this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
387 points (96.4% liked)
Technology
60047 readers
2836 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If microsoft would just put out a modernized version of windows 95 it would probably be seen as "visionary" and be perfect for like what eighty percent of people and businesses, I just want a modern windows that unnoticeable and secure
Honestly, if there was just a modern windows XP that could run the programs I dualboot for, I wouldn't be dualbooting!
Modern windows is just so bloated and cluttered.
I was gutted when I had to move on from XP. Bring it back!
I've been using windows all my life and I've never seen anyone not say this about "their" version. Except ME. Fuck ME.
But seriously my dad refused to switch to Windows from DOS for the longest time. 95? The best. 98? Can't upgrade. Xp or die. 7 forever. 10 or bust. In 10 years it will be people clamoring over 11 and refusing to switch.
I don't see win2000 or vista or 8 in that list. Not including those demonstrates within your anecdote that Microsoft is capable of putting out shitty half-step OS's that people pretty widely dislike.
That's what 11 feels like. In ten years people will be fighting the move from 12 to whatever is next, and people might not even talk about 11. Like they don't talk about 8.
That's because, like with the pattern of those other three disliked OS's, Microsoft is going to to have to be reminded that people won't just accept a polished turd. They will actually have to make a good OS with a reason to upgrade.
Windows 2000 was for enterprise, not home use. 8 was for mobile & touchscreens (at first) and that failed miserably yes, hence their 8.1 release. Just like ME they tried hopping on a bandwagon and it flopped. Two major flops in 23 years is not a bad record. But my point remains that when whatever new OS comes out, people look back at the last one with rose tinted glasses.
My gran had a pc with 2000 on it. I still have an old laptop with 8 on it. 8.1 failed too. Don't act like those OS's were nonexistent.
Nobody looks at those 3 OS's with rose tinted glasses. 10 isn't the best operating system, but let's not pretend that 11 is such a major upgrade that people will fall over themselves to get it. That's literally what the OP is about.
From the days of DOS till today Windows 2000 is definitely my favorite, the most cohesive, straightforward and consistent experience. For now I just hope software will keep supporting LTSC through till the end of support.
I still don't understand how people prefer 10 over 11. The only difference to me is that 11 isn't supported on most of my devices. 11 seems like 10 with some "CSS" changes...
For a small example: They hid a bunch of useful things like 7Zip behind a sub-menu. Doing a basic task like zipping a file now requires extra effort. For the short time I used it, everything was like that. Everything was just more steps or more hidden for no reason.
Furthermore, 11 has a ton more spyware in it. 10 was already bad, but 11 just dials it up.