Every other version of windows is bad

[SansVarnic]

Windows 8 and 8.1 (both are the same OS, 8.1 is 8 with SP1) are solid OS's. The Only thing with Win8 is it is trying to be something it is not.

MS attempted to make a tablet friendly UI but did not allow desktop ease of use. Yes 3rd party mods allowed for some old functionality to return but this is not the argument here; as a whole the general public is not savvy enough to install the mods to regain the windows menu function. The biggest thing that people disliked is the change that MS attempted when trying to get in on the tablet movement.

Win10 is a monumental move forward in this train of thought, not only have MS accomplished its original goal of creating the UI elemant for the tablet but it allowed for ease of use / classic functionality for the desktop user and it makes another leap forward that neither Android or IOS has yet done, universal native OS collaboration across devices: PC / Tablet / Phone. The Iphone and IOS do not do this, Android has some but to the level of Win10 and cannott be run on a pc.

[Agazed]

Another day, another same topic talked to death.

 

Windows XP had more problems than Windows 10. It was a super rushed version of Windows, because sales of Windows 2000 was extremely weak, and Me didn't fare well.

It was done in 1 year. It was plagued with BSOD issues, not to mention that XP since day 1 had SERIOUS critical security issues, which made Microsoft stall project Longhorn development (Vista) to work on XP security issues. In addition, Microsoft knew that XP had so bad security and it's NT3 based kernel/OS could no longer be sustained for modern technologies, and security realities of tomorrow (which is yesterday, a great number of  years), that is why they scrap the OS, and restarted from scratch with Project Longhorn, which become 6 years later Vista. As Windows XP was Windows 2000 with a skin, faster boot, compatibility mode, and new help document, and a firewall that alerts you of a software wanted access to the web, after it has accessed it numerous times before, rendering the firewall useless (not to mention that software could add itself to the white list), Windows 2000 faced the same problem, hence why they shared the same updates. So if XP is bad as I am highlighting, Windows 2000 is also bad.

 

Vista was a great OS, but it was made for tomorrows computer. Sure it had bugs that were not there before, something that happens when you recode everything from scratch, pretty much.

Microsoft mistake was to push lower specs system requirement from what it actually needed. Either due to the pressure of shareholder to have sales after 6 years in the works, and billions spent, or manufactures wanted to continue to take advantage of the consumers by selling over priced hardware, and satisfy budget oriented consumers, instead of just having XP for lower end systems, and Vista for proper specs systems. It would have been odd, but at least it would have worked. Not to mention that many people installed Vista on their system with too low specs. Vista biggest problem was that manufactures decided to push new hardware for Vista support. You wanted Vista drivers? Buy new hardware and peripheral. Luckily, not all hardware manufacture were like this, but the big ones like HP, Creative Labs, and many others, did. Only to see after months later that people switch hardware and put their company in their blacklist, and since back tracked in doing this business model.

Only tech savy people could manage to go around it, by finding the "new" product the manufacture was pushing which was the identical product that the person had, just a different look essentially, and install those drivers instead. So it all piled up, and people blamed Vista.

 

Windows 7, is Vista. Just more bug fixes from Vista latest service pack and latest updates, and optimization. You saying that you liked Windows 7 but not Vista, shows that Vista was not bad actually. Sure it brought new features, of course it will, but it is still Vista, much like Windows 8, and 10.

 

If you find Windows 10 good, then you never tried Windows 8. As, from the end user perspective, it has nothing much really new compared to the massive collection of features that Windows 8 brought over Windows 7. Sure you have Cortana, and Microsoft own implementation of multiple desktop (as the APIs existed since Windows NT4 days, possibly even before, hence how you had these third party software), not to mention that Microsoft made a XP add-on with one. Edge web browser, Action Center, updated apps, and a few tweaks here and there on the interface essentially. I know there is a lot more, but I am just saying at a end user perspective, and not the back end stuff which is major.

 

Great post. However I am judging the OSes based on the initial release more of the service packs that come after.

 

I don't really recall Windows XP having many security issues, because I was very young at the time. The fact that Microsoft quickly fixed these bugs made it OK and the media didn't have enough time to infect people with the info of Windows XP being a bad OS.

 

If Vista came out exactly when computers were able to run it, then it would be a good OS. I love Vista, but for its time, it was bad. Which is why it gets a bad rating from the public and myself.

 

And Windows 8.1 lacked a start menu, which was why it got to much hate. The navigation was horrible. And 8.1 didn't improve much, making it a "bad" OS.

[flibberdipper]

Vista had some serious security and performance issues.

 

Windows 8 lacked one of the most important parts of an OS - navigation. 

I never had problems with Vista, and 8/8.1 is my favorite OS to date. Other than maybe OS X just because it's so clean, simple, and IT HAS FUCKING CONTINUITY *cough*Windows 10*cough*

[Agazed]

I think you need to check your data. Every source I've seen (including the Wikipedia page for Windows XP) says that, as of July 2015, Windows XP only has an 11.75% market share.

 

Windows 7 has more people using it CURRENTLY. Windows XP had more sales though.

[flibberdipper]

Another day, another same topic talked to death.

 

Windows XP had more problems than Windows 10. It was a super rushed version of Windows, because sales of Windows 2000 was extremely weak, and Me didn't fare well.

It was done in 1 year. It was plagued with BSOD issues, not to mention that XP since day 1 had SERIOUS critical security issues, which made Microsoft stall project Longhorn development (Vista) to work on XP security issues. In addition, Microsoft knew that XP had so bad security and it's NT3 based kernel/OS could no longer be sustained for modern technologies, and security realities of tomorrow (which is yesterday, a great number of  years), that is why they scrap the OS, and restarted from scratch with Project Longhorn, which become 6 years later Vista. As Windows XP was Windows 2000 with a skin, faster boot, compatibility mode, and new help document, and a firewall that alerts you of a software wanted access to the web, after it has accessed it numerous times before, rendering the firewall useless (not to mention that software could add itself to the white list), Windows 2000 faced the same problem, hence why they shared the same updates. So if XP is bad as I am highlighting, Windows 2000 is also bad.

 

Vista was a great OS, but it was made for tomorrows computer. Sure it had bugs that were not there before, something that happens when you recode everything from scratch, pretty much.

Microsoft mistake was to push lower specs system requirement from what it actually needed. Either due to the pressure of shareholder to have sales after 6 years in the works, and billions spent, or manufactures wanted to continue to take advantage of the consumers by selling over priced hardware, and satisfy budget oriented consumers, instead of just having XP for lower end systems, and Vista for proper specs systems. It would have been odd, but at least it would have worked. Not to mention that many people installed Vista on their system with too low specs. Vista biggest problem was that manufactures decided to push new hardware for Vista support. You wanted Vista drivers? Buy new hardware and peripheral. Luckily, not all hardware manufacture were like this, but the big ones like HP, Creative Labs, and many others, did. Only to see after months later that people switch hardware and put their company in their blacklist, and since back tracked in doing this business model.

Only tech savy people could manage to go around it, by finding the "new" product the manufacture was pushing which was the identical product that the person had, just a different look essentially, and install those drivers instead. So it all piled up, and people blamed Vista.

 

Windows 7, is Vista. Just more bug fixes from Vista latest service pack and latest updates, and optimization. You saying that you liked Windows 7 but not Vista, shows that Vista was not bad actually. Sure it brought new features, of course it will, but it is still Vista, much like Windows 8, and 10.

 

If you find Windows 10 good, then you never tried Windows 8. As, from the end user perspective, it has nothing much really new compared to the massive collection of features that Windows 8 brought over Windows 7. Sure you have Cortana, and Microsoft own implementation of multiple desktop (as the APIs existed since Windows NT4 days, possibly even before, hence how you had these third party software), not to mention that Microsoft made a XP add-on with one. Edge web browser, Action Center, updated apps, and a few tweaks here and there on the interface essentially. I know there is a lot more, but I am just saying at a end user perspective, and not the back end stuff which is major.

FINARRY, someone else that understands Vista being good.

 

Saying that because of the "spying"? Au contraire!

 

 

 

I'm gonna go against the jerk again. Windows 10 is pretty great. I'd still advise against upgrading until October, though.

 

People also seem to forget that Windows is pretty broken at release, with the only major exception being 7. You guys know how XP is the most successful Windows version ever, right? It was not adopted en masse until 2004, after SP2 came out. Yeah.

Why tf did you quote me lol

[Nowak]

FINARRY, someone else that understands Vista being good.

I admittedly liked Vista too. Had a hard time justifying it to people, though, even with my "It could be Windows ME" analogy.

[Burusutazu]

I bet it would take 2x less time for someone to turn off something as simple as sticky keys in Windows 7 than Windows 8.1.

Swipe left -> type "Sticky Keys". It's the same exact process as on W7

[Albatross]

For y'all that hasn't heard...Win7/8/8.1 pushed out the updates that put Win10 spyGarbage onto your computer. The updates, if you would like to make sure aren't installed, is: KB3075249 and KB3080149.

 

FINARRY, someone else that understands Vista being good.

 

I actually liked Vista a lot when I had it. Never encountered the issues others seem to have.

[flibberdipper]

I admittedly liked Vista too. Had a hard time justifying it to people, though, even with my "It could be Windows ME" analogy.

 

For y'all that hasn't heard...Win7/8/8.1 pushed out the updates that put Win10 spyGarbage onto your computer. The updates, if you would like to make sure aren't installed, is: KB3075249 and KB3080149.

 

 

I actually liked Vista a lot when I had it. Never encountered the issues others seem to have.

My dad literally doesn't understand that it's actually a good OS when paired with good hardware. It ran fine on my netbook oddly enough, and when paired with an E7400 and a GTX 480... Hold on to your panties, DirectX 10 is gonna steal em lol

[GoodBytes]

In what world, even if I were to believe any of that, does it make it okay to spy on people because it is untraceable and anonymous? Is this how you justify what they are doing? Because that's just crazy...

It is OK, because the information collected is not private information, unless you are willingly giving it to Microsoft by using any of its services, in order to give you that service.

Unless you host your own service, and use that for yourself, there is no 1 single product out there that will give you complete privacy in terms of cloud based solutions. Basically what I am trying to say: If it uses the cloud, and it's not you hosting by you, the privacy policy is the same as Windows 10. Which funny enough, is the same as Windows 8, which no one bat an eye.

 

And was I suppose to acknowledge Win8 doing the same thing positively or something? And because it would ruin metrics, it makes it okay to be spied on and lied to? I love how you justify the violation of people's privacy. If people don't want to be spied on they shouldn't be and M$ certainly shouldn't hide the ability to turn it off entirely by lying about accessible settings in the control panel. Those settings don't change a thing, at least not on their own.

Lied to? Microsoft never lied to any one. What violation? This is like you posting something personal on Facebook, and going "OMG! Facebook is spying on me. They have my private information on their server, and others can see it!". Did you know that this forum also spies on you. Look your post is in Linus forum servers!!!!! It knows your IP address, from which your ISP information can be recovered, your modem number, and approximate geographical information. And the servers are backuped! See how silly it sounds?

[Agazed]

Vista was a good OS, but not for its time. It was slow on the computers that were out at the time, making it a bad OS. Just like a user above stated.

 

Windows 7 fixed these problems.

[Nowak]

My dad literally doesn't understand that it's actually a good OS when paired with good hardware. It ran fine on my netbook oddly enough, and when paired with an E7400 and a GTX 480... Hold on to your panties, DirectX 10 is gonna steal em lol

I ran Vista on a Core 2 Duo E4300 and 1GB RAM (then 3GB RAM). For the most part, it was okay, especially after the RAM bump. My biggest problem with it wasn't even directly caused by the OS, it was caused by a rootkit.

[terrytek]

I ran Vista on a Core 2 Duo E4300 and 1GB RAM (then 3GB RAM). For the most part, it was okay, especially after the RAM bump. My biggest problem with it wasn't even directly caused by the OS, it was caused by a rootkit.

I used to run Vista on a Q6600 and 2 GB of RAM, and it did run rather smooth. But i bumped it to 6GB, and upgraded to Windows 10. Still use it to this day.

[flibberdipper]

I ran Vista on a Core 2 Duo E4300 and 1GB RAM (then 3GB RAM). For the most part, it was okay, especially after the RAM bump. My biggest problem with it wasn't even directly caused by the OS, it was caused by a rootkit.

Yup. Hell, I ran it on a Sempron 145, 2GB of RAM, and a 6570 for a bit and it was actually pretty good. Once I unlocked the other core on the CPU it was a snappy little OS.

[Nowak]

The biggest problem most people had was that Vista was too heavy for their old computers. The other biggest problem was that it shipped with an immature driver model. By the time 7 was released, this new driver model matured, so people had no problems with it.

 

7 also had the same system requirements as Vista, but by then every computer met the minimum system requirements so nobody gave a shit there either. To this day the system requirements and driver model have been unchanged. Well, the driver model has been refined a bit, but it's mature enough to the point where nobody gives a shit about it anymore.

[Albatross]

It is OK, because the information collected is not private information, unless you are willingly giving it to Microsoft by using any of its services, in order to give you that service.

Unless you host your own service, and use that for yourself, there is no 1 single product out there that will give you complete privacy in terms of cloud based solutions. Basically what I am trying to say: If it uses the cloud, and it's not you hosting by you, the privacy policy is the same as Windows 10. Which funny enough, is the same as Windows 8, which no one bat an eye.

 

 

What defines as "private" to you and why do you or any other person get to decide what is private to me or the next user though? I don't want Microsoft digging through my stuff and information, deciding what is private and what is not, and what to sell it for. I don't care if what they see is a fanart on my computer to credit card information or private documents—I don't want them in it and I don't want them storing it "for their private use".

 

And I'm well aware that there isn't a product out there that will give you "complete privacy", especially in regards those that use cloud based storage, it doesn't make what is going on right (or make ignoring the problem right) and there is nothing you nor anyone else can say to logically and rightfully justify people's privacy being violated. It would be one thing if the options were entirely optional and easily accessible, but they aren't. They purposely hid these things far into the OS where the average joe won't ever find or if he does, won't ever wish to fiddle with it to achieve what he wants. So when someone else gives up with "I won't find anything that will let me keep my privacy anyways/I don't have anything to hide" it makes the spying (and products that do it) continue and makes that selection of products that do provide privacy smaller and smaller because someone else decides that privacy doesn't matter.

 

I dislike Windows 8, but yea, I have seen people complain about Win10 but justify Win8. Makes absolutely no sense.

 

Lied to? Microsoft never lied to any one. What violation? This is like you posting something personal on Facebook, and going "OMG! Facebook is spying on me. They have my private information on their server, and others can see it!". Did you know that this forum also spies on you. Look your post is in Linus forum servers!!!!! It knows your IP address, from which your ISP information can be recovered, your modem number, and approximate geographical information. And the servers are backuped! See how silly it sounds?

 

They are telling people the settings in the Privacy window disables those unwanted features. They don't tell those users those aren't the only options to be turned off if privacy is key or that if they all aren't disabled, spying will still go on. That's lying.

 

I don't go to Facebook/sites like it, so I wouldn't ever be in a situation where I'd idiotically declare Facebook is spying on me. I think it is pretty obvious that's what will happen on a site like that...it isn't the same thing (one is private the other is an online meetup/etc site) and it isn't silly to want to keep your information, or as much as you can, private. Knowing my IP address isn't the same as snooping through my computer/device and you know it. So kindly stop with trying to radicalize my objections with privacy violations by making me, or others, look like a tin-foil hat idiot, because it doesn't prove your point.

[William5849]

Windows 10 is the last windows we will see. So there will not be another version of windows as it is now a service.

[GoodBytes]

Windows 10 is the last windows we will see. So there will not be another version of windows as it is now a service.

There will be Windows 11.

Maybe not 3 years from now, but never say never. There is always a point in time where they need to scrap everything (or almost) and restart, much like they did with XP with Vista.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

My dad literally doesn't understand that it's actually a good OS when paired with good hardware. It ran fine on my netbook oddly enough, and when paired with an E7400 and a GTX 480... Hold on to your panties, DirectX 10 is gonna steal em lol

indeed. Vista on my netbook was stupidly fast compared to both XP and Win7 (fresh install vs fresh install). I had to get the drivers all over the place because Packard Bell only supplied XP drivers, but it was worth it.

I grew up with DOS and then Mac and only moved to Windows in the first half of the 00s, so XP was my first taste of Windows.

XP : okay, but most of it is nostalgia. When using it nowadays you realize it really wasn't all that great.

Vista : Excellent with the right hardware

Win7 : Like Vista, only less powerful and more ugly

Win8 : Those stupid tiles ... and where's the Start Menu?

Win8.1 : OMFG they didn't fix any of the things that needed fixing!

Win10 : Better than 8.1, but that's hardly an achievement. Still nowhere near good.

[JonU]

I keep seeing people argue about how Windows 10 is invading their privacy. Please explain this to me. When you install software you agreed to the EULA, right? I'm willing to bet you didn't read this in it's entirety, if at all. I'm also willing to bet (since I didn't read it all) that you agreed to this data collection process. Therefore, since you agreed to this, it isn't an invasion of privacy. If you really think Microsoft are the only ones giving the NSA info, you're delusional. They can get whatever info they want regardless of whether or not it's given to them. The only way not to have data collected on you is to get rid of your modern tech and be a hermit out in the mountains living off the land.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

I keep seeing people argue about how Windows 10 is invading their privacy. Please explain this to me. When you install software you agreed to the EULA, right? I'm willing to bet you didn't read this in it's entirety, if at all. I'm also willing to bet (since I didn't read it all) that you agreed to this data collection process. Therefore, since you agreed to this, it isn't an invasion of privacy. If you really think Microsoft are the only ones giving the NSA info, you're delusional. They can get whatever info they want regardless of whether or not it's given to them. The only way not to have data collected on you is to get rid of your modern tech and be a hermit out in the mountains living off the land.

 

The EULA isn't very clear TBH, and just because people clicked to the "agree" button doesn't mean they can't have their thoughts or reservations about it. 

They're still idiots for "agreeing", but at least they are having concerns and are voicing them. 

 

As for MS not being the only ones handing over data, that's very true.  However while it's easy to avoid using Google or Facebook, ditching Microsoft services is difficult for gamers and impossible for certain professionals. 

You can also (through private browsing and/or deliberate fake queries and page hits) provide so much misinformation to Google or Facebook that they can't build an accurate profile, but it's not that easy when the PC's OS itself is collecting the data already.

[Jimbillroo Digital]

Never gets old

 

[RH00D]

The EULA isn't very clear TBH, and just because people clicked to the "agree" button doesn't mean they can't have their thoughts or reservations about it. 

They're still idiots for "agreeing", but at least they are having concerns and are voicing them. 

 

As for MS not being the only ones handing over data, that's very true.  However while it's easy to avoid using Google or Facebook, ditching Microsoft services is difficult for gamers and impossible for certain professionals. 

You can also (through private browsing and/or deliberate fake queries and page hits) provide so much misinformation to Google or Facebook that they can't build an accurate profile, but it's not that easy when the PC's OS itself is collecting the data already.

 

There is OS X and Linux so its not impossible to get off Microsoft software.

 

But the main thing people seem to be missing is that being secretive in itself sets off alarms and draws attention. As they say, the best place to hide is in plain sight.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

There is OS X and Linux so its not impossible to get off Microsoft software.

True, but (for now) Windows is the dominant platform for gaming, for many titles there simply is no other option (not even WINE or similar emulators).

Some people are willing to make that sacrifice (or don't see it as a sacrifice at all), for others the proverbial carrot of games and DX12 is working and they just click "I agree".

Also some professionals need to work with Windows-only hardware or software. Those people have little option but to accept Microsoft's terms, even on their private PC if they work from home (like myself). They could of course get another job that doesn't require a PC, but that's not always a realistic scenario especially in tough times.

[jayctech]

I bet it would take 2x less time for someone to turn off something as simple as sticky keys in Windows 7 than Windows 8.1.

Swipe left -> type "Sticky Keys". It's the same exact process as on W7

Or just hit Start and type.