Sure. We can go with Apple copying BMW. I don’t really care about that. But the point is Microsoft is copying Apple with their recent branding. There is an obvious trend.
So Android is based on Linux and Linux is based on Unix, right. Well All of Apple’s OS are based on Unix as their core foundation. So, much of what may look like Apple copying Linux could be Apple adopting new core development. Remember this is open sourced and Apple submits changes that may filter into Linux and in turn Android.
It would be except for the fact the literally skipped windows 9 to match Apple at 10. There is no reason to go to 11 for them at this point because the development cycles are different. It’s clearly a copy with no other purpose as usual. This and their vaporware marketing is how they stay in the limelight
You mean that search function that one decade after apples spotlight finally was close to giving instant results? Still remember first time using spotlight. Jaw dropping compared to the windows experience
ya but Microsoft is not good at copying apple. Microsoft customer support is horrible.
It’s gonna be named
im pretty sure Microsoft will call it Windows 11 Series W
There was never an effort to say this; the purpose of the message was to communicate that what the person with the Futurama profile picture said was not indicative of that what the original poster said was untrue.
This confusion, for sure, is the motivation of all the argumentative messages. The initial thread text conveys only mentions of similarities in naming. Of course, it was not made for people to believe Microsoft is culpable of anything.
The thesis was that Microsoft wants to do similar marketing to Apple's. I presume the I'm going to offend some people by saying this was due to the belief of that it would be thought it was another.
Prior the release of Windows 7, Microsoft was using "cute" names for OS releases. Windows 95, Windows Me, Windows XP, and Windows Vista. Windows XP was the direct follow-on to Windows 2000, which itself was a follow on to Windows NT 4. The first version of Windows NT was 3.1, and Microsoft chose that version number to prevent people thinking that Windows NT was a lesser version of the consumer oriented Windows 3.1. Windows XPs version number was 5.1, compared to Windows 2000 at 5.0. Windows Vista was version 6.0, with both Windows 7 and 8 only bumping it to 6.1 and 6.2 respectively. When it came time for what is now Windows 10, the choice of Windows 9 could have caused confusion with Windows 95, so they went up by one number. It has no relation to the naming of macOS.
No. And I don’t see the purpose of such and upgrade either. Fascinating as it is going from Win1 to vista on the same virtual machine that also shows the weakness of the policy at Redmond. Whenever you insist on maintaining backwards compatibility you also inherit a lot of crap, holes, flaws and restrictions that limits what the next version can do.
