Apple has been doing 10.x for a while now. Most FOSS stuff (well, at least the stuff I program for) doesn't change the number before the dot unless there's an API incompatibility. I'm sure there's lots of Microsoft detractors that would just want to say, Windows 7 really is just Vista (and therefore just as bad) because the number has changed so little. Please. While I'm not a Windows user and definitely not an MS fan, arguing the merits of software based on the version number is just silly.

I thought it was more interesting from the change control perspective.

Seems like a no-brainer from an engineering perspective.

- They use 7: It says "7.0" when you look at the version number on the About Windows dialog, which nearly no users look at anyway.

- They use 6.1: All the programs that have a hard-coded check for "6" keep working and you can claim complete application compatibility with Vista.

Windows XP was 5.1 to Windows 2000's 5.0 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows#Timeline_of_r...) yet few would claim that Windows XP was not a significant release.

I agree. But if, as you suggest, it's an "engineering no-brainer" to retain the leading digit even on a major new release, something about the versioning system is broken.

Windows culture is so full of wrong assumptions that any OS change breaks apps. Versioning looks like a very small problem.

winver.exe says Version 6.1 (Build 7000), that's the About Windows dialog.

I'm using the Beta version.

"Following Windows 3.0 was Windows NT which was code versioned as Windows 3.1. Then came Windows 95"

Wait, what about Windows 3.1 (ie the 16-bit one, the upgrade from 3.0)? Did they have two different products that were both Windows version 3.1, or did "Windows 3.1" get a different version number? These people are nuts.

Win 95 wasn't a follow on from NT. There used to be two separate paths for Windows: 95 -> 98 -> 98SE -> ME [end of line], and NT -> 2000 -> XP -> Vista -> 7

What happens when they make Version 7.0?

Windows 7 will be a different piece of software from Windows Version 7.0

It's easy to see how something like this could cost MSFT thousands of man-hours of confusion and disambiguation.