The suggestion made is essentially that old code won't be changed - it's not uncommon for businesses to run 15 year old software which will NEVER be changed to accommodate new versions of Windows.Picard wrote:Also, if these coding lines can make the difference between 95 and 98, why can't they between 9? and 98 It's just one digit instead of two, it can't be too hard to find a workaround solution (from either side) without having to skip a number.
If code checks "Does the version start with 9" then "95", "98", or "9" will still match and cause problems.
/I/ have written code that does this - I imagine it's rampant in the software world.
We had a developer here at work fuming at Microsoft because Windows 8 screws up Lotus 1-2-3 95 - this is the reality of working in businesses, not everything runs the latest version and old code does not get fixed.
It could be marketing, it could be trying to match Apple (with OS X), it could be because they wanted a cooler name, but I also think it's entirely possible they found a lot of applications that broke under a Windows 9 and this was an easy fix.
Apparently some ancient software actually still breaks under Windows 10 - thinking it's Windows 1! http://twitter.com/rozzie/status/517857618841182208
