Windows 8 coming in July 2011

[Ci7]

bring it on!!

[Motoko.]

bring it on!!

Yeah that Core i7 of yours needs to do something.. I kid :laugh:

[Ci7]

Yeah that Core i7 of yours needs to do something.. I kid :laugh:

what to do my CPU is mad because he had got any really task to do other then rendering browser ,since a while ago :p

[bjoswald]

Way too soon, MS! Let Windows 7 sink in a little more!

[fix-this!]

I think they are moving too fast. Seven will still be fresh by the time 8 arrives. Would seem a little silly to switch after 1 year 6 months.

not really, i mean im already bored with windows 7, i love it but im bored. most people are like this too after lets say 6 months time. we want something new to play with. i wonder when a alpha or beta of 8 would start to emerge? maybe by the end of this year?

[Quillz]

Way too soon, MS! Let Windows 7 sink in a little more!

New Windows releases are typically every 2-3 years.

[Shadrack]

I'm all for them going with a more regular release schedule :).

But I think they need to lower their upgrade license costs to something more affordable. More along the lines of Snow Leopard upgrade which was for $35 IIRC.

Edit: But I guess I did get my Windows 7 upgrade for $30. But I got a discount. It should just be priced that way.

[SugarCain]

I call BS. Unless I hear from MS i'll take it with a grain of salt.

[Solid Knight]

I think they use a six month release schedule that way they'll always have good quality control.

[aussiefloyd_fan]

I cant wait for the windows 8 launch parties :p I actually hosted a windows 7 party. It would totally rawk if they do a windows 8 partayyy

[Sandor]

Dont see the problem.

It's only too soon for people who have bought Win 7. In that case they might not need or buy 8 on release but might do another year down the line.

For people using vista or who got machines say a year before Win 7 came along, then it's a reasonable time to think about upgrading.

The point is not everyone is at the same stage with their equipment or requirements so blanket statements about it being too soon or too late become irrelevant. If it's a useful product and offers advantages or improvements and can be shown to be stable then that's reason enough to release it.

[ahhell]

what to do my CPU is mad because he had got any really task to do other then rendering browser ,since a while ago :p

Ummm...? :huh:

[itzwolf]

To soon in my opinion, I'd say 3 years would be better overall. I am all about new stuff to play with but if this holds true for instance where I work (US Gov) we will still be running Windows XP when this is released. A prime example that businesses will keep what works and instead of waiting for a service pack of an OS they will wait for a service pack and upgrade every other OS release.

[addc182]

it definately does seem a bit soon, but theres still all the delays to come lol

[sweetsam]

I will upgrade if I get another $30 deal otherwise it will be windows 9 for me.

[Skulltrail]

Sh*t, I just purchased a copy of Win7 Pro... any news on what to expect with Windows 8? More importantly, will Windows 8 be it's name? I'm sort of getting tired of the numbers... Windows 7 is an inept name for an OS especially one of Windows 7's caliber in comparison to its predecessor (Vista).

[Ci7]

Sh*t, I just purchased a copy of Win7 Pro... any news on what to expect with Windows 8? More importantly, will Windows 8 be it's name? I'm sort of getting tired of the numbers... Windows 7 is an inept name for an OS especially one of Windows 7's caliber in comparison to its predecessor (Vista).

no , Windows 8 is just a referance

there is no telling at this point who it would look like

but i would say Windows 7 +1

[RvXtm]

They'll just ad another wallpaper pack and theme and brand it Windows 8 , how long can that take ? :p

[mrp04]

I can't believe how quick people forget. This is the usual release cycle for Windows. They just screwed up after XP and basically wasted two years. Look at everything from 95 to XP and then Vista to 7. 2-3 years is usual.

[kjordan2001]

I can't believe how quick people forget. This is the usual release cycle for Windows. They just screwed up after XP and basically wasted two years. Look at everything from 95 to XP and then Vista to 7. 2-3 years is usual.

And going by the home product releases:

95 (Good), 98 (Bad starting off), 98SE (Good), ME (Bad), XP (Good), Vista (Bad starting off), and Windows 7 (Good)

We can pretty much expect the next one to be bad. They should probably go to 4-6 year releases unless Windows 7 is going to give them a good and non-Fisher Price UI to build off of.

[aussiefloyd_fan]

Microsoft OS 8 , i swear , they need to get rid of "windows" but then again it might be too confusing.. call it microsoft os 8 :p yes thats an apple reference there:laugh::laugh:

[qdave]

I dont see an issue with Windows name..in fact it's quite cool.

Windows 2012 might sound a bit weird :D

[sweetsam]

Window Octo !! :D

[GreenInspiration]

Can't wait

[Zzz1111]

With the cost of upgrading, I never upgrade unless I'm purchasing a new computer. Seeing as I just bought one, It'll probably be windows 9 by the time I get another one.