Is Windows 11 coming? Leaks confirm it

texasrattler

Posts: 1,194   +563
I didn't say anything about TS. Could MS change their mind, could have. But going to another # doesn't do anything for them. Going to a name like Windows OS would be smarter as I said it streamlines the name. They are the only company that uses a actual #. It hasn't helped them at all.
 

Mugsy

Posts: 734   +172
I've been arguing for a "Windows 9" for a couple of years now, which is basically proven/trusted Windows 7 with support for DX12 and Win10 drivers.

Win10 is an ugly spam delivery device that requires a Bachelors in Engineering to customize.

Win95: Good
Win98: Bad
Win98se: Good
WinME: Bad
WinXP: Good
WinVista: Bad
Win7: Good
Win8: Bad
Win9: -------------- (fill in the blank)
Win10: Bad.
 

Mugsy

Posts: 734   +172
Let me see...

Windows 98 - Great
Windows 2000 - Amm
Windows XP - Great
Windows Vista - Amm
Windows 7 - Great
Windows 8 - Amm
Windows 10 - Good
Windows 11- ???

Will loop break? :
I made my own list before I saw yours. People have noticed that every other version of Windows is terrible.
 

DZillaXx

Posts: 335   +459
Honestly I don't see any reason for MS to not continue the Windows 10 continually growing model. Where we get two big updates every year.

At some point I do see the move to a Azure AD based version for home use, but MS just barely has this working smoothly today in the business world. Or better yet a full move to Azure than will host your full windows install, but still allow to sync apps from your onedrive and execute apps on host hardware not not cloud. Kinda like a Hybrid Cloud/local VM.

I'd love to be able to have a single windows install and be able to move between devices and have apps like adobe still treat the install as a single license.
 

Gezzer

Posts: 154   +79
Curious what makes you say that 98 was great and 2000 was Amm ? Personally, I was very happy to upgrade from 98 which felt toyish compared to 2000, but that‘s just me. Speaking of „me“ - you missed that one.


In this case they can keep it.

I think for a lot of users 98/98se were 95 refined and so by comparison it was a much better OS (kind of like Vista and Win7). Not perfect by any means, but much more stable and user friendly.

As for 2000 it wasn't really marketed to everyday windows users. It was meant to be the OS where NT and 9x were merged into one and would be the basis for windows going forward. But they changed their minds and decided that ME would be the last 9x OS. So other then people that sought it out not a lot of non NT users are familiar with it.
 

quadibloc

Posts: 308   +196
Of course, they could change the name to Windows 11 without requiring people to pay for an upgrade in order to use it on their existing computers.
We've decided this feature upgrade deserved a new name, but don't worry, it doesn't really change anything for our loyal users.
In that case, what's in a name?
 

poohbear

Posts: 643   +557
Subscription based guaranteed.

The biggest OS in the world is...Android. Is MS no longer scared of Google offering a free OS for PCs? That was the very reason they said Win 10 was the last version and a free upgrade! To deter Google from pursuing a Chrome OS for PCs.
 

Gezzer

Posts: 154   +79
Are they going back to the old upgrade model? If so I'm all for it.

I don't hate Win10, once I've tweaked it to my liking. But I think one of it's biggest problems is the constant updating. Windows can't be Android no matter how hard MS tries to make it the same. Android has a very small target hardware to support, and not a lot of legacy software to consider.
Windows OTOH is what? 30 years old? It's pretty hard to do a full 180 (like Win10) when you have that much momentum behind you.
 

DAOWAce

Posts: 314   +57
I wouldn't doubt they'd go back on what they said and shove out a new version of Windows you have to pay for this time.

A revamped UI = Windows can die. 10 was bad enough with its changes, and every update has transitioned it more and more into a mobile UI piece of trash that insults power users. I'm still on v1703 because of this reason alone, and when I dual boot to my updated 20H2 or whatever I want to break something with how frustrating the 'metro' UI is to deal with.

Usability is king in an operating system, and if the quality of my life worsens with an update, I don't update until things become too broken to tolerate. Companies really need to learn to leave things alone or give users options to revert back.. but they don't, you either take it up the butt or find another product. Why does almost nobody give users a choice? I wish I knew.

Anyway, ranting here won't change reality.
 

Steve Lalancette

Posts: 32   +28
Well... Since Windows 8, I'm not excited anymore.
Microsoft doesn't care about this type of consumers since 2012.
Since the Xbox One debacle, I'm trying to avoid anything related to Microsoft.
They don't want to sell something that consumers want.
It's a 'live service' company. They want total control and they don't care about consequences it makes.
Windows update can't and won't be good, period.
 

TheBigFatClown

Posts: 967   +389
So, they lied just so they could skip 9. Windows 11? Stupid name at this point in the game. It should just be Windows OS. Keep the year/quarter numbers in the build where they can be easily seen/found but jut stop the name changes already.
I have to say it is very good logic being used on the article writers part though. The shadow of the horizontal bar not being cast does present the eye with what looks like an 11.
I hope it's not true.
 

yukka

Posts: 982   +152
I think for a lot of users 98/98se were 95 refined and so by comparison it was a much better OS (kind of like Vista and Win7). Not perfect by any means, but much more stable and user friendly.

As for 2000 it wasn't really marketed to everyday windows users. It was meant to be the OS where NT and 9x were merged into one and would be the basis for windows going forward. But they changed their minds and decided that ME would be the last 9x OS. So other then people that sought it out not a lot of non NT users are familiar with it.

Win2000 was NT. Compatibility patches allowed it to run most games eventually. It was really stable and completely brilliant compared to ME (many errors) which tried to do away with dos. ME was the worst version of windows I had first hand experience of using (my first pc had 95 on it) and 2000 saw me through my degree course. But it wasn’t marketed to home users. Those of us in the know used it extensively though.
 
Last edited:

Bullwinkle M

Posts: 552   +439
That is unless you decide you want to play an even remotely current gaming title. I'd imagine even current applications are problematic trying to get them running on XP.


You mean like GTA5?

Yeah I play that on my XP machines a lot

I can swap to a Windows 10 Pro SSD, Windows 10 Enterprise, Windows 8.1 Home, Windows 8.1 Enterprise, Windows 7, Windows XP, Linux, Chromium and several other OS's I have here on separate SSD's

What was your point again?
 

Darth Shiv

Posts: 2,210   +779
I think you meant ME not 2000. As far as I'm aware there was nothing wrong with Windows 2000 (AKA:Windows NT5).
2000 was exceptional... I used both server and workstation variants with great success. Dual booted 98 and Server for years and hardly used 98. 98 was slightly more performant in some situations but I hardly noticed after a few SPs. Such a massive step up from 98 overall. Far far far better kernel and security model. NTFS just so much better as well.
 

defaultluser

Posts: 230   +209
Win2000 was NT. Compatibility patches allowed it to run most games eventually. It was really stable and completely brilliant compared to ME (many errors) which tried to do away with dos. ME was the worst version of windows I had first hand experience of using (my first pc had 95 on it) and 2000 saw me through my degree course. But it wasn’t marketed to hone users. Those of us in the know used it extensively though.

It was also the last NT OS before they introduced activation (so I rode that one forever.)

The only real feature difference between XP and 2000 was the impressive DOS apps emulator (but you would handle most older pre-SVGA games via DOSBox). It even got a USB 2.0 service pack.

I only started to crave the XP flavor after Service Pack 2 added the security management tool Games that said "XP only" rAN FINE
 
Last edited:

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,671   +4,152
I'm betting either a major move towards SaaS with more cloud integration and subscription services, or a total nothingburger involving either "new icons" that look just plain worse or maybe they FINALLY finished the move from the old control panel to the metro settings menu that they started back with windows 8 in 2012 and was supposed to be finished for windows 8.1 in 2014.
You mean like GTA5?

Yeah I play that on my XP machines a lot

I can swap to a Windows 10 Pro SSD, Windows 10 Enterprise, Windows 8.1 Home, Windows 8.1 Enterprise, Windows 7, Windows XP, Linux, Chromium and several other OS's I have here on separate SSD's

What was your point again?
Wow, one whole game that came out originally on the 360/ps3. You really showed him.
 

Mjswooosh

Posts: 47   +79
You mean like GTA5?

Yeah I play that on my XP machines a lot

I can swap to a Windows 10 Pro SSD, Windows 10 Enterprise, Windows 8.1 Home, Windows 8.1 Enterprise, Windows 7, Windows XP, Linux, Chromium and several other OS's I have here on separate SSD's

What was your point again?

Dual/triple/quad booting other OSes is a viable option of course. I do it myself. But you are being disingenuous implying this is an "XP machine" since you have to boot up newer OSes to play modern games, which proves his point.
 

defaultname365

Posts: 34   +23
I don't mind if it is Windows 11, but for goodness sake stop breaking the devices we're using with compatibility/driver issues.