Actually it's server 2k8 not win7 they used for the API layers, so no it's not win7 reskinned. Theres an awful lot more changed than people think theres a very good reason for keeping the major version number the same despite the huge changes though namely compatability ;)

Ups, should have said DirectX and not Direct3D (even though that's the right term)... Everything that's using DirectX is using either Direct2D or Direct3D for the graphics related stuff. So, 'real' games are possible just as they have been possible with Win32 the last decade or two.
I was in no way snapping at him, dunno why it looks that way, but I'm almost never angry or feeling negative when posting (unless I use the f word a few times in which case it is pretty noticeable :p), but anyways, was just trying to get a point across that many of us here have told him the same thing over and over again, yet he still keeps on rolling with the same stuff. :)

It is not science fiction, many of the new things (including DirectX10+) in Windows NT 6 cannot be ported back to NT 5.x unless some major kernel restructuring is made.

Oh, certainly there are plenty of changes under the bonnet like the filesystem stuff, that most people don't know or care about. But my understanding those are relatively minor stuff, that have been fitted into a service pack for Win 7 and Server 2008 R2.

We don't know what will happen. They only said that Win32 isn't going anywhere.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Display_Driver_Model

That necessarily doesn't disprove what I said......

OK, so if Microsoft's motivation was greed why do it only once?

DirectX 11 launched with Windows 7 but can be installed on Vista. If DirectX 10's exclusivity was a ploy to get XP users to buy Vista why not do that again to promote Windows 7?

Hypothetical musings: Maybe because they chose to use other methods to get people to buy Win7? Using the same method multiple times would draw more attention to it & make it all the more obvious, would it not?

Occam's razor. Which is simpler, that there are technical reasons for limiting new technology to a new product, or that this is all part of a scheme to trick users into buying Windows upgrades--despite the vast majority only upgrading to a new Windows version incidentally by buying a new PC that includes it?

Why can't both be the case in some/all of MS's decisions? I never said/implied that getting people to move to new OS versions was the only reason they(possibly) designed their new OSs as they did, just that it was possibly ONE of the reasons/part of the reason why they did.

If you want I can tell you what MS' strategy is, because it's obvious as hell, but maybe I'm taking for granted the industry knowledge that makes it obvious to me:

They need new business, and that business is hardware. You cannot make money on the PC, margins are razor thin and that's on a good day. So what have we got? The Surface, Windows Phone 7, Windows Phone 8, XBox 360, whatever the upcoming XBox is called, Kinect, etc.

Now how do you draw people to your "stable" of devices? You do it like Apple did, with integration and ease of use. Seriously, everything MS is doing just screams "We want a unified, easy as fuck UI that your grandma could use!" Because at the end of the day, they're counting on grandma to buy it, as well as you, and to stay in MS' ecosystem of software and hardware products.

They actually have a shot of pulling this off, Surface could be an outstanding optional addon to XBox 360 and PC gaming that will make the WiiU tablet look like a really bad joke. WP7 could likewise start integrating a lot more than it already does.

I don't know what to say, they're making it easy as fuck to use, stable, easy to teach people to use, even the computer illiterate. I don't know if it'll work for sure and I'm not saying they're not making some mistakes along the way that violate this basic goal, but this is Revision 1, I expect Revision 2 to be a lot better if they can hang onto this.

MS is a dividend company and always has been, investors know they cannot demand growth because extra money gets poured into dividends instead, this actually helps MS as investors are more likely to stick around and take a longer term view of the company, as opposed to mercenary investors that are only looking out for number 1 and don't care about a company's long term viability.

There really are no super secret strategies at play here, at least none of any consequence that I can see. MS is going to give everyone every reason to upgrade as they can, that's a no brainer, but the kicker is they'll have to do it by offering a really good service, platform, well supported by developers.

Trust me, MS couldn't give a flying fuck what Gabe thinks, they have legions of devs just slavering to make their mark on this platform in the hopes this thing will make it big. I for one hope they succeed, if for no other reason than I love seeing as many awesome electronic ecosystems out there as possible.

And with todays announcement about valve moving into non game software sales the other shoe has dropped.

With that info it becomes even more obvious that the appstore is what Gabe is scared of, if MS allows people the same software without having to install steam...

i may have missed this or something i don't know, i apologize if it's been covered already, but how is win 8 with game compatibility?

exactly the same as win7 but with the addition of metro games