01.03.09
Vista 7 is Just Vista.1, Like Mandriva 2009.1 is to Mandriva 2009
REMEMBER VISTA 7? There is a reason why we insist on calling it Vista 7. Internally, it’s known that the operating system just Vista with some visual changes and it's equally insecure. It’s mostly just marketing fluff. It’s the same as Windows in 2005/6 when only Microsoft fans tried and blogged about Vista/Longhorn.
A reader has just sent us some interesting information: “I just thought you might be interested to know. So-called “Windows 7″ identifies itself as “Windows 6.1″ in the registry: HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\CurrentVersion
“Sounds like internally they use version numbering consistent with being a revision of Vista (6.0).” █
“Linux is a cult that captures the best-and-brightest kids.”
–Jim Gray (Microsoft Research)
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
The Mad Hatter said,
January 3, 2009 at 10:46 pm
Which is basically the same thing that XP did, it identified itself as 5.1. Windows 2000 was Windows 5, so XP was identifying itself as a variation on 2000.
What I was told was that this made it easier for Independent Software Vendors, as anything that they’d written for 2000 would work on XP, and apparently anything written for Vista is supposed to work on Windows 7. The only problems as I see it are:
1) Is there any software written to run on Vista?
2) Are then any Independent Software Vendors who write for Windows left?
If the answer is no to either question, or “not many” the exercise is wasted.
G. Michaels said,
January 3, 2009 at 11:44 pm
Standard for all versions of Windows that I can see:
http://docs.google.com/View?docid=ddb8mfth_0dw4v7hc7
My XP laptop says “Windows 5.1.2″.
Here’s even more enlightenment.
This is rather weird, for someone so allegedly intelligent and knowledgeable about all things Microsoft. In all seriousness, do you have a daily post quota you need to meet or something?
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.
Myfraudsoft said,
January 4, 2009 at 2:11 am
Watch out for this ‘G. Michaels’ fellow, he is a witch hunter (stalks and makes ad hominem attacks on a person called ‘twitter’).
Roy Schestowitz said,
January 4, 2009 at 4:42 am
It’s a vandal.
Omar Hafez said,
January 4, 2009 at 11:34 am
@ G. Michaels
I can’t believe it, don’t you ever get tired?
That reminds me of RMS saying:
“Idiots can be defeated but they never admit it.”
Dan O'Brian said,
January 4, 2009 at 12:21 pm
The version in the registry is the version of the kernel, afaik.
Windows 7 is the Vista kernel with (supposedly as I’ve never seen it) an improved user-space.
Roy Schestowitz said,
January 4, 2009 at 12:28 pm
IOW, it’s Vista with lipstick, which fails to deliver what they promised. Mary Jo Foley wrote about this disappointment about 6 months ago.
Remember WinMin?
Dan O'Brian said,
January 4, 2009 at 12:34 pm
No, I don’t remember WinMin.
Out of curiosity, what did Microsoft promise for Windows 7? I really don’t know because I don’t follow Windows development (I prefer to use Linux when I can).
Roy Schestowitz said,
January 4, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Here is the MJF post:
“Windows 7 will be a minor update to Vista — with “minor,” here, meaning as less disruptive as possible to users and their applications. Microsoft has said Windows 7 will use the same driver model that Vista did.”
http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1413
Also:
Windows 7: The information lockdown continues
http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1406
Wilcox:
Eight Things About Windows 7
“1. Windows 7 won’t be much different from Windows Vista…
“2. There’s no new kernel or modular design…
“3. The user interface won’t radically change….”
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/operating_systems/eight_things_about_windows_7.html?kc=MWRSS02129TX1K0000535
Also see:
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2008/06/windows_7_rip.html
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/05/windows_7_shows.html