Fuck you. Bringing up ME and making me relive the memories. Even as a kid, I couldn’t stand it wanted 98 back.
ME and Vista are by far the worst to date.
Comment on Learn how to count with Bill Gates
flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
Quality, but what about ME, and arguably 3.11. Does NT cover both 3.5.1 and 4? (my memory is hazy about earlier)
saltesc@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
aeronmelon@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
ME and Vista are by far the worst to date.
11 is trying its darnedest.
MxM111@kbin.social 5 weeks ago
Really? I do not see much difference compared with 10, other than shifted start button.
087008001234@lemmy.ml 5 weeks ago
The silenced cries of the side taskbars…
TheCheddarCheese@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Well aside from that, which shouldn’t have been set by default imo, it has more bugs, ridiculous system requirements, requires a ms account even more than before and runs worse.
I guess however bad the versions before it might have been, they at least kind of had a point? 11 is just a shitty reskin to squeeze out those sweet licensing dollars. They didn’t even bother changing the version number in the older releases.
morhp@lemmynsfw.com 5 weeks ago
I switched mostly to Linux when windows 8 was released, but I don’t mind 11. It looks quite nice, the start menu is pretty good and normal again compared to the ugly full screen shitshow from windows 8 and the weird hybrid thing from windows 10 and most of that foreign mobile metro crap from windows 8 is gone again or reintegrated into the desktop.
Having tabs in the explorer is also super nice.
EtherWhack@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I personally never had any issues with Vista. Even deferred win7 for 4-5 years until I got curious. Though I did have a system made for it, so that was part of it.
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Vista was a nightmare if you had OEM equipment that wasn’t just vista compatible, but MADE FOR VISTA. Your experience was an aberration, most people got ‘vista compatible’ PCs that were running vista but made with XP sp1 in mind. So you’d see these systems that had no hardware graphics acceleration beyond onboard anemic garbage trying to run menus with DOF blur and soft overlays just gagging, and god forbid you had to troubleshoot/support some software on some shit like this, it was a nightmare.
The rest of the people upgraded from XP to Vista themselves, and the smart ones went “OH FUCK NO” and went back in droves.
MxM111@kbin.social 5 weeks ago
8 was quite bad too
The_Hideous_Orgalorg@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
8 only gets hate because people lost their minds with the start menu change.
MxM111@kbin.social 5 weeks ago
It had multiple personalities disorder. Two e-mails, two browsers, two settings. It was confusing as hell.
RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 weeks ago
I actually liked it then, you could just roughly click in the area and would hit the right shortcut.
aeronmelon@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I don’t know if they reclassified it at some point, but back on those days 3.5 was titled “Windows for Workgroups” and 4.0 was the first to be known simply as “NT”.
BillibusMaximus@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
3.11 was WfW, and ran on top of DOS just like 3.1 did.
NT 3.51 used the NT kernel, and (mostly) looked like 3.1/3.11 on the surface. NT 4 used the NT kernel, and (mostly) looked like Win95.
Win 95/98/Me also ran on DOS, though it was more tightly integrated than it was in the 3.1 days.
Win 2k and everything after was based on NT.
ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 5 weeks ago
I remember the early win 3.11 to win 95 days when it was still easier to exit to dos to install a lot of software because no one was writing windows interfaces for anything.
Now I’m wondering if I still have my Doom .WADs saved somewhere…
brianorca@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Replace NT in this list with ME and you have all the consumer versions. NT was the business version in parallel with 3, 95, 98, and ME.
GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 5 weeks ago
Win2k wasn’t consumer. It was the business offering at the same time as ME, which may be surprising to some. Xp was their successor, merging the business and personal lines.
dan@upvote.au 5 weeks ago
I remember using Windows 2000 at school. That OS was solid. Far more reliable and stable than what I was running at home (Windows 98, first edition).
GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 5 weeks ago
Yeah, those were the days, back when more often than not a Windows upgrade was also an improvement. As much as I loved Win2k, WinXP was even better. Let’s not talk about Vista and while Win7 was nice, it wasn’t much of a UX improvement.
Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Also 98SE, is that just covered by 98? I don’t think it should be there’s a reason they released a second edition.
IIII@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
8.1 as well
EtherWhack@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I see 8.1 as 9. Will never not.
db2@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Bob