Category: Geeks r Us
Hey, for those of you that know this sort of stuff, what do you think has been the best version of windows? Microsoft should have just stuck to that version and improved apon it?
I'm only fimiliar with windows me and xp. I've used vista on a limited basis.
Look forward to your thoughts.
out of all of them i like xp the most though Mi wasn't bad either
I've the complete opposite. I didn't have any trouble with ME, but everyone else I talk with says that ME and vista sucked the most. I'll agree with them about VIsta, but maybe we had a good copy of ME or something because we had no problems, at least I didn't, maybe my parents did though. My favortie version is XP, or seven, when its out of beta stages.
The one thing that stands out for me with me was I got that dreaded blue screen more often.
I use Vista with no problems these days, so I'd say that if it isn't better than XP yet, it will be eventually.
I doubt seriously that vista will ever be better then XP.
95, 98, and ME were really just glorified shells on top of dos. There were stability and security issues, memory limitations , all sorts of things that kept those operating systems from developing to their full potential, especially in the corporate world.
NT and 2000 dealt with those issues, but were never really adopted by home users due to a serious lack of drivers for popular peripherals. XP was the next generation of NT, and really where Windows basically came into its own. So, long story short, I would say that to date, XP has been the most tried and true, and has proven itself over time.
Vista got off to a rocky start and has taken a lot of bad pub. I think it was actually released a year or so earlier than it should have been. nowadays though, if you have a machine with reasonable resources, and by reasonable resources, I mean 2 gigs of ram or more, Vista runs just fine. Only time will tell what people's perceptions will ultimately be of Vista and or Windows 7.
Al
Reasonable resources, to the o/s itself is bs, but let's be practical here. Does an average home user need 3 gigs of ram, even 2 for that matter? Yup granny will be doing video editing I'm sure. One should not have to buy maxed out resource in a box because the o/s needs it. I will buy them because I need them. That is what vista boosters are overseeing and when it is pointed out to them they freak out saying I'm rude mean etc.
I have used 2000 and loved it. XP came along and was the comfortable lazy boy recliner we all got to know, well, and I suppose love more or less. Windows 1 was good for its time, 3.1 was the xp of it's day and 95, if drivers were not installed, looked like a 2 year old design it. 98/SE was ok but buggy. This program has performed and illegal operation and will be shut down. If the problem persists, Please contact the program vender. Close button. Chkdsk ran everytime the machine was shut down the wrong way, and then came along ME. ME is Vista before we put the braudway sex cover on it. Buggy BSOD galore. Most don't know that ME was done and dusted in 7 weeks hence why it ran like such garbage. ME was also intended for businesses, and they had to get something out because they were losing money, or feared that anyway. Somewhere along the line ME was leaked and was sold on machines. 2000 came out which was based on the new NTFS file system. I love 2000 because of its snappiness. I loved it to death. It could run on very low resources and was a quick install. Neptune came along most people don't know this either, but Neptune, though it still has a build number attached to it was actually a final release version though it was never released to the public because it was rolled over into the wistler project. Neptune was intended to be 2000 Home, and Installing it was extremely fast I was surprised. It runs just like 2000. The wistler project then became xp which was a glorified 2000. M$ could have settled, and they did, with xp. XP gave more networking support, bug fixes and a whole new look and feel.
But overall, when all said and done, xp has to be the best thing MS pumped out. We've beaten vista to death, we know it's a piece of shit so we won't revisit it. I have used just about every version of windows and still feel safe and sound with XP.
Ii've been wanting to try out that 2000 CD u gave me cody. I wonder how fast it'll go with my desktop.
ah. Excellent history there. Though I've heard of neptune, I never did get to tried it. The only OS I have never tried from Microsoft was Windows ME.
Overall though I miss those windows 3.1 days. Yes, memory limitations and the kernel stability was a bit on the downside as 3.1 only weighed around... 20 MB total? But the user interface was nice and simple, where you could just choose a program group and find the application you wanted quickly and easily. Now-a-days the program manager is disabled on most XP machines and all machines above Vista don't even have the executable.
Asides 3.1 I would have to agree that XP was the best. It was light and most of all didn't eat up your resources (though with 7 we see a decrease of ram usage). In deed I liked 2000, but felt it's lack of drivers far too annoying.
Windows 95 and 98 had that nice security flaw where someone could hit the escape key to bypass the password dialog. Heh. Remember those days? Why create a password if anyone could hit the Escape key and get access to your system? lol. Stupid Microsoft.
I'd have to say xp as well
2000 was alright, I never really ran into alot of problems with it, but of corse the one I used wasn't a home addition.
Vista I can't stand and will probably never use again. Besides eating up the resources, it wasn't as fast with stuff as xp is. also just all the bugs and problems with it annoied me to no end.
So my favorite, and will probably always be my favorite as it looks, is xp.
XP Pro's the way to go...