What happened to Windows 9?

[dangkhoa]

Sorry, my logical mind is acting up again. Why no Win 9? 

[Geek-9pm]

Sorry, my logical mind is acting up again. Why no Win 9? 

This will bring a lot of dumb answers.

The accepted resewn is that some developers only looked at the fists numeral and the if it was a 9 then the developer would assume windows 95, 98 or 98se.
So MS make the new OS 10  to prevent them for thinking s was an ealier version of windows.
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/191279-why-is-it-called-windows-10-not-windows-9

here’s also the fact that the name of each Windows release doesn’t actually match the real version number. For example, Windows 8.1 is actually version 6.3 of Windows. Windows 10 is version 6.4. The last time the release name actually matched the version number was the enterprise-focused Windows NT 4.0, which was released back in 1996. Windows 2000, which was called NT 5.0 during development, was actually version 5.0. Windows XP was version 5.1. Windows Vista was 6.0, Windows 7 was 6.1, Windows 8 was 6.2, and Windows 8.1 is version 6.3.

Myself, I think it was more about marketing.The 9 would sound so dumb. Like a 10 of anything is the best. A 9 is not the best.  And look at Apple. They already had a ten, the roman-numeral X. Marketing rules above logic. 

[patio]

Nothin happened to Windows 9...it never existed.

[BC_Programmer]

The numbers MS started adding since Windows 7 never really meant anything. Windows 7 wasn't the 7th version of Windows and wasn't even version 7; nor was Windows 8 or 8.1 version 8 and 8.1 respectively.

Even if they were version numbers, There is no rule about how you label or increment versions. You can do whatever you want. a First version can be version 10 if you want, and A lot of software skips versions for marketing reasons. Word for Windows skipped straight from version 2 to version 6, for example. Excel had no version 3 for Windows, etc.

Mac OS X that Geek Mention started at Version 10, even though it was a Version 1. (X or 10 was a marketing choice there to indicate succession from their previous System Version 9)

Similarly, Apple's System 8 was largely labelled as such not due to technical changes from 7 but as a way to get out of clone contracts with clone makers to effectively put an end to them.

[Geek-9pm]

Myself, I have no trouble with the number 9. I am Geek-9pm and  i never was a geek8 or a geek7. I just started out as a 9 and will always be a 9.
Well, yes there  is a geek7, but it never was me.
An somebody has geek8.
Geek6 looks nice, but they will not let me put her picture here.
Forum rules.

Now, as for MS, they say thee will not be a Windows 11.
It will always be 10.

This was released on April 1 this year.:

Microsoft skips Windows 11, announces Windows 12 in early 2019

Click image to enlarge.

Windows 12 is all about VR

Yes, you’ve read that right! Our sources from the company confirmed that Microsoft is planning to release a new operating system called Windows 12 in early 2019. Indeed, there will be no Windows 11, as the company decided to jump straight to Windows 12.

Do you believe it?   

[BC_Programmer]

This was released on April 1 this year

...

Do you believe it?   

No.

[DaveLembke]

Microsoft claiming that it will always be called Windows 10 I dont quite understand. So 16 years from now they will still have Windows 10. It just seems stupid, and I feel they are going to revert to new naming conventions. They might as well just call Windows "Windows" with no version name, but the version numbers of the build always incrementing upwards etc.

When Windows 7 came out, I thought it was intended for a 2007 release but due to problems it wasnt released until 2009. They had Server 2008 etc. Windows 8 obviously was the next version from 7 as 7 being version 7. Then 8.1 being a correction to very ill customer ratings and complaints of 8. Then 10 came out because they claim that scripts that check for (Windows 9) as a lazy shorthand check for Windows 95 and Windows 98 exclusions was the issue so they decided on 10. However I feel that 8.1 should have really been called 9 as for there are some serious changes between 8.0 and 8.1 . I think they also wanted the public to feel that they stuck 2x as much effort into 10 so by not releasing 9, it gives some sort of impression that well yes we messed up with 8 and made things a little better with 8.1 for Start Menu etc but the gap from 8.1 to 10 being one that gives a psychological impression to people that they put more effort into their product to making it better.

I personally like the names and numbers attached to the Windows Name as for it shows clearly which is old from new. If Windows 10 was to remain forever as the name, which just seems dumb, it will cause confusion between old from new computers. If someone today says they have Windows and you ask what version and they say Windows Me you then have a pretty good understanding before even looking at the computer that its probably around 17 years old. In the future if people say I am running Windows 10, it will be questions like what are you running for a computer as for it could be a Pentium 4 all the way forward newer to a Core i9 or whatever the latest fastest CPU is but drastic differences in computational processing power.

[BC_Programmer]

The idea is that "new versions" of Windows are still Windows 10 but get delivered as content updates. And we have ended up with a new "naming convention" of sorts- Redstone, Redstone 2, Anniversary Edition, etc.

Then 10 came out because they claim that scripts that check for (Windows 9) as a lazy shorthand check for Windows 95 and Windows 98 exclusions was the issue so they decided on 10.

Ah, I wondered if anybody would mention this. That is more of a "Just so" Explanation. No modern applications which are still usable on Windows 10 do this- or rather, no significant number of them do. With tools like "Grepcode" which searches through Open Source repositories you can find loads of examples, but what you find when you look into it deeper is that they are Linux tools that were forked from codebases that ran on both, and thus the windows codepaths are pretty much as they were, very old abandonware projects that pretty much nobody uses, or very old software revisions. For example there are current text editors listed in grepcode that do that, which seems spooky until you note that it is a SVN revision from like 2003.

It's also pretty much exclusive to Java software, so it doesn't even find itself covering a particularly large subset of application programs altogether.

The numbers are all marketing now, IMO. Pretty much the same as 95/98/etc.

I personally like the names and numbers attached to the Windows Name as for it shows clearly which is old from new.

That's a good point but I think in some sense things are starting to level off somewhat in terms of Windows and it's matching with Hardware capabilities. It's sort of like how MS-DOS 6.22 could (can?) still be installed and run on a much older IBM XT.

[rjbinney]

Mine goes to 11.