windows versions

Windows 3.1: worthless
Windows 95: miscarriage
Windows 98: a bit better than 95 but still shit, lol DOS
Windows Me: what the flying fuck
Windows 2000: gorgeous but nobody gave a fuck about it due to XP coming out like 6 months later
Windows XP: literally 2000 with a better kernel and updated drivers + massive library of software and seemingly indefinite support, the best thing ever
Windows Vista: SHIT
Windows 7: LOL aero glass, a little less retarded than vista
Windows 8: better than 7 but can't hold a tee to XP or 2k, also ugly as sin

95 was great the fuck are you talking about faggot

oaky wrote:95 was great the fuck are you talking about faggot

crashes fucking everywhere
insecure as fuck
limited support
draconic bullshit from microsoft
lol internet exploder

95 was shit

windows xp has an amazing feature where it doesnt explode and go BSOD every time a seperate program doesnt work as intended

for some reason

when i use windows 98

it's less shitty than i remember it

windows 95 is good the developers who made applications for it (including the built in ones they're separate teams at microsoft according to the windows 2k source) are bad because they were allowed full access to everything on the os which was true up until ME

why is vista shit some might ask??????? well because microcock decided it would be a good idea to engineer the damn thing specifically for super high end computers which nobody had at the time

so it ran like cocks on everything else

spinnythings wrote:why is vista shit some might ask??????? well because microcock decided it would be a good idea to engineer the damn thing specifically for super high end computers which nobody had at the time

spinnythings wrote:so it ran like cocks on everything else

"planned obsoletion" is a thing

MS needlessly cranks up the resource usage with every release to force people into buying new hardware and such, it's all carefully planned out

install debian

vista was such a disappointment if you look at what it could have been

sure it looked balls-out modern with retarded shit but it was a hell of a lot better than vista since vista I hear was developed in a year from the kernel and window manager they made

oaky wrote:windows 95 is good the developers who made applications for it (including the built in ones they're separate teams at microsoft according to the windows 2k source) are bad because they were allowed full access to everything on the os which was true up until ME

name one windows version before 2000 that didnt sporatically crash and explode all the time

they were all shit and unstable and 95 certainly isnt an exception

Amsoautisticd8er wrote:

oaky wrote:windows 95 is good the developers who made applications for it (including the built in ones they're separate teams at microsoft according to the windows 2k source) are bad because they were allowed full access to everything on the os which was true up until ME

name one windows version before 2000 that didnt sporatically crash and explode all the time

they were all shit and unstable and 95 certainly isnt an exception

windows 1.0-3.1 were file managers with a pretty shell i don't believe they crashed every second like 95

every version after windows 98 were given an assload of files/fixes to make sure devs didn't fuck up like the registry and dll files to replace ini files (because usually they would save it in the C:\ folder or the C:\Windows folder with generic names like settings.ini and they would get overwritten) take a look inside a \windows folder on windows xp-8 and you'll see \winsxs which is like 5000gb of dlls and other files to make sure programs are more stable and it's even bigger on versions of windows without the intel 386 driver set for some reason

lol win ME

Amsoautisticd8er wrote:

spinnythings wrote:why is vista shit some might ask??????? well because microcock decided it would be a good idea to engineer the damn thing specifically for super high end computers which nobody had at the time

spinnythings wrote:so it ran like cocks on everything else

"planned obsoletion" is a thing

MS needlessly cranks up the resource usage with every release to force people into buying new hardware and such, it's all carefully planned out

install debian

that whole thing does all come together considering windows 7 tests on mesopotamian cpus

miffoo wrote:

Amsoautisticd8er wrote:

spinnythings wrote:why is vista shit some might ask??????? well because microcock decided it would be a good idea to engineer the damn thing specifically for super high end computers which nobody had at the time

spinnythings wrote:so it ran like cocks on everything else

"planned obsoletion" is a thing

MS needlessly cranks up the resource usage with every release to force people into buying new hardware and such, it's all carefully planned out

install debian

that whole thing does all come together considering windows 7 tests on mesopotamian cpus

being able to run it on old hardware =/= being able to use it on old hardware

Amsoautisticd8er wrote:

miffoo wrote:

Amsoautisticd8er wrote:


"planned obsoletion" is a thing

MS needlessly cranks up the resource usage with every release to force people into buying new hardware and such, it's all carefully planned out

install debian

that whole thing does all come together considering windows 7 tests on mesopotamian cpus

being able to run it on old hardware =/= being able to use it on old hardware

not like that old though

more or less just cpus ranging into like pentium iiis with ram below the minimum requirement (like maybe 384-512MB or something)

wow you can RUN the OS but not any applications!

nobody gives a shit if the os starts they care about the programs you can run and when you can't even reliably open notepad it's not 'running'

intel pentium 75 RUNNING WINDOWZ 8

windows is basically a gaming console so its counter-intuitive to run it on a computer that cant get 60 fps on XP minesweeper

oaky wrote:wow you can RUN the OS but not any applications!

what the fuck kind of a faggot tests the OS on old CPUs without opening anything that sounds like the gayest thing fucking ever im laughing my ass off thinking about it

spinnythings wrote:

oaky wrote:wow you can RUN the OS but not any applications!

what the fuck kind of a faggot tests the OS on old CPUs without opening anything that sounds like the gayest thing fucking ever im laughing my ass off thinking about it

but watch the cpu usage woaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 100% sheheheheitttt

a HOBBY of mine as a PROFESSIONAL ELECTRICAL ENGINEER is to take VERY OLD CPUs and FORCE them to run VERY RESOURCE-EXPENSIVE OS's

spinnythings wrote:

oaky wrote:wow you can RUN the OS but not any applications!

what the fuck kind of a faggot tests the OS on old CPUs without opening anything that sounds like the gayest thing fucking ever im laughing my ass off thinking about it

holy dick guys my CPU is at 0% when my computer is off!!!!SO POWERFUL

"benchmarks" are fucking retarded and anyone who does them or pays attention to them is likewise