this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
1074 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
60055 readers
2921 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
because windows 2000 was peak windows
As much as I loved 2000, XP was better and 7 the best ever.
2000 was the pioneer though, it was such a huge step forward in every way
Yes, Win2k, WinXP, and Win7 were all major leaps forward in various areas. Imagine if 8 had been just a major cleanup of Windows 7 and unifying the various settings paradigms, how much better that would have been.
But alas, Windows 8 was the 'oh crap, tablets and phones might eat our lunch' release and the focus was throwing the desktop/laptop experience under the bus to try to cater to sensibilities of markets they were never going to capture. Also, to have their own 'app store' to try to wrestle a google/apple like revenue model for applications running on the platform.
If MS had put any focus on allowing skins/themes for Windows, the touch market would have just been an extra feature. There is no technical reason they couldn't have, as evidenced by the third-party apps that allowed legacy skins on previous versions, such as 8 and 10. But they needed that lock-in and forced experience, rather than giving people the choice.
I will confess that I think making windows UI appropriate for tablet or phone has to be more than a skinning exercise. E.g. software interacting with a mouse pointer unable to deal with more vague and multiple touches. UI elements needing different spacing for the form factor. A different scheme for switching full screen tasks and recognizing that traditional windowing isn't going to be very helpful in a smaller than 9" format.
Unfortunately windows basically favored touch at the expense of traditional desktop, when their home turf was very much not touch enabled.
Windows 8 was actually a big cleanup over 7. We got a much improved task manager, Explorer got a ribbon, copy operations now showed a graph, and performance was very similar to Win7. It was just that Microsoft overshadowed these improvements with the UI disaster and telemetry.
We'll have to disagree with the ribbon being an improvement, but the rest definitely count.
Long time Linux user here. The smoothest OS I've ever used was xp64. That just ran like butter. Unfortunately, it was killed off to push people to Vista.
Windows ME was peak.
Let me tel... ... ... ... ... ... sorry, my ME froze
its funny since windows me was just windows 2000 but worse since they didnt have to worry about business customers
Windows ME was actually some Windows 2000 bits glued onto Windows 98. That's why it was so terrible, it was kind of an afterthought when initial plans for '2k for everyone' got abandoned as they realized the home app ecosystem needed more compatibility workarounds than they were prepared to offer. So instead of completing the 2k based product line, they just '2k'ed up Win98 to satisfy their then-current release cadence and make sure home market had a 'current' OS to go with the 2k professional line.