Server 2008! I think vista had one of the better start meus.

UK contestants only

Hey'up Dan lad, why didn't you do a top 10 of YOUR most hated OS'? Then maybe down the line do 2 top 10's of viewers most beloved and hated OS'?

Where was TempleOS?

@@JamieCrookes TempleOS is never gonna be anyone's daily OS, but it's real value (imho), lay in providing us a window into the mind of a troubled fellow soul.

Xp x64 aka xp pro 64 bit.. I had that and my 32bt aka x86 edition product keys

Must have been your hardware. 98 and 98SE were great. Back then, I only reinstalled when I upgraded to the new OS.

That's heroic

@@toddnolastname4485 Great in some respects, but not in start up time... (or stability between programs or processes). The start up time was really like a bad joke, especially compared to the *instant on* computers we used in the 1980s.

J3QQ4 🌚

Did you get to have Classic Shell running to improve the situation? BTW was CS compatible with Server '12?

me

Or just run it in "Desktop" mode. Really, I don't get how supposed IT professionals missed that.

Win Server 2012 with Metro makes me wonder wtf was wrong with MS executives in that era.

@@wton The full screen start menu made me rationally angry. It was terrible over RDP sessions. “Want to start a program? PREPARE FOR SLOWNESS!”

When Seven Reached EOL I Ran It For 2 More Years Downloading The Security Patches From Pirate Sites! Windows 10 Is Simply Spyware/Malware And After Big Tech Interfered In The 2020 Elections I Have Left Them Forever! I Now Run Kubuntu Or To Say Debian With The KDE Desktop! Essentially Kubuntu! I Did Run Kodachi But When My Nordvpn Quit Supporting It I Had To Move On!! I Really Loved The Kodachi Dashboard For It's Simplicity And Security But You can Do All Of Those Things In Settings Here And There! But It Was Nice having Them All In One Place!

Back when Windows 10 was brand new, I remember it was a gamble on whether it would start again after shutting down my computer. Sometimes it would just grenade itself for no reason. It even did that years after release, but it wasn't as common. Windows Aero is still a favorite of mine to this day too. At least Windows 11 is better than Windows 10 in that regard.

Not gonna read a novel for opinion on an os.

Windows 11 looks a lot better

@@trabant601e One thing that royally pisses me off about Win11 is how you have to keep clicking on additional options to get to the traditional Cut, Copy, and Paste options in the Explorer context menu. Sure, I could use the hotkeys but I prefer to use the context menu. What about users who aren't familiar with using hotkeys? Whoever decided it was a good idea to hide those options by default is an idiot.

Organisational ‘features’ such as that are a big give away…

Not quite as far back, but I did work on a 1401, 360. I remember placing the startup code in the I/O buffer to save memory on the 360 (Assembly). The introduction of VM/370 was a godsend, made several patches to both DOS 26.2 and VSE for improvements. Fascinating how capable those (relatively) insanely expensive systems were. Lease prices were tens of 1000's per month. It's easy to take all advancements with a grain of salt with that background.

Shit, I was born in 63!👶 I got my first PC a Sinclair z81 in 1981, and hardly used it for being slower than writing by hand... I had a few 2,3, and 486's, a Macintosh Lisa (Still have it but won't boot the OS anymore), and AMD K's and a few Athlon's too. I really only became a power user with Windows 3.1 and a GUI🥴. Some 15 years ago, when my OS was Windows 7, I just got too fed up with MS and literally nuked it and shredded the CD and switched to Linux cold turkey!🤬 I put myself through Linux boot camp and learned it rather quick for having no Windows to fall back on, and have been Loving it ever since.🥳🐧BTW I use Arch!😜🐧 I just built A wicked system with an AMD 7500X, 64 GiB of RAM, and two swift WD Black NVME's, but held off on getting a better graphics card than the one I swapped from my old i5 system because the prices are still too unjustifiably insane!

@@Bob-of-Zoid I too got bit by tbe Linux bug back in 2004. Work PC had XP, couldnt change that, but i FDISKed my home pc (Celeron Coppermine) and installed Fedora Core 1. Never looked back. A P4 (intels biggest piece of shit IMHO) then a Core i3, and now I'm on Fedora 31 and probably due for and upgrade. I only kept the Win7 partition for Autocad, but now Dassault gives us Draftsight for Linux and I'm a happy camper.

@@johnclement5903 You mean you got bit by a penguin!🐧 HAIL TUX!😂 I have tried FreeCAD and it's pretty powerful, but not necessarily as easy to use. I kind of been putting off learning it, because my wish of buying a CNC Router is not tenable at the moment. Over the years that I have tried it on and off, it has improved a great deal. I checked out "Draftsight" but it's proprietary not FOSS, and there's zero Linux anything on their site. It all points at Windows and MAC OS exclusively. So either you are using it on Windows, or you are speaking of another software. There are a few supposedly good online CAD/CAM tools, but putting your designs you may want to patent, or protect for any reason, on some companies servers is trouble waiting to happen. I can't wait to hear the news when a bunch of people find out their patent was patented by someone else, or their entire business model was copied marketed and released before they had a chance too, and found out it was because they did everything with google doc's and google is in the business (Through "Affiliates") of using others hard work to their advantage, and that those they rip off blindly handed over their whole freaking business and all data associated for not reading and understanding their EULA! My Business is nearly 100% self contained. I don't do any other services than email, a host for my website, and an internet provider. I don't do cloud, or software services of any kind, and never will!

I switched to Mac while trying to use Windows 8 while working on a masters.

What happened to the third party widgets? Did anyone pay for them?

​@@treehugger3615 I think the widgets as a whole had a vulnerability, regardless of who made them, the actual widget *system* was flawed in execution.

@@AraiDigital I'll go one better; the entire windows system itself, has been flawed in execution. The greed which kept new bells and whistles front and center, while not fixing the underlying problems in the OS, is what has perpetually kept windows from ever becoming a great program. The incredible bloat of windows, as well as the intentionally hiding so much in an obscure 'registry', simply makes it a non starter for serious users.

@@d.e.b.b5788 Lawdy, that damned registry. I consider myself an advanced user and have worked as IT support, though not always for Windows. The complexity of trying to tease out a problem, and then resolve it, is insane. You think you've found the right entry for something, then discover that there was a connection somewhere that has now made your system unstable. I'm grateful that I haven't had to dive into it in years. My current system is stable and I rarely add new software, which was the cause of most of my past ventures. It is approximately 5 years old now, and I hope I can keep it going another 5. Compared to current systems, the specs may seem weak, but all my software runs smoothly.

@@d.e.b.b5788 You have hit the nail on the head! "the entire windows system itself, has been flawed in execution" The "incredible bloat", the registry, the incompatibilities, and so on mean that almost ANY other OS is preferable for the desktop. Absolutely Linux for a server!

Idk, it starts up fast and plays games pretty well. Win7 took way too long to start up.

Wrong. Someone here isn't a power user. Windows 7 constantly crashed and was even more difficult to find settings for. Windows 10 is BY FAR the most user friendly and stable.

Rebecca you really need to spend much, much more time with Windows 10, preferring it over Windows 7 speaks volumes in your familiarity with the OS

After using Win10, I don't think I could go back to Win7. Win10 does a ton more than 7 did, is more powerful, and is more secure. It's better than 7 in soooooo many ways.

@@soulintake Ahh yes, the old "You don't like something I like, so hence you must be an inferior user," argument. I'm sorry, but it doesn't work like that. I don't doubt that you like it, but I don't. And it has nothing to do with skill levels.

Vista never had issues if you built for vista, my own machine was pretty much the best you could buy as of December 2006 (and the CPU got upgraded as soon as there was a quad core 2 extreme which happened in 2007). I also had 2 dual 8800 gts gfx cards, 4gb of ram (think I had 8gb at the end of 2007 when I got the new cpu so I already had more memory than most users at the time unless we're talking eec memory users) That PC ($7,876.47) gave me so much entertainment than any game console ever did (ok, the ps2 was a banger, the 360 also was pretty damn stacked in 2007 as well as PS3 but the 360/ps3 was the last GOOD console gaming generation.. it's sucked since) You also gotta realize I was only 17 at the time (jan 2007), so $8k was a lot of money and I was screamed at by my parents because college was coming up and I just bought kick ass PC components (hindsight College was a waste of money and I don't recommend college unless it's a trained and needed position like a dr, lawyer, etc.. everything else can be learned on your own) That PC lasted me until LGA 2011 which I think came out at the tail end of 2011 or early 2012.. Now obv I upgraded the CPU and gpu a few times but honestly that system kept up for a good solid 5 years! In 2012 I went with a i7 3820 (I originally was gonna upgrade this later but never happened but I did get a stable 4.5ghz out of it), 16gb of ddr3 (eventually 64gb), 5x 2tb hdd, 4x 500gb ssd, 1x 2tb ssd(main os/programs), gtx 680, 3x samsung 24' 120hz 3d panels (I can't remember the actual product name but they were 3d tn panels that ran at 120hz). I don't think I upgraded my gpu until I noticed severe fps issues at 1080p high settings.. think I upgraded to a Titan or a Titanx.. it was a titan (which then got upgraded to gtx 1080) and now I'm on a 3070ti (that's mainly cause it was impossible to get ANY gpu at the time.. prob won't upgrade until a 5080/90 or see how amd is doing.

Once hardware caught up Vista was a great OS. The problem was that most of the PCs people were using at the time it was released weren't really up to the task. It needed a multicore CPU with a gigabyte of RAM and a video card with 3D acceleration to run well and those are things most people didn't have yet. Windows 7 was only a minor update to Vista and it was hugely popular.

A while back, I ran across an old laptop that came with Vista Starter, and 256mb of ram.

I had an all in one PC with ME on it. I could see no issue with it. Perhaps only a bluescreen once in afew months for me. Didn't quite know what people disliked at the time.

The problem with saying Vista is the worst, yet fine after SP2, then shouldn't it be tied with XP? That had ridiculous bugs, some of which, like the fact that anyone from anywhere could literally send you a system message, usually spam, with no way of blocking them, without being patched to hell and back first.

Tolerating and justifying MS products and behavior (and the opposite) is a declaration of principle It would be debatable to accept MS if their products were superb Supporting MS crap leads to later supporting nazis, zionists and all kinds of fascists

I used Vista on 2009 laptop, and for a long time I did not switch to Win7 or Win8, as it simply worked like a charm. When I switched to Win7, I noticed that this system is just a revamp of Vista SP2 and it did not work as great as people said.

It's insane to me because Microsoft proved a universal truth with their Mojave campaign - all they had to do was take Vista, rebrand it Windows 7, and braindead people would eat it up. Vista SP2 and Win7 RTM are the exact. same. fucking. operating system. XP RTM and SP1 were unmitigated nightmares and it will never cease to blow my mind the mental gymnastics people do to claim Vista is the "worst" of anything.

Dan should really look into this. My contact list?

Fasthost better figure it out real quick!

This is no surprise and standard Internet "Win Prizes" marketing. I do not see the problem here ...

Man if you are worried about this you should read Google and facebook terms of service.

@@FloppydriveMaestro FYI, Google does not sell your personal information to advertisers. Facebook on the other hand has a history of freakin' giving it away.

Teams is junk. Although, after thinking about it, New Teams is quite -decent- workable.

You could improve stuff a lot by disabling all the Aero nonsense, all those see through menus and cool animations and stuff.

I remember that, I was a Novell 3.11 CNE.

No fond memories of XTree Gold....?

I threw away the ms dos floppies that came with my pc. Never used it. First pc dos and then Dr dos. X tree gold (gets faraway look like Homer Simpson mmmmmmmm)

And it was a good thing from what I remember.

I must be older. I still remember installing MS-DOS 5.0 on a IBM XT with 8088 and 256KB RAM. Guess what? It worked!

xD

I had a similar issue supporting an architect. There was just a couple pieces of software they had to be able to use. Some time around 2010 we still had to use xp on a virtual machine to run that 1 program he would have to spend tens of thousands of dollars to replace. He retired before having to do that. After that when someone askes ‘what computer should I get?’ I ask them what software will be installed on it.

That's great. I'm definitely glad you're billed by the hour. It's hard for me to imagine someone being a competent lawyer and being so cheap that they'd refuse to buy even a mid-range PC. Did you ever try partitioning or adding a separate drive for storage? It also seems like she might have had about 2,000 documents on her desktop, which would account for the very slow startup.

@@encycl07pedia- She was actually SUPER organized. And mostly “offline.” She only used the computer for exactly the hat was needed for technical reasons. (The online recordings/transcripts.)

Lawyers also bill by the hour. Maybe she's smarter than you think.

NT was pretty good, and CE did exactly what it promised.

@@logan_page Very little computing for very little computers? 😋

still better than the spyware rootkit malware PUP trojan called "windows 10" who TF uses it as there OS, all the normies of the world were doomed.

Jeff Govak what do you use, pray tell?

@@NightmareRex6 what do you use??

Agree, but XP runned for me best after SP2 Windows 8 wasnt that bad after 8.1 and tweaking. Vista, to be honest whas great to on my laptop runned it till Windows 10 came out.

True

Hahahahahah...

Windows ME was the worst version of a Microsoft gui, ever. I made more money back in the day downgrading to Windows 98SE then anything else.

@@RDJ134 8.1was a service hack. 8 and 8.1 were both horrible, much worse than Vista.

The problem with Me is that Windows 2000 came out around the same time, looked very similar, offered that same feature and also was a whole lot more stable. Once games started supporting Win2k there was little reason to use Me.

@@kukuc96 I do hope Windows finally fades out. It really is a weird and obsolete design.

@@BalooUriza Wow! Great story!

@@BalooUriza Like Gnome 3 :D

That actually explains a lot.... like why there's 8 different versions when only 3 of them are actually useable

@@jasonmetcalfe4695 Not really. ME is just 98 without some legacy support, and 9x is just 3.x with a better program manager. Vista and 7 are literally the same except for branding. Microsoft's just really good at selling its OS customers the same turd twice and them liking it the second time, even if nothing substantive has changed about it but the marketing materials.

Same

I loved Vista in general, it was eye candy to me.

About that same time, Compiz/Beryl came along and completely blew away any notion of what I had previously thought of as 'pretty'.

Vista64 GOOD, Vista32 BAD. They should have been brave and only ever released the 64 bit version.

​@@SwervingLemon hahah exactly. I went full force on compiz and completely stopped using Windows back in university up to this day. Linux was also more convenient for my uni assignments, so it was a pretty easy transition completely away from Windows (I'd already been dual-booting linux for a few years).

Multiple Errors I call it

In Germany, the "ME" wasn't only spelled out letter by letter since "me" isn't a word in German, it was also backronymed to either "MüllEimer" (Garbage can) or "Müll Edition" (Garbage Edition). ;-)

we called it the missery edition. One new dell pc ran ME with autocad. The OC plotter could only work with ME or not available anymore win2000 license. ME made your day misserable. One day i was so fed up with it i took the pc stealthy to my home and installed 2000. Problem solved 😁

And now Bill Gates wants to F'k the world with his shitty vaccines. Does any one trust this guy?

And for a little more I could have got a computer with Windows 2000. Oy...

Windows ME worked just fine if you weren't reliant on DOS programs. Not a good OS but hardly the worst.

@@thelaughingmanofficial For some this may have been the case, but I have heard many stories of people installing ME or buying a PC with ME already installed and the computer crashed a heck of lot more than 95 or 98 ever did. I've heard that this may have been a driver issue, possibly due to many PC manufacturers not properly updating their drivers for ME or putting out buggy ME drivers. The removal of Real Mode DOS in ME did alleviate a common cause of crashes in 95 and 98 but drivers and/or other issue made ME crash allot for others reason, at least for many. Apparently, ME was rushed out as stop-gap Windows update for the year 2000 because they had originally planned to release a consumer version of Windows 2000 codenamed Windows Neptune but canceled those plans in favor developing Windows XP, codenamed Whistler. Whistler was a combo of Neptune and Odyssey (the planned successor to Win2000 workstation). With Whistler/XP they decided to introduce a radical Luna theme over the old Windows 2000 that wasn't much different the NT 4 theme. Had Neptune been completed and released instead of ME, I think even with the somewhat boring interface, that would have been the better move then update the interface with XP a year later as planned.

​@@thelaughingmanofficial It worked fine if you weren't reliant on ANY program, to be fair. Nothing justifies 98SE running smoothly without a hitch (for 9X standards) while ME crashes when you sneeze. Even 3.1 variants of Windows didn't give me that much trouble. So yes, ME is definitely the worst of 'em. Far, FAR worse than Vista, that's for sure.

Vista had fairly high memory requirements at the time. However I had 8 GB in my quad core system in the year 2008 and it ran like a dream.

I've always said that saying Vista was bad because it ran slow on machines that really shouldn't have came with it is like saying XP is bad because ran like shit on a Pentium MMX.

Windows Me was far worse than Vista.

I'd say it's a pretty big problem if a mass-market operating system doesn't, uh, operate very well for most users (including even some who bought computers with Vista OEM).

@@kvngn that wasn't the fault of Vista. It was the fault of OEMs slapping Vista Home Premium on machines that shouldn't have ran anything past Vista Home Basic.

Because slow download speeds made it more convenient to get the software at the store.

The real killer in MS-DOS 4.0 though was "Smartdrive" - for about 3 MONTHS before MS-DOS 4.0 was released, the best selling drive BY VOLUME was the Miniscribe 3650 and it's RLL certified version the 3675R - which had more than 1024 tracks. Smartdrive was limited to 1024 tracks, or it would OVERWRITE DATA - so you either had to format the drive smaller and LOSE CAPACITY, or you had to ditch SmartDrive entirely, or you had your most critical parts of the drive get overwritten and LOSE DATA. There were other drives with the same issue that were less common but had been around LONGER, like the Microscience 3085 and it's ESDI version the 3170, and had EVEN MORE tracks. There was a VERY STRONG reason MS-DOS 5.0 had a WIDE, OPEN BETA TEST before it was released - and I think that's STILL the only Microsoft OS that ever had a REAL Beta Test program.

That wasn't a good reason to be booted. Maybe you had a better idea of how the GUI was supposed to look and work. Maybe your ideas were better than the mess that ended up being win 8.

@@jamesphillipshort It made me laugh. I did not care at all. But it shows the attitude of the Windows developers at the time.

So you were a hacker and used it for ban evasion?

yes it sucked, still better than the trojan rootkit spuware PUP Malware known as "windows 10" were in big trouble world is more and more useing litteral malicius code as an OS, just because they bic corp dosent make it "safe" infact, big corp measn MORE DANGERUS!!!

The funny thing is that "svista" in Italian means "error by distraction" EDIT: Hello fellow Greek neighbor!

Εχω δει να τα χρησιμποποιουν μερικοι στο δημοσιο, αλλα λιγοι. Εκει δεν εχουν τα Svista εχουν ακομα τα XP

@@NightmareRex6 When I finally did an install as they made sure some stuff no longer works on Windows 7, I laughed when it asked if I agreed for them to collect 'inking'. Or to put it another way, agree to key logging. Some accused me of being a tin foil hat wearer, so I showed them the link on the Micro$oft site how to switch it off and check it hasn't been switched on again by an update. I use Linux for everything else now and just have Windows 10 for gaming and the stuff that won't run on 7 or Linux.

Και νομιζα οτι μονο εγω το λεω ετσι...

I skipped Me all together and instead migrated to windows 2000, man that was a breath of fresh air, as it was the first full 32-bit plug and play OS.

lot of older programs and games did not work op 2k (like carmageddon 2)

Amen!

For some time here 2000 wasn't listed as many of the "experts" didn't believe it was a desktop OS.

I've been using 2000 for so long that I barely used XP, which I saw as "NT for dummies". I made the switch just to have a 64 bit OS (yes, there was an x64 version of XP)

My memory in Win2k is as sweet as the memory of my childhood, I miss them, I even still remember how hard disk sound when at 2k's loading screen.

I agree. I used Vista for years and I thought it was fine. UAC could be a bit annoying but really, its just one click to say 'Yes I made that change' I never had issues with it being tripped multiple times for a program.

AzlanTLion I just turned UAC off. After that, I found Vista to be great. Actually had better luck with vista than 7 (in terms of stability). My one complaint with Vista is that it never had Aero Snap

My laptop back in 2007 was a Celeron with 2GB of memory and it came/ran with Vista fine. Granted, I was a student who didn't need much out of it except for social media, document manipulation, and occassional light gaming. Also, I liked UAC when it was introduced to be honest. Back during the XP days I used to have an anti-malware solution that relied on approving/denying system events instead of virus definitions to work as I was fed up by my PC getting screwed over whenever I plug a flash drive in.

The reason you never had any real issues was because it was already SP2 on decent hardware. At launch even hardware higher than recommended specs was struggling with aero on and a few programs open. On top of that depending on which peripherals you used more often then not drivers would be a major headache and take forever to get resolved (many I know just bought different hardware that they knew from forums/friends worked). Partly it was Microsoft's problem of not enough collaboration with manufacturers and their buy-in scheme for Win compatible (pay us to get your hardware working PnP); partly it was manufacturers pushing their products too soon and then dragging their feet and pointing fingers instead of working on proper drivers together with MS. I had plenty of issues with it (including many blue screens) until SP1 was released. That solved all my issues (well at least my pc issues lol). After SP2 it was pretty much a pre-win7 version.

Vista was a day late and a dollar short. It wasn't a bad OS, it just couldn't cash the checks that the Longhorn hype wrote. Blame Ballmer.

Those were the dark days. What a crap operating system

@@soulintake The operating system itself wasn’t crap. It’s the fault of the OEMs for not living up to modern standards.

@@melonademan5639 Totally agree! I loved it! I selected compatible hardware at the time with Vista Ultimate. Never ran into any problems at all. Was quite content with it!

Vista wasn't optimised very well so it ran badly on low end hardware. Basically the same problem as ME

In 2007, Vista simply wasn't up to scratch. I'm not sure if you used it in 2007, and on what hardware, but the whole planet couldn't suddenly dump everything, throw away every peripheral, and buy a dual core system with 3GB RAM and 256MB+ of video RAM. There were systems with 32 and 64MB of video RAM, that were single core with lower bus speeds such as Pentium 4 2.8GHz machines that had no chance in hell, and that's without looking at their device drivers and peripherals. The world doesn't stop just because Microsoft finally manages to get their bloated trash out of the door at v0.7 beta 2 [wink]

Same here. My Windows ME PC never gave me any issues.

I couldn't get it to run for more than 10 minutes without crashing.

@@ivandubinsky1857 You must have been an early adopter. By the time XP was right around the corner is when I had purchased a PC with ME. It did have a later revision that you probably didn't have. It kinda sucks it took them that long to fix the issues it had before because everyone I talk to in person has had a bad experience with ME except myself. Mine ran just as good as XP.

@@ThexthSurvivor I had a good experience with ME too, it was MUCH faster than Windows XP on my Pentium III machine at the time and it was somewhat faster than Win98se, it was also my favourite Windows user interface ever. The difference between NT and 9x in terms of speed is often forgotten but there really was a big performance hit going to NT. ME ran very well on older hardware, it was happy with 64MB of memory whereas XP really needed 256 to present a decent experience upon release. As XP became patched and evolved into SP3 you really had to have 512MB to run XP.

The problem with ME was definitely stability, and the computer restore feature which ate your generally not to big HDD up, and never worked one single time when the system files ended up corrupted. I had a brand new 1.0ghz P3 machine with 256mb of RAM and a 40gb HDD, computer restore would often take up 5gb of it after any long period of time, the performance was fine on that machine, the stability was not. We bought a second HDD to keep my parents work stuff on and every single member of the family including my at the time 6 year old brother knew how to run the system restore CDs to reinstall windows ME and all the drivers. My family LOVED ME when I stole a windows 2000 CD key and install disk from my highschool from machines they imaged XP on. Still couldn't play real mode DOS games, but the computer worked. Windows 2000 was great, OEM keys would install on any machine. Running a Windows ME virtual machine in retrospect isn't as terrible because, well, eventually all the problems got patched but it was long after everyone forgot ME existed. I played the hell out of Unreal Tournament, Quake 3, and Mechwarrior 4 on that machine, as well as Empire Earth.

I loved UAC. When I got used to it being there, I could no longer go back to XP.

Removed a good many too, and Vista was every bit as bad as people made it out to be. The 64 bit didn't have issues aside from getting drivers, the 32 bit would blue screen and ruin the file table if run on a 32 bit chip. The upgrade theory doesn't hold as people were having these problems on new machines with OEM installs.

I remember the same issue with O/S 2 back in the early 90s. I was working for an automation vendor and we had software from Europe than ran on O/S 2. The problem is that OS/S 2 required at least 2 Mb RAM and more to run well (a lot in the early 90s) and people wouldn't buy it. Windows 3.0/3.1 required a lot less RAM. O/S 2 was so superior to Windows it wasn't funny but people wouldn't buy it because of the memory requirements. It sounds like a joke in 2020, but memory was really expensive in the early 1990's.

@@shaunpcoleman At least it leveled off a bit since Vista, otherwise we'd be in the 1/2- 1 TB zone. I had 2 mb in 93 and it was half the cost of the PC

lol. Yeah, it's kind of how lots of HTML has become "obsolete" and "no longer supported" but pretty much every browser reads those tags just fine. I imagine if a browser actually removed those from support, half the Web would break on the browser. It sounds like you didn't do any quick-and-dirty hacks. Thank you for writing good code.

Percisely

It was the same with drivers. Back then there were a lot of crappy hardware manufacturers that provided very bad driver support especially from companies fromplaces like Taiwan. As great at hardware Taiwanese companies are they are terrible at software and especially documentation.

Clap clap for the good little developer who does as he's told.

@@MS-ho9wq You mean the developer that did the one thing that made their software work? Yes, how dare they! /s

What I remember too , 98SE without as much reinstall hassle for that reason I remember hating 98 more which blue screened just as much.

Back in the day, it was fine. Nowadays, it is rubbish.

Most likely you simply used the proper drivers and hardware. Like with Vista Me didn't like drivers and Hardware from the previous Windows. Which is understandable. Used both Vista and Me and both are actually quite good. Vista has the maybe most appealing UI of all. It's just hip to hate both of them lol

like the nokia 3310 memes 99% of the haters never touched ME or worked with it.

The GUI was fantastic. I miss it too.

Loved it too but machine was capable and kept clean. .. I knew the struggle of 9x from w98, xp, me ... suddenly I didn't have to annually reformat to have a working computer .. that was new to me ..hahha .

@@MarcoLarouche I had several times where one of the system files in Windows XP got corrupted and I figured out that I could pull a copy from a working XP machine and just replace it unfortunately at that time most boot disks couldn't read NTFS so I had to install NTFS for dos onto a floppy and put that system file there so I could replace it from the floppy lol. Keep in mind I was like 10 so that was a big deal for me 😂

I had a few machines running Vista. I'm not sure what all the hate was about with this release. The very first release had some issues, but these were quickly fixed. It was actually one of the most polished releases Microsoft ever put out. It's downfall was being sold, initially, on older hardware that really wasn't up to the task.

@B3ro1080 I seem to recall gamers' main complaint with Vista being added latency, and many staying with XP. I don't really pay too much attention to the needs of gamers' because they are not representative of general usage. PC gaming also wasn't quite as "hot" of a scene then as it is today. Sometimes I think a lot of the BS about latency, frame rates, resolution, etc are more of a dick size contest than actually about playability or strategy.

@B3ro1080 Anything over 60FPS is higher than human persistence of vision. Any latency below 200ms isn't perceptible.

@B3ro1080 It wasn't that big in 2007 when Vista came out. Present, but not the esports thing we have today. As for as 200ms goes. It's all in your head. Find a science book. Looks like you responded just to argue anyways.

@B3ro1080 Plenty of online reaction time tests around to prove that out. 200ms is considered average... The all time average on the famous dataset is 280ms. The old gold standard for RTT before ubiquitous fiber links was 90ms or roughly half typical reaction time. No denying that some have exceptional reflexes, but even the best test subjects tested in the 140s. That is visual reaction time. Aural reflex is much faster... Some professional athletes testing as low as 78ms.

Why would you go 2 weeks without backing up your thesis?!

By the time WIndows 7 was mature, Vista had been patched sufficiently to be stable. But the first year or two of using it was horrible.

In those days offices were filled with 512 meg of ram machines and a powerful PC would have 1 to 2 gigs. XP survived for so long that oems cheaper out with less ram to a race to the bottom with price wars.

@xwinglover I had mine for 2 weeks before it started acting up.

But that's the problem. No problem with a game pushing the limits of hardware, the world's most popular OS shouldn't be.

In Benchmarks, Vista simply could not keep up to Windows 7 because of the way it wasted ram to display the desktop while Windows 7 used much faster vram.

Grapical User Interface!

That's because you got a later update and you haven't tried the inital release

It's a pity my printer didn't have a driver in 7 & later. I found one, but it would have cost me $80. Thanks MS.

It's an old ad. He was actually destroying it and then the mom went to the PC and used System Restore to showcase the ability of Windows Me to repair itself.

@@EricchiYukia Horrible OS at the time. Unnecessary, and died before it could redeem itself.

Mistake edition

@@Phil-D83 No that's windows 7

@@Jimmycozad1980 reee

Did you buy it in the first few months? Zero driver support out of the box. What a failure

10/10 assessments there. Windows 8 was only tolerable if you were comfortable using the keyboard more than clicking icons with the mouse.

2000 was really the dry run for XP. And it was really great. XP was really just 2000 with higher hardware requirements and a pasteurized wallpaper. Though as computers got faster and faster, XP began to overtake 2000 in what it could get out of the hardware. For me that seemed somewhere around the Athlon XP 1600ish area.

@@soulintake You scream "incel". Are you ok?

@@wishusknight3009 I'm fine, you seem a bit emotional over this, its going to be okay man! Have a great day!

I agree, i had windows Vista running on a Core2Duo system and it was quite fast and stable.

@@hyperturbotechnomike runnnin' win 7 on 2 core and it still is fairly ''good''

I had the same good experience, stable without crashes. And when I changed the HDD for a SSD, the system improved a looooot

Powerful PC also struggle with vista not because of low performance but due to terrible hardware handling. This problem didn't exist in W7 so many of us just waited on xp until W7 came out.

fun story, dad's old core 2 duo laptop from 2008 HATES 10 (and by proxy also 11 i imagine) due to a borked intel wifi driver. vista that it shipped with? NOT A SINGLE BSOD, EVER. like idk.

Windows NT 3.1 was a lot worse. It was abandoned by microsoft because it was so full of bugs. NT 3.5 had a revamped code base.

I used both and don't recall having any stability issues with either. With DOS most crashes are caused by bugs in the applications, and most Windows 3.1 (and later too) crashes are caused by driver bugs.

Exactly, i didnt use windows XP until the SP3, and WinMe used to behave very well at that time. I dont know what the people that dislikes WinMe tried to do, but in my experience it fulfilled its purpose

@@salvadormendoza8535 I had a dual boot system back in the day with WinMe and Windows 2000. They could access each others drives except maybe for the NTFS partition. I used Windows 2000 to surf the Internet from a user account (once I got it properly locked down which took awhile). I never used any anti virus. If I went to the wrong web page it would prompt for my admin password and get a big laugh from me. Only issue was if I needed to change screen settings or something I needed to log in to admin. Anyway WinMe had all the drivers I needed and every game ran, and I could still invoke DOS for Ultima 7 or something if I needed to. Reboots required, but no boot diskettes ever needed.

Well that answers my question as to whether TempleOS made an appearance

Replace Windows 8 with Windows 10

Glad to see IBM OS2 Warp not on the list. I always sort of enjoyed that one.

​@@HansensUniverseT-A No noninono lol

most people who used it seem to have had a very good experience with it (by used it I mean used it long term)

My issues Vista actually started with the release of SP1. Had an external HDD that worked fine until I upgraded to SP1. After a few bouts of uninstalling/reinstalling the OS and testing I found that running Linux in a VM allowed me to access the drive.

A lot of people installed it, found their performance dropped 75% on then quickly ditched it for a less intensive os, usually the one they just 'upgraded' from. To put it into context, let's say you brought a brand new car but handles and performs like some 70s beater, you would be upset you paid top dollar for a worse car than you had, no matter how shiny it was. The death knell was business - forced into upgrading through security and support policies. If you have 500 pcs that work perfectly fine, then have to throw them out to spend $2000*500 to replace them, just to be able to do the exact same thing you did before with zero productivity improvements... well let's just say MS made themselves extremely unpopular worldwide.

@@tvctaswegia497 there WERE productivity improvements though. also, I hate computer car analogies but here, if you were getting worse performance, it was because you didn't get a new car (computer).

@@tvctaswegia497 If you're spending $2000 a piece when buying 500 computers in bulk you're getting scammed... Typical office pc's very capable of running Vista could be bought for ~350 back then, buying 500 in bulk will easily get you a 15-20% discount at HP/Dell thus ~$280*500. Also, performance didn't drop 75%, that's just a made up percentage and the wrong measure anyway. System resource utilization increased a bit yes but nowhere near 75%, more in the range of 5-10% when running on a low-end system. Once you spent more than $250 on a new pc Vista ran fine from launch. Their peripheral support sucked though.

It wasn't as good as XP, but it was mostly tolerable. And 10 isn't half as good as 7, but it's tolerable.

I think technically it is/was

Microsoft's joke on us: Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 were all Windows 6.x under the covers. 10 would have been another 6.x, but Microsoft wanted to cut ties with Windows 8 so much that the product name and system version were both upped to 10.

WINDOWS 10 is windows 8 upgraded to windows 7 (but not as good as 7)

Funny and true.

"This incident will be reported"

Actually, it's worse. Sometimes it doesn't allow a damn thing to function even if you're an Admin. For instance, if some moron decided for some service to have a DCOM-based interface. You just enable everything, turn off every firewall thus completely ruining security of the system, but still it's permission denied issue.

But it is mostly protecting you from programs that are doing something you didn't expect, or didn't even realize that you were running / were being run for you...it isn't perfect but had its raison d'etra.

Start Is Back

​@@barkybarker2592 I think the one I used was "Start Shell" or sonething

OS/2 Warp seriously shouldve bene on here!!!!!

OS/2 was essentially sabotaged by Microsoft. IBM and Microsoft had an agreement where IBM would make the server software and Microsoft the client side software. They collaborated on the project for 2-3 years. Then since IBM still was not allowed to protect their software/hardware patents (per gov't decree that STILL is in effect I believe), Microsoft took all of the shared information and created Windows 3 (or NT, it has been a long time) plus their own server software. IBM was holding the bag and came out with OS/2 as a client side for their server software. Note that ALL of Bill Gates early software (MS-DOS) were essentially copied directly from IBM directly, because IBM was not allowed to protect their patents and copyrights in the computing field. Nowadays IBM partners with other companies when patenting hard drive technolofy and tape drives, because the other company can protect the shared patents even if IBM is prohibited from doing so.

Oh man.... OS2 2.0 was an actual real OS..... It's problem was Microsoft marketing. IBM made it a real 32 bit OS where MS "trying" to come out with Windows NT, NT was half 16 bit and half 32. When writing code for NT you had to constantly "Thunk" (I think that's how they spelled it), variables from 16 to 32 or the inverse. And the speed difference, IBM moving off Microsoft's compiler over to.....can't remember their name but it was an outfit in Canada. Anywho, it was fast, very fast by comparison. IBM should have continue with it despite losing the marketing FUD. If they had things would be a lot different today which is an interesting thought.

Ye tbh I've used Vista a couple of times and it seems ok I guess it's just that the hardware back then wasn't powerful enough for a modern gui in the operating system

My experience with Vista was the UAC being the most annoying aspect in that it felt every action prompted the UAC to ask "are you sure you really want to do that?", ended up turning off UAC on quite a few pc's because it really did get to people.

That pesky UAC issue could easily be turned off :-)

@Josh B'Gosh said "It wasn't a "bad" operating system, as every iteration of Windows is resource hungry and bloated beyond anyone's needs Your response is the best example of what I say: microsofties believe crap is normal so it's ridiculous to demand MS products to function as a car I bet you would sue if your car behaved like MS crap

Vista definitely had faults, but unlike most of the OSes here, it somewhat redeemed itself after a few years once SP1 and SP2 for Vista came out. 7 was out for a while and I remember going back and installing Vista on a computer when SP2 was out and it was still supported and it ran well on that computer. It wasn't a powerful computer but certainly better than the early minimum system requirements and it was honestly a pleasant experience. Felt like I was using a blend of XP and Windows 7 and while I wouldn't consider the system as stable as Windows 7, I don't remember running into many issues with it. So yeah by the time the Service Packs came out for Vista, the reputation was already irredeemable and 7 had a better launch so people stuck with XP or 7.

Same

That was my immediate expectation

You are looking for the best OS list then 😋

@@youreperfectstudio4789 TempleOS deserves to be at the top of both lists RIP Terry

It offers ultimate privacy and is an excellent developers research operating system. It's not meant for you perhaps. 😼