Microsoft → Re: [News] Windows 9 - April 2015

The whole "every other OS" myth is just that. Windows XP was a real dog when it came out. Win98 "first edition" was too. Win ME was actually not bad--if you were a new user not dragging along legacy gear. And then there's Windows 2000.

Actually, it is more like Intel's tick-tock upgrade cycle. The every other is a minor change and people have no issues going to it. The ones users have a big problem with are the major changes. Most people don't like change.

Most of my issues have been driver related, Windows 2000 (no 3D driver support), Windows ME (buggy drivers), Windows 8 (no RAID drivers available on release). I used Windows 2000 at work and didn't have any issues with it. Windows ME was just too buggy in general. I'm using Windows 8 on my media machine, but Windows 7 on my main machine. I doubt I'll go to Windows 8 on my main machine as I don't see a good reason. If I update my SSD to a larger size I'll install Windows 8. If not I'll wait until the next version comes out and install Windows 9 on release day.

I agree. Win 95 was freaking awesome after having to deal Windows 3.1 and DOS. I was a very happy camper at that time.

I liked Dos, I used dos before Windows came along, and Win 3.x sucked for games so you still had to run them in dos most of the time. Even with Win9x you tended to had to run dos games in outside of Win 9x, however in those days Windows was nothing more than a dos application. It wasn't until NT that Windows was the operating system, but compatibility problems showed for older programs. What was good, and bad about Win 95 was it didn't have IE included, however those were times were you had to buy your browser, otherwise get it from your isp on disk. After it was obviously how much of a security risk IE was even if you never used it, I would of rather had Win 95 with IE never installed.

As far as the proposed Win 9 goes, it might be like Win 7, how people didn't like Vista, yet Win 7 was basically Vista SP2 with a few minor improvements, yet people loved it. I don't think metro is going anywhere, but they might have pulled their head out of their ass to realize that metro was not the desired desktop users wanted, however they could have just listened to the beta users, news outlets, and even preview release users.... We'll just get another more refined metro like you can almost completely avoid metro in 8.1 now after you change a few settings.

Even my friend who has an xbox 360 doesn't want to buy an xbox one.

Windows 95 OSR2 was really stable for me. Same with Windows 98 SE. I am also having success with a Vista Ultimate machine that has the latest service pack for Vista.

All operating systems that are dramatic changes seem to have issues at first.

It becomes a matter of what quirks you can live with without them annoying you all the time. WinME was a heck of a lot more stable that Win95 was, and ditto Vista in comparison to WinME. The BSOD virtually disappeared with Vista, so that was wonderful.

That was pretty much my experience too, I had the first release of Win 9x running on a 386DX50 (talk about dating myself) and man was it slow compared to Win 3.x(I was using 3.11 at the time).

Yeah but remember what was really cool about getting Win95OSR2 on a new PC? First you were the cat's PJ's in your clan because it could not be bought retail. Then you got the disk and you could upgrade all your older PCs, which for me was great because I had a lot of PCs. And I could even upgrade my old kids PC that they just used to learn junk.