This is getting way to sidetracked from OP.
Lets stick to the basic, this is guiless so its not essentially WINDOWS anymore, so again I do not understand the point of the OP mentioning FREE and WINDOWS OS.
I would just like to understand why the naming scheme were used.
Not necessarily. GUI-less Windows is still Windows if it's running the Windows kernel. It's like saying if you run Mac OS X with the GUI turned off you're not using Mac OS X. In reality, you're still using Mac OS X, you still need a legal license to run Mac OS X, and you're still bound by the restrictions of that license (I.E. - It's only supposed to run on Apple hardware). Just because someone strips out the signature element of an item doesn't rob that item of its essence. Yes, a GUI-less Mac OS X is basically Darwin (a FreeBSD derivative), but you're still using OS X frameworks, daemons and kernel-level software (like launchd, OS X's equivalent to cron; backupd, better known as Time Machine; and Grand Central Dispatch, their multi-core and 64-bit optimization routines) that has been compiled by engineers in Cupertino. This analogy can be said about Windows. Just because the Windows GUI is up, doesn't mean that the code doesn't come from Microsoft and that it doesn't use copyrighted code that you require a license to use.
People bring up free operating systems, like Linux (though I haven't heard anyone mention using BSD, Contiki, or Haiku, to name a few other free OSes), because it seems like a safer (legally speaking) alternative to pirating an operating system. Also it seems, from comments here, that Linux is a more efficient environment for running mining software (given personal experience, this would likely be true, but this is all anecdotal), making one question why you would go to so much effort to steal an operating system, and risk prosecution under the law for stealing and using said operating system, when there is a free alternative that is technically superior in every way (again, anecdotal).
Now, just because I said all this, don't go thinking that I'm trying to foist Linux on everyone in here. I use a Mac, and run Mac OS X. Given all the junk I run on it, it's a sub-optimal part-time mining rig that struggles to maintain 4 megahashes per second. It's certainly less efficient than running Linux on the machine either (trust me, I've compared the two). But I use OS X for certain reasons, namely Final Cut Pro and Motion. Of course, were I to run a dedicated mining rig, it'd be Linux, so I can understand both sides of the argument.
P.S. - Also, I'm pretty sure it's prohibited to encourage unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material. Hence why everyone is in such a huff trying to figure out what on earth is happening with Hyper-V, and is confused over the promise in the subject line of a "Free Windows OS!"
