Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 14th May 2012 22:49 UTC
Windows For weeks - if not months - I've been trying to come up with a way to succinctly and accurately explain why, exactly, Windows 8 rubs me the wrong way, usability-wise. I think I finally got it.
Thread beginning with comment 518540
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by astroraptor on Fri 18th May 2012 01:28 UTC
Member since:

Windows 1.x and 2.x - Rubbish. DOS was more productive
Windows 3.x - The shape of things to come. Lots of apps and games.
Windows NT 3.x - Rubbish but stable (shape of things to come)
Windows 95 - Revolutionary. Can't say otherwise.
Windows NT 4.0 - Meh, better than NT 3.x
Windows 98 - 95 with a nicer UI
Windows ME - Tripe. Bug laden. Pretty though.
Windows 2000 - Best Microsoft OS ever.
Windows XP - 2nd best Microsoft OS ever. The fact that it's still lingering over 10 years after its release exemplifies this.
Windows Vista - Tripe. Bug laden. Pretty though.
Windows 7 - Pretty. 3rd best Microsoft OS ever.
Windows 8 - I sense a trend. From what I've used: The Start Menu cannot go. It just isn't time for it to be done with.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Progression
by clasqm on Fri 18th May 2012 07:56 in reply to "Progression"
clasqm Member since:

Extrapolating, then, we can look forward to Windows 9, the 4th best Windows OS ever?

(I won't say "best Microsoft OS" since I still carry a soft spot in my heart for MS-DOS 5)

Edited 2012-05-18 07:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Progression
by MadRat on Fri 18th May 2012 11:57 in reply to "Progression"
MadRat Member since:

Win98SE was the best 16-bit gaming OS. And when people often considered Win2K a better gaming OS the benchmarks typically still favored the 98SE. Win2K was over-rated for stability. And if you found the right mix of drivers then 98SE was good for a month at a time (before the clock bug kicked in) before a reboot was inevitable.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Progression
by zima on Sun 20th May 2012 01:21 in reply to "Progression"
zima Member since:

Windows 3.x - The shape of things to come. Lots of apps and games.

Games? You ran games in DOS, back then (and well into 9x era).

Plus, early NT were rather decent - just not so well supported and with somewhat beefier hardware requirements (mostly RAM, in the times when it was very expensive) than contemporary 9x. If NT 4.0 had USB and (then) latest DirectX, you'd probably describe it as "best ever" instead of 2k (which was a relatively minor improvement over what NT already offered; same as XP after it, yet for some reason it's 2nd for you)

And it sometimes seems, in such comment threads, like I was the only one without issues under Me... (partly because, I suspect, too many people tried to treat it like earlier 9x, to "tweak" it with old tricks - which often broke the system, owing to slighly too big changes from 98SE)

Reply Parent Score: 2