Windows 7 to be officially named... Windows 7
By Nilay Patel 
posted October 13th 2008 6:12PM
posted October 13th 2008 6:12PM
posted October 13th 2008 6:12PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
And whats Windows Cloud officially named...? Windows Strata ? Or is it going to be Windows 6.9 now...?
I say go for Windows 2010 and kick it old school....back to the roots of 95 and 98. Or even better Windows '10
Ah, Chicago, Daytona, Cairo, Whistler, where have you gone? What's wrong with Dave Cutler?
I always thought it was dumb to shed the "NT" name, they spent all this time and energy convincing people to switch to NT instead of old 16/32-bit Windows 95/98/ME. Then they turn around and call it Windows 2000. Then the call it Windows XP. Then Windows Vista.
Way to throw out brand equity.
Can we call this NT 7?
I Love It.
The Best Call, if you ask me.
Thank you Microsoft for believe in this code name and for don't come with yet another windows crap name.
I remember a time when software (including OS's) came out of the box, bug free, and doing what the manufacturer claimed it did. Then Microsoft came along and changed all that. Now we buy it so full of mistakes and disfunctionality, and are somehow convinced to assist them (for free) in the debugging of it, for years to come. If any other type of product was marketed and sold in this state, the company would fail almost instantly, no matter how good their marketing is.
Not many people today know or realize that Microsoft Windows was originally nothing more than a handy (although buggy) MENU SYSTEM which ran under Microsoft DOS at the time and made it easier to run your programs than typing them at the command prompt. If that was all that it was today it wouldn't be nearly the mess that it is. The OS was more stable and hense anything running under it, including Windows. But even then "crashes" occured.
It is not impossible to run a computer for a lengthy amount of time without it crashing. QNX (Canadian) runs the Canada Arm on shuttles and has never had a computer malfunction. It has been known to run factory equipment 24/7 for years (3 or more) with the computer never needing to be shut down or rebooted.
Other "Unix like" OS's are known to be similarly stable and there are a number of free ones but the trade off is lack of an industry standard. In the case of QNX above, the OS costs about the same or greater than the hardware does. Either way, not practical.
In the end, Microsoft wins because they are what I call "The Poor Man's OS", because without them in the forefront all these years, average people at home could never have enjoyed what computers did for them. Creat an affordable interface into the computer that regular people can figure out and use.
And as much as I'd love to bash MS for all the problems, I'm cheaping out by using it in the first place and should expect problems at such a low price.
Personally, I use XP because I don't want to upgrade to 4 times the hardware just so I can run at half the speed. Instead, I upgraded to 4 times the power and run at 8 times the speed. XP runs my current hardware proplerly so no need to upgrade, yet.
I agree though. Keep Windows 7 in Beta long enought to ensure that we don't get that sour taste in our mouths again.
newwindows7.com FOR SALE
Well, better than the name: Vista
http://www.aquariumfish.me
who cares what the darn thing is called
Why don't they name it what it is. That is Windows 7 = Vista Pro. Yeah, "Vista Pro"!
Can I say what very few people seem to be thinking. Who cares if Microsoft havn't worried about yet another Style change. Vista's style is fine. Let Microsoft concentrate on things people will really care about when it's released. IS IT STABLE, DOES IT HAVE GOOD SUPPORT, etc. The same questions people have been asking for since Microsofts biggest mistake. WinME.