[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

Quillz

Posted
Posted

Windows 10...interesting they skipped 9

I guess their logic is 8.1 was the "ninth" release of Windows, hence that was the secret Windows 9 all along.

 

Frankly, Windows 10 is odd. They might as well have just called it "Windows" like some rumors were suggesting.

 

Or... NT 6.4.

Grand Master

Max Norris

Posted
Posted

Perhaps they're going back to the original numbering before the whole names thing started? 95=4, 98=5,SE=5.1, Me=5.2, XP=6, Vista=7, 7=8, 8=9, 8.1=9.1? And now 10? Kind of makes sense, in a nosebleed inducing sort of way.

Grand Master

Quillz

Posted
Posted

Perhaps they're going back to the original numbering before the whole names thing started? 95=4, 98=5,SE=5.1, Me=5.2, XP=6, Vista=7, 7=8, 8=9, 8.1=9.1? And now 10?

This is why their whole numbering independent of the kernel was dumb. XP was 5.1, not 6, that was Vista. Every release since Vista has been a 6.x release. Their Windows 7 logic appears to only work if you assume NT 3.1 was the "first" release.

 

Either way, Windows 10 just seems odd to me. But I guess it works since, like stated before, "Windows 9" is apparently 8.1.

Grand Master

Max Norris

Posted
Posted

This is why their whole numbering independent of the kernel was dumb. XP was 5.1, not 6, that was Vista. Every release since Vista has been a 6.x release. Their Windows 7 logic appears to only work if you assume NT 3.1 was the "first" release.

Yea I can agree with that, sticking with the NT version would have made sense. Oh well, at least they didn't go with a stupid animal name or something, or even worse, Windows One.
Grand Master

PGHammer

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. :)

And so much for the StartScreen going away.

 

It is a merger of Windows 8.x, Phone, and RT.

 

The idea is that it will be a longer term release - it will likely be in 2016, as opposed to 2015.

 

It will also replace the current versions of Windows Phone and RT (in addition to Windows 8.x).

 

Myerson also called out the "insistence" on a "niche" version of Windows for enterprises as being nonsensical (if looked at logically, he's right).

 

The majority of folks wanting the "Windows 9" branding are looking short term (as a Windows 8.x replacement).  Instead, Microsoft is looking longer term (and multi-platform).

 

Mini-Start (for those that absolutely must have a Start menu) - however, what horks ME off is that it throws ALL those Start-menu bringbacks from third parties (most of which are free) under the bus - why?  Can someone that wanted that Microsoft-sourced Start menu explain the logic of that to me?

 

The StartScreen/AppScreen tag-team from 8.1 - for those (such as moi) that are quite happy with the 8.x paradigm (whether we have touch support or not).

 

And scalability (screen sizes from inches to feet, and computing power from dual-core to multicore that hasn't been seen in anything yet).

 

And all without sacrificing backward-compatibility.

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