Microsoft’s journey to a clear, inclusive, and universally logical Windows version naming convention has been less straightforward than many users might realize. After years of bewildering and, at times, geographically exclusive update names like “Anniversary Update,” “Fall Creators Update,” and “Spring Creators Update,” the company decided to abandon these seasonal and arbitrary monikers in 2018. The change, motivated by the need for global inclusivity and genuine clarity, ultimately reshaped how users and IT professionals track Windows advancements in a modern, interconnected world. This transition, sparked by an employee’s candid feedback about hemispheric bias, underscores the importance of thoughtful naming in technology—and offers a fascinating look inside Microsoft’s decision-making process.
Windows users who navigated the OS ecosystem between Windows 10’s release and its post-2018 updates likely remember the parade of strangely named updates. At first glance, titles like “Anniversary Update,” “Fall Creators Update,” and “Spring Creators Update” may have seemed almost celebratory or creative. However, for IT departments, global businesses, and everyday users, decoding the actual meaning—and more crucially, the release timing—of these updates turned into an unnecessary challenge.
By embracing clear, hemisphere-neutral, and predictable naming conventions, Microsoft not only resolved a genuine usability pain point but also set a new benchmark for software update transparency. While no system is perfect and trade-offs remain, the journey from “Fall Creators Update” to “25H2” stands as a vivid example of how mindful iteration, user feedback, and a willingness to confront bias can push product design—and user experience—toward a more open, universal future.
Source: Neowin Here is the reason why Microsoft ditched its absurd Windows version names
Background: The Era of Confusing Windows Version Names
Windows users who navigated the OS ecosystem between Windows 10’s release and its post-2018 updates likely remember the parade of strangely named updates. At first glance, titles like “Anniversary Update,” “Fall Creators Update,” and “Spring Creators Update” may have seemed almost celebratory or creative. However, for IT departments, global businesses, and everyday users, decoding the actual meaning—and more crucially, the release timing—of these updates turned into an unnecessary challenge.Why Naming Mattered More Than Ever
As Windows evolved into its “as-a-service” model, quick and regular updates became the norm. Unlike the major jumps from Windows 95 to Windows XP or Windows 7, the new era brought incremental yet essential changes twice a year. This frequency magnified the problem: With updates named for seasons, users outside the northern hemisphere often found the names misleading. In Sydney, Cape Town, or Buenos Aires, the “Fall” Creators Update didn’t launch during autumn at all, and the very concept of “Spring” was reversed or irrelevant.The Catalyst for Change: Inclusion and Bias in Naming
Raymond Chen, a respected voice within Microsoft, recently shed light on what happened behind the scenes. During an internal company meeting, a senior executive posed a question about unconscious bias—a topic gaining increased attention not just in HR circles, but in product development teams as well.The Defining Moment
An employee from the southern hemisphere bravely articulated a key point: The seasonal naming convention implicitly favored the northern hemisphere, and more broadly, English-speaking temperate regions. This seemingly minor detail caused confusion everywhere else in the world. What was meant to be relatable was, in effect, alienating for a significant portion of global users—an oversight that, once realized, could not be ignored.Immediate Action
According to Chen’s account, the leadership team took this feedback seriously. The next day, Microsoft shifted toward a hemisphere-neutral, time-based naming convention. This move was not merely cosmetic: it directly addressed a blind spot in how Microsoft communicated major software events to its worldwide audience.The Shift to Logical Naming: H1, H2, and Simplicity
The new standard, which began in earnest with Windows 10 version 1803 (April 2018 Update), phased out seasonal names. Instead, updates were identified by semiannual version numbers—such as “1803” (March 2018), “1909” (September 2019)—or later, with a clear “H1” or “H2” indicating the first or second half of the year.Key Features of the New Naming Convention
- Predictability: IT departments and end users could now easily determine when a feature update was released.
- Inclusivity: No hemisphere, culture, or language was privileged or obscured by the naming scheme.
- Simplicity: Version names corresponded to either specific months or calendar halves, erasing the confusion around “Spring” or “Fall.”
- Global Relevance: Companies and users worldwide now experienced Windows releases under a truly universal nomenclature.
Reduction in Update Frequency
Microsoft also moved from biannual to annual feature updates, further simplifying the tracking and deployment of new Windows versions. For instance, “Windows 11, version 25H2,” expected later this year, continues this logical trend.Critical Analysis: Strengths and Lingering Weaknesses
Notable Strengths
The shift to the H1/H2 and annual model delivers several clear benefits:- Clarity for IT Administrators: Update planning, documentation, and patch management are all facilitated by transparent and date-based names.
- Global User Satisfaction: Respect for worldwide audiences fosters trust and adapts Microsoft’s communications to its genuinely international customer base.
- Historical Tracking: It’s now considerably easier to chart the evolution of Windows, search for update-specific information, and reference older versions without ambiguity.
Challenges and Risks
Yet, the new convention is not without drawbacks:- Loss of Personality: While decisive and globally understandable, the date-based naming scheme lacks the flair or “brand cachet” of past names. The old system, despite its flaws, was sometimes memorable in a way “22H2” or “25H2” can never be.
- Potential for Over-Simplicity: The risk of confusion persists for casual users unfamiliar with the “H1/H2” shorthand. Newcomers might not immediately grasp whether “21H1” is newer than “20H2” without context.
- Legacy Software and Documentation Issues: The transition led to discrepancies in older documentation and third-party guides, where update names and version numbers did not always reconcile seamlessly.
Technical Impact: Versioning in Practice
How Organizations Track Windows Updates
Enterprise environments depend on precise versioning to ensure software compatibility, regulatory compliance, and hardware provisioning. The H1 and H2 system, as well as more explicit version numbers, now integrates neatly into asset management, patching cycles, and support workflows.- Asset Inventory: Administrators can set policy based on H1/H2 releases, knowing exactly what feature set and security protections are available.
- Compliance: Businesses in regulated industries find it easier to demonstrate up-to-date OS deployments, as feature versions are indisputable.
- Support: Microsoft itself, along with third-party ISVs, refers to H1/H2 versions when listing compatibility, troubleshooting steps, and end-of-support dates.
Home Users Benefit Too
For enthusiasts and everyday consumers, the streamlined naming approach helps demystify update notifications and the “About This PC” panels. Users now immediately know if they’re running the latest build and can more easily research issues or features pertaining to a specific version.Broader Implications: Inclusivity as an Industry Standard
Microsoft’s naming evolution resonates beyond its own ecosystem. The logic of hemisphere-neutral, timestamped versioning is echoed by competing platforms and software vendors, from Apple’s annual macOS releases to enterprise Linux distributions.Lessons for the Tech Industry
- User-Centric Design: Even “small” details like product names can have global impact, prompting reconsideration of assumptions that may seem benign but are in fact exclusionary.
- Feedback Loops Matter: The candid observation by a single employee, met with real change, illustrates the value of open channels for employee input within large organizations.
- Consistency in Communication: Standardization across updates fosters smoother communication, not only with users but within development and support teams.
Looking Ahead: What Comes After H1/H2?
With the pace of innovation and user expectation ever-increasing, Microsoft’s current model appears well-suited for at least the near term. However, as new paradigms emerge—cloud-based Windows experiences, AI-powered operating system updates, and even more granular release cycles—the company may once again need to rethink how it signals change to its audience.Future Considerations
- Dynamic Versioning Systems: As Windows delivers more features outside the traditional “update” concept, there may be a need for continuous or rolling release identifiers.
- Regional and Language-Based Personalization: Beyond versioning, Microsoft and its peers might explore adaptive UI and documentation based on user geography and language, with more sensitive localization approaches.
- User-Driven Naming Conventions: Crowdsourcing or hybrid naming approaches could strike a balance between memorability and universality, offering a nod to both tradition and inclusivity.
Conclusion
Microsoft’s decision to move away from the confusing and geographically biased Windows version names was not just a triumph of logic and simplicity, but a meaningful step toward greater inclusivity and global user respect. The change—spurred by candid, critical feedback from within—demonstrates how even entrenched tech giants can adapt when their internal culture encourages listening, reflection, and decisive action.By embracing clear, hemisphere-neutral, and predictable naming conventions, Microsoft not only resolved a genuine usability pain point but also set a new benchmark for software update transparency. While no system is perfect and trade-offs remain, the journey from “Fall Creators Update” to “25H2” stands as a vivid example of how mindful iteration, user feedback, and a willingness to confront bias can push product design—and user experience—toward a more open, universal future.
Source: Neowin Here is the reason why Microsoft ditched its absurd Windows version names
