Posts Tagged ‘Windows Server 9’

One of my personal hobbies that I have the most fun with is keeping up with the future of Windows. Typically, whenever I run across a roadmap or some part in a presentation that makes me feel all warm and tingly, I post it here. Well, putting my nose to the grindstone and digging for Windows 8 information today (since it seems to be popping – up – all – over – recently), I actually ran across a mention of Windows 9. Now, I’m certainly no stranger to running into mentions of future versions of Windows:

November 2007: http://uxevangelist.blogspot.com/2007/11/windows-7-and-windows-8-wealth-of.html
July 2008: http://uxevangelist.blogspot.com/2008/07/windows-8-confirmed.html
August 2008: http://uxevangelist.blogspot.com/2008/08/windows-server-7-and-8-oh-and-9-too-yep.html

(Shameless self-pat-on-the-back there, hehehe)

Aside from that roadmap, the only mention I’ve heard of Windows 9 out of Microsoft was from an interview Mark Russinovich gave last year when he said, “…what are the important things Windows should be addressing in the next five years…and…so, looking further out past Windows 7 into Windows 8, Windows 9…” You can hear it here (@ 2:42). (And though I ran across this myself, Marius Oiaga of Softpedia apparently did a write-up about it back in September 2008, so I want to be fair and mention it)

Well, now I’ve run across a semi-dated presentation given March 11, 2009 by Dave Probert, Architect, Windows Kernel Group. It’s a short ‘n sweet mention, but he lists, “working on Windows 8 and Windows 9, including manycore, services, and core facilities” as his day job. No mention of Windows 7 there, so we can assume these guys must be well on their way developing for Windows 8… well, since March 11, at least.

That oh-so-casual mentioning of Windows 8 and Windows 9 has my noodle turning a bit more than is probably necessary. First, since he mentioned both Windows 8 AND Windows 9, does this mean they’re working on technology that will go into Windows 8 and – thus – into Windows 9, or does it mean they’re working on technologies for BOTH Windows 8 and Windows 9, respectively? If the latter, it makes me question if Windows 9 is going to be the introduction to everything that’s going into Midori or if it’s still going to be NT-based. Likewise, I wonder if Microsoft is going to keep the Windows name when they switch the underlying technology to whatever’s going into Midori – much like they did when dumping 9X and making NT the kernel for both their client and server operating systems – or if Windows will indeed be retired in lieu of a new name (heck, I wonder if THEY even know yet… My brain’s just wandering here, so nevermind me. lol).

Either way, Windows 8 and Windows 9 had might as well leave room for us to assume there to eventually be a Windows 10, 11, 12 et al, but I don’t like to assume these things… especially in light of such a small detail that leaves a lot to be read into (isn’t that part of the fun in all of this, though?). What do you think? Oh, and please can the, “oh, wow, it’s Windows 8; who would’ve ever guessed” comments. If you don’t care, then don’t waste your time and ours by letting us know; because we don’t care that you don’t care. lol.

Lastly, some of you may have missed a conversation back in February where Mark Russinovich set the record straight about the version number of Windows 7 and how they’re going to go forward with versioning. This pretty much sums it up right here:

Mark Russinovich: “And one comment about the version number, the version number change is actually one of the biggest impacts on application compatibility. When we moved to Windows Vista from XP going from a version number of 5.1 to 6, actually breaks lots of apps that check for the major version number. So a lot of people look at the version number and try to read something into it. Like, .1, well that’s now a major upgrade or rev over what we had previously, and actually it’s totally meaningless from that perspective. It’s just simply saying, this is a different version of the OS, and we are actually going to just rev the minor version number so that we don’t break those apps that are checking the major version number. If you follow that logic you can figure out the version number for Windows 8. Right, Mark?”

Mark Minasi: “So version 18 will be 6.1.1.1.1.1…”

Mark Russinovich: “Exactly.”

A little bit of comedy for you at the end there, but at least we can gauge more accurately the meaning of the version number from here forward (although I don’t know if Windows 8 is going to be 6.1.1 or 6.2, lol). Anyway, that’s it for now! More on Windows 8 and Windows 9 when I dig it up!

Resources:

Dave Probert’s Presentation: Download Here (Page 2 is the mention of Windows 8 and Windows 9)
Mark Russinovich’s Conversation: Download Here (Page 6 is where I’m referencing)

-Stephen

First of all, a GINORMOUS “THANK YOU!” to Mary Jo Foley for bringing to my attention and piquing my interest in regards to Microsoft’s recent announcement that Windows 7 Server is (and always has been, apparently) synonymous with Windows Server 2008 R2. If not for her, I probably would’ve simply forgotten about the following information for much longer than I already have. lol. Anyway, thanks, MJ! You da (wo)MAN! =)

First thing’s first: If you haven’t heard, Microsoft managed to thoroughly confuse the crap out of much of the community by dropping one of their infamous ambiguity bombs: Windows Server 2008 R2 (slated for a 2010 release) = Windows 7 Server.

Derrrrr, HUH!?

Allllrighty, then! So, those of us who have been adhering closely to Microsoft’s release cycle up to this point by assuming (comfortably, I might add) Windows Server 2008 R2 would come well-before Windows 7 Server were basically dropped off in the land of “wtfville”. Interesting place, this “wtfville!” What’s there to potentially learn here in “wtfville?” Let’s find out, shall we? Yes, we shall.

For your reference, here is a slide dated November, 2007 that I’ve had for way too long to not have done anything with it by now, but perhaps that’s best since it may provide some sort of clarity to Microsoft’s recent statement. This does make Microsoft’s seemingly odd statement mesh (Full resolution image at the click of a mouse!):

Interesting slides here in “wtfville.” Let’s recap:

Windows Server “7″: 2011
Windows Server “8″: 2013
Windows Server “9″: 2015

DRAMA!

If Windows 7 Server really is Windows Server 2008 R2, then does that roadmap imply the following?

Windows Server “7″ = Windows Server 2008 R2
Windows Server “8″ = Windows Server 2013
Windows Server “9″ = Windows Server 2013 R2

I assume they’re just going to treat every minor and major update for the next 7 years or so not as they have up to this point, but rather in their newly-adorned numerical codename format. The question from there is how does Microsoft then plan on publicly referencing those server releases? By their ambiguous numerical codenames or as is assumed by me above… or better yet, in some kind of top-secret ninja format where one must DIE if they ever found out! (Any takers that Sinofsky would go for the extreme latter if he could? hehehe)

Let’s make this even MORE confusing by tweaking that roadmap to fit their latest projected year of release for Windows 7 Server (aka Windows Server 2008 R2, mind you) in the following January 2008 server roadmap (Confucious say: “Clicky-clicky for full resolution image.” Long Zheng say: “I don’t talk like that, Stephen. Prepare to die, Stephen.”):

Windows Server “7″: 2010
Windows Server “8″: 2012
Windows Server “9″: 2014

Then, we would have:

Windows Server “7″ = Windows Server 2008 R2
Windows Server “8″ = Windows Server 2012
Windows Server “9″ = Windows Server 2014 R2

Actually, let’s get even MORE wacky in “wtfville” by referencing the following slide out of a February 2008 presentation which tentatively places Windows Server 2008 R2 in a 2009 release slot (You know what to do for a full resolution image… I hope):

Hmm, “Windows 2012 Server” DOES have a nice ring to it, now that I think about it! Anyway, Microsoft’s release cycle of 2 years between minor releases and 4 years between major releases still seems to apply regardless of which slide we reference above. Don’t forget that the exact date of release may fall on what appears to be the 1st, 3rd or even 5th year due to a number of factors, such as whether they go by the calendar year, their fiscal year, etc. Basically, what I’m taking away from this is that Microsoft has decided to go with a numerically sequential codename standard. Man, if Microsoft was superstitious, imagine the confusion and mass chaos to ensue when they got to Windows 2013 Server or Windows Server “13″! …oh yeah, I forgot… they ARE superstitious. *cough, cough* OFFICE 14 *cough, cough*

Well, “wtfville,” it’s been real and it’s been fun but it hasn’t been real fun, if you know what I mean! And now, let’s see what MJ’s take on all of this is. GO!

-Steve-O

PS – Yes, I realize I used “Windows Server ’7′” and “Windows 7 Server” interchangeably, but so does Microsoft, so, PUH! =)

Oh, and Rafael Rivera Jr. say:

UPDATE: Supposedly, this really was all just a matter of Windows 7 Server being the internal codename for what will be Windows Server 2008 R2 but MJ doesn’t buy it.