When it comes to operating systems, it is very rarely we need a complete revolution and redesign. The most important things are stability and compatibility, with performance in a close third.
A Short History
If you watch dozens of Windows reviews on the Internet, you will see that everybody likes to say that Microsoft has pretty much released a poor version of Windows after a great one. XP was great, Vista was awful, 7 was great, 8 was weird, 10 was great, and everybody is hoping 11 won’t suck.
While that might be true to a certain extent, I believe the refinement of the actual “revolution” is what made Windows XP, 7, and 10 grand. Vista came with a complete overhaul, and it felt different from what we knew in XP. I tried a lot to like Vista, and I used it for a good while, but the real downside was the performance. It felt real laggy and slow, and honestly, not too reliable.
I went back and forward at that time between XP and Vista, until, a bit under 2.5 years, Microsoft released the refinement, Windows 7. Out of the gate, it felt like a better-polished system. The speed seemed there, the search was better, there was less bloatware and a cleaner interface overall.
Windows 7 was so good that people saw no reason to upgrade to Windows 8. My experience with the OS was great and benchmarks also showed that it was faster, more secure, and somewhat less resource-intensive. However, people had an issue with the new “Metro” interface and the disappearance of the Start menu. That got a lot of hate, and I was not really against it until I used the Windows Server equivalent (Server 2012). It was getting on my nerves as the “new” Start window only seemed to complicate simple usage of the OS.
Microsoft was trying something new, a revolution of sorts, that eventually failed, their “Metro” interface with which they were trying to popularize on all form factors did not catch on.
So, skip Windows 9, because why not, and queue in the evolution, Windows 10.