Is Windows 10 a re-skin?

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by Michael Goff, Jun 12, 2018.

  1. Michael Goff macrumors G4

    Michael Goff

    Jul 5, 2012

    But this would basically just be a rant if I didn't throw this out to the wonderful people out there. What do you guys think? Is Windows 10 a re-skinned XP?
  2. MacDawg macrumors Core


    Mar 20, 2004
    "Between the Hedges"
  3. AidenShaw macrumors P6


    Feb 8, 2003
    The Peninsula
    Encyclopedic answer: NFW
  4. Tech198 macrumors G5

    Mar 21, 2011
    Australia, Perth
    If Windows 10 was all new code, Windows 7 apps wouldn't work...

    Very un-Microsoft to code anything nowadays from the "ground up" like Apple, because Microsoft cares too much about backward compatibility. That's Windows 7 stuff/drivers would still be ok on Windows 10.

    As we all now, anything fresh, tends to break, as Apple is also finding that out now
  5. Zenithal, Jun 12, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2018

    Zenithal macrumors 603

    Sep 10, 2009
    Every OS uses legacy code. There's fragments of the newest macOS dating back nearly 20 years. @MacDawg hit the nail on the head.

    The argument gets more confusing seeing as MS is constantly pushing out updates to W10 where they refactor the code within. This is more noticeable if you're on the 'fast-ring' of updates as opposed to the annual cycle, or the 14-18 month deferral cycle.

    My suggestion is to avoid silly posts like the one you've quoted. If someone makes a grand claim like that, they better have facts to back up their statement. Paper statements like that are less worthy than used toilet paper.

    If Windows is simply a reskin, so is any Linux distro. You can install just about any x86 Linux distro on ancient hardware. And it'll work.
  6. Anonymous Freak macrumors 601

    Anonymous Freak

    Dec 12, 2002
    All the major versions of Windows since XP are "Windows NT kernel" systems. With Windows 2000, they stopped giving them direct version numbers - but the version numbers are still buried in the systems if you go searching.

    Windows NT 3.1 was the first version of Windows NT - numbered 3.1 to match the same numbering as the consumer Windows 3.1
    Then came Windows NT 3.5
    Windows NT 4.0
    Windows 2000 was Windows NT 5.0
    Windows XP was Windows NT 5.1
    Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP x64 were Windows NT 5.2
    Windows Vista was Windows NT 6.0 (as was Windows Server 2008)
    Windows 7 was..... Windows NT 6.1 (7 really was much more a "reskin of Vista" than anything else.) (as was Windows Server 2008 R2.)
    Windows 8 and Windows Server 2012 were Windows NT 6.2
    Windows 8.1 and Windows Server 2012 R2 were Windows NT 6.3 (that's right, "8.0 -> 8.1" was the same internally as Vista -> 7.)
    Windows 10 is... Windows NT 10.0.

    Yes, they bumped the version number up to match, but the core is as different from Windows 7 as Windows 7 is from XP. Or XP is from Windows NT 4.0. While no, they didn't "rewrite the whole thing from scratch," a significant portion of 10 *WAS* rewritten from the Vista/7/8/8.1 code line. It is far more than just a reskin. Even Windows 8 was more than just a "skin" - the "Modern"/"Metro" interface uses completely brand-new code, encompassing the "Universal Windows Platform" application interface - something that does not exist in Windows 7 or previous.
  7. Tech198, Jun 13, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018

    Tech198 macrumors G5

    Mar 21, 2011
    Australia, Perth
    old code may be there, but that doesn't mean it still has its users today. old code is ok to have, but if there is no reason behind it, either from system function point of view, developer point of view, or manufacture point of view, then its useless.

    Yes MacOS may have more legacy code than Windows, but it "can't" be used because Apple's limiting on newer OS. and "depreciated' over time. yet its just stuck in the OS, defunct.

    Open up Console,,, you'll find depreciated calls in there, even on Sierra, because it still works *sorta*, but would work better with new call in place. Yet I don't think Apple "force" it on devs.
  8. Zenithal, Jun 13, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018

    Zenithal macrumors 603

    Sep 10, 2009
    Based on specificity the user can identify, no. Of course there's a very high chance Finder will have code hailing from OS 9. Which wouldn't be at all surprising. You don't reinvent the wheel when moving forward. Mojave is faster than the previous macOS because it uses CPU time more wisely. That's a very basic and over simplification of the subject matter. Doesn't mean a full re-write from the ground up of the file system structure and core system took place.

    Apple doesn't care about supporting old products because they don't have enough market share for it to matter much. 9 out of 10 times, if you have a problem with Windows, it's the result of the software and not the OS. This is the same with macOS.

    The notion that Apple writes an OS from scratch every 1-2 years is preposterous. Apple writes their own OS and gets to decide what components go into their computers. They can decide to deny updates to computers running x hardware and allow computers running y hardware.
  9. elppa macrumors 68040


    Nov 26, 2003
    I think I can understand and make a case for both perspectives. Without a link to the full thread it is hard to tell but I suspect "re-skin" was a loose choice of phrasing to try an encapsulate the idea that some screens saw no change (outside of inherited window border/chrome updates) in the XP-Vista-7-10 cycle. Foundations like like the NTFS file system and the registry are also present in all versions. These are not bad things, but they are not new things either.

    It would be inaccurate to think of new releases as re-skins, but it would equally be inaccurate to think of new releases as wholly new products. macOS High Sierra is an ongoing refinement of NeXTSTEP 0.8 (more specifically Mac OS X 10.0) in the same way Windows 10 April 2018 Update is an ongoing refinement of Windows NT 3.1 (more specifically Windows XP/NT 5.1).

    What gets classified as "new" in the evolution of these systems is fairly arbitrary as well. For instance Windows XP added significant new functionality over its lifetime and three service packs. Similarly Apple added major functionality like Intel (x86) support and the Mac App Store as minor point releases to Tiger (10.4) and Snow Leopard (10.6) respectively.
  10. Rhonindk macrumors 68030


    Wondering where @I7guy is in this discussion ... :cool:

    Personal and professional opinion: No and No.
  11. I7guy macrumors G5

    Nov 30, 2013
    Looking at Central Park@550 feet
    Poking the bear?;)
    --- Post Merged, Jun 13, 2018 ---
    What does a consumer think about the differences between xp and 10 or 7 and 10?

    Can one get the same workflow accomplished in both environments assuming 32 bit? What workflow can’t be accomplished?
  12. Rhonindk macrumors 68030



    Yup :D

Share This Page