Windows OS versions stick around for so long, each one needs two different tier rankings, "At Launch" and "Mature".

@MrFirsito

10 ай бұрын

youre right, vista was amazing at the end, same xp, same windows 8.1 ... windows 10 is amazing right now, am expecting win11 will be amazing in few years, microsoft normal procedure

@kreuner11

10 ай бұрын

​@@MrFirsitomost computers can't install windows 11

@Dhruv-qw7jf

10 ай бұрын

well that can be said for most OSes, like Android wasn't that good at launch but now its (arguably) the best mobile OS.

@poisonsnivy6439

10 ай бұрын

@@MrFirsitoi would say Windows 10 is amazing right now with a couple of modifications, a vanilla install of 10 is just a worse windows 7

@jankees4037

10 ай бұрын

Windows 8.1 is actually the superior version of Windows 7. No flaws, metro and gadgets just turn it all of. I find Windows 8.1 to be the best Windows ever.

I loved Windows 7 and held onto it for dear life until about a year ago. I feel like 7 gave the most freedom with the least amount of hassle.

@chandlerbing7570

10 ай бұрын

I agree. Had to set a copy up for a client that needed legacy software. Honestly apart from the fact I had to hunt for drivers for the laptop, and the 300+ updates, I had to do nothing to the OS. No Turning off unnecessary features, no uninstalling apps that aren't needed, no having to uninstall apps again that aren't needed but Microsoft insisted on reinstalling them, no having to re disable the features that Microsoft reenabled after an update.

@_modiX

10 ай бұрын

7 was my dream of an OS back to the day, I loved it so much and I made use of many of its features, like libraries etc.. I also loved the Aero Theme and nothing else can compete with it these days.

@rp7r54

10 ай бұрын

WINDOWS 7 GOAT GREAT OF ALL TIME

@jankees4037

10 ай бұрын

I moved from Windows 7 to Windows 8.1 now. It is tough to run motherboards these days with W7. No one makes drivers anymore much for that system.

@_modiX

10 ай бұрын

@@jankees4037 It's unfortunate that software support eventually drops. Unless W7 is open-source, there is nothing you can do about it. I moved to macOS for a more consistent experience and I look into Linux as a daily driver to free myself from corporate eventually.

I started my IT career in a Windows 2000 environment and didn't realize how good those times were until much later.

the best thing about 95 was how random it/the installer was ... you could re-install it five times on the same machine and each time the error messages you got after the first boot-up were different ones. Fun times

@RadioactiveBlueberry

9 ай бұрын

I've had similar behavior even with some Linux installer, root cause being overheating CPU. All I needed to do was to replace the fan.

@archangel_one

8 ай бұрын

That's because you kept sticking the disks in backwards and in the wrong order.😁 My trick was to reformat first.

@nezhakan

4 ай бұрын

I got first release of 95 on actual 486 machine and it is solid as rock. While on pentium it was pain in the ass.

@HattoriZero

4 ай бұрын

You just got a bad motherboard with leaky capacitors or a bad RAM stick.

@protator

4 ай бұрын

@@HattoriZero Well, those issues went away when I switched to 98, but who knows

XP may be terrible objectively for many security and others, but for UI and Experience and other stuff, it was beautiful. All the bloat that I can tolerate and love. I found nothing unnessary that I hate about it. That why everyone have rose color glass. It was the best.

@Gregorius421

10 ай бұрын

We used XP since its release till Windows 7. It was the best option available.

@lingux_yt

10 ай бұрын

terrible, it had blue screens of de4th all the time

@Account.for.Comment

10 ай бұрын

@@lingux_yt but when there is no bsod, there is no Cortana, no Search that had Bing in it. Start Menu has no lousy metro apps, If I don't like the XP start menu, I can switch back to the 1990s version. No need for a Microsoft account or an email address. Great wallpapers to choose from, and not new ones shown up randomly in start screen for whatever dumb reasons. No Settings, just Control Panel. Run get you quickly. And if I don't like something, disable it is easy, and it will not show up in the next update. XP UI/UX are great. Win7 remove a few things but overall added what XP lacked. That's why these two are so beloved, while what WIndows the last 10 years are so despised, even if they have better security.

@TheTytan007

6 ай бұрын

UX was OK but XP was a disaster in a long term and many development problems Vista had were directly linked to XP being objectively unfinished

@kuklama0706

4 ай бұрын

​@@lingux_yt no it did not.

I remember getting windows 2000 down to about 12megs in memory. Lots of great things there. We went from FAT to NFTS, Plug and play USB that worked, Active Directory, NT Kernel. Such a good time to be into computers.

@graysonpeddie

10 ай бұрын

Wow... I wish I had Windows 2000 at the time, but I was still a late teenager at the time... :(

@dewguy453

10 ай бұрын

NTFS*

@bojanmajnaric

9 ай бұрын

You are completely right. Win 2k was absolutely fantastic and is probably the best system to install / vm today for all retro needs. So many people slept on it and nowadays run 98 / xp vms but this is the true gold.

@FijiAura_GD

5 ай бұрын

I screenshot nft

95 , 98SE , XP , Win7 were all excellent for me. I think I used XP and 7 the most. I work with Vending Machines and we still have a lot with Windows XP Embedded running 24/7 like a charm. 😊

@WalterKnox

5 ай бұрын

The ability to run extremely long hours without crashing or becoming bogged down is one of XPs great strenghts. I have several computers that serve dedicated tasks and run 24/7 that run XP and have been running constantly for months to years without any complaints. I run a part 15 AM radio station, and the machine that plays the music for said station was originally running Windows 7, but after around 3 or 4 weeks of uptime, Windows 7 became unstable and I either got a bluescreen, or it would become so bogged down that it couldn't play the audio properly. I "downgraded" that system to XP about a year ago, and it has never given me that issue again.

@Yarumasi

4 ай бұрын

98SE was cool although that was when I was starting to feel the slog of the 90s era Windows. XP couldn't have come any faster honestly.

@michamarkowski2204

3 ай бұрын

@@WalterKnox I gave my last tower PC to my mom 15 or more years ago. It had XP. I had to reinstall it only thrice: twice because motherboard died and once because a HDD died. Other than that the OS was stable AF.

I'd love you to elaborate on Windows 2000's strength comparing to XP. What I mean is that I have a feeling that architecturally those weren't two different, the impression that the latter was a "virus magnet" might've come from the fact that it was much more widely used in the residential environment. In the end, many security features from 2000 found their way to XP and were actually improved with SP2. But maybe I'm wrong, I never used those "professionally"

@adamgreenhill110

4 ай бұрын

You're right - XP was built from 2000, and finally brought Windows NT to consumers. For business use, people weren't using random websites and installing random software, so 2000 had a better reputation

@thej3799

2 ай бұрын

Server 2003 was the best NT kernel from the era. To this day I have a working VM of server03 that I've copied around since the mid-2000s.

Windows 2000 and XP was my favourite. XP needed tons of fixes and tweaks tho :(

@chrisjlocke

10 ай бұрын

Windows 2000 was rock solid. Didnt often have Explorer issues like nowadays, or even blue-screens. I was developing in VB6 and found it a great experience.

@gregbirger5810

10 ай бұрын

Every Microsoft OS needs tons of fixes & tweaks! ;-) Even the high point of Win7 needs security tweaks among others.

As another comment said. It really needs to be launch vs "final product" list as so much happens during its life cycle. I would personally put Windows 8.1 up a tier. I just had a really experience on it. XP up a tier as well. Overall a solid list I can agree with!

@Gregorius421

10 ай бұрын

With Classic Shell, I really liked Win 8.1. It was less of a burden to set up and maintain.

@griffin1366

10 ай бұрын

@@Gregorius421 Yep. Classic Shell made it so much better.

@HIKKG

10 ай бұрын

I have to agree about Win8.1, especially when it comes to the *Embedded Industry* edition (+ replacement of the hideous Start menu with "StartIsBack" or "Classic Shell"; and also the "Aero Lite" theme with minimal borders) - as it is extremely optimized for older systems built on x86 processors of 2006-2010. In most cases, when I installed it (Embedded Industry edition) as a pure upgrade from Win7, it outperformed Win7 (usually in terms of system startup speed from HDD) or was on par in terms of responsiveness and overall performance.

@HIKKG

10 ай бұрын

Currently, it can be used in conjunction with a modern version of Chromium called *Supermium* , which is a fork with minimal changes to be used on Windows Vista/7/8.1. It's still in WIP state, as a respected developer under the nickname "win32ss" is currently the only one behind this project. If you are a little confused by the WIP status of "Supermium" - you can temporarily (until the project leaves the WIP state) use an optimized fork of Chromium ESR v109 called "Thorium" which is available on "thorium-win7" repository.

98 SE was the best DOS-based WIndows, 7 was the best NT based one. Everything since 7 belongs where the sun don't shine.

@gregbirger5810

10 ай бұрын

Could not agree more. 100% spot on.

@loxo5526

10 ай бұрын

Totally agree. Windows 11 to me it's just 10 but harder to use and more bloated

@greggmacdonald9644

10 ай бұрын

7 was awesome! Sadly, Microsoft's operating systems keep getting worse and worse, it's really annoying.

Windows ME was kind of a rush job release due to the fact that people at the time thought Windows 2000 was the next version of Windows after 98SE. However it lacked a lot of compatibility; especially with games. With 2000 and XP, I still remember the nightmares of dealing with the Nimda and CodeRed viruses. Due to those affecting 2000 as well, I wouldn't put in in Excellent as the system would instantly get hit as soon as it went online without having SP3 installed on it. I had 2k advanced Server at the time and those viruses took down all 4 of the family computers running windows in the house; all stemming initially from the 2k advanced server install.

Sorry, I blast you, Vista was cancer and had more bugs than XP.

@Big-Chungus21

10 ай бұрын

Vista was like Windows 10, except kind of the opposite at the same time. Both started out bad, but Vista was a hell of a lot more stable than what a lot of people remember after it got its first updates. Windows 10 was sort of the same, except it never really became all that stable, and the updates made it even worse in a lot of ways.

@detach8

10 ай бұрын

agree, vista should be in the bad or worst list. it’s worse than XP

@_modiX

10 ай бұрын

@@Big-Chungus21 why is it that Windows 7 run so much better compared to Vista then. Windows 7 and XP both run very smooth, Vista was just a bad hog in between, it really just was a beta of 7 when you think about it.

@_modiX

10 ай бұрын

@@Zeeshhy I think that went over your head. He asked for the blast literally. Watch the video.

@lexcelius6921

10 ай бұрын

Vista's Bugs were because it came out for Hardware that could not run it or could Barely Run it(even new PCs and Laptops that came up the Hardware was Designed for XP). 7 was Literally just a Rebrand of Vista because Vista Forced everyone including Manufacturers to Upgrade their Hardware. If 7 came out ob the Same Hardware as Vista it would have been just as Bad as Vista Perception Wise.

I could definitely agree with you on your decision with 11, I'm also running it and I would occasionally run into bugs as well with it after the updates. One thing that I am not all that big of a fan of in 11 is when doing the storage manager, it makes it not as easy to get rid of stuff as the old style disk cleanup did. I run on my system a dual-boot of Windows 11 and Ubuntu Budgiie 23.04. I'm curious to see how 12 will be when it is launced.

I think you are spot on with this tier list. I agree with where you placed each OS, and thinking of those systems both in how they were in their times and in retrospect. I like to experiment with Windows OS a lot, and hearing your opinions were really interesting.

You skipped Windows NT 4 Workstation. I would put that in the Good category, and 2000 Pro in the excellent as well. I had great experience with 2000 Pro , and that was the version of Windows I switched to fully after 98se. The improvement of 2000 Pro over NT 4 workstation was obvious , USB support , better support for NTFS volumes greater than 8GB and you could boot off of NTFS completely. It was perfect. When XP came out , I really did not see any real improvement, but more of a slightly decrease when XP came out, because not only the dumb look they tried to push , but also started the whole phoning home to microsoft to verify your copy. I never upgraded to XP, it was meh at best.

@eliotcole

10 ай бұрын

I assumed he didn't measure NT and server versions because they might technically be considered a different trench of OS' ...

@breadmoth6443

10 ай бұрын

@@eliotcole then why mention xp and pro ? those are essentially Windows NT , and the versions after.

@eliotcole

10 ай бұрын

@@breadmoth6443 my name is not Chris Titus, mate ...

@breadmoth6443

10 ай бұрын

@@eliotcole k was just making a point but heyho i guess the order of the day is snarky remarks.

i like how windows early on went from bad to better then as we got more into the future it took a 180 and went from being good to getting worse

I actually agree with you on Vista. The issue was that OEMs sold PCs with hardware well below what Vista required...they were preloading it on PCs with 256MB of RAM! I bought a cheap Vista laptop back in the day and after putting in a 2GB stick it ran fine. The main changes I'd make is that I'd move 10 to great, and 11 is borderline between average and good, although I'd put 11 over 8.1 so there's that.

I think the thing I miss the most about Windows 95-XP was the ability to replace the explorer shell. I used to run LiteStep on 98-XP, as well as a bunch of other 3rd party software (web browsers, file explorers, memory managers, etc) to try and not use as much of the Microsoft supplied software as possible. At one point, it almost felt like my Mandrake Linux install that I had on another machine.. lol. Too bad Microsoft eventually put a kebosh to that and all we have are 'interfaces' that sit on top of the windows explorer shell.

List is missing NT4.0, as for Win2k, SP3 really was it's sweet spot. As for 11, we are slowly being forced towards that in the G-sphere of influence, and.. no.. it's totally NOT ready for use in business, let alone government systems.

@jik7864

8 ай бұрын

Said by people who probably never have tested Windows 11.

@eggrobo

8 ай бұрын

@@jik7864 well, windows 10 just works fine.

@Rattlepiece

2 ай бұрын

Windows 11 works well for business.

I actually love the list, all but maybe 8.1. I feel like you're overlooking it as an 8 enhancement but in my experience it's more like a 98 to 98 SE type of upgrade. They gave back the computer to your hands and it wasn't as bloated and locked down as 10 which means you'd get the very best performance out of any windows OS while also having a fairly recent system. If it was called windows 9, it would have been so much bigger than 10, I am completely certain. It really took the best of 7 and 10 and failed for its poor marketing. Rest in peace sweet prince.

@ShiroCh_ID

6 ай бұрын

actually, windows 10 started as windows 8.1 update to Unify/seamlessifying UWP Apps and WIn32 Programs, but it went downhill since Microsoft turn it way into System as a Services Type of thing and thus makes windows 10

@bvd_vlvd

6 ай бұрын

@@ShiroCh_ID I mean every windows starts as a sort of update. Vista might not be so obvious but it's because it began as Longhorn that looks like a Vista/XP mutation. After all, they all are just Windows NT, just different updates

@thomasthereal4067

4 ай бұрын

Exactly. My parents bought me a laptop with Windows 8 on it and I was sceptical about it. But after it updatet to 8.1, it was awesome. I used to play games on my dads PC with Windows 7. So yeah 8.1 is objectively better than 7.

@bvd_vlvd

4 ай бұрын

@@thomasthereal4067 Shame that they died on the same day so it had a shorter life, but there's no point in keeping it afloat if you failed to promote it so no one's using it

I dunno man, I ran XP for a long time and I can't remember having any major issues with viruses. I went many years without having to ever reinstall the OS (maybe never?). I think it just depends on how responsible a user is in terms of downloading/installing random stuff and keeping your system properly maintained. I definitely installed some less-than-legit stuff back in the day, but I tried to keep up on housekeeping, scanning for viruses, etc. XP deserves a little more love IMO.

@LibertyRapsher

10 ай бұрын

Over the last 7 years I've been a Linux guy, however I have insanely fond memories of XP. It was my favorite Microsoft span by far. XP was a nightmare for novice computer users though... every single one of my friends computers I went on during that time was a mess and I became the computer fix guy, but for anyone with moderate computer skills xp was a nice, fun, versatile operating system... it was before Microsoft became ultra sinister so they simply created the best operating system possible (especially with Windows 8 and beyond, you would think that Microsoft tried to create the worst operating system possible and wanted their operating system to fail because they couldn't have done any worse then what they did and they became so blatantly sinister) and XP just did everything right to anyone who had enough computer knowledge to maintain their computer. It had the best layout, it was snappy, etc... It was by far the quickest Microsoft operating system by far to get organized after a fresh install. If I were to go back in time I would have used Microsoft through the XP years and then I would switch to Linux.

I appreciate that it’s not a super long video. I’ve seen some of these tier list videos drag on for over an hour.

That was really interesting insight on Windows 7. I was an avid Vista user. I was using it on hardware it was designed for and it was fast and it remains the only Windows version I've used as my main OS that never gave me a blue screen. When I jumped ship to 7 when Vista lost support, I noticed that it was bogging down abnormally quick, it had memory management issues and overall got more buggy the longer I used it. I never had an explanation for this, especially since I never experienced this with Vista. We had a Vista machine that ran for 10 years and it was as fast at the time it was retired as it was when it was new, which was madly impressive to me.

For the most part I agree with this tier list, more than I thought that I would! My only change, personally, would be to put Windows 8 and 8.1 higher on the list. They felt really responsive, they kept a lot of the administrative menues from Windows 7 (as opposed to Windows 10 which increasingly over time started forcing the majority of administrative tools through the new Settings app), and while the full screen Start menu was off-putting for me in the very beginning, it is the only Start menu which I truly felt home with after I customised it, and I became so used to it that I did something similar with a full screen Start menu in Windows 10. Windows 8, to me, took the parts of Windows 7 that I was most fond of and made them feel familiar, yet perhaps more modernised. I have a lot of mixed feelings about Windows 10, and I like to say that it is the best Windows operating system released up to that point in time, simultaneously as being one of the very worst. Windows 10 improved and also introduced some really cool stuff, but over the years, I have felt allergic to Windows 10. Helping customers daily since its release, both in corporate environments and in a computer workshop, there are so many things which have caused a massive headache which I have never before seen in any Windows version prior, and I could go on about these all night. Unlike earlier Windows operating systems, Windows 10 underwent big changes under the hood twice a year, which meant that it would download the entire Windows operating system anew, install itself onto your harddrive/SSD, then afterwards try to migrate programs, settings and files seamlessly to the new revision. This went wrong much more than it should. If such a in-place (automatic and forced, mind you) upgrade failed, it was designed to seamlessly roll back to the previous revision, but often it would simply be stuck in a bootloop or on a blank screen. There were many corporate critical computers which would be forced to download the next revision upgrade, the operating system would crash and become unusable, and after forcefully managing to revert the upgrade via rescue media, it would immediately tell you that you needed the update and start re-downloading the big update, with a progress bar and no way to cancel it, despite it already having failed and fully crashed moments prior. Disabling Windows Update services and registry fixes would be reverted within a day as they were not seen as a setting, Windows viewed them as bugs. Furthermore, all blocks of known Windows sites and IP addresses in Windows Firewall and in the Hosts file would be ignored, still allowing communication to those sites. At one point in time, Windows calmed down, and disabling Windows Update services etc. often stayed that way, for a while at least. Well, until Microsoft decides to change that during an update again. At any rate, things became much better with and after revision 1909, as Microsoft made changes to its revisional upgrade system, thankfully. Windows 10 has also "mutated" a lot throughout the years, with the constant moving around and sometimes removal of useful administrative features so that we have to search for them, and then suddenly removed all-together in one of the updates, sometimes even re-introduced in a later update, without documentation. One feature I tended to use was ICS, which was removed as it was deemed unnecessary, but was later re-introduced through a separate update. Perhaps not the best of examples, but in all versions of Windows, including the first few revisions of Windows 10, you could right-click This PC (My Computer), click Properties, and you had a handy overview of the PC in the manner you were used to, with links to System Restore and Advanced System Settings. After a certain update, right-clicking This PC and clicking Properties would bring you to the new Settings app with a different summary page, but hitting Win + Break would still bring up the classic summary screen. After yet another update later on, the hotkey would also bring you to the new summary. Some updates later, the hotkey would bring up the classical menu. Why all these changes? Not able to stay the slightest persistent makes the system a royal pain to navigate! Another major pain was the fact that with Windows 10, System Protection (aka. System Restore) was for the first time *off by default*. I saw a few handful times when this was turned on, but for the most part, this was disabled, so if an update crashed your computer, you could no longer revert to a previous state. This also happened a lot with upgrading from Windows 7 and 8.1 to Windows 10. In 7 and 8.1, System Protection would naturally be enabled as this was always the default setting, while after Windows 10 was installed, the feature would be disabled, to save storage space presumably. But that is not to say that I hate everything about Windows 10. As I said, it is also excellent in some regards. (This could have been introduced in Windows 8, but I am fairly sure it was introduced in Windows 10, it certainly was not there in Windows 7 Home Premium / Professional) For the first time, you could actually do a disaster recovery by simply moving your system drive from one computer to another. With Windows 7 and earlier, you would typically encounter Stop errors and/or bootloops if you put a system drive in a different computer. Although you need to ensure that BIOS uses the correct HDD mode (AHCI/RAID/IDE) and correct BIOS mode (UEFI vs Legacy BIOS) Windows 10 intelligently notices a change in hardware, like motherboard and other base drivers, and reconfigures base drivers so that it can boot successfully in most cases. Drivers are also now much more seamlessly and quickly installed, often without user intervention. Although the following were introduced in Windows 8 or 8.1, product keys now are converted to digital licenses, so if you re-install the same edition as before, Windows should now activate automatically upon Internet connectivity, and not require you to type in your product key manually. Speaking of product activation, it is also possible to use Windows 10 without activating, if you do not mind certain restrictions that may apply to you (you may be unable to change the desktop wallpaper, and there will likely be a watermark on your desktop wallpaper and in the Settings app telling you that you have not yet activated). That is just at the top of my head that I can think of right now, my mind is tired and I am two minutes from heading into sleep. Windows ME was truly awful, it only gave me a few Stop errors a day on a good day. It was an interesting mess of an operating system, though. I heard one of the reasons it was so unstable was that it was an in-between mix between Windows 98 and Windows 2000, and that drivers were very poorly written. Like you, I was very fond of Windows Vista, and to this day, I do sort of miss it, if only for its lovely visuals. While Vista did give me a lot of trouble in the start, after the first service pack, the system treated me really well. A controversial opinion, but imagine how boring this world would be if we all had the exact same opinion. Good night, everyone.

@tomclanys

6 ай бұрын

Amen about the updates, amen about the settings. Control panel was the best, and system settings android-style just suck on 10, you can never find anything and most of the useful stuff is hidden and not even there. Also, for the system restore, I remember I had to disable it in win 7 as some viruses would just hide in there and restore themselves after being removed by any antivirus. Since then I never used it again. Performance wise Win 10 is very good, stability is meh - it never crashed, but needs to be restarted once in a while because it starts stuttering if too much RAM is used, almost if a system process was swapped away. It's also a huge pain to configure and if left with autoupdates enabled even in a tiny bit, something will change and break without the system telling you at all that it did it.

having been in IT support since the 98 second era, I actually agree with your list, I never used 8 or 8.1 or had to deal with it though, 11 is average, I don't use it personally but its on my wifes laptop ME should really have just been a service pack for 98 2nd, its stable under certain conditions, and has some cool stuff in it as for XP I hated it until service pack 3, then it became fully usable, and I used it until 7 came along - definitely only the professional version, home version had way more issues

another great video chris, with some interesting omissions; {winders 3.0 & workgroup 3.12}. in the 1990s, 1 of my first "big" contract jobs was performing a company wide upgrade (7.5k units) from windows 3 to wfwg 3.12. had never done anything that large before, but I dug in, got deep and wrote the update. after a few test runs, I set the upgrade into the corporate login script and it was an amazing success with only 3 systems having an issue which was promptly resolved. this year I'm celebrating my 46th year in high tech having began in 1977 at the age of 15 on my old commodore PET. (somewhere) in my collection I still have my windows .9 [pre 1.0] disk tucked away in my office. 13 years ago, my father and I used to go toe to toe on my non stop criticism over microserf and their constant mistakes along they way. his argument was that even with their flaws they've given me quite a career while my argument was always, yeah but they could have done so much better.... lol. keep your greatness alive man. always love seeing your latest iteration across the industry......

Fun list and I mostly agree. I missed the pure 32 bit NT ranked. I used NT4 personally and professionally and loved it back then. The drawback was max DirectX 3 support but a few good games worked. 2000 that replaced NT4 was equally good with the full DX support but felt more sluggish at the time.

The first PC I purchased (for college) came with Windows ME preinstalled. After about a week of BSD and other issues I found Linux (Red Hat) and haven't looked back.

@juanmanuelfc

10 ай бұрын

My exact same story! At the time a sys admin friend of mine installed Slackware for me. Used it for years until Ubuntu came along.

I love vista. Although I was a child, but I remember the UI so well, and Win7 is my most favorite.

@Top_Cheeze

10 ай бұрын

Vista had better task bar functionality and intact quick launch, now you need third party solutions to get back the same productivity, lol

I've been running Linux on desktop since Win 10 came out, and I've not regretted it. I bought a new desktop PC with Win 11 on it and am dual-booting with Linux. I'm really liking Win11 for home use. Something about the user interface is so appealing. There are some features missing vs. Win 10 that I wonder if I'll enjoy it when we switch at work.

I also have very fond memories of Windows 2000 because it was my very first computer when I was young. I love the nostalgia that it provides and I thought it was a very good system. I just didn't like how it didn't have some built-in games that my Windows 95 system had. I feel like 95 also had a lot more screensaver options, at least on my system when I got that one. I kind of miss 2000 and would probably release intense euphoria if I got to mess around with my first system again. Unfortunately, it is dead now. I think the hard drive is dead, but I'm not entirely certain what happened as I was like 9 when that happened. I just remember installing Flash, my computer became unresponsive, and got stuck in a memory test loop forever (rebooted each time the 24000k or so counted down to 0 rather than saying Windows 2000 was starting).

@dmrfnk

3 ай бұрын

I had Win2000 and found myself editing the WM color theme in registry one day. Ended up with a nice boxy black highlights on flat white theme that you couldn't achieve with just the options in the settings ui. I never got the same to work on WinXP or Server 2003.

My first computer had Windows Me. For me it was the best thing ever, despite the insane amount of problems it had, which I thought was normal and was always bugging the local IT guy who sold it to me for help. Looking back, I spent a lot of time fighting the OS and trying stuff and that's probably one of the reasons I ended up pursuing a career in IT, which led me to become a developer. So, thanks Windows Me for everything!

You did NOT just put vista over xp

Great! I'm looking forward to a Linux tier of the ones you have used

Ooh, very interesting Chris. Happy to say that my thoughts are quite similar to yours; my Windows journey has been (and I have a habit of leapfrogging versions): 3.1, 98SE, 2000, 7 and now 10. Will probably skip 11 and go straight to 12 (mainly because my PC isn't 11 ready, and so will need a new one)... Note, I have used XP and 11 for work, am not totally ignorant of those. Fave of all time: 2000 (with SP4).

I'm typing this from a W7 machine... which is, not for much longer now, still my main machine. Not a tech professional, not a typical user either. I never got infected with any ransomware, didn't blindly install every update microsoft offered to me, particularly telemetry related stuff and windows 10 update nagging. this installation is probably running on 8 years or so now, and runs quite OK.

@xylentantivirus

Ай бұрын

Still Win7?

XP is good when you are REALLY careful, but it's true that XP broke with tons of virus, and the internet back then was -insecure- so any page can download random malware. But hey, thanks to breaking XP I learned about Linux (Ubuntu) because my uncle install it while he search for Windows 7 starter ISO

Totally agree with you on Windows 2K. Excellent history summary. New information on older Window version that either were not known, or forgotten about. Thanks Chris.

Been on Windows since 98 and pretty much agree with your assessment, although I loved my win7 - now on win 11... it's tolerable with a lot of unnecessary changes to the UI which is a pain. Any rumors on when we can expect Win-12?

Does anybody know what the last telemetry-free version of Windows 7 was, and/or how to find it? I would like to keep an ISO of it for posterity and good luck

I can say that there are people still using windows 7 and companies that are not only still using windows 7 but even ms dos xD. Great tier list!

Thank u for making this vid Titus, u should make it regularly every year or half a year.

You forgot NT 3.51 & 4.0. NT4 was where the whole NewTechnology ecosystem really found it's footing, it had SIX Service Packs, dedicated server versions and was a business/commercial standard until Win2k came along.

XP was extremely weak to viruses. I've had installs that were severely infected before the setup ended. Vista started off really rough but by the time SP2 came out it was basically Windows 7. I managed to snag a copy of Vista Ultimate for $50 back in the day, that turned out to be $50 well spent by the time SP2 came out.

@klebleonard

10 ай бұрын

skill issue

@TheRosswise

10 ай бұрын

Im in IT, its not a skill issue. I had to setup XP offline and manually install service packs and antivirus before I put it online to get around it. It is extremely likely that it did happen to you two, you just didnt know it.

@GENERAL9612

Ай бұрын

@@TheRosswiseYeah, XP was really prone to viruses compared to later versions of Windows in my experience. Especially with the wild west the internet was back then compared to now. A lot of trial and error to what not to do.

After Windows 7 I pretty much stopped using Windows. Went strictly to Linux for all my daily task. Couple things to bicker about with Linux but overall much better than any Windows OS as of recently. Every time I have to use windows on somebody else's device I get so ticked off by all the garbage that's on it. I have a Windows 7 and Windows 10 device that I use strictly for tuning cars. Every time I use Windows 10 I get so mad because of how slow it is on crummy hardware. (It's a cheap tablet) Also the UAC and non-stop updates has never stopped bothering the hell out of me. I always end up shutting them off and it's still pops up, makes me crazy.

@LtSich

10 ай бұрын

I have fully switched to linux with the end of Win7... Before that I was only using Linux on server... Now I use it on my PC every day... And finally I have to say, thx Microsoft for doing those crappy OS, now I'm more than happy on Linux :)

@CrazedPerformanceRepair

10 ай бұрын

@@LtSich I hear that, so much better. Just takes time adopting.

@luiscarlosvieira3966

10 ай бұрын

Lol... I switched to Linux after XP... and ... me too... I get so annoyed when have to deal with a Windows pc... so much crap....

@CrazedPerformanceRepair

10 ай бұрын

@@luiscarlosvieira3966 I was actively playing with Linux since XP, just didn't commit fully yet because of game support.

@luiscarlosvieira3966

10 ай бұрын

@@CrazedPerformanceRepair lol... me too... just gamming was holding me to XP... started "linuxing" in 98... and moved completely to Linux 2007... gamming was not a thing for me anymore...

I was ready to come with my pitchfork about XP, until I listened to your rationale. I was always good about knowing what I could and could not do, as well as how to clean up my system if it did get infected. It was great for me because I knew how to use it, especially after SP3. I can see why and agree with you about where you placed it on your list though.

Which bios chip from a manufacturer have you have encountered the least problems with? ty for the video...btw, loved w2k. peace.

Listening to you brings back memories of keeping the installation file of ME in a partition to be able to reinstall every time it crashed. TBH, Win 10 is about the best version of windows to date. I installed Win11 the day it came out. (remember the leaked Beta?) It has survived on two of my machines, but I continue to be underwhelmed. It is as if I hope that it will get better, but it seems to be going in the other direction. I've tested Win10 LTSC, and I may well use that until W11 either improves or dies a lingering death. (We will always have Linux) 😇

@hyperturbotechnomike

4 ай бұрын

I do use LTSC on all my win desktops and my workstation (3D/CAD/industrial hardware design). Even latest games are running flawlessly, such as Robocop in unreal engine 5 or Cyberpunk Phantom Liberty. If LTSC wouldn't exist, i would perhaps still use WIndows 8 with start menu replacer. The regular windows versions of 10 and 11 are just full of rubbish bloatware and bing AI bs and i don't want do debloat them all the time after some sneaky updates. And i can't and don't want to switch to a linux desktop, especially for my work, i need complex windows software. I also don't get paid for troubleshooting compatibility problems with my own machines or potentially delaying some time critical projects.

Windows 11 would have been Great or Excellent Because MS is trying to rebuild a lot of the UI elements and the base dependencies however they shouldn't forced users to sign in with a microsoft account and those other weird artificial requirements. However, I like that you -kind of- normally distrusted them XD.

Speaking of Windows 10 and debloating... It would be really nice if you could update your Windows Edge removal guide since it's not working anymore. Thanks in advance!

My old boss still uses his Vista laptop. I don't think he realises, or cares, but I have to hold back saying something. It's a very old school business in fairness.

Windows 8.1 was excellent, especially after 8.

@JOHNWICK-5903.5

10 ай бұрын

Except UWP everything about 8.1 was great. It was stable, ran fine on low-end hardware and didn’t nagged like 10 & 11 does.

What happened to NT 4.0?

@dmrfnk

3 ай бұрын

Also Windows Server 2003. I didn't like XP when it launched and started using this on the desktop. Not all games agreed to install on it, probably just checking whether os name string contains 2000 or XP and throwing in the towel if not 😅

while I was in South Korea I saw so many different shops that had the digital signage boards running windows 7 and I had to do a double take (the only reason I know this is because their ordering program kept crashing)

Win 2000 didn't have viruses because nobody used it. It didn't run half the software out there, and it couldn't talk to half the hardware out there.

My experience with Windows Me was so bad I ended up switching to Linux. Never looked back. Suffice to say that the first time I ever switched the notebook on I got a blue screen of death. Over the coming weeks it must have crashed at least 2 or 3 times a day, every day. I never felt so cheated out of my hard earned money.

The "average" tier should really be titled "eh", and "good" should be titled "fine"

I remember the Windows 2000 professional launching presentation in 1999 and the host said that the next year, would be launched the "home version" of Windows 2000 and will be named ME. I believe that the NT version of ME was ready for the year 2000 and because of that, they delayed the launching of the operating system rebranding for XP and this ME we have was just a gap between XP and 98.

We had Windows 2 on some of the computers in my school. Excel had some annoying features like its weird copy/paste that still haven't died about 30 years later. When you consider that the competition to Windows 3 was OS/2, Windows was average at best.

I had been using Windows 7 until 2019. It was so slow at the end. Then I switched to Linux and never looked back.

@tober7141

2 ай бұрын

How much of a gamer are you? 🤔

@adjusted-bunny

2 ай бұрын

@@tober7141 I am not a gamer.

@tober7141

2 ай бұрын

@@adjusted-bunny Hmm, I suspected that. Linux is unfortunately sometimes incorrectly detected as some type of cheat hence why Linux users some times get banned from games :-(

Why is red "excelent" and green "the absolute worst"?! That's somehow making me angry!

I'm pretty sure the reactOS team is aiming more towards NT5 compatibility now. I've tried it myself on both vm and real hardware, and not only does it work well enough for its purpose, but even some programs made for modern windows such as multimc work well.

@-x21-

Ай бұрын

Windows 2000 is NT 5.0

I remember that when 3.1 was introduced, we were all impressed by the progress compared to previous versions. That said, for serious technical works, we were only using workstations with Unix at that time.

I started about the same timeframe as you (around the Win 3.11 / Win95 era) and my general experience has been every other release has been great. I don't know if that means Microsoft doesn't give their engineers enough time to develop properly or whether it takes a full release to get enough user feedback. I rocked Win2K for many years and then Win7 as preferred versions but I must say that Win10 Pro with WSL is a nice touch though you need to debloat Win10. The jury is still out on 11

It's a very intersting video with an interesting point of vue. I switched from Mac to Windows around the XP / Vista period, mainly because of gaming, but also because of apple pissing me off quite a bit. And as such, putting XP on a low tier and Vista so high is really surprising to me. But it does make sense from the perspective of an IT oriented point of vue. Thank you for that video, it was very instructive !

@michamarkowski2204

3 ай бұрын

I'm in IT for 20 yrs and it doesn't make sense for me. What's the purpose of having more secure OS when it's unusable?

@Bananeisafree

3 ай бұрын

@@michamarkowski2204 I don't know i don't work in IT. Ok joke aside i guess what is was thinking when I wrote this was, while tiresome to deal with crappy design, it might be less stressful than having to deal won't constant potential security breaches. Again, not an IT guy, I was mainly acknowledging the fact that different point of vue were possible...

My mother had a Windows 8 PC, so hated having to help with the PC and pretty must disable the Tablet interface once 8.1 update came. Think the biggest issue I ever ran into was User handling getting corrupted in Windows 10, so everything not stock took 5+ minutes to open, luckily found a fix that required edit in Computer Admin console.

As someone born in the mid 2000s, 7 was the first Windows version I ever used and it was good, but I was younger then and didn't really know nor remember that much. Windows 10 is the OS I would say I've grown up on. My knowledge and interest in technology and computers started to grow after 10 released and it'll probably be the one I look back on most fondly despite what people think about it. I don't mind 11, my only real gripe is the start menu since I grew up on 10, and that's the style of start menu I'm the most familiar with.

Glad to see Win 2000 up there.

@WiseWorker908

10 ай бұрын

Glad to see Win2K win.

Windows 8 was an unfortunate failure. If we ignore the Metro UI shenanigans they did, the OS was actually super responsive and actually kind of lightweight. It also brought many features that we are all used to now, such as the new Task Manager, File Explorer ribbon, SSD improvements, faster boot times and more. I would say Windows 8 was the lightest version of modern Windows since XP, despite its new and controversial UX.

@parkman29

10 ай бұрын

Yes, and until they ended support for it in January, it was my favorite windows because you could put on openshell and a few other programs to make it look and feel like windows 7 without all the bloat.

@KingKrouch

10 ай бұрын

The fullscreen start menu sounds great for a HTPC setup (with a controller), a touch screen, or handheld PC (like the Steam Deck) setup, but on an actual desktop setup, it’s a bit clunky.

@Big-Chungus21

10 ай бұрын

I wouldnt be surprised that it was more lightweight than maybe even 7 before it. It had very little fancy effects, and a simple GUI. It was fairly beautiful in my opinion, but not very usable. The reason im guessing is that Windows 8 was being developed with the Surface tablets in mind, Microsoft thought they would start some sort of revolution. So they made Windows 8 more lightweight, so that you could have pretty good battery life and performance on a tablet. I wish they continued that idea and released a more lightweight version catered towards tablets, I think the idea of a single version being used for both was wrong.

@hawk_7000

10 ай бұрын

8.1 really fixed a lot of the most annoying things about 8.0. If they had just gone a little further, like making that whole full screen metro "start screen" thing an optional feature, I think 8.1 could have been accepted by the masses as a great OS.

@uroboloss

10 ай бұрын

I actually used it over Windows 7 and liked it a lot, although I avoided the Metro UI as much as possible.

Hey titux I disabled secure boot then installed arch afterwards linux is running fine but i can't access bios menu anymore also no black screen keyboard mouse check things Now i am unable to reinstall windows or dabian or anything Just stuck with arch If i hit del like before the screen is just green nothing appearing Where can i fine or ask for this solution

Excellent Video! Double Dare you to justapose top Linux Distros of the same ERA 🙂

Windows 2000 Pro was still the best.

I fully agree with you on Win2k... This one was the best... Very stable, low ressources usage... I would love to see an OS like this today... Even XFCE on Linux is not so "clean" and "light" but stable and reliable...

@DryPaperHammerBro

10 ай бұрын

LXQt?

@LtSich

10 ай бұрын

@@DryPaperHammerBro tbh I have never try this one.

@DryPaperHammerBro

10 ай бұрын

@@LtSich That’s an even lighter desktop environment for a Linux PC

I lost track of how much malware I cleaned off of computers running XP back in the day. And I had a great experience with Vista, but to be fair, SP1 was already out when I started using Vista and it was very soon to be updated to SP2. I don't think I ever had any further issues with it, ever, after SP2

As a student, I acquired knowledge of MS-DOS by exploring my brother's old laptop during the mid-'90s when he upgraded to Windows 95. Fond memories include the iconic "Good Times" song on Windows 95. While Windows 98 left a positive impression, I surprisingly enjoyed Windows ME. Regarding Windows XP, I concur on the initial security concerns, although improvements were evident with Service Pack 2. I remember switching over to NTFS. Vista, unfortunately, falls into the unfavorable category due to sluggish file copying and excessive prompts. On a brighter note, I appreciated the dynamic wallpaper feature.

I'd say ... Thanks Microsoft. For releasing Windows 11. Because of it, now I've found the joy of using Linux Mint. Without it, I would never know the Linux World and 2023 technology is so awesome. So, thanks.

@tomspencer1364

10 ай бұрын

A team that listens to their customers and produces an excellent product. The opposite of Microsoft.

@pneubreu

5 ай бұрын

I completely agree. I've followed the same journey. I tolerated Windows 10, but after using 11 for a bit I couldn't stay on it anymore. So thanks to Microsoft I now use Debian on my main system.

@SupremeCodyGaming

3 ай бұрын

Thanks to microsoft, i'm using windows 11.

Where is WIndows for workstations? NT? CE? Server versions?

@sullivan912

10 ай бұрын

NT4 Workstation was solid enough. Versions before that were as buggy as hell.

My first computer came with Windows 98SE, and I remember being one excited 13 year old upgrading to Windows 2000 Professional. Closest I could get to Windows XP as my PC was not compatible with XP . Really enjoyed both OSs. Xp is still my favorite of all time, this far

These videos helped me take my old Phenom II machine with windows 10 and optimize it enough to where my Dad can play games on it. Took out enough junk I know he doesn't use to where even that old dinosaur can keep going a little longer. I've applied several changes to my own desktop as well to rid myself of stuff I have no use for. Going from 300 processes down to 184 was such a nice improvement. I would like to make a custom ISO for this machine but it came with Windows 11 on it with no Windows Key sticker and it wont show me in settings what it was. Mass distribution key kind of junk. Oh well.

I haven't really used the earlier versions of Windows, but my ranking of what I have used would be: 1. Windows 7 2. Windows XP 3. Windows 11 4. Windows 10 5. Windows 8 While I respect your opinion, the deal with Windows XP was that it was the first home user release not based on MSDOS, using the new NT base instead, while being quite lightweight. Thus it was kept simple and stable. This is more personal, but the visuals and audio are also just iconic

I totally agree with you about Vista. I used Vista and loved it. I hated XP. Virus Magnet. Super easy to bypass most microsoft security processes.

@lmnts556

10 ай бұрын

Xp > Vista.

@Raivo_K

9 ай бұрын

Same here with Vista. Tho my experience was better than most because i was running high end hardware for the time. Most people still used singe core CPU's and 256-512MB RAM with a terrible Intel iGPU and a slow HDD. I was running dual core Athlon X2 and 2GB of RAM with 7900GTX and WD Raptor HDD. Good times. Also i liked the Vista UI way better than XP tho XP was my first personal PC MS OS tho i had used 98 on some places earlier on public places or friends house.

@michamarkowski2204

3 ай бұрын

@@Raivo_K I've been building/fixing PCs for a living between XP SP2b and 7 SP1. When Vista launched, most PCs had 1 or 2 GBs RAM. 512 MB was a rarity. Both Athlon X2 and Intel Dual Core were already established on the market. You could blame hardware leftovers for the bad launch of Vista, but the truth is even medium and high-end (for that time) specs often weren't enough. After a year, when the P35 Chipset was a standard, most PCs were sold with 2-4 GBs RAM and 8600/8500GT, Vista should run smoothly, but didn't. It was still a huge resource hog (both CPU and RAM).

I started with DOS, then DOS Shell, then Windows 3.11. Windows 98 had this annual issue where it was temperamental for two weeks every year. This included the installer which sometimes failed to install Windows. Once the two weeks were up, it was behaving again. Windows 8.1 often caused slowdowns, it also added 10% CPU usage by the idle Windows Update process. This in turn caused the CPU fan to go faster and make noise in the office which then annoyed some people. Not sure yet if I like Windows 11. Seems slow on my Celeron laptop (yes, that is 1.1 Ghz economy CPU), plus all those extra layers to click through to find something.

Erm.. I am really missing something in the list which actually were in use finally in professional environments: WindowsNT 3.5x and Windows NT4 Workstation. Where would you locate these two ? (they are very stable, since based on the NT kernel like windows 2000 and newer OS were the advanced iterations of). The most severe drawbacks of the early OS is that they had no firewalls until WIndows XP (early revs had kind of internet connection protection, the "firewall" as such in terms of functionality became instated with WIndows XP SP2). Only since then the windows users have been propery "firewalled" insofar. The earlier NT-types were still vulnerable in the context of "infiltration and intrusion". The consumer windows were altogether. "open to the world"...literally, from the point on where TCPIP and networking / internet traffic became a thing. I still remember times where my first DSL connection over PPPOE was not via a router (which is a NAT firewall by default) but instead had a physical IP inside of the providerside network (a very simple DSL line-modem)

When Win2k came out, I was managing a project upgrading all the PCs in the estate from NT to 2000. We've built the images to install, tested all the software in our domain and test users were happy with it. All of a sudden company taken over and parent company went with XP. All the efforts down the drain. I was furious and for that I never used XP at home.

Nice to see you speak truth about XP. No amount of rose tint can make me forget about the absolutely obnoxious Messenger Service pop-up spam.

The problem with ME was that they tried to make Windows 2000 home edition, but not based on the NT kernel. It went way beyond what a DOS based system could handle. It crashed constantly. I got a copy of 2000 from work and ran that at home. It was like night and day. I just cleaned out a cabinet with a bunch of old CDs and I still had the install cds for 95, ME, 98SE, 2000, and several XP Pro (pirated) . I threw 'em all out

You completely overlooked Windows NT which was rock solid, my first truly stable version of Windows. Used it for years, but some programs wouldn't run so installed 2000 which was also excellent. Anyway, am surprised you skipped NT.

98 was my family's 1st computer and it was good for habbo hotel. I don't remember much of it other than that. XP for me only holds nostalgic value, especially with the olive theme. But really that's about it. I remember it fondly but today it's just a toy that I may open as a virtual machine. Nostalgia aside, it's "average" for me. I don't miss it really. Vista was pretty exciting to me and probably has my favorite aesthetic. I like the glass look, the shiny buttons, the blur in windows, and the underwater-y godray look with shiny wavy lines on blue-green-yellow colors, and it was pretty cool to see 1 of the screensaver have transparent bubbles bouncing around (not very impressive today but I like bubbles and having transparent stuff was amazing). I didn't have any issues with it other than being a bit slow (mostly because I wasn't too tech savvy yet when it came down to specs and money) but turning off windows effects sped it up pretty nicely. Widgets I just threw out of the way. It's "Good" for me. I do miss the feeling it gave me but not the OS. Win 7 was a little better than vista, which made it feel less amazing. It gave me a feeling of "ok so now I'm using the more accepted version of Windows" mostly. It ran better, but I bet it was mostly due to being on a newer laptop. It became the baseline in my head what Windows OS is supposed to be. I'm actually going to put win8.1 in a good or potentially even great category. I didn't have the "UGH what is this crap" mindset on the get-go and gave it a fair chance when it still was just 8, so in 1-2 days or so when I got used to it, it was quite nice, and when 8.1 update came it was even better. I was told later that the start menu was made like so for tablet reasons but I didn't really internalize that information fully until very late. It was just an odd different start menu which I accepted. I knew that there was classic shell as an option if I didn't like the start menu but I didn't mind. Windows 10 was the 1st time I had a PC instead of a laptop which made it pretty special, especially since I built it myself. Going back to the Windows 7 UI with a hint of 8.1 was pretty neat. After 10 years of using it, the only issue I was bummed about was that since I've always been a Bluetooth headphone, the 1803 update fucked up the user experience that you could only fix by changing the "disableabsolutevolume" registry value. I got used to the new ways later but how everything started with that Bluetooth feature was buggy and controlled the audio in ways that just did not work or changed the volume for you to break your eardrums. No issues anymore but changing the volume for your headphones and computer separately had its use (I use Linux now mostly and I can have the best of both worlds and then some). This version has the most complaints I've heard from my friends. Haven't tried 11 a whole lot. I really don't prefer any version over the other when it comes down to versions between XP to 10 as long they are up to the standards of today with security and compatibility, since I don't think there have been any necessary user features since even before XP maybe. Debloated windows 10 would probably be my pick.

There's one thing I like about windoze 11. They put all of the system tools together in one place. Other than that, I think you give it too much credit.

What if windows 10 version that you told with latest security updates will be used , isn't it great in terms of performance and can it defeat LTSC version of it as heard many times LTSC gives good performance comparison to pro?

On my journey I went through 3.1, 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, se7en and 10 LTSC I would say that XP by its very nature was the one that allowed to increase the Experience Level (pun intended, I suppose) from "average" to "advanced" users, and of these, the ones that added a Linux partition (for good measure) are the ones that ended up converting in "superusers"

I'm still using WIn7 SP3 with updates disabled since 2014 as my laptop daily driver. Having omitted that post-2014 rash of NSA "security patches" aka back doors (you tactfully call it "telemetry"), it runs rock solid, sometimes for up to a year at a time between reboots. Note my laptop is 2010 era (very few original parts) and I love it simply because the model is £100 on eBay (I have many in various stages of decomposition / cannibalization), with the later CPUs it can be maxed to 16GB (spec says 8GB) and with a decent SSD it flies. Throw Ubuntu on one and it screams along :) The only innovations of significance since have been battery capacity, screen resolution and weight - none are issues for me because I have an identical laptop and every location.

7>xp>2000>vista>10>8(.1)>11

good job Chris, nice feedback

As someone who was there for both the previews of Windows 10 and the mobile version, I remember after launch Windows 10 was one of the buggiest versions of Windows ever. I remember a horrible glitch at the time was the start menu just wouldn’t open despite clicking on it. It was a major issue during the launch that buttons wouldn’t do the task except unless you prayed to the Microsoft gods after an application restart or a reboot. And then the Microsoft Store was almost unusable for literally like years until Windows 10 finally matured 😭

A Vista upgrade literally bricked my computer. Putting Vista anywhere above XP is absolute blasphemy

I didn’t see any mention of Windows NT, which was sort of the precursor to Windows 2000, but yes, I used both heavily back in the days and they were rock solid for business use (not gaming).

Would love to see a ranking regarding OS memory management and how each OS fared with multi-tasking!!! If memory serves me correctly, I think I started with XP, moved to 7 and now am currently on 10.

@mowtow90

10 ай бұрын

There are tests like that done by other youtubers. Win 8.1 outscored everyone with how light it was. Unfortunatly 8.1 is the hidden gem that most people overlook because it retained a lot of the garbage 8 introduced. You had to mod it to make it great. What was allways funny to me was that Linux users that customize their distros all the time to make them great for them ,hated 8.1 for having to do the same on it -go figure.

@guitarhero01234

10 ай бұрын

@@mowtow90 I could be wrong, I was barely familiar with Linux at the time, but I feel like Linux users were more busy blowing up about GNOME 3 and Unity back then. I seem to recall Windows users hating Windows 8 more than anyone else

@mowtow90

10 ай бұрын

@@guitarhero01234 Yes , the hate was against 8 not much 8.1 which tried to address the "tablet mode" tiles and Metro settings menu isues 8 had. Among other stuff. The problem was it retained the modes in the background so it could no get people to switch. I used it for quite a while and liked it a lot (modded of course). Then came w10 which at the start had the promise to be the best OS they ever made. I think that was the time they wanted to go 1 OS ,endless updates. Unfortunatly MS decided to bloat it with all the crap they could think of and made it a mear shadow of its former self. Just like the lete versions of windows 7. They pretty much took 2 good OSes (7 and 10) and run them into to grownd. With 11 , they are doing it from the get go. That explains why W12 is in the pipeline already.

I agree with you on XP - running essentially everything as admin was a nightmare for tech support, and while yes, there was much money to be made in virus removal, it did indicate that the current system wasn’t working. Without an internet connection, XP is great, to the point where it might be tinting the glasses rose-colored. You can see quite a bit of the developed cruft inherited from older NT versions, but their tools were still somewhat congruent with those inherited from prior versions. Heck, PROGMAN was still available! 7 was *pretty*. It took the lessons from Vista and made a related product that felt simple and (for those in the MS ecosystem) intuitive to support. But it did suffer from a lot of the XP infection woes, which from 8 onward finally started getting more decent at within the base installation. I only used 2000 during my WinServer class at community college in 2008. On Core 2s, the systems flew, even on an HDD. I know I have a tainted positive view of it as a result; the hardware was far too new for the OS and was near instantaneous as a result, along with already having many years of XP knowledge from fixing my home machine from my child-era antics. I’m sure it was amazing! But I only saw it in an inflated, best-case scenario. I’m now wondering if I should try to get 2000 running on my atom N450 over XP….