On 2014-10-02, 8:59 AM, CHARLES SCAGLIONE -> TOM WALKER wrote:   
    CS> On 10/1/14 11:27, TOM WALKER wrote:   
      
    >> This form C/NET:   
      
    >> Forget Windows 9. In an unexpected twist, Microsoft will be going   
    >> straight to double digits from Windows 8 as it faces a challenging   
    >> future for its operating system.   
      
    CS> Another article I read said that MS considered 8.1 to be the ninth   
    CS> release and decided instead to go with 10.  After two straight disasters   
    CS> of Windows 8 and 8.1, maybe 10 will turn out OK. I'm still using Windows   
    CS> 7 and of course my faithful Mac OS X.   
      
   We'll probably never really know, but how to count versions is idiosyncratic   
   at best... especially given that from 1993's Win NT (labelled NT 3.1) to   
   2002's WinXP release there were two parallel but only vaguely related streams   
   of Windows releases: Win 3.11/Win95/Win98/Windows Milennium and Win   
   NT3.1/NT3.5/NT4/Win2000 - that's 8 releases right there.   
      
   The suggestion that there were problems using Windows 9 because many   
   applications were coded to check for Windows 9* seem the most realistic to me.   
      
   --- Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunde   
    * Origin: Fidonet Via Newsreader - http://www.easternstar.info (1:123/789.0)