|
Later, Blackcomb was delayed, and an interim, minor release, codenamed "Longhorn" (named for the Longhorn Tavern between the resorts), was announced for a 2003 release.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/10/24/gates_confirms_windows_longhorn |title=Gates confirms Windows Longhorn for 2003 |last=Lettice |first=John |date=2001-10-24 |publisher=The Register |accessdate=2008-03-05}}</ref> By the middle of 2003, however, Longhorn had acquired some of the features originally intended for Blackcomb, including [[WinFS]], the [[Desktop Window Manager]], and new versions of system components built on the [[.NET Framework]]. After the 2003 "Summer of Worms", where three major viruses − [[Blaster (computer worm)|Blaster]], [[Sobig (computer worm)|Sobig]], and [[Welchia]] − exploited flaws in Windows operating systems within a short time period, Microsoft changed its development priorities, putting some of Longhorn's major development work on hold in order to develop new service packs for Windows XP and [[Windows Server 2003]]. [[Development of Windows Vista|Development of Longhorn]] was also "reset" in September 2004.
===Naming===
As major feature work on Windows Vista wound down in early 2006, Blackcomb was renamed ''Vienna''.<ref name=thurrottfaq>{{cite web |url=http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/windows_7.asp |title=Windows "7" FAQ |last=Thurrott |first=Paul |authorlink=Paul Thurrott |publisher=Paul Thurrott's SuperSite for Windows |date=14 February 2007 |accessdate=2008-01-05}}</ref> However, following the release of [[Windows Vista]], it was confirmed by [[Microsoft]] on July 20, 2007 that "the internal name for the next version of the Windows Client OS"<ref name="zdnet592">{{cite news | first=Mary J |last=Foley |title=Windows Seven: Think 2010 |date=2007-07-20 |publisher=[[ZDNet]] | url=http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=592 |accessdate = 2007-09-19}}</ref> was ''Windows 7'', a name that had been reported by some sources months before.<ref name="thurrottfaq" /> On October 13, 2008, it was announced that ''Windows 7'' would also be the official name of the operating system.<ref>{{cite news | first=Ina | last=Fried | title=Microsoft makes Windows 7 name final | date=2008-10-13 | publisher=[[CNET]] | url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10064971-56.html | accessdate=2008-10-13}}</ref><ref name="CBC14Oct08">{{cite news|url = http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/10/14/tech-windows.html|title = For Microsoft's Windows, 7th time's a charm|accessdate = 2008-10-27|last = [[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation]]|authorlink = |year = 2008|month = October | work=CBC News}}</ref> Mike Nash, Microsoft's vice-president of Windows product management said:
{{blockquote| The decision to use the name Windows 7 is about simplicity. Simply put, this is the seventh release of Windows, so therefore Windows 7 just makes sense.
Coming up with an all-new 'aspirational' name does not do justice to what we are trying to achieve, which is to stay firmly rooted in our aspirations for Windows Vista, while evolving and refining the substantial investments in platform technology in Windows Vista into the next generation of Windows.<ref name="CBC14Oct08" /><ref>{{cite web
|url = http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/230106/windows-7-to-be-called-windows-7.html
|title = Windows 7 to be called... Windows 7
|date = 14 October 2008
|accessdate = 2008-10-17
|last = Collins
|first = Barry
|publisher = [[PC Pro]]
}}</ref> }}
Numbering this version of Windows as "7" has confused many users, so on October 14, 2008, Nash clarified his earlier remarks, saying:<ref name="Protalinski">{{cite web|url = http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2008/10/15/final-release-of-windows-7-to-have-kernel-version-6-1|title = Final release of Windows 7 to have kernel version 6.1|accessdate = 2008-11-24|last = Protalinski |first = Emil|authorlink = |year = 2008|month = October}}</ref><ref name="Nash14Oct08">{{cite web|url = http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx|title = Windows Vista Team Blog - Why 7?|accessdate = 2008-11-24|last = Nash|first = Mike.|authorlink = |year = 2008|month = October}}</ref>
{{blockquote|The very first release of Windows was Windows 1.0, the second was Windows 2.0, the third Windows 3.0. Here's where things get a little more complicated. Following Windows 3.0 was Windows NT which was code versioned as Windows 3.1. Then came Windows 95, which was code versioned as Windows 4.0. Then, Windows 98, 98 SE and Windows Millennium each shipped as 4.10.1998, 4.10.2222, and 4.90.3000, respectively. So we're counting all 9x versions as being 4.0. Windows 2000 code was 5.0 and then we shipped Windows XP as 5.1, even though it was a major release we didn't want to change code version numbers to maximize application compatibility. That brings us to Windows Vista, which is 6.0. So we see Windows 7 as our next logical significant release and 7th in the family of Windows releases...There's been some fodder about whether using 6.1 in the code is an indicator of the relevance of Windows 7. It is not. Windows 7 is a significant and evolutionary advancement of the client operating system. It is in every way a major effort in design, engineering and innovation. The only thing to read into the code versioning is that we are absolutely committed to making sure application compatibility is optimized for our customers.<ref name="Nash14Oct08" /> }}
==See also==
|
