This might seem like an odd question, but I would be interested to find out the answer to this.

Office 2000 came out before Windows 2000. Windows 95 came out in 95 and 98 in 98. Why was there an Office 97? Is it because windows 98 was due out in 97? Or am I looking for logic in something that has no logic to it!?!?!?

I ask this, because I am currently writing training courses for my work, and would like to know the answer to this just in case someone brings it up as a question (which I am sure they won't)

Thanks.

Report this post to a moderator

I never thought of this before, but I would say because windows 98 was due out in 97.

Regards,
XF

__________________
Knowledge is POWER, Learning is the KEY!

Report this post to a moderator

Don't quote me on it, because I'm not 100% sure, but wasn't Windows 98 originally called Windows 97, but was so late being released that they renamed to to 98?

Office 98 was simply the Mac version of Office 97.

I don't think there's any intentional logic to it. Major releases just come out about every 2 years. NT had new versions in that time period, too.

Report this post to a moderator

Windows 93...opps, I mean Windows94...ummm Windows95 aka Chicago was the one that was late.
Office97 was just a upgrade to Word 6.0, integrating PowerPoint, Excel, Outlook...
then Office 2000, Office XP, you know...they just have to keep doing updates and claiming that it's a new and improved WindowsMe...I mean XP....
Well...you know Micro$oft.

Report this post to a moderator

there was an upgrade to the Outlook 97 component of Office 97 which then made it Outlook 98 but the rest of the suite stayed @ 97.

why couldn't things have stayed with incrementing full and dotted numbers? i mean the office suite, any other app and most importantly the OS. i don't think there are any Linux flavors trying to use the yearly version designation... Mac didn't. i know the actual version stamp is using this (for at least the OS) but what's with the lame marketing dept. coming up with this brilliant yearly designator.. blah.

oh well.

__________________
chunder

Report this post to a moderator

But Chunder...
If they released Outlook97 SR-3, how could they make money off of Outlook98?

Oh yea...let us not forget, Win1.0, Win2.0, Win3.0, Win3.1, Win3.11, Win95, Win98, Win3.51, WinNT, Win2000, WinXP, DOS 1.0, 2.0, 3.1, 3.12, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 6.1, 6.12, 6.2, 6.21, 6.22 (btw, they charged for every edition....and they wonder why everyone loves to copy their software)

I think I have been dealing with Microsoft too long....

Report this post to a moderator

If I remember right there was a Windows 97 but it became Windows version C or something of that nature

__________________
Help Fight Cancer by Joining the United Devices Wheel of Time Team at:
United Devices


If tommorrow never comes, How do we get out of today????

Push to test, Release to detonate

Report this post to a moderator

quote:

---

Originally posted by Taqwus
If I remember right there was a Windows 97 but it became Windows version C or something of that nature

---

fer real? or are you talking a beta release? there were a few releases of 95... and then 2 of 98... but 97 and C?

quote:

---

If tommorrow never comes, How do we get out of today????

---

or should that read, "If tommorrow never comes, do you REALLY want Micro$oft helping you with where you want to go today?" i mean, COME ON! if there's no tomorrow, i don't want to waste all of today rebooting & patching!!

__________________
chunder

Report this post to a moderator

heya peoples,

Maybe he was refering to Windows CE for PDAs and other small computer-like peripherials. I remember that the Sega Dreamcast was suppose to run on Windows CE and X-box was rumored to run on it ( of course when it was just announced that Microsfot will do X-box)

__________________
---- Microsoft Windows XP-----
---- X/XX/XX XX:XX -----
Your mouse moved or you touched a key, Windows requires to restart before the the new settings are changed.
[ RESTART COMPUTER ]

Report this post to a moderator