[OFFICIAL] Windows 10 Insider Program

By Ian S.
in The Fast Ring (Insider Previews)

 Share

Windows Technical Preview  

1,031 members have voted

  1. 1. On a scale of 1-5, 1 being worst, 5 being best. What do you think of Windows 10 from the leaks so far?

    • 5.Great, best OS ever
      156
    • 4. Pretty Good, needs a lot of minor tweaks
      409
    • 3. OK, Needs a few major improvements, some minor ones
      168
    • 2. Fine, Needs a lot of major improvements
      79
    • 1.Poor, Needs too many improvements, all hope is lost, never going to use it
      41

  2. 2. Based on the recent leaks by Neowin and Winfuture.de, my next OS upgrade will be?

    • Windows 10
      720
    • Windows 8
      20
    • Windows 7
      48
    • Sticking with XP
      3
    • OSX Yosemite
      35
    • Linux
      24
    • Sticking with OSX Mavericks
      3

  3. 3. Should Microsoft give away Windows 10 for free?

    • Yes for Windows 8.1 Users
      305
    • Yes for Windows 7 and above users
      227
    • Yes for Vista and above users
      31
    • Yes for XP and above users
      27
    • Yes for all Windows users
      192
    • No
      71

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

George P Global Moderator

Posted
  • Global Moderator
Posted

Yeah, the fact that the current marketing numbering of the OS doesn't follow the actual kernel numbering kinda bugs me.

 

It's no different than all the Linux distros and maybe even OSX itself?     None of those follow the kernel version for anything, besides a OS is more than just it's kernel.   Lots of things that make up Windows have different versions to them.

Veteran

BooBerry

Posted
Posted

I really hope Windows 9 is the official name. I don't want Microsoft going back to yearly product names (9x releases) or "cute" names (XP, Vista).

 

Frankly, in a perfect world, we'd be looking at Windows NT 6.4...

 

Frankly if improves on win 7 & 8 then the name is irrelevant . :rofl:

Grand Master

Quillz

Posted
Posted

Yeah, the fact that the current marketing numbering of the OS doesn't follow the actual kernel numbering kinda bugs me.

It was kind of the norm for Microsoft back in the day. Windows 3, Windows 3.1, MS-DOS 6, MS-DOS 6.22, etc.

 

They may be boring but at the end of the day, it's the simplest, most honest way to name your product.

Grand Master

George P Global Moderator

Posted
  • Global Moderator
Posted

It was kind of the norm for Microsoft back in the day. Windows 3, Windows 3.1, MS-DOS 6, MS-DOS 6.22, etc.

 

They may be boring but at the end of the day, it's the simplest, most honest way to name your product.

 

Yeah but you can't keep trying to sell a "major" new version of your OS and have it be labeled as 6.2 or 6.3 compared to 7 and 8.   It's the business side of things coming into play.  Back when those version of Windows and MS-DOS were being sold it was a different market, it was smaller and it was mostly techies who liked to know the version numbers and model numbers of things they were buying/using.   Now things have changed, heck things changed with Windows 95.

Veteran

BooBerry

Posted
Posted

It was kind of the norm for Microsoft back in the day. Windows 3, Windows 3.1, MS-DOS 6, MS-DOS 6.22, etc.

 

They may be boring but at the end of the day, it's the simplest, most honest way to name your product.

 

honest yes but simplest? That not always true.

Grand Master

Dot Matrix

Posted
Posted

Myerson: "but the world in which Windows has grown up has changed", "Our new Windows must be built from the group up for a mobile first cloud first world."

 

 

I like this guy. He's speaking a lot of sense. :)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing