Comments

• The Mad Hatter

  2009-01-04 03:46:34

  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

  2009-01-04 04:44:36

  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

  
  
  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

  2009-01-04 07:11:39

  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

  2009-01-04 09:42:53

  It's a vandal.

• Omar Hafez

  2009-01-04 16:34:59

  @ 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

  2009-01-04 17:21:27

  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

  2009-01-04 17:28:56

  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

  2009-01-04 17:34:36

  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

  2009-01-04 17:39:11

  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