco]

please do not make a 32 bit version.  let's get the 64 bit era going

[MCD]

please do not make a 32 bit version.  let's get the 64 bit era going

[Smooth Groove]

They should just force everyone to go the 64bit route.  64bit computing is so much better.  For example, Crysis 64 bit loads several times faster than the 32bit version.

[Rman]

Vista was released in November 2006.

But that was five years after XP was released.  I know Apple updates their OS frequently, but that's a smaller userbase, considerably.  

[TVC15]

They should just force everyone to go the 64bit route.  64bit computing is so much better.  For example, Crysis 64 bit loads several times faster than the 32bit version.

By the time Windows 7 is out, there will still be relatively powerful x86 processors out there, though.  I think by the time the next next gen comes around, x86 will be extinct as far as modern computing goes.  Don't forget that the OG Intel Core architecture (which admittedly was only out there for about a year) is only x86.

Vista was released in November 2006.

But that was five years after XP was released.  I know Apple updates their OS frequently, but that's a smaller userbase, considerably. 

Up until Vista, it was generally 3 years between major releases.  Check the dates:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows#Timeline_of_releases

[Rman]

I does seem like Vista was released not to long ago.  Oh well.  My office still hasn't upgraded.  The IT people are still reluctant to upgrade.  Maybe that's the reason it seems like Vista is still very new.

[Smooth Groove]

I hope my homey has me covered when the next Windows is launched.  

[Bildi]

They could have just called it Windows Vista 2?

I guess they don't want the negative connotations straight out of the gate.

[CajoleJuice]

I think many companies are just waiting for Windows 7 to upgrade.

[xnikki118x]

I think many companies are just waiting for Windows 7 to upgrade.

I'm certainly not getting a new PC until then. Hopefully Windows 7 is better than Vista, though. If it's like Vistasquared then I'm totally fucked.

[Fresh Prince]

So Vista is like Windows Me.

[Smooth Groove]

WTF's wrong with you people?  I have no problems using Vista x64 for anything.

Downloading stuff is certainly faster on Vista than XP, which is why I use Vista 90% of the time.  There aren't even that many games or apps anymore that run better on XP.  

[Fresh Prince]

I like Vista when it is running properly, but frankly after two issues (one to do with a corrupt update and another to do with a missing boot mgr) with it on my laptop I just installed XP instead.

[Bloodwake]

I'll wait for Windows 7, but seriously, it took them five years to make XP any good. There's nothing to make me think that Windows 7 or Vista is any good.

[MrAngryFace]

Vista is fine, I dont think there's a big enough rolleyes for that last post

[patrickula]

Maybe I'll upgrade from Vista 32 to Windows 7 64 when it comes out... will I have to reinstall all my apps/games if I try it?

[Bocsius]

And I was thinking about buying a new laptop in the spring....

If they're targetting 2010, that means 2011. And then you'd have to wait for some patches to hit, so next spring for a new laptop might work after all. 2012+ for the next upgrade.

[Human Snorenado]

I think many companies are just waiting for Windows 7 to upgrade.

I'm certainly not getting a new PC until then. Hopefully Windows 7 is better than Vista, though. If it's like Vistasquared then I'm totally fucked.

The thing is, if Vista follows the pattern of Windows 2000 and Vista, it will just become fully stable and usable by the time they're ready to try and force us onto something new, unstable and not usable.

[hyp]

Vista is fine, I dont think there's a big enough rolleyes for that last post

vista 64 on an 8-core intel mac pro is a beautiful thing.  too many vista haters out there. 

[Phoenix Dark]

I hope my homey has me covered when the next Windows is launched.   

 

[laesperanzapaz]

They should just force everyone to go the 64bit route.  64bit computing is so much better.  For example, Crysis 64 bit loads several times faster than the 32bit version.

By the time Windows 7 is out, there will still be relatively powerful x86 processors out there, though.  I think by the time the next next gen comes around, x86 will be extinct as far as modern computing goes. Don't forget that the OG Intel Core architecture (which admittedly was only out there for about a year) is only x86.

Vista was released in November 2006.

But that was five years after XP was released.  I know Apple updates their OS frequently, but that's a smaller userbase, considerably. 

Up until Vista, it was generally 3 years between major releases.  Check the dates:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows#Timeline_of_releases

uhm.... 

[laesperanzapaz]

and FYI, Vista 64bit is superior to 32bit, at least at this point, there is no major probs.  There is some incompatibility here and there...example: Google Desktop grrrr

but Vista as a whole, is a disappointment.  Not a failure, but a major disapointment.  Compared to XP, it has much superior organization [really great search system, fore example] but shit inferior performance.  XP at startup was 300-400MB while Vista64 goes 1.5GB on average.  Not to mention games performance, and disapointing DX10.

Hopefully they fix their shit for 7, but the cynic that i am, MS will prolly half-fuck it up and get away with it.