Windows Blue, coming next year?

A new report indicates Microsoft's will release a new version of Windows next year classified as an "update." The update won't be Windows 9, but instead an interim release that is currently known by the codename "Blue," although it may merely be a service pack.

Mary Jo Foley of ZDNet reports that sources have informed her that an update for Windows will be released sometime next year, although Foley is unsure if the update will be a full release or merely a service pack. She also hypothesizes that the update could simply be referred to as a version number, such as Windows 8.1, returning Microsoft to its naming conventions used in the early 1990s.

In the article, Foley notes that Microsoft is believed to be speeding up the rate at which it releases new iterations of its flagship operating system, creating a pace more akin to what Apple's done with its OS X releases. 

Foley's report comes after several Microsoft employees recently updated their résumés and profiles across various social networking sites to state that they're working on Windows 9, indicating that development on the next full Windows operating system is already underway. Reports had indicated that Windows 9 was codenamed "Blue," which Foley's report says is not true.

If Foley's report is accurate, Blue would likely be a service package, as she hypothesizes, given Microsoft's own employees are stating they're working on Windows 9 and a release within a year of Windows 8 would be highly unusual for Microsoft unless it was a much smaller update.

Source: ZDNet

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

EA working with Microsoft to release Windows Phone 8 games

Next Story

From The Forums: Windows 8 "Metro" File Explorer concepts

136 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

What's most likely is that "Blue" will be an update to Windows 8, adding features to and smoothing more of the edges of the Modern UI.

Just seeing the differences between the DP, CP, RP, and RTM, it's obvious that Modern UI is still in it's initial stages of development. Microsoft probably has a much more ambitious platform planned for Modern UI, but learning from the mistakes of Vista, has componentized the development so that the base of the platform was ready for the Windows 8 release timeframe.

Modern UI will likely be matured over the course of Windows 8, priming Windows 9 for a much more immersive iteration of the Modern UI platform.

The article says,
The update won't be Windows 9...

The headline on the front page tile says,
Windows 9 codenamed "blue" to be released next year?

Your own article contradicts itself. lol

well there's a good chance that it would come next year for $40 just like windows 8. and microsoft will convert to the osx style of updating

I can see this happening since Microsoft are going to take on the iPad/Android Pads which get yearly updates. If Microsoft is to compete against them then they cannot update the OS every 3 years, the cycle is too slow.

Ah well at worst sounds like it will be a SP with some features included at best could be a WP 7.5 sort of deal, enhancing windows 8 and modern Ui with some interim improvements that will come into full swing with Win9. Could be a good way to appease those not sold on Modern UI and also glimpse at the direction win9 will take further down this path no doubt.

Since when did Microsoft use codenames for service packs?
I'm fairly confident that Windows Blue is going to be a service pack or otherwise known as an update to Windows 8
I'm also sure it will called Windows 8 Service Pack 1
The only other thing that I'm gathering from this is that it might be a little more than just a service pack.. maybe feature pack if you will.. adding somethings that were not finished or available at release time like an all so important file manager for Metro
I don't think Microsoft would charge people for this kind of update though, they are more interested in pushing security fixes through service packs and charging for something like that would leave many people opting to not update and become insecure which would be bad not only for themselves but for other computers in the chance that they get infected by a security vulnerability that went unpatched.
Alternately, Microsoft may opt to push all their security updates through windows update

Hello,

Perhaps it is something else entirely, maybe related to the Barnes & Noble "NewCo" venture?

Both 'Tacit Blue' and 'Have Blue' (code-names for projects at some aerospace engineering firms) generated some rather unusual results.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

This is exactly what i questioned on the comments for another article a while back. How will Microsoft keep up with the rapid development cycles of Android and iOS? Given that Modern UI uses the extremely simple to customize CSS and HTML front ends I suspect that we will see "service packs" that have a lot of UI features and updates from now on.

Iridium said,
This is exactly what i questioned on the comments for another article a while back. How will Microsoft keep up with the rapid development cycles of Android and iOS? Given that Modern UI uses the extremely simple to customize CSS and HTML front ends I suspect that we will see "service packs" that have a lot of UI features and updates from now on.

yeah like iOS or Android are even remotely close to the level of Windows 8.

Mike Frett said,
Sorry guys but the days of Service Packs are nearing an end. To be replaced by: "Want a service pack? Buy our new OS!.".

It does seem to be headed that way.

Windows NT 4.0 - 6 service packs
Windows 2000 - 4 service packs
Windows XP - 3 service packs (after ten years)
Windows Vista - 2 service packs
Windows 7 - 1 service pack?

TRC said,

It does seem to be headed that way.

Windows NT 4.0 - 6 service packs
Windows 2000 - 4 service packs
Windows XP - 3 service packs (after ten years)
Windows Vista - 2 service packs
Windows 7 - 1 service pack?


7 has not reached EOL. 7 will be the next Win XP.

Henceforth expect a good SP3 by 2017....

Windows Nashville said,
I want Win 7 start menu. Until then, Win Blue can go to hell.

I'm not a fan of metro either, but even I'm getting tired of hearing this. Accept it, adapt, learn to use the start screen. The start menu is never coming back.

shockz said,

I'm not a fan of metro either, but even I'm getting tired of hearing this. Accept it, adapt, learn to use the start screen. The start menu is never coming back.


The issue is a little deeper. The problem is ... whoever tought that switching back and forth two different screens/interfaces is a good idea is simply a moron. This is not a good UI decision, that's it. That's why people want back the Start Menu, because they are annoyed, not because they refuse to adapt to changes for the sake of changes.

Mortis said,

The issue is a little deeper. The problem is ... whoever tought that switching back and forth two different screens/interfaces is a good idea is simply a moron. This is not a good UI decision, that's it. That's why people want back the Start Menu, because they are annoyed, not because they refuse to adapt to changes for the sake of changes.

Windows 8 was rushed to meet a deadline. People think that this dual environment was intentional. It was not. The desktop simply has to many dependency for it to be eliminated on the next release of Windows.

Mortis said,

The issue is a little deeper. The problem is ... whoever tought that switching back and forth two different screens/interfaces is a good idea is simply a moron. This is not a good UI decision, that's it. That's why people want back the Start Menu, because they are annoyed, not because they refuse to adapt to changes for the sake of changes.

Guess I'm a moron, I like the added functionality (see it as added functionality, not as a takeover)

Mary Jo Foley wrote this so take it with a dump truck full of salt.
No doubt in a day or two she will be proven wrong yet again.

ahhell said,
Mary Jo Foley wrote this so take it with a dump truck full of salt.
No doubt in a day or two she will be proven wrong yet again.

What are you referencing here? The Metro renaming mess? That still hasn't been fully finalized or confirmed yet. These things aren't usually a matter of being black-and-white right or wrong.

I honestly don't get how people can acknowledge the painful state of constant bureaucracy within Microsoft and then act indignant and offended when someone's prediction isn't spot on. MJF very well could have been directly quoting executive sources from within Microsoft, just to have the machine toss out that idea and go in a completely different direction.

Businesses do that ALL THE TIME. Don't get butt hurt just because you don't know what a company is going to do months in advance.

freak180 said,
will somebody please think of the icons!!!! lol

Perhaps Windows 8.1 'blue' could bring metro icons to the desktop. I hope it does!

I could totally see them editing the way Modern-UI tiles are arranged or are styled. Kind of like Windows Phone 8 and 7.8. I'm hoping this will be the case.

I've been posting along those lines for a while now.
They have to upgrade their OS more often now to stay on par with Android an iOS.
They can't just let WinRT sit there for 3 years without any upgrades.
So I still think we might see smaller updates (updates to the WinRT framework) every 6 months and maybe larger updates adding functionality to the OS every year from now on?

I would like that very much

Stoffel said,
I've been posting along those lines for a while now.
They have to upgrade their OS more often now to stay on par with Android an iOS.
They can't just let WinRT sit there for 3 years without any upgrades.
So I still think we might see smaller updates (updates to the WinRT framework) every 6 months and maybe larger updates adding functionality to the OS every year from now on?

I would like that very much


The new release cycle is now 2 years, no longer 3 years.

But I'm thinking like you that MS will update the winRT environment and windows RT too) every year, like they did with windows phone.

Nearly yearly releases work for Apple because they can put out a list of unsupported models of their computers. Doing this with Windows (assuming they add features that older computers can't support) would be a support nightmare.

I wonder how many people even upgrade a Windows PC, and how many upgrade twice.

threetonesun said,
Nearly yearly releases work for Apple because they can put out a list of unsupported models of their computers. Doing this with Windows (assuming they add features that older computers can't support) would be a support nightmare.

I wonder how many people even upgrade a Windows PC, and how many upgrade twice.


Yeah, its horrible my Windows 8 install support directional hardware (g-force stuff), GPRS, wifi, touchscreen and more on my desktop! While I don't have any of those

I heard from an MS employee that Microsoft will release a new version of windows every two years.

However, future versions of windows will no longer be supported 10 years (maybe "only" 8 years, which is still huge compared to osx/linux distros).

Anyway windows 9 rtm is not coming next year.

link8506 said,
I heard from an MS employee that Microsoft will release a new version of windows every two years.

However, future versions of windows will no longer be supported 10 years (maybe "only" 8 years, which is still huge compared to osx/linux distros).

Anyway windows 9 rtm is not coming next year.

People aren't buying new computers as often anymore, they have to milk us some way.

TRC said,

People aren't buying new computers as often anymore, they have to milk us some way.


Well aren't you just the most adorable little anti-capitalist ever. *messes your hair*

hypothesizes that the update could merely get a version number, such as Windows 8.1, returning Microsoft to its naming conventions used in the early 1990s.

Just because the Version number will be 8.1 doesn't mean they will call it "Windows 8.1" in the market. They would likely just call it "Windows 8 SP1" or "Windows 8 R2"

xendrome said,

Just because the Version number will be 8.1 doesn't mean they will call it "Windows 8.1" in the market. They would likely just call it "Windows 8 SP1" or "Windows 8 R2"

The version number is 6.2 though.

still1 said,
the big question is will they charge for the update?

If it includes a certain amount of new features, I think they should maybe charge something like $20, like Apple have been doing.

simrat said,

Have they ever charged for an update?

Microsoft is "trying to pull an apple" so you never know. If they do, it'll be cheap

simrat said,

Have they ever charged for an update?


"Microsoft's will release a new version of Windows next year classified as an "update." and MS trying to release update like apple!! Could possible charge for the update!!

ahhell said,

That wasn't an update. Win98SE was a complete rework of Win98.

Didn't they rework it because Windows ME was a such a fail?

simrat said,

Have they ever charged for an update?


There are legal reasons for charging if an update includes significantly new fuctionality/features. That's based on a particular interpration of some stipulation in competition legislation somewhere...and there's precedence, and it's on the tip of my tongue but I just can't grasp where I read it right now. Is that ringing a bell for anyone else? I'll look into it later if not.

Tyler R. said,

Didn't they rework it because Windows ME was a such a fail?


98 SE came out well before Me. I'm not usually the "search is your friend" douchebag, but questions of release dates on major products are five second endeavors.

Joshie said,

98 SE came out well before Me. I'm not usually the "search is your friend" douchebag, but questions of release dates on major products are five second endeavors.

LOL! Sorry about that!

TRC said,

Windows 98 Second Edition says yes.


That's like saying they charged money for Win7. Considering the differences between Win98 and Win98se are as numerous as the differences between Vista and Win7.

Shadowzz said,

That's like saying they charged money for Win7. Considering the differences between Win98 and Win98se are as numerous as the differences between Vista and Win7.

Might be safer to say 98->98SE was like Windows 3.1->Windows for Workgroups 3.11.

98SE was still fundamentally the same UI as 98.

Tyler R. said,

Didn't they rework it because Windows ME was a such a fail?

Windows Me was released in September 2000. 98 SE was May 1999.

Also, keeping in mind Windows 98 SE was released in an era with limited bandwidth. The changes and updates made from 98 to 98 SE are comparable, if not less, than XP to XP SP2/3. Might have made sense back then to sell it as an upgrade, whereas today those updates can come easily via Windows Update.

Problem with using a version number like 8.1 is that "Windows 8" isn't version 8.0, it's version 6.2. So I guess behind the scenes it would be version 6.2.1 or something like that.

falconer2 said,
Problem with using a version number like 8.1 is that "Windows 8" isn't version 8.0, it's version 6.2. So I guess behind the scenes it would be version 6.2.1 or something like that.
I don't think so, I think they're not planning to put a new number between 6.2 and the build number. More an increasion of the buildnummer like 6.2.9300.

And on the other hand, do you know what's the version number of Windows Phone 7.5? Yes, version 7.10.

Studio384 said,
I don't think so, I think they're not planning to put a new number between 6.2 and the build number. More an increasion of the buildnummer like 6.2.9300.

And on the other hand, do you know what's the version number of Windows Phone 7.5? Yes, version 7.10.


Kernel != the whole OS. Those are kernel versions. Know what (kernel) version Windows 2012 is, 6.2. But is Windows 2012 equal to Windows 8? hell no!

Tyler R. said,
Windows 8.5 maybe? (Windows 8 SP 1)

If this is the only release before "Windows 9," I would like that name.

Some people could be working on Blue while others are working on Windows 9. That is what is likely.

I would love to see a yearly release cycle for Windows, similar to what Apple is doing for OS X. That shouldn't prevent Microsoft from refining the "Metro" experience and allowing it to evolve.

Calum said,
Some people could be working on Blue while others are working on Windows 9. That is what is likely.

I would love to see a yearly release cycle for Windows, similar to what Apple is doing for OS X. That shouldn't prevent Microsoft from refining the "Metro" experience and allowing it to evolve.

Maybe Microsoft will make the metro/winRT environment (APIs and features) evolve every year to compete efficiently with android/ios.

But a stand alone version of windows every year would be a bad idea as most businesses would run versions of windows several releases older than the current version. That would make testing apps much more resource consuming for third party developers.

I heard from a reliable source that MS will release new versions of windows every two years, and I'm afraid it is a too short interval for enterprise users.

link8506 said,

I heard from a reliable source that MS will release new versions of windows every two years, and I'm afraid it is a too short interval for enterprise users.

I suppose there's always the Ubuntu solution of having a long-term support version every few releases that enterprises could rely on, while the in-between releases could keep users and OEMs current with new functionality and support for hardware.

Anything to avoid the duality of a consumer edition (other than RT) and business edition.

drazgoosh said,
Could PC operating systems have regular updates from now on? Similar to phone updates once every 6 months.

I like this. Hope so!

drazgoosh said,
Could PC operating systems have regular updates from now on? Similar to phone updates once every 6 months.

This would be a licensing disaster for the corporate world.

drazgoosh said,
Could PC operating systems have regular updates from now on? Similar to phone updates once every 6 months.

never heard of Microsoft Patch Day Tuesdays i take it ?

drazgoosh said,
Could PC operating systems have regular updates from now on? Similar to phone updates once every 6 months.

I would indeed have to say that this would be a rather refreshing strategy for Windows, and is not as far-fetched as you may think. All you need to do is look into the new pricing model that Microsoft are trying to adopt.

If Microsoft are going to start charging $42 (£30 give or take) per version of Windows, and then releasing an update every year rather than their usual schedule of releasing an new operating system every 3 to 4 years, the money would then work out to be about the same income stream that Microsoft was previously getting on the old release model.

Windows is currently the slowest moving operating system when it comes to features and version revision's. Apple's release cycle is about one version every year, and some LINUX distro's follow a six-month revision cycle.

The one thing that Microsoft would have to be careful with is the alienation of their business partners, for it is their slow release cycle combined with their long life support of each operating system version, that makes Windows attractive to corporations for deployment across their IT systems. I think that Microsoft can remedy this by following a similar release schedule to the Ubuntu operating system.

Ubuntu follows a release schedule that consists of releasing a new version every six months, alongside a LTS version with a five year support cycle. Microsoft could adopt a similar strategy where for example, they could sell "Windows 8 LTS" as a long life deployment option for big corporations, Alongside other Windows versions for the general public to consume like "Windows 8.1". Each whole number version of Windows will focus on technology shifts with tools that will be useful for corporations, developers, and consumers. And following that, each .X release will then focus on features that will mainly pull the attention of the consumer, such as little gadgets and tools and slight improvements to the user experience.

If Microsoft are deciding to follow a faster release schedule for their operating system, then I think that the above model would be a perfect strategy for Microsoft to follow. It will not only allow them to compete with Apple and android's fast feature output. It will also allow them to keep businesses happy, by having a robust operating system with lasting support.

Edited by Ad Man Gamer, Aug 14 2012, 12:44pm :

One could say the Windows 8 to be released in a bit will be like a "LTS". I wouldn't expect the core to change in the slightest. That should keep corporate users happy while consumers get point updates for, as you said, user experience improvements.

That is funny. People have been complaining that Windows 8 Modern UI, saying that it looks like Windows 3.1. Now if Microsoft starts using versions again like they did with Windows 3.1 that will add to what people are saying.

BillyJack said,
That is funny. People have been complaining that Windows 8 Modern UI, saying that it looks like Windows 3.1. Now if Microsoft starts using versions again like they did with Windows 3.1 that will add to what people are saying.

I'm going to wait for "Windows 8.1 for Workgroups". I just hope they bring back Reversi.

BillyJack said,
That is funny. People have been complaining that Windows 8 Modern UI, saying that it looks like Windows 1

Fixed it for ya. Windows 8 looks nothing like Windows 3.1...

BillyJack said,
That is funny. People have been complaining that Windows 8 Modern UI, saying that it looks like Windows 3.1. Now if Microsoft starts using versions again like they did with Windows 3.1 that will add to what people are saying.
Don't think so, the version number of Windows 8 is 6.2.

On the other hand, the version number of Windows Phone 7.5 is 7.10.

Studio384 said,
Don't think so, the version number of Windows 8 is 6.2.

On the other hand, the version number of Windows Phone 7.5 is 7.10.

While this is true, you can also just think of it as 6+2=8.

Studio384 said,
Don't think so, the version number of Windows 8 is 6.2.

On the other hand, the version number of Windows Phone 7.5 is 7.10.


6.2 is NT kernel and 7.10 is CE kernel.

ivkos said,
Hope it'll bring the Start menu back.

Stop being dumb. They are more likely to improve on the start screen than anything. I hope they're serious about sending out updates like they do with their phones :3

freak180 said,

Stop being dumb. They are more likely to improve on the start screen than anything. I hope they're serious about sending out updates like they do with their phones :3

so he's "dumb" because he has an opinion? the only "dumb" ones are the people who think everybody has to like w8 in it's current form.

smooth3006 said,

so he's "dumb" because he has an opinion? the only "dumb" ones are the people who think everybody has to like w8 in it's current form.


I think he was referring to the ridiculous notion that MS would remove their new Start screen. That is definitely not going to happen anytime soon. Maybe they'll give people a classic start menu of sorts, but they won't (and shouldn't) remove the new start screen just to appease the population reluctant to change. Hopefully there will be some improvements though.

smooth3006 said,

so he's "dumb" because he has an opinion? the only "dumb" ones are the people who think everybody has to like w8 in it's current form.


They don't have to like it. They don't have to use it. They don't have to post on every windows 8 thread about it.

smooth3006 said,

so he's "dumb" because he has an opinion? the only "dumb" ones are the people who think everybody has to like w8 in it's current form.


He's not dumb for loving the old Start Menu, he's dumb for thinking it'll actually come back...

smooth3006 said,

so he's "dumb" because he has an opinion? the only "dumb" ones are the people who think everybody has to like w8 in it's current form.


Chsoriano is spot is. Thats what I meant. I never said nor imply that he has to like win 8 in its current form.

smooth3006 said,

so he's "dumb" because he has an opinion? the only "dumb" ones are the people who think everybody has to like w8 in it's current form.


Chsoriano is spot is. Thats what I meant. I never said nor imply that he has to like win 8 in its current form. People need to be realistic here

smooth3006 said,

so he's "dumb" because he has an opinion? the only "dumb" ones are the people who think everybody has to like w8 in it's current form.


Chsoriano is spot is. Thats what I meant. I never said nor imply that he has to like win 8 in its current form. People need to be realistic here

Houtei said,

They don't have to like it. They don't have to use it. They don't have to post on every windows 8 thread about it.

Actually we do

Windows 8 sucks lol

Houtei said,

They don't have to like it. They don't have to use it. They don't have to post on every windows 8 thread about it.

Likewise for the pro-Start Menu people . . .

Probably a massive NUI update to go along with Kinect 2 technology. I say this because I find it interesting that TellMe is missing from Windows but it integrated into XBOX and Windows Phone 8.

rojorojo said,
Probably a massive NUI update to go along with Kinect 2 technology. I say this because I find it interesting that TellMe is missing from Windows but it integrated into XBOX and Windows Phone 8.

"Metro" was designed to be NUI friendly from the start and will receive updates to make it more so. There are a lot of great things coming through the pipes from MS research. I wouldn't be shocked MS releases a PC panel with an integrated Kinect sometime late next year utilizing the technology they acquired from Perceptive Pixel.

smooth3006 said,
how about your release a sp2 for w7.

Seriously. It's turned into a process to run windows update on a clean install. Hours depending on connection.

The Dark Knight said,

AutoPatcher is your friend!

AutoPatcher is nice but we shouldn't have to rely on third party programs to do something that Microsoft is more than capable and should be obligated to do.

The Dark Knight said,

AutoPatcher is your friend!

Wow, thought Autopatcher had been discontinued years ago - wish I'd have known this sooner!

The Dark Knight said,
Yes, that is correct. It's high time they release SP2. Nearly 3 years now since Windows 7 came out.

I honestly don't think 7 needs any "servicing".

shockz said,

Seriously. It's turned into a process to run windows update on a clean install. Hours depending on connection.

Ive never had to install any SP's on as a clean install, just either downloaded it or used Windows update . both cases system upgraded correctly.
If you do have an issue with a slow connection, download the ISO or MSI file.

shockz said,

Seriously. It's turned into a process to run windows update on a clean install. Hours depending on connection.

Ive never had to install any SP's on as a clean install, just either downloaded it or used Windows update . both cases system upgraded correctly.
If you do have an issue with a slow connection, download the ISO or MSI file.

smooth3006 said,

xp received 3 service packs and vista received 2. we at least have one more coming.

Don't expects something like XP SP1. A SP2 for windows 7 would be just a compilation of the updates released after SP1, nothing new.

The Dark Knight said,

AutoPatcher is your friend!

AutoPatcher works like crap lately for me, always has an overflow error

TRC said,

AutoPatcher is nice but we shouldn't have to rely on third party programs to do something that Microsoft is more than capable and should be obligated to do.

Except that MS makes a boatload of money by putting in the bare minimum and licensing their APIs to third parties so make better solutions.

neufuse said,

AutoPatcher works like crap lately for me, always has an overflow error

Try wsusoffline updater, never gave me issues.

Mal1 said,

Ive never had to install any SP's on as a clean install, just either downloaded it or used Windows update . both cases system upgraded correctly.
If you do have an issue with a slow connection, download the ISO or MSI file.


Yes, your connection will magically increase in speed if you download the ISO or MSI file.

Mal1 said,

Ive never had to install any SP's on as a clean install, just either downloaded it or used Windows update . both cases system upgraded correctly.
If you do have an issue with a slow connection, download the ISO or MSI file.

Even with SP1 on 7, a clean install takes forever with Windows Update. If not a new service pack, at least come up with a rollup of the past updates not included with 7 SP1.

DClark said,

Yes, your connection will magically increase in speed if you download the ISO or MSI file.

It'll at least save considerable amount of bandwidths if you're updating like say... 10 computers at once?

shockz said,
a rollup of the past updates not included with 7 SP1.

I do believe that is the ideal of a service pack.

SP1 was Feb 2011. Wouldn't be surprised if one comes out post-Windows 8.

Mal1 said,

Ive never had to install any SP's on as a clean install, just either downloaded it or used Windows update . both cases system upgraded correctly.
If you do have an issue with a slow connection, download the ISO or MSI file.

ya uhh do you see the contradiction ? lol

JJ_ said,
I hear SP2 for 7 will remove the start button

I hear the next big update will bring Start Buton an menu back to windows 8

Mal1 said,

Ive never had to install any SP's on as a clean install, just either downloaded it or used Windows update . both cases system upgraded correctly.
If you do have an issue with a slow connection, download the ISO or MSI file.

There are 80+ updates for Windows 7 SP1, so it would definitely be nice to have an SP2 ISO.

smooth3006 said,
how about you release a sp2 for w7.

Exactly... most of the changes added to WIn8 should be pushed into a SP2 for Win7 such as the multi monitor support it got. I don't just want to see updates rolled up I want some enhancements!

It could be an incremental update like Mango for the phones. Not a full point release but something substantial.

pack34 said,
It could be an incremental update like Mango for the phones. Not a full point release but something substantial.

Or may be Microsoft is moving towards yearly updates like Apple and Android.

pack34 said,
It could be an incremental update like Mango for the phones. Not a full point release but something substantial.

So just like Androids and WP7 phones, your PC goes out of update bracket after 2 years and you have to buy a new PC for new upgrade?

FMH said,
Or may be Microsoft is moving towards yearly updates like Apple and Android.

Must be a real slap in the face for all those people calling OS X releases "service packs".