Windows 7 Officially Named

But doesnt that mean Mac OS is better because it is 10?

It's going to be called Windows 7! Imaginative.

For anyone else sad enough to be interested in what they consider to be a version, looking at this Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows

Version 4:
Windows 95
Windows NT 4.0
Windows 98
Windows ME

Version 5:
Windows 2000
Windows XP
Windows Server 2003
Windows Home Server

Version 6:
Windows Vista
Windows Server 2008

So it is officially “Windows 7”? Who gives a cucumber!? I remember there were so much hullabaloo about Vista and how it was going to revolutionise the whole “personal computing experience”! Microsoft, with its bad joke called Vista, has wasted so much of people’s precious savings and hours and hours of their time. In the end, after so many delays, what Microsoft released was nothing more than some fancy graphic works.

Microsoft should really not bother with the next Windows because I intend to use XP for the next 200 years. As for other people, well, after losing their homes, their pensions and all their savings, I don’t think anyone will be rushing to get their wallet out for Microsoft. Bread, milk and utility bills will take priority over “Windows 7”.

bring it on - I've been supporting Windows since Windows 3
confirming the name raises awareness - key for any product launch as massive as a new version of Windows.

Azad - don't fall for the hype....most people who make comments like yours really do not have all the facts...

p.s. use Vista, Love Vista

@Azad

Vista works fine for me and always has done! Most of the people with Vista issues are people who installed it on ageing hardware and hardware that had no Vista support.

And PC's that come with it pre-installed are absolutely fine.

All i want is an OS that is stable, secure, works with pretty much all software out there, incl.third party stuff and doesn't slow my system noticeably. As far as i'm concerned, for the time being i'll stick with XP. MS seems to have a habit of investing too much money in essentially rubbish, namely VISTA from what i hear!! ( not been pursuaded to even try out VISTA, as all the comments about it, i've heard are negative!!).Seems MS could take a few huge leaves out of APPLES book!!

There is a metric s*/tload of bad hype around Vista, but almost all of it I've never seen! I "borrowed" a copy of Vista to try out a couple of weeks after it was released on my 4 year old hardware to see what it was like. Started dual booting with XP, and liked Vista so much that I deleted the XP partition and bought a legit copy. I might be lucky in that I've never had a hardware incompatability (and am using 32 bit which might help) but Vista runs a LOT more stable on my 4 YEAR OLD (MIDRANGE WHEN BOUGHT!) HARDWARE that XP ever did! Sure it may slow down a little bit here and there, but a cheap 4GB ReadyBoost USB key helps a lot more than I thought it would!

@Steve

Or there are people like me who bought a new computer with Vista installed but found out their Vista-compatible anti-virus (Kaspersky) was giving them a blue-screen. Sometimes the 3rd Party software developers are just as much to blame.

(Since I installed an update last month no more BSOD's, and as you say Vista works fine for me now)

With respect, I disagree with HSC and Steve. I used to repair PCs; we used to get loads of new PCs with Vista pre-installed and they suffered from endless problems. Ageing hardware may cause some of Vista’s problems, but those computers were brand new models that came out soon after Vista. Those models were manufactured specifically for Vista and they still suffered.

Whatever the case, guys, people will think thrice before buying another Windows.

They should have called it "Windows Sorry".

Honestly, I dont get why is Vista being singled out.

I mean when XP came out, it was given the same kind of treatment suggesting that it was merely a graphic makeover of 98, but a few years later, when the hardware caught up with it, and all software became compatible, people realised it was a major improvement over older versions.

Once you start using Vista you realise, its a lot faster, efficient and yes it is PRETTIER, and since when is that a bad thing..isnt that what Apple and Steve Jobs use to con people out of their money..by giving them old technology and ageing software under a pretty little GUI. I mean credit to Microsoft for trying to make things easier on the eye.

Whoever cribs about Vista probably installed it more than a year back, and doesnt quite appreciate the improvements made by MS in that time, or still is trying to run it on old hardware.

Get better hardware and you will see Vista perform really well.

roll on "Windows 7".. I just hope Microsoft don't get greedy and charge through the nose for an upgrade disc like they done with Vista.

Not many will justify spending over £100 for an OS upgrade. £ 50 is a more reasonable price point.

OK Vista has a larger footprint than XP and requires more system resources, yes there are lot of release 1 issues with Vista. These issues don't make Vista a bad operating system. In my experience all OS's require optimisation, both in the form of user configuration and and vendor software updates. Vista is no different in this regard. In fact I would say it is easier to configure and optimise Windows than Mac OS or Linux. When you add hardware support to the equation Mac OS and Linux are at a major disadvantage. Windows XP's days are numbered, there are feature we will need that it doesn't/will not support e.g. multi-touch, UDF 2.5+, etc. XP loyalists will need a slice of humble pie with that copy of Windows 7 - but you never know the open source community might just prove me wrong...

Sure Vista may be more modern and "better" in some respects than XP especially on new machines but for the vast majority of existing XP installations it offers no compelling reason to upgrade -- yes more eye candy, but hardly any new function, an iritatingly confusing set of editions and it's expensive to buy for upgraders. MS need to understand that OSes are fast becoming commodity items - realistically an average user can get all the functionality they need now (Linux, OpenOffice, Firefox) - why pay more. The only problem is the retail MS hegemony prevents them from knowing this (Linux based Eee PCs and the like excepted).