Yes, the next version of Windows will be Win10 version 2004

Topic

New Reply

You couldn’t make this stuff up. The beta test version of Win10, known as 20H1, will ultimately emerge as Win10 version 2004, build 19033. It’s appare
[See the full post at: Yes, the next version of Windows will be Win10 version 2004]

4 users thanked author for this post.

Fred, Carl D, abbodi86, CyGuy

Reply | Quote

Replies

Well, at least they are being consistent lol.

Reply | Quote

Well, with all of the Light Mode themes, these last two releases have come full circle to where they now resemble Windows 95/98 and NT.

Reply | Quote

I think that H1 (Half 1)and H2(Half 2) make more sense and would give Microsoft more apparent flexibility.  Not that they don’t already have it.

Reply | Quote

April Fools’ Day joke, perhaps?

Fractal Design Pop Air * Thermaltake Toughpower GF3 750W * ASUS TUF GAMING B560M-PLUS * Intel Core i9-11900K * 4 x 8 GB G.Skill Aegis DDR4 3600 MHz CL16 * ASRock RX 6800 XT Phantom Gaming 16GB OC * XPG GAMMIX S70 BLADE 1TB * SanDisk Ultra 3D 1TB * Samsung EVO 840 250GB * DVD RW Lite-ON iHAS 124 * Windows 10 Pro 22H2 64-bit Insider * Windows 11 Pro Beta Insider

Reply | Quote

I don’t understand why they don’t just drop the whole YYMM format for the Version and stick with the Build number as the Version.Build.  They’ve stuck with the same Build prefix since v1803 (17134), v1809 (17763), etc.  It would be so much easier to say it’s Version 17134, Build 864 (17134.864).

Windows 10 Pro x64 v1909, Windows 7 Home Premium x64, Windows Vista Home Premium x64

1 user thanked author for this post.

b

Reply | Quote

They cannot predict which build will be the final (RTM) for each version

besides, 17134 is the build number, 864 is the delta revision

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

Which brings me back to my original recommendation:

• Win 10 = RTM version (1507)
• Win 10.1 = version 1511
• Win 10.2 = version 1607
• Win 10.3 = version 1703
• Win 10.4 = version 1709
• Win 10.5 = version 1803
• Win 10.6 = version 1809
• Win 10.7 = version 1903
• Win 10.7 SP 1 = version 1909
• Win 10.8 = version 2004

I think I first proposed that numbering system in early 2015.

6 users thanked author for this post.

wavy, Great Lake Bunyip, A1ex, RamRod, abbodi86, MrJimPhelps

Reply | Quote

I’m happily computing on Windows 10.1 using Office 2003.

Happy Thanksgiving Woody & VIP’s!!!

Reply | Quote

abbodi86 wrote:

They cannot predict which build will be the final (RTM) for each version

Why do they need to predict it? 1909 was 19H2 until last month, and by then it was 18363.

Reply | Quote

1909 is out of question, out of the ordinary

let’s take build 19033, we know it’s not the final 20H2 build, yet because it’s escrow and not evaluation, it got the official tag “version 2004”
if they would use the build number as version, it will create inconsistency

Reply | Quote

Remember
https://www.askwoody.com/forums/topic/the-next-next-version-of-windows-10-code-named-20h1-known-colloquially-as-2003-may-arrive-in-december-2019/#post-1995168

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

Windows 10 has been out for over four years and they’re still coming out with “Beta” versions? I’m sorry, but this is not my idea of a serious OS.  It seems more like a play toy for those who wish to to play around with.

Being 20 something in the 70's was so much better than being 70 something in the insane 20's

2 users thanked author for this post.

Geo, Carl D

Reply | Quote

Charlie wrote:

Windows 10 has been out for over four years and they’re still coming out with “Beta” versions?

Would you rather they release them directly to the general public instead?

Reply | Quote

With the release of Windows 10 it would appear that MS has lost sight of what an operating system is supposed to do which is manage your hardware and run software (programs).

While the OS is doing that job, it should stay quietly in the background and not be bothering you with never ending updates, ads. etc., etc.

And, don’t get me started about Candy Crush and the rest of the ever increasing ‘bloat’ that’s been added to Windows 10 since it’s release over 4 years ago. Regular readers should know, like I do, how to avoid most of the bloat. For now, at least.

As quite a few people have said during the last 4 years, Windows 10 is more of an advertising platform than an operating system. I’m sure it will only get worse from here on – especially after Windows 7 reaches end of support next January.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Charlie, doriel

Reply | Quote

Dell Latitude 3420, Intel Core i7 @ 2.8 GHz, 16GB RAM, W10 22H2 Enterprise

HAL3000, AMD Athlon 200GE @ 3,4 GHz, 8GB RAM, Fedora 29

PRUSA i3 MK3S+

Reply | Quote

If 20H1 is really done, maybe they should spend the next four months stabilizing it. That way we don’t have a beta by time it comes out.

Reply | Quote

Well, at least they’re finally getting Windows 10 into the 21st Century (19’s to 20’s).

Who knows – by the time they eventually move it from 2004 to the 2020’s it might be out of Beta status. Not bad after nearly 5 years.

Reply | Quote

[warrenrumak]

Charlie wrote:

Windows 10 has been out for over four years and they’re still coming out with “Beta” versions? I’m sorry, but this is not my idea of a serious OS.  It seems more like a play toy for those who wish to to play around with.

Windows 10 is doing exactly the same thing that Mac OS X and Linux distributions have been doing for almost 20 years: Incremental improvements on a regular basis.  Windows was always the sole outlier with every release being significantly different visually and functionally.

• This reply was modified 5 years, 6 months ago by warrenrumak.

1 user thanked author for this post.

RamRod

Reply | Quote

And I preferred it that way. Thanks for your consideration.

Reply | Quote

warrenrumak wrote:

Windows was always the sole outlier with every release being significantly different visually and functionally.

Not really, I remember a bunch of Windows releases looking mostly the same as their predecessor… and also visually and functionally converged user interface on very different kernels in the 3.x / NT 3.x and 9x/NT4 eras.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Charlie

Reply | Quote

There are no advertisements on my Linux Mint, and there are no games – unless I decide to pick what I want and install it with Software Installer.  No frou frou, just an operating system with what you need.

Being 20 something in the 70's was so much better than being 70 something in the insane 20's

Reply | Quote

There are no advertisements or games on my Windows 10 either.

Reply | Quote

No piece of software, including Windows itself, is ever completely bug free.  As bugs are found, they are corrected, requiring an update.  Similarly, external threats may develop after the OS is in use, possibly also requiring a security update.

Unfortunately, sometimes the updates introduce new bugs or incompatibilities.

Windows 10 Pro 64 bit 20H2

Reply | Quote

Oh Adobe could give them lessons. “Robohelp 2019” released “totally ready for production despite having 1/4 or the features of RH2017”. So they bundled RH 2017 (with maybe a few tweaks and patches, as far as we can tell) with it, relabelled as “Robohelp 2019 Classic”. That’s not going to cause any confusion when people ask for help, is it?

Reply | Quote

There’s clearly a lot of heavy weight expertise on this site; many of you may work for Microsoft now, or have in the past, and certainly have spent careers supporting systems of various sorts.

Do any of you know where we are going,

when we will get there,

and how will we know we have arrived?

ASUS GL702VS 24GB RAM Intel Core i7 64 bit Win 10 Home 22H2 OS Build 19045.3693
Windows Feature Experience Pack 1000.19053.1000.0
Not Win 11 eligible.

Reply | Quote

mn– wrote:

warrenrumak wrote:

Windows was always the sole outlier with every release being significantly different visually and functionally.

Not really, I remember a bunch of Windows releases looking mostly the same as their predecessor… and also visually and functionally converged user interface on very different kernels in the 3.x / NT 3.x and 9x/NT4 eras.

Then you misremember.  NT 3.1/3.5 looked like Windows 3.1.  NT 4 looked like Windows 95, with the Start menu, Task Bar, and the whole “desktop” metaphor.  NT 4 itself changed quite significantly with the post-SP3 Shell Update, which added stuff like the tree navigation to Explorer.  A lot changed with Windows 2000, like the addition of Management Console, the new Windows Explorer with the left-side info panel & browser-like interface, and the big move away from the spatial file interface that originated with 95 & NT 4.  And then everything changed again with Windows XP with the two-column start menu, green/blue colour theme, categories in Control Panel, rounded buttons, balloon pop-ups, and much greater use of gradients.

And so on and so forth.

Reply | Quote

warrenrumak wrote:

Then you misremember.  NT 3.1/3.5 looked like Windows 3.1.  NT 4 looked like Windows 95

Yes, exactly as I meant. Windows 3.1 / 3.11 and NT 3.x were about 5 numbered releases (and more if you count server and workstation separately and also on other hardware architectures, like NT on PowerPC and Alpha) with a consistend look and feel between very different internals.

Similarly Windows 9x and NT 4 were another set of releases coordinated to look mostly alike with different internals, even with the gradual differences between original 95 and 98SE and also NT with the various service packs…

Really not counting ME/2k and XP into this at all. Though, even 7 configured for traditional mode still wasn’t too different for end users coming from NT4.

Reply | Quote

there are recent rumors that “version 2004” may be RTM’ed on December 17 as reported by these recent articles:

https://news.softpedia.com/news/windows-10-version-2004-could-reach-rtm-on-december-17-528365.shtml

https://borncity.com/win/2019/11/29/windows-10-v2004-freigabe-am-17-dezember-2019/

Reply | Quote

Does this mean that by the time it’s out, ‘2004’ will be 16 years out of date, or is it just yet more evidence of Microsoft’s tin ear?

Reply | Quote