09-21-2009, 08:29 PM
My segmentation, assuming it is based on the NT Kernel line.
1) 3.1, 3.5
2) 3.51
3) 4
4) 2000
5) XP
6) Vista
7) 7
My reasoning is the difference between 3.5 and 3.51 is similar to Vista and 7.
Win7 is a little more similar to OS X graphically in some simple aspects than Vista. Complete look and feel of OS X is still a ways off. I have more experience with Server 2008 R2 than Win7 right now. I might be missing some fluff from an upgrade of Vista with 7 Home Premium, versus a clean minimal install of 7 Ultimate.
Edit: Ed Bott said it is:Windows NT 3.1, 3.5, 4.0, 2000, XP, Vista, 7. My list makes as much sense. It could be argued that Win7 got the name because it is what they hoped to released in 2007 instead of the crap that is Vista. One problem is that it was supposed to be released in 2005 (2004?), which would have been a couple of years late. The kernel revision for Win7 is supposed to be listed as 6.1. :dunno:
1) 3.1, 3.5
2) 3.51
3) 4
4) 2000
5) XP
6) Vista
7) 7
My reasoning is the difference between 3.5 and 3.51 is similar to Vista and 7.
Win7 is a little more similar to OS X graphically in some simple aspects than Vista. Complete look and feel of OS X is still a ways off. I have more experience with Server 2008 R2 than Win7 right now. I might be missing some fluff from an upgrade of Vista with 7 Home Premium, versus a clean minimal install of 7 Ultimate.
Edit: Ed Bott said it is:Windows NT 3.1, 3.5, 4.0, 2000, XP, Vista, 7. My list makes as much sense. It could be argued that Win7 got the name because it is what they hoped to released in 2007 instead of the crap that is Vista. One problem is that it was supposed to be released in 2005 (2004?), which would have been a couple of years late. The kernel revision for Win7 is supposed to be listed as 6.1. :dunno: