Win 7 still tops

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
  1.    #30

    So have lots of Service Packs and Windows Updates? What if someone needed to do a clean install of their OS, and they didn't have a image available to use, then wouldn't they need to spend hours installing all the Windows Updates and Service Packs again?
      My Computer


  2. Posts : 548
    Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
       #31

    We've always been able to upgrade between Windows operating systems that are chronologically next to each other; for example it's very simple to upgrade from Windows 95 to Windows 98 (or Windows Me!), Windows 2000 to Windows XP, Windows Vista to Windows 7, and so forth.

    However, when you're talking operating systems with a few (if not several) versions between them, like Windows 2000 vs. Windows 7 or Ubuntu 6 vs. Ubuntu 12, it's probably a better idea to just install anew from technical and ease-of-use standpoints.

    A fun thing to consider when talking about this is Windows's internal version number. The numbers increment on a logical version numbering system like so: Windows NT 4.0 is 4.0, Windows 2000 is 5.0 while Windows XP is 5.1, Windows Vista is 6.0 while Windows 7 is 6.1 and Windows 8 is 6.2. As a result, Windows 7 is effectively Windows NT 6.1.
      My Computer


  3. Posts : 4,466
    Windows 10 Education 64 bit
       #32

    bberkey1 said:
    King Arthur said:
    @bberkey1
    Windows 2000, XP, Vista, 7, and 8 are all upgrades building on Windows NT 4.0, which in turn is a flavor of Windows alongside others like Windows 9x which has Windows 98 and ME stemming from Windows 95. Windows 7 is to Ubuntu 12 as Windows Vista is to Ubuntu 11 and so forth; we already have what you describe, just under a different version numbering system.
    I see. Thanks for the info King.

    If this is the current system, then why continue to add flavors to the mix and instead just have one omni-flavor if you will? I know as you said these are all add ins to the NT 4.0, but would it be possible to no longer have to install a new OS, but rather just update from your computer to get the new features that they would have included to a new flavor?

    So if windows 7 was the final OS add on, and MS said "we will just continue to add to this flavor like a giant ball of twine, updating and tweaking through downloads and do away with any more future flavors" That way there would no longer be a need for a separate windows flavor.
    Sounds good in theory but I can see a few pitfalls in that approach. Drivers for hardware would be one big one. Depending on what that last update did or didn't do you may need this driver or that driver. Or a new driver may need to be written. There has to be something that defines what "Windows" you had before the update and what "Windows" you have now so you can get the correct driver. It's going to effect program compatibility too. You can't just call it Windows and keep changing its core files etc. There has to be some kind of mile marker or version number so you know where you're at.
      My Computer


  4. mjf
    Posts : 5,969
    Windows 7x64 Home Premium SP1
       #33

    x BlueRobot said:
    So have lots of Service Packs and Windows Updates? What if someone needed to do a clean install of their OS, and they didn't have a image available to use, then wouldn't they need to spend hours installing all the Windows Updates and Service Packs again?
    I would have thought that a clean install from a Windows SP1 install Disc or ISO would have been manageable. But I would make sure I had an image available except for an install on new hardware.
      My Computer


 
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

  Related Discussions
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22.
Find Us