Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 22nd May 2010 21:33 UTC
Windows "The first truly successful Microsoft Windows operating system is twenty years old today; Windows 3.0 was launched on the 22nd of May 1990 and was the successor to Windows 2.1x. The Graphics User interface (technically it was not an operating system) sat on top of MS-DOS and could run applications for the operating system from within a Window and many might fondly remember that it was available on 5.25-inch high density floppy disks. More significantly, it proved to be the perfect partner for Intel's then-new range of 386 processor, which bought protected mode and extended memory capabilities to the market."
Thread beginning with comment 426123
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Blah...
by Neolander on Sun 23rd May 2010 06:07 UTC in reply to "Blah..."
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

3.0 might have been the first version of Windows to actually be successful, but IMO it didn't get decent until 95. But then, since when does "success" ever correspond to "quality" in the first place? What's amazing is that it's been 20 years since the first commercially successful version of Windows, yet it took almost that long to get rid of most of the annoyances. And yet some stupid ones remain to this day.

That's because each time you remove some old annoyances, there's someone to put some new ones. Maybe in order to motivate people to buy future updates ?

Eg : Win95 was somewhat stable and efficient. It could have remained light-weight. Then Microsoft integrated IE everywhere to justify its infamous presence, and it was the end. W2K had almost no built-in annoyances, it worked just perfectly well for most things. Then XP was made cartoonish, heavy as hell (including the task manager, which was just plain stupid), and full of stupid popups. And after getting somewhat usable finally, the Windows GUI was completely redone in Vista for no special reason, so that it becomes unreadable and unintuitive again...

Edited 2010-05-23 06:10 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Blah...
by UltraZelda64 on Sun 23rd May 2010 10:22 in reply to "RE: Blah..."
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

No, I'm talking about long-standing annoyances. Like selecting the *entire* file name during rename, extension and all, leading to loads of "are you sure--Windows might not be able to read this file" messages. You'd think an OS that depends so much on filename extensions would get it right, but it's been there for as long as I remember. It wasn't until a dud of an OS release, Vista, before this was even fixed, and tons of $$$ worth of upgrades along the way (including forced hardware upgrades).

And how about deleting a file that's in use--does Windows 7 still bitch that it won't do anything and tell you to close the file and then try again manually, instead of just doing it once all handles are closed? Don't even get me started on all the annoyances caused by poor system design that has spawned a massive money-sucking industry, anti-virus.

That, and annoyances-by-design such as warning and notifying out the ass for everything, as well as the braindead idea of *hiding* filename extensions by default. But to be fair, these particular annoyances showed up starting with Windows ME if I remember right, they haven't been there from the start. And don't say that it's good to pop up useless notifications every ten seconds and in rapid-fire at boot just to "protect" people. Sure, these last couple haven't been there forever, but they sure as hell feel like it. I see Windows 7 has cleaned up the notification mess just a little bit, which is good--now there's gazillions of third-party apps that will continue the old MS way of "never shut the hell up."

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Blah...
by vodoomoth on Sun 23rd May 2010 11:52 in reply to "RE[2]: Blah..."
vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

Very true.

But the most annoying ones to me are:
- ejecting a USB device. Why can't the "eject" in the systray give the name of the volume instead of the drive unit? Come on! It's clearly easier to read "Samsung DVD/RW" or "USB Key" or "MicroSD6110" than "E:", especially when plugging the same peripheral may make it appear as "F:" or "G:" or anything else depending on what has already been plugged. Each time I have more than one removable device plugged, I need to open an explorer before knowing which is which.
- the garbage characters in the terminal due to Unicode strings not being detected and translated to the system page code. That stupid console hasn't changed since Windows95 except for the 'tab' key providing name completion.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Blah...
by DOSguy on Sun 23rd May 2010 13:45 in reply to "RE[2]: Blah..."
DOSguy Member since:
2009-07-27

That, and annoyances-by-design such as warning and notifying out the ass for everything, as well as the braindead idea of *hiding* filename extensions by default. But to be fair, these particular annoyances showed up starting with Windows ME if I remember right, they haven't been there from the start.


Windows 95 hid file extensions by default.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Blah...
by darknexus on Sun 23rd May 2010 21:15 in reply to "RE[2]: Blah..."
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

And how about deleting a file that's in use--does Windows 7 still bitch that it won't do anything and tell you to close the file and then try again manually, instead of just doing it once all handles are closed?


Yep, it sure does. And related to that, my top Windows annoyance (for Vista and later) is the way updates are handled. Essentially, since an update can't replace existing files, one must typically restart the system. No biggy if it contains an important system component, except what happens after that is the system will attempt to install the update on shutdown. Then will finish installing it at reboot time. Then that update will require another restart which it will do... again and again until all the updates are installed. Ridiculous, and that's not counting the infinite update/revert/update loop when an update fails. All this because of Windows' idiotic file locking. Even 2k and XP had this mostly right, even if they required too many restarts for non-critical updates at least it was only *one* restart per batch of updates.

Reply Parent Score: 2