Windows 9 could reach RTM as early as October

WZor, a well-known source for Microsoft software leaks, has tweeted in response to earlier speculation regarding the launch of Windows 9, saying that the development of the operating system could reach the release to manufacturing (RTM) stage by 21 October 2014.

It was reported recently that Microsoft is planning to release Windows 9 by April 2015 with 3 milestone builds before hitting RTM. However, the new piece of information from WZor, completely invalidates the earlier leaked roadmap.

Windows 9 is expected to advance the Modern UI further as "Metro 2.0," to be more mature and usable. Although we have heard that Microsoft won't be making pre-alpha builds available to developers at the upcoming BUILD 2014 in April, we can expect to hear more about the future operating system directly from the company.

Source: WZor on Twitter

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Lumia Black update begins rollout to Nokia Lumia 625

Next Story

LG's curved G Flex handset heads to Europe next month

115 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

@WZorNET tweeted 10 minutes ago...
NEW! Win 8.1 2014 Update Build Leak
6.3.9600.16596.WINBLUES14_GDR_LEAN.140114-0237
screenshot's soon and may by possible ISO public leaks!

My uncle's dad knows a bloke who's married to a girl who met a guy in a bar who's best mate reckons Windows 9 is already done.

Well my best friend knows a girl who's dad has a sister who's husband's brother has a daughter who can talk to monkey's. The monkey told her that Windows 9 is in the very early stages.

dangel777 said,
My uncle's dad knows a bloke who's married to a girl who met a guy in a bar who's best mate reckons Windows 9 is already done.

Dark Helmet: Lonestar there is something I need to tell you? I am your brothers friends sisters cousins friends exroomate! So what does that make us? NOTHING!

dangel777 said,
My uncle's dad knows a bloke who's married to a girl who met a guy in a bar who's best mate reckons Windows 9 is already done.

What a coincidence, your dad's, friend's, girlfriend must have met my sister in-law's, cousin's, friend that works at that bar.

Small world.

Now there are 3 things I do not believe on this rumors about Windows 9s dates.

- 1 rumor suggests that works on Windowsw 9 aren't even started yet until somewhere shortly before Build. I doubt it (see older rumor).
- It says that it will RTM in October, the launch date is somewhere in April, according to rumors, but that's a timeframe of half a year, isn't going to happen. Then the RTM date is wrong and will be somewhere in February, or the launch date is wrong, en will be somewhere in January, or both.
- No preview build released at Build sounds kind of odd to me. Both Build 2011 and 2013 where used to release a preview build of Windows, while the 2012 edition focused on the RTM of Windows 8. What other reason would Microsoft have to put Build so early on schedule? Windows 8.1 Update 1? I doubt it, the update is to small to spend a full conference on it. Windows Phone 8.1? Might be, but Build has mostly focused on Windows, not Windows Phone. It can still be WP8.1, but that doesn't out the chance on a Windows 9 Beta.

Studio384 said,
Now there are 3 things I do not believe on this rumors about Windows 9s dates.

- 1 rumor suggests that works on Windowsw 9 aren't even started yet until somewhere shortly before Build. I doubt it (see older rumor).
- It says that it will RTM in October, the launch date is somewhere in April, according to rumors, but that's a timeframe of half a year, isn't going to happen. Then the RTM date is wrong and will be somewhere in February, or the launch date is wrong, en will be somewhere in January, or both.
- No preview build released at Build sounds kind of odd to me. Both Build 2011 and 2013 where used to release a preview build of Windows, while the 2012 edition focused on the RTM of Windows 8. What other reason would Microsoft have to put Build so early on schedule? Windows 8.1 Update 1? I doubt it, the update is to small to spend a full conference on it. Windows Phone 8.1? Might be, but Build has mostly focused on Windows, not Windows Phone. It can still be WP8.1, but that doesn't out the chance on a Windows 9 Beta.

I fully expect Build will be about Windows Phone 8.1, and the updates coming in Win8 Update 1 that help bridge the platforms. There are also a few other platform-related announcements, I hear. Oh, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Xbox One there too, but haven't heard anything specific about that.

Much of the Windows team has been working on Update 1 and general planning for the next year. But they're also going through a major re-org. That slows things down. For most intents and purposes, I'm sure work on 9/8.2/Threshold/whatever is just barely starting. I bet the PM and design teams are just starting to ramp up their planning efforts. Coding in earnest comes later.

The April / Spring 2014 date makes sense as it would mean aligning with the Phone release schedule. Things can change (especially with leadership still in flux), but I'm betting someone pulled this October rumor out of their ass.

Brandon Live said,

The April / Spring 2014 date makes sense as it would mean aligning with the Phone release schedule.

April / Spring 2015, right?

WP8.1 and Win8.1 Update 1 at BUILD 2014, and WP9 and Win9 at BUILD 2015.

If they price it similar to Apple's scheme (just thinking about how often they push out updates), hopefully this will be a $29 thing. I'd be Ok with that.

Exciting! :-)

I absolutely love Windows 8.1, but Windows 9 will shut the haters up (just as Windows 7 did for Vista).

j2006 said,
Exciting! :-)

I absolutely love Windows 8.1, but Windows 9 will shut the haters up (just as Windows 7 did for Vista).

People don't hate Windows 8, People hate Windows 8 Modern UI.

j2006 said,
Exciting! :-)

I absolutely love Windows 8.1, but Windows 9 will shut the haters up (just as Windows 7 did for Vista).

It won't. Many will still be running XP when this comes out next year sadly. There is a large aging demographic who does not handle change well and many are on fixed incomes.

I find it strange they whine about Windows 7 because menus are gone and refuse to accept the ribbon. Not all but most of Windows 8 haters fit this camp. Once the mind has aged it makes learning all the more difficult and a negative experience filled with OCD of it was fine where it was before??!

But we are entering an era of fast enough so I doubt even if this new version of Windows is the best thing EVER many will just shrug their shoulders and not care. What they have works. The 1990s were a very special time in history economic and computer wise.

sinetheo said,

It won't. Many will still be running XP when this comes out next year sadly. There is a large aging demographic who does not handle change well and many are on fixed incomes.

I find it strange they whine about Windows 7 because menus are gone and refuse to accept the ribbon. Not all but most of Windows 8 haters fit this camp. Once the mind has aged it makes learning all the more difficult and a negative experience filled with OCD of it was fine where it was before??!

But we are entering an era of fast enough so I doubt even if this new version of Windows is the best thing EVER many will just shrug their shoulders and not care. What they have works. The 1990s were a very special time in history economic and computer wise.

You're never too old to learn new things. That's just plain laziness.

sinetheo said,
It has to be out at build. MS needs 6 months of testing and feedback with all releases. Windows 7 and 8 had this

With the way they are managing NT, they don't this much 'end user' testing anymore.

Starting with XP SP2 and expanding created/invented new internal testing centers and new automated server based testing technologies. This expanded considerably with Vista/Win7/Win8.

If you look at Windows 8.1 it was only in the hands of users for a 2-3 months before it was RTM'd, and it was a considerable update, especially when you consider there are more versions to manage, supporting ARM, etc.

sinetheo said,
It has to be out at build. MS needs 6 months of testing and feedback with all releases. Windows 7 and 8 had this

Could be a big surprise at BUILD. A sudden, unexpected Windows 9 Dev Preview and unexpectedly soon RTM date of only 6 months later would be sure to create a stir. Also release WP8.1 and Win8.1 Update 1 with shared app store goodness.

Mobius Enigma said,

With the way they are managing NT, they don't this much 'end user' testing anymore.

Starting with XP SP2 and expanding created/invented new internal testing centers and new automated server based testing technologies. This expanded considerably with Vista/Win7/Win8.

If you look at Windows 8.1 it was only in the hands of users for a 2-3 months before it was RTM'd, and it was a considerable update, especially when you consider there are more versions to manage, supporting ARM, etc.

After W7 reached RTM Sinofsky, so pathologically averse to criticism, destroyed the MS Beta program replacing it with "metrics" and "telemetries" etc., etc.
Another smart move by the guy with a Napoleon complex.....

Since business moved to 7 after waiting until its half lifed crying, and screaming all the way like a kid not wanting to leave the park with XP, a very short 3 years are left before its start and over again. This will be the next OS.

Developers need to certify apps or else we will have a repeat of win7 2010 where no apps were certified by the ISVs to be win 7 ready.

Fritzly said,

After W7 reached RTM Sinofsky, so pathologically averse to criticism, destroyed the MS Beta program replacing it with "metrics" and "telemetries" etc., etc.
Another smart move by the guy with a Napoleon complex.....

Uhh, this is just wrong in every way.

First off, Win7 had more beta testing on it than any prior release. Hell, the self-host efforts at Microsoft constitute far more real-world testing these days than the technical betas of old. Never mind that there are still private beta programs (i.e. TAP). You just don't know about them as they're smaller and managed more closely/privately than before. There are also far more public "preview" releases than pre-Win7.

If Steven didn't want feedback he wouldn't have been so aggressive about blogging so many details and responding to them either personally or with the help of engineers and designers from the team.

Feedback is just one element in designing a great product, though. Customers often don't know what they want until they see it, or often can't see the whole picture until more of the pieces come together. Plus, the vast majority of feedback is anticipated ahead of time. That doesn't make it less valuable, but it's unlikely you're going to suggest something the team hasn't already considered (and may or may not already be planning to do).

First of all check what I said : after W7: second I am very well aware of TAP; thirdly you know very well the differences between a "Private Beta" and " Public preview".
Finally the results of this " We know better than our customers what they want" attitude are quite evident...

Brandon Live said,

Uhh, this is just wrong in every way.

First off, Win7 had more beta testing on it than any prior release. Hell, the self-host efforts at Microsoft constitute far more real-world testing these days than the technical betas of old. Never mind that there are still private beta programs (i.e. TAP). You just don't know about them as they're smaller and managed more closely/privately than before. There are also far more public "preview" releases than pre-Win7.

If Steven didn't want feedback he wouldn't have been so aggressive about blogging so many details and responding to them either personally or with the help of engineers and designers from the team.

Feedback is just one element in designing a great product, though. Customers often don't know what they want until they see it, or often can't see the whole picture until more of the pieces come together. Plus, the vast majority of feedback is anticipated ahead of time. That doesn't make it less valuable, but it's unlikely you're going to suggest something the team hasn't already considered (and may or may not already be planning to do).

Although I agree with your assessment overall, it is true that Sinofsky killed off the more technical beta releases and feedback.

I think there is still some need for an initial and higher level technical beta group outside of Microsoft.

I'm all for an accelerated development process but given how little information has been revealed to the public so far, and given the lack of leadership at Microsoft with the search for a new CEO, I don't have much confidence in this being accurate. For that to be the case I'd expect to see a Windows 9 blog launched within a month or two, as was the case with Windows 8.

Still, I hope it's true.

This I agree with. For a supposedly futuristic operating system like Windows 8 to have old icons, is nauseating. This is one reason the "Modern UI" looks like a theme put together by an amateur on DeviantArt.

JHBrown said,
This I agree with. For a supposedly futuristic operating system like Windows 8 to have old icons, is nauseating. This is one reason the "Modern UI" looks like a theme put together by an amateur on DeviantArt.

I agree about the older 8bit color icons, but sadly some of them have to remain and the software in the OS referencing them hasn't been updated as it should.

As for the Modern UI impressions, go look up Modernism. Notice the cycles and philosophy, we are in a new digital cycle of Modernism that should have been expected. It isn't just Microsoft that is doing it, although they kicked it off.

we'll see what they say at build, but windows 9 is similar to how windows 7 fixed perception problems without actually changing much so I was surprised 2015 was talked about. All they are adding are things which 3rd party tools have hacked away at (quasy classic start menu and floating store apps). Given this mod should be even easier if you are Microsoft and have source code, I don't see why it would take longer. Windows 8 already did the footprint reduction and prower management which improved the bloated windows 7 (sorry fans, windows 7 is a pig with lipstick).

2015 should be windows 10 or 9.1 if you go by the yearly cycle the client team wants to keep up.

neonspark said,
Windows 8 already did the footprint reduction and prower management which improved the bloated windows 7 (sorry fans, windows 7 is a pig with lipstick).

Hmm, it's strange that my Windows 7 system runs just as fast and in many cases, faster than the Windows 8 systems I've used with similar specs. In boot time, you got me there, but I really don't care about about time. Pig with lipstick? SMH!

Much of Windows 8 perceived performance improvements have to do with not truly booting but rather using some hibernate hybrid to appear faster.

Windows is turning into macosx where the differences between releases is tiny. Go back 10 years and then you will see major differences

Windows 9 is a major one. After this I expect small updates.

I have an ssd on my win 7 box so the tiny differences certainly are not noticeable. I may or may not get Windows 9 as what I have works. It will depend on economics which is why old XP boxen are still kicking. When your pay is cut to 12/hr aka 25,000 a year the PC is the last thing your tiny budget goes too. Glad I make more now but still many

JHBrown said,
Hmm, it's strange that my Windows 7 system runs just as fast and in many cases, faster than the Windows 8 systems I've used with similar specs. In boot time, you got me there, but I really don't care about about time. Pig with lipstick? SMH!

Really? I find quite the opposite - MS' focus on footprint, power saving/efficiency have made it quicker than 7 for me on any machine I've tested it on. It's also more robust too (by design) which isn't a bad thing. Whilst the UI is contentious the core OS is definitely much improved - albeit a 'sum of it's parts' thing rather than single feature.

sinetheo said,
Much of Windows 8 perceived performance improvements have to do with not truly booting but rather using some hibernate hybrid to appear faster.

It's nothing to do with appearance - it is faster by design. If for some odd reason you feel that 'true boots' are only where the whole kernel space is completely reinitialised pointlessly every time you power on then it's beyond me Hibernating the kernel was a darn good idea.. I think the only people disagreeing with that were the Creative driver team

The only negative is it's too blinking fast to interrupt - something they're all too aware of and that's why they ensure the RE loads in the event of boot failure. Still makes me nervous though (and hence always keep some recovery media at hand..).

JHBrown said,
Hmm, it's strange that my Windows 7 system runs just as fast and in many cases, faster than the Windows 8 systems I've used with similar specs. In boot time, you got me there, but I really don't care about about time. Pig with lipstick? SMH!

footprint reduction' are key words in the OP.

Windows 8 can run on a lower amount of RAM than Windows 7. It has a new 'low RAM priority' mode.

This is less important with actual RAM, even though it can run well with 256mb of RAM.

However, it does mean it can continue to run well with a lot of RAM consumed by other applications. (This isn't even taking into account the WinRT API set with active suspending, etc.)

Windows 8 also runs 'lighter', consumes less CPU cycles for the OS, and executes CPU cycles faster.

This means Windows 8 has better battery times, less more room for Applications to use the CPU and executes Application code faster.

A good anecdotal example is take a notebook that the CPU never could get cool enough on XP/7 to turn the fans off, and install Windows 8 on it, and notice the fan not only turns off, but runs far less and the system has a lower CPU temperature.


The reason this much work was done on Windows 8, is because of the focus on mobile computing. Getting Win8 to run well on ARM devices also extends to non-ARM as the tighter code pays off.

sinetheo said,
Much of Windows 8 perceived performance improvements have to do with not truly booting but rather using some hibernate hybrid to appear faster.

Windows is turning into macosx where the differences between releases is tiny. Go back 10 years and then you will see major differences

Windows 9 is a major one. After this I expect small updates.

I have an ssd on my win 7 box so the tiny differences certainly are not noticeable. I may or may not get Windows 9 as what I have works. It will depend on economics which is why old XP boxen are still kicking. When your pay is cut to 12/hr aka 25,000 a year the PC is the last thing your tiny budget goes too. Glad I make more now but still many

...but it isn't just in the hybrid boot. In a non-hybrid boot, Windows 8 is also faster.

In raw computing Windows 8, uses less CPU resources, leaves more room for Software and executes Software faster. It also uses less RAM, has new RAM priority management modes that can speed up software.

These are things designed into NT kernel and not just anecdotal or conceptual changes, but very technical and measurable differences. Microsoft put a lot of work to ensure Windows 8 runs well on low end ARM processors, and these optimizations are in the x86/x64 code bases as well.


Look at numbers from any review, even take this one that was done before optimized GPU drivers were available.
http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8...-benchmarked_p2-7000002671/

If you notice any 'gaming' comparisons in 2013 after GPU drivers got even more optimized, the performance jump is anywhere from 5-15% faster on Windows 8.


It really isn't just people 'wanting' to believe Windows 8 is faster.

Really not too excited about the increased speed of software development these days from a number of vendors. I wouldn't mind if it wasn't that the only reason they do it is to sell new versions to customers, rather than maintain existing versions. It's extremely inconvenient to keep having to go through major upgrade cycles rather than gentler incremental updates.

And I don't just mean it for Windows, but other vendors too - VMware are a total nightmare and seem to be getting worse!

Ya it seems like when ever I upgrade to a new version of Vmware the next week, another new version comes out which I can usually get a free upgrade too, but then it seems like the week after that another new version comes out.

If nothing else, the choice of UI to use has to be there--one UI for tablet and other touch-centric devices and one UI for mouse/keyboard centric devices; selectable on initial install. (The unused code can just remain on the DVD reducing code bloat on the computer.)

TsarNikky said,
...

Just no. You always spout this.

I'll agree with you if you change the options list to:
UI for touch.
UI for keyboard and mouse
Both

I don't like limiting my interactions
Consistency goes a long way across devices.

Dot Matrix said,
If that's the case, then not much will be changed from Win8.1.
I agree. From now on, I just expect "minor" feature updates to Windows. Microsoft obviously laid out the path for the next few years with Windows 8.

One could compare the Win 8 to 9 transition like OS X 10.8 to 10.9, but nothing like the upgrade from Mac OS 9 to OS X, or even Vista to 7. I don't think there ever will be such major upgrades in the industry again (but do believe Microsoft have a web-based OS as part of their plans for the future - I wouldn't be surprised if in 20 years we're all using thin clients connected to a remote server via a 1GB/s fiber internet connection).

I'm glad I grew up during the software revolution (which is still in progress) - most kids today would have no idea what an accomplishment modern OSs are (and not just thanks to Microsoft (who did have a large part to play), but other companies such as NeXT, especially - proof can be seen on YouTube through old company video).

68k said,
I wouldn't be surprised if in 20 years we're all using thin clients connected to a remote server via a 1GB/s fiber internet connection).

In 20 years, I want to interface like in the matrix.
No hole's barred, jack that thing in head already!

68k said,
I agree. From now on, I just expect "minor" feature updates to Windows. Microsoft obviously laid out the path for the next few years with Windows 8.

One could compare the Win 8 to 9 transition like OS X 10.8 to 10.9, but nothing like the upgrade from Mac OS 9 to OS X, or even Vista to 7. I don't think there ever will be such major upgrades in the industry again (but do believe Microsoft have a web-based OS as part of their plans for the future - I wouldn't be surprised if in 20 years we're all using thin clients connected to a remote server via a 1GB/s fiber internet connection).

I'm glad I grew up during the software revolution (which is still in progress) - most kids today would have no idea what an accomplishment modern OSs are (and not just thanks to Microsoft (who did have a large part to play), but other companies such as NeXT, especially - proof can be seen on YouTube through old company video).

I assume you mean XP to Vista, not Vista to 7. (Vista to 7 was one of the smallest major version updates in Windows NT history.)

As for the future, latency will continue to be an issue. Microsoft does have a online OS model; however, they don't want to leave users at the mercy of bandwidth and waste local CPU/GPU resources if it is not necessary.

Microsoft' online model started a long time ago, when they first showcased HTML Word documents and online editing over 15 years ago. (Sun and IBM killed some of this with their W3C complaints, but SharePoint and other pieces survived.)

With low power, powerful CPU/GPU technology available, using it only for video streaming or rendering is a waste. Even Chromebooks are a waste of a lot of local processing. (Having i3/i5 processors in Chromebooks is currently ridiculous.)

Ideally, having the best of both worlds, access to extra processing/information when you have connectivity, and the ability to work well offline and augment both experiences with local processing.

(Windows 8.1 is at the beginning of making both online/offline worlds work transparently for users. With MS Accounts, SkyDrive, etc it is breaking users into the model slowly.)

You all should have gone to Windows 7 like the 53 contracting companies I deal with at work. Going to Windows 8 is not a safe bet because it will change from all of the backlash since its release.

JHBrown said,
You all should have gone to Windows 7 like the 53 contracting companies I deal with at work. Going to Windows 8 is not a safe bet because it will change from all of the backlash since its release.

Um, it's not changing that much.

JHBrown said,
You all should have gone to Windows 7 like the 53 contracting companies I deal with at work. Going to Windows 8 is not a safe bet because it will change from all of the backlash since its release.

That's completely absurd logic. Is the change in 8.1 from windows 8 or hell even 7 desktop environment, where 99% of work is done in enterprise, really that great that it'll break workflow or compatibility of software used in organizations?

JHBrown said,
You all should have gone to Windows 7 like the 53 contracting companies I deal with at work. Going to Windows 8 is not a safe bet because it will change from all of the backlash since its release.

there's allot of FUD in that statement!

amigaman said,

there's allot of FUD in that statement!

Retraining and help desk calls are expensive. The fact that corps are now migrating to a 5 year old OS and you know will scream bloody murder in 2 years when it will be time to EOL again shows the disconnect with Windows 8.

If you worked with these users you would see how they hate change and need hand holding. My post where some customers are stocking up XP machines to 55 year olds thinking IE 8 best browser ever as only it has bookmarks. If its not in a menu its not there.

Now image +1200 of these users calling you and DEMANDING to get rid of this cell phone right NOW!!!! While you have more important things to do?

Call it fud for the luddites holding back progress all you want. But we have work to do in the office and metrics to meet by the MBAs up top. Something outdated, simple, Manageable, just works, hmm sounds alot like XP. Which is why that OS won't go away. The over 40 crowd thinks Win 7 is too hard as well and some have requested XP back. SIGH

sinetheo said,

Retraining and help desk calls are expensive. The fact that corps are now migrating to a 5 year old OS and you know will scream bloody murder in 2 years when it will be time to EOL again shows the disconnect with Windows 8.

If you worked with these users you would see how they hate change and need hand holding. My post where some customers are stocking up XP machines to 55 year olds thinking IE 8 best browser ever as only it has bookmarks. If its not in a menu its not there.

Now image +1200 of these users calling you and DEMANDING to get rid of this cell phone right NOW!!!! While you have more important things to do?

Call it fud for the luddites holding back progress all you want. But we have work to do in the office and metrics to meet by the MBAs up top. Something outdated, simple, Manageable, just works, hmm sounds alot like XP. Which is why that OS won't go away. The over 40 crowd thinks Win 7 is too hard as well and some have requested XP back. SIGH

The over 40 crowd needs to deal. They're the ones who should be used to things changing. God knows how much things have already changed since they've been using computers. Sorry, but we don't use menus, terminals, or command lines anymore. Computing has moved on, and is once more advancing towards mobile use. This is how things work. You move on, or you "die" off.

Edited by Dot Matrix, Jan 21 2014, 5:33pm :

I hope they are doing this, and should forget about the Windows 8.1 update 1, unless its a service pack. The focus should be on making Windows 9 the next Windows 7/XP in regards to sales and user experience.

Anarkii said,
I hope they are doing this, and should forget about the Windows 8.1 update 1, unless its a service pack. The focus should be on making Windows 9 the next Windows 7/XP in regards to sales and user experience.

Update 1 is an important update, not just a service pack because it's said to bring core winrt changes that will match better with WP8.1. To skip it wouldn't help bring Windows 9 out quicker, the changes need to happen regardless.

JHBrown said,
Nope! Start Menu CB Edition(come back).

In 2007 users hated the new Start Menu in Vista, and now they act like it is most brilliant thing ever added to an OS. Funny, uh?

When Windows 11 hits, people will be installing the Windows 8.1 Start Screen, as it was the best thing 'ever'.

Anarkii said,
I hope they are doing this, and should forget about the Windows 8.1 update 1, unless its a service pack. The focus should be on making Windows 9 the next Windows 7/XP in regards to sales and user experience.

Development of one does not preclude or delay development of the other.

Microsoft has plenty of developers that can be assigned to the 8.1 updates, while the main Windows team developers work on 9.

They have done this for 20+ years, with a smaller team taking on the role of ancillary work, while key teams move on to build the next major version. Often with key teams moving on to the next version before the RTM of the current version.

Microsoft has developers that are working on and rolling out Windows XP updates, this didn't stop them from releasing Vista or 7 or 8.

says who? 8.1 really has some gaps that have stayed unresolved since beta stage. if this means better compability and gaps filled i'm in. else no, thank you

They will be combining Windows Phone abnd Windows RT to make a Phone/Phablet/Tablet OS on one side and the Windows Pro on the desktops/laptops. Unification costs time probably..

Phones are a bit different. A 2012 WP7 phone (Lumia 900) can't use WP8 for example, so it makes sense for a slower major phone OS cycle.

I think you have to put a little faith in Joe here. I think they really did a lot of under the hood improvements. The system is still in an early stage

subcld said,
so we know they are extremely fast why are they slowing down wp development

While it sounds like a minor update looking at the version number Windows Phone 8.1 is said to be a big update, they could've called it 9.0 I bet, or at least 8.5. I also think that they had to work out the upcoming changes to the APIs coming with update 1 for Windows 8.1 which will bring the two OSs closer at the API level. This all adds to the delay I bet, but all WP8 devices will get the update so no worries.

Steven P. said,
Phones are a bit different. A 2012 WP7 phone (Lumia 900) can't use WP8 for example, so it makes sense for a slower major phone OS cycle.

but that example ignores the fact that wp7x used a different kernel than windows, and now it uses the same, along with wp8 requiring a tpm chip. Now that wp uses the same kernel along with all 8x hardware having a tpm it can have major version bumps and upgrades can happen.

subcld said,
so we know they are extremely fast why are they slowing down wp development

ii don't think wp dev has slowed, although it may seem it has from a user perspective. One of the objectives of the 8 platform was unification of os's, which was clearly evident when ms decided to "reengineer" the nt kernel and apply it to all os's. Merging os requires allot of under the bonnet work, or pluming if you like, to ensure that all os's function in an integrated and converged manner. So from a different perspective wp cannot be developed in isolation and must consider potential impacts on server, desktop and console os's. I hope that makes sense

subcld said,
so we know they are extremely fast why are they slowing down wp development

Where is WP development slowing down? 8.1 is not far off, and WP9 and Win9 should release at the same time.

The biggest gain will be additional layering of WP so that updates can be released without a full OS update, which is also coming.

Same. As far as i know MS doesn't even start development on Win 9 until the coming Win 8.1 update is finished around April. So that will mean they would only be working on Win 9 for just a few months, which is ridiculous. So i'm sure this all ****.

Uhm, they've been developing Windows 9 for a while now. Once Windows 8 went RTM, the (old) Windows Service Pack team(s) took over and worked on 8.1.

NoClipMode said,
Same. As far as i know MS doesn't even start development on Win 9 until the coming Win 8.1 update is finished around April. So that will mean they would only be working on Win 9 for just a few months, which is ridiculous. So i'm sure this all ****.

That's not how it works. MS fork off code branches and this let's different teams not only work on different versions but also allows features to be spun off and reintegrated into the main build when ready. Typically they would get to a feature complete state on Windows some time before release and would already off forked off for the next major release. Bugfixing and tidying up can be spun off to a non-core team of engineers just like post release service pack/hotfix issues can. It also gives you the ability to merge in big feature changes (or drop them out) at will.
All this is standard for large scale development and is even more important if you're trying to bring things to market ever quicker (and MS are).

NoClipMode said,
Same. As far as i know MS doesn't even start development on Win 9 until the coming Win 8.1 update is finished around April. So that will mean they would only be working on Win 9 for just a few months, which is ridiculous. So i'm sure this all ****.

8.1 was released in October ...

dangel777 said,

That's not how it works. MS fork off code branches and this let's different teams not only work on different versions but also allows features to be spun off and reintegrated into the main build when ready. Typically they would get to a feature complete state on Windows some time before release and would already off forked off for the next major release. Bugfixing and tidying up can be spun off to a non-core team of engineers just like post release service pack/hotfix issues can. It also gives you the ability to merge in big feature changes (or drop them out) at will.
All this is standard for large scale development and is even more important if you're trying to bring things to market ever quicker (and MS are).


This is true and is part of agile dev which allows for rapid release cycles (8, 8.1) which have clear advantages over classic waterfall dev (xp, vista, 7) which i guess most people are familiar with.

NoClipMode said,
Same. As far as i know MS doesn't even start development on Win 9 until the coming Win 8.1 update is finished around April. So that will mean they would only be working on Win 9 for just a few months, which is ridiculous. So i'm sure this all ****.

Whether this rumor is BS or not is debatable.

Windows 8.1 RTM'd several months before it was released. As dangel777 notes, development on NT isn't a sequential process. This is one reason it was important for Microsoft to properly re-layer NT in the MinWin work so that a branch can be pulled for the next version and various trunk changes can still be rolled in as needed.

Keeping this in mind, Windows 9 has probably been in development at Microsoft for at least a year now, even if the release date doesn't happen until late 2015.

For example:
Win2k development started in 1996, before NT 4.0 was released. An early beta of Win2k was released to select testers in 1997, and the original scheduled ship date was set for 1999, which was met.

Shadowzz said,
Uhm, they've been developing Windows 9 for a while now. Once Windows 8 went RTM, the (old) Windows Service Pack team(s) took over and worked on 8.1.

There is no "Windows Service Pack team". There is the Windows Sustained Engineering (SE) team who did service packs back in the day (when service packs existed) (with the exception of XPSP2 which it's well documented had all of Windows working on it) and still do monthly security updates. You think they are the ones who developed 8.1??

dangel777 said,

That's not how it works. MS fork off code branches and this let's different teams not only work on different versions but also allows features to be spun off and reintegrated into the main build when ready. Typically they would get to a feature complete state on Windows some time before release and would already off forked off for the next major release. Bugfixing and tidying up can be spun off to a non-core team of engineers just like post release service pack/hotfix issues can. It also gives you the ability to merge in big feature changes (or drop them out) at will.
All this is standard for large scale development and is even more important if you're trying to bring things to market ever quicker (and MS are).

Thats exactly what i used to think, but i recently read somewhere (maybe on Paul Thurrotts site) that MS haven't even started Win 9 yet, and wont until April. What you say makes far more sense though.

NoClipMode said,

Thats exactly what i used to think, but i recently read somewhere (maybe on Paul Thurrotts site) that MS haven't even started Win 9 yet, and wont until April. What you say makes far more sense though.

Paul T. is confused easily. He has good sources; understanding his sources is not something he does well.

The same is true of other 'tech writers, like Mary Jo F. - that started and kept the insane MinWin controversy going even after I witnessed a MS Engineer explain it to her like a 5 year old.


Northgrove said,
A sign that there is urgency for Microsoft in resolving the poor sales of Windows 8.

windows 8 has a stigma like vista did, enough people have voiced their negative opinions about the OS (valid or not) that the negative has overshadowed all else in public perception.
so they need to bump to windows 9 and make a few changes, this will improves sales and give fence sitters a reason to get off the fence.

Northgrove said,
A sign that there is urgency for Microsoft in resolving the poor sales of Windows 8.

They released Windows8 in the midst of a very poor economy and now inflation... This surely has a lot to do with lagging markets that rely on discretionary spending...

Northgrove said,
A sign that there is urgency for Microsoft in resolving the poor sales of Windows 8.

/sigh

BEFORE Windows 8, Microsoft were looking to decrease time between versions of Windows.
But don't let that get in the way of your ideology.

ZipZapRap said,

/sigh

BEFORE Windows 8, Microsoft were looking to decrease time between versions of Windows.
But don't let that get in the way of your ideology.

This may be true, but MS needs to stabilize the current release in a hurry. We're finishing up a 7 rollout before the April XP EOL date. Not too many enterprises are going to roll out 8.x+ in its current, changing state. They're (we included) are also not going to do annual rollouts of major releases. Just not gonna happen.

MorganX said,

This may be true, but MS needs to stabilize the current release in a hurry. We're finishing up a 7 rollout before the April XP EOL date. Not too many enterprises are going to roll out 8.x+ in its current, changing state. They're (we included) are also not going to do annual rollouts of major releases. Just not gonna happen.


we are planning to shadow mictosofts yearly release cycle, and are gearing up to support it as we can see an number of opportunity's to leverage the modern ui as a complement to the productivity desktop environment. I.e the modern ui will be used not only as an app launcher but also as a conduit for business related dashboards for a number of bi and data analytics' projects currently under dev. Our rollout will include a migration to yoga's as a laptop replacement happens to coincide, to get the most benefit from the os.
personally i find 8 a joy to use, although there are some improvements that can be made, but that's the same for all os's.

Northgrove said,
A sign that there is urgency for Microsoft in resolving the poor sales of Windows 8.

Two years between major releases har been the plan since before Win8

Although W8 was released, temporarily, at a much lower price than previous OSes. I bought five copies of it and upgraded two systems that, honestly, I would not upgraded if the OS price was the usual $199 for each one.

Fritzly said,
Although W8 was released, temporarily, at a much lower price than previous OSes. I bought five copies of it and upgraded two systems that, honestly, I would not upgraded if the OS price was the usual $199 for each one.
Same here. I bought 3 licenses for $15 a pop. No way I'd buy one at retail or system builder price.

MorganX said,
Not too many enterprises are going to roll out 8.x+ in its current, changing state.

Can you prove that?
Remember, anecdotes don't back up statements

Because on the flip side, the largest company in Australia is deploying 8 this year. But that's just an anecdote as well.

I don't have to prove it, it's self evident but If I had to yes, I can provide more local governments (US) who ARE NOT going to roll it out until it stabilizes than you can provide who are, minimum 2500 users.

Everything online is an "anectdote" since we're not submitting affidavits. When you read something you don't like, saying "prove" it is quite ridiculous especially when the reality is self evident based solely on the deployment numbers in the enterprise.

I'm not sure if all of Australia upgraded that it would make much of a difference ... but that's just an anecdote. However if all of the US did, it would, another anecdote.

ZipZapRap said,

Can you prove that?
Remember, anecdotes don't back up statements

Because on the flip side, the largest company in Australia is deploying 8 this year. But that's just an anecdote as well.

ok so the whole issue in this thread is large company rollouts, which take time, planning and resources. So the new model of faster rollouts of major versions seems to be getting attention, why so?

Think about it, when a company is ready to upgrade, its ready to upgrade, as a whole. The old way which our minds are stuck in is windows xp - new versions (either long planned rollouts to 7, or rollouts underway to 7 and/or 8), vista was skipped even though by the time sp2 came along it was fine, because of the stigma.

You have to remember companies are people, and not just IT making suggestions or plans, if the big guys at the top end up establishing an opinion towards an OS due to that OS gaining a negative stigma then its most likely not going to happen, hence the long wait for 7.

Now we have 8, and 8.1, but the 8x series will have this stigma and that's that.

so back to large company rollouts and timing of major OS releases. It doesn't matter IMO, because large companies will plan large rollouts based on features and TOS and support life cycle, this is what hurt 8 a lot (major hangfire due to vista's stigma (admittedly not all bad), then Major rollouts of 7 due to it being very good, why upgrade to 8?). If a company sees the benefit of a new runtime or modern apps (I know a few that are, that use dynamics apps and other major LOB tools for enterprise level companies) AND have not just upgraded to 7 AND the cost is worthwhile, they will upgrade.

But these considerations are based on the XP- vista - 7 - 8 releases, and the time between them all. With faster releases we will see less dramatic changes between each version, this will help people adopt more easily (Think of how XP and its lengthy life got people stuck in certain ways of doing things on their computers, I took me ages to tell people that its far easier to hit start and type a few letters).

Faster major updates will mean we all don't have to be ont he same version anymore, with the store available and apps getting better, along with x86 apps working anyway, the updates will be more feature based and for people that want the features NOW that's fine, for big companies its fine also, just skip a few, no one hurts.

duddit2 said,

You have to remember companies are people, and not just IT making suggestions or plans, if the big guys at the top end up establishing an opinion towards an OS due to that OS gaining a negative stigma then its most likely not going to happen, hence the long wait for 7.

so back to large company rollouts and timing of major OS releases. It doesn't matter IMO, because large companies will plan large rollouts based on features and TOS and support life cycle
But these considerations

IME, IT and the CIO decide when to rollout. If what you suggest was true, XP would not have had such a long lifespan. A new runtime or apps should not require a major version upgrade and rollout annually and I doubt very many follow.

There are many more decisions that influence a rollout of a major OS in an enterprise, the least of which is not cost, time, training, and TCO.

Deploying significant updates, .x releases, and major releases are two different things. Only time will tell, but if there is a major release annually, my money is on most enterprises skipping several. There will be major backlash if such rollouts become mandatory or required for significant functionality. If 9 is a transparent update, even though it is a major release, I would reconsider my "opinion." We'll have to see. Just because MS gives it a major release, doesn't mean it is truly much more than a service pack.

MorganX said,

IME, IT and the CIO decide when to rollout. If what you suggest was true, XP would not have had such a long lifespan. A new runtime or apps should not require a major version upgrade and rollout annually and I doubt very many follow.

There are many more decisions that influence a rollout of a major OS in an enterprise, the least of which is not cost, time, training, and TCO.

Deploying significant updates, .x releases, and major releases are two different things. Only time will tell, but if there is a major release annually, my money is on most enterprises skipping several. There will be major backlash if such rollouts become mandatory or required for significant functionality. If 9 is a transparent update, even though it is a major release, I would reconsider my "opinion." We'll have to see. Just because MS gives it a major release, doesn't mean it is truly much more than a service pack.

If there had been earlier new versions of XP, they would have chosen to move forward sooner.

As you also note, by having bigger 'breaks' in versions, companies got forced into updates instead of mixing a progression of updates.

By having more frequent 'non-breaking' updates, it puts the control back into the customers hands. Even with Vista/Win7/Win8 - they can exist and work well mixed in the same organization.

Another note on XP, part of the reason it lasted so long was that it received significant updates as Microsoft reorganized their internal development processes.

SP2 was a major revision in terms of features and security, bigger than 8 to 8.1 even, but everyone forgets this part.

EvilAstroboy said,
This going to be a WIN8 add-on or a whole new OS ?

Major version bump, so it'll be a whole new OS. But you'll probably be able to purchase it via their Windows 8.x store, just like you get Windows 8.1 update.

I'm not too sure about that. With the release of Windows 7, Windows Vista Ultimate edition users didn't even get a discount even after they paid a considerable amount more for the 'extras' that supposed to have been part of the ultimate edition. I won't hold my breath for it.

-adrian- said,
I guess they will offer it as a freee update and just name it differently to make people believe in it again.

I don't think so, if this was 8.2 then maybe it'll be free to 8.x users but this is going to be a major release so I bet they'll offer it for a low price like they did with 8.0 ($15 for digital upgrade $40 or so for the full DVD option).

I think MS is trying to force everyone their services on. This means Outlook, Skype, MS Store. Don't think they really need those 15$ from the Windows 8.1 Users after 1-2 Years

-adrian- said,
I think MS is trying to force everyone their services on. This means Outlook, Skype, MS Store. Don't think they really need those 15$ from the Windows 8.1 Users after 1-2 Years

Maybe but still, at best it could be free for 8.x users only like 8.1 was. They're still in the business of selling software, and if it's a good release I have no issues with paying a small $15 fee like I did when I got 8.0.

sagum said,
I'm not too sure about that. With the release of Windows 7, Windows Vista Ultimate edition users didn't even get a discount even after they paid a considerable amount more for the 'extras' that supposed to have been part of the ultimate edition. I won't hold my breath for it.
Not this nonsense again. People who paid for Windows Vista Ultimate Edition were paying for every single feature that was in all the other editions, all in one package. The extras was a bonus.

If I sign a contract and it includes "Bonuses" I expect to receive them, failure to do it would be considered a breach of the contract.
Not to mention that what you call ed "Bonus" were advertised as "Features and services".

-adrian- said,
I think MS is trying to force everyone their services on. This means Outlook, Skype, MS Store. Don't think they really need those 15$ from the Windows 8.1 Users after 1-2 Years

Still, you can use whatever service you prefer... like on Android, with google (ish).

George P said,

I don't think so, if this was 8.2 then maybe it'll be free to 8.x users but this is going to be a major release so I bet they'll offer it for a low price like they did with 8.0 ($15 for digital upgrade $40 or so for the full DVD option).
Except if it's out by October of this year itself how "major" can it be? This simply sounds like a re-badged Win8.2 with minor Metro UI updates, just to get over the bad press and reputation of Win8.

Romero said,
Except if it's out by October of this year itself how "major" can it be? This simply sounds like a re-badged Win8.2 with minor Metro UI updates, just to get over the bad press and reputation of Win8.

That's a big if at this point. I don't expect it to come out by October personally but like I said in my other post we'll get a good idea of the timetable if they show something at build or just talk about their plans for 9 in less detail. Business wise it'll be better for them to release it in April 2015, that way the OEMs will have time to have new hardware out before the back to school period and all the holidays. If you release it late in the year then you're going to miss out and the hardware makers are slow anyways so there goes most of the holidays to.

MS should have always released new versions in the spring-summer period IMO.

W8 reached RTM status more than two years ago; typically MS starts development of the next OS before that milestone, things like brainstorming sessions etc., therefore there could be plenty of time to deliver a major release. Of course this does not mean they will, just that they could.

I sure hope Win9 is not based on brainstorming sessions they conducted more than two years ago. Let's hope they've learnt from their mistakes and manage to deliver something that will satisfy both desktop and tablet users.