|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
 Posted: Tue, 9th Oct 2012 18:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Windows 8, to me, is worse.
At least in ME they was trying to take what was good in the previous ones, and combine them..failed doing so, but tried.
In 8 they just went "Lets take the UI, toss it out the window, and give people something that looks like what they use to test what colors monkeys can see, by having them push big colorful squares"
Then to top it off, people figured out how to make 8 like the old if they wanted to, and MS went "OHH crap, people are changing out UI to what they like? cant have that..fix it so they cant..make them use what WE like".
And sure sure, its 'evolution' of an UI..and can learn the totally alien new one, but its like someone reinventing the bike, where you pedal with your hands, your feet are used to steer, and you bite on a ball for breaks. Or more like it to me, its the "south park' bike Garrison made.
And its not an evolution of a UI..evolution of the UI would be "ok we have a horse(windows 7), now we have a horse with wings!"..this is "We have a horse...now we have a platypus!"
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 9th Oct 2012 19:02 Post subject: |
|
|
 ME sucked balls, i was in heaven when I upgraded to 2000... 
| Quote: | | PC awesome button = Uninstall! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Tue, 9th Oct 2012 19:33 Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, it was. Win 95 trails right behind it, unpatched XP comes in as 3rd.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ixigia
[Moderator] Consigliere
Posts: 65081
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Tue, 9th Oct 2012 19:35 Post subject: |
|
|
My father has had Windows ME on his laptop until a couple of years ago. He's still convinced that in the end, it wasn't that bad xD
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Tue, 9th Oct 2012 19:42 Post subject: Re: Was Windows Millenium the worse ever ? |
|
|
| S.S.S wrote: | | People whined a lot about Vista and rightfully so |
Why rightfully so btw? Because it was perfectly stable, as long as you had the appropriate drivers. Even with the appropriate drivers, XP/ME/95 were unstable as hell. Vista was heavier on computers than XP in some ways, but so was XP compared to its predecessors.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 9th Oct 2012 21:28 Post subject: |
|
|
had win ME for years, wasnt that bad, sure wasnt a vista or win8 to me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 9th Oct 2012 22:27 Post subject: |
|
|
| DXWarlock wrote: | Windows 8, to me, is worse.
At least in ME they was trying to take what was good in the previous ones, and combine them..failed doing so, but tried.
In 8 they just went "Lets take the UI, toss it out the window, and give people something that looks like what they use to test what colors monkeys can see, by having them push big colorful squares"
Then to top it off, people figured out how to make 8 like the old if they wanted to, and MS went "OHH crap, people are changing out UI to what they like? cant have that..fix it so they cant..make them use what WE like".
And sure sure, its 'evolution' of an UI..and can learn the totally alien new one, but its like someone reinventing the bike, where you pedal with your hands, your feet are used to steer, and you bite on a ball for breaks. Or more like it to me, its the "south park' bike Garrison made.
And its not an evolution of a UI..evolution of the UI would be "ok we have a horse(windows 7), now we have a horse with wings!"..this is "We have a horse...now we have a platypus!" |
bullshit. the only bad thing about win8 is UI (and that's question of taste), everything else is great. it's built on improved win7 kernel, so it's stable, fast, efficient.
the only bad thing about WinMe was.... everything. so yes, WinMe was the worst windows ever.
on another note, i always laugh at people bad mouthing vista. they don't realize that their beloved win7 is like 95% vista. vista was simply ahead of its time, but when average computer finally caught up with vista's requirements, ms simply repackaged it as win7 with a few tweaks here and there, and everyone was like "omg this OS is so awesome"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Tue, 9th Oct 2012 22:36 Post subject: |
|
|
| Intel_NVIDIA wrote: |
bullshit. the only bad thing about win8 is UI, everything else is great. it's built on improved win7 kernel, so it's stable, fast, efficient.
the only bad thing about win me was.... everything. so yes, win me was the worst windows ever. |
Bullshit on which part, how can an opinion be 'bullshit' its an opinion of which one you like the least...so you are calling bullshit on my claiming I dislike it?
or calling bullshit on the UI being clunky? them disabling being able to make it like previous ones? That the UI isn't an evolution of the previous ones, but a totally new ground up attempt?
Isn't that the whole context of my post? how the UI is totally changed, making using it rather useless when accustom to the previous ones? Its not a 'small but good improvement over what was there'. Its a 'toss the old on in the trash, even the good parts, and start over.'
so TO ME, that makes the the worst one so far, going off his "quickest install and uninstall" time lapse. ME i used for a few months, until I went back to 98.
Windows 8 i lasted a week before I went "screw this, I feel like I'm using the 1998 AOL screen for an OS GUI"
As for the speed, I can live with a 2 second slower boot time/loaded to usable desktop, with win7 and SSD..if I don't have to relearn to 'ride the bike' to be able to do what before required no thought, as its ingrained as second nature.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
Last edited by DXWarlock on Tue, 9th Oct 2012 22:48; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Tue, 9th Oct 2012 22:43 Post subject: Re: Was Windows Millenium the worse ever ? |
|
|
| S.S.S wrote: | | Mostly because it was bloated with a bunch of useless stuff. It wasn't THAT bad and ran stable for me most of the time too but Windows 7 is what Vista should have been from the beginning. You are correct that some of the criticism was unwarranted but some of it was justified imho |
I can't say I agree, because all 7 is, is an optimised version of Vista. Nothing was removed really; they replaced the Security Center with the Action Center and that's about it. Everything else from Vista is still there, it's just more optimised, most notably in the memory requirements of most components. So yeah, in a way 7 is what Vista should've been, but it's still as "bloated" as Vista in terms of how many components there are
7 is by far the best version of Windows though, definitely. Windows 8 is still the same thing underneath, just with a crappy UI on top. Windows 2000 is still superior to XP as far as I'm concerned; XP may be NT 5.1 (with Win2k being 5.0), but MS fucked something up in the kernel which made vanilla XP so bad. SP1 stabilised it, SP2 is the one that made it into a decent OS. I switched back to Win2K and stayed on that until SP2 came out; I tried SP1 as well, but it was still problematic with "foreign" hardware, even if you had the drivers (I had an Adaptec SCSI controller at the time).
ME on the other hand...that was to Win98SE what XP was to Win2K. They took the Win2K UI, slapped on top of a modified and fucked up Win98SE kernel and that was that. Anyone who puts that above Vista either didn't get beyond using IE (and even that was tricky in ME ) or is just lying through their teeth.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kumkss
Posts: 4835
Location: Chile
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Oct 2012 22:29 Post subject: |
|
|
WinME run way more stable than Win98SE for me, almost zero blue screens compared to at least several per week on 98SE. However RAM requirements were noticeably higher, and I had only 64 MB back then.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 28th Oct 2012 00:11 Post subject: |
|
|
Windows Milenium was bad, but for me the worst was Windows XP 64Bit...
it was an unstable mess with almost no driver support...
| |IcedFreon| wrote: | | lol you're done wih the game? already ??????? jesus. ppl havent even finished downloading it yet |
source
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 28th Oct 2012 00:17 Post subject: |
|
|
Windows XP 64-bit is certainly the worst from consumer standpoint. Not necessarily Microsoft's doing, but it was a really different code base (Windows Server 2003 64-bit offspring) and was almost completely overlooked by driver makers.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 28th Oct 2012 00:19 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | | Windows XP 64-bit is certainly the worst from consumer standpoint. Not necessarily Microsoft's doing, but it was a really different code base (Windows Server 2003 64-bit offspring) and was almost completely overlooked by driver makers. |
even in company environments it was a curse - I had a couple of customers who tried it for their CAD departments... it was horrible.
| |IcedFreon| wrote: | | lol you're done wih the game? already ??????? jesus. ppl havent even finished downloading it yet |
source |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 28th Oct 2012 00:21 Post subject: |
|
|
Well, to be honest, it was mostly due to poorly written software and bad driver support. In fact, had it been well supported by software makers, it would have been a much better XP, as it was based on the hugely improved Server 2003 code base. And people think Vista was bad.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 28th Oct 2012 00:25 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | | Well, to be honest, it was mostly due to poorly written software and bad driver support. In fact, had it been well supported by software makers, it would have been a much better XP, as it was based on the hugely improved Server 2003 code base. And people think Vista was bad. |
lol sure... but it wasn't... so imho the worst Windows OS...
wasn't microsofts fault, sure... same with vista - it wasn't really bad when you had high-end hardware anyway... ^^
| |IcedFreon| wrote: | | lol you're done wih the game? already ??????? jesus. ppl havent even finished downloading it yet |
source |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
).
