cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/2823044
This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/nostalgia by /u/Character-Emotion237 on 2024-05-02 22:39:26.
cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/2823044
This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/nostalgia by /u/Character-Emotion237 on 2024-05-02 22:39:26.
The original 98 was rough around the edges (BSODs galore) but SE was a bit more stable.
XP was so stable you could generally run things without too many issues barring running out of memory (late era)
XP took a while to get there, though, and it suffered until SP3 with woefully inadequate security for the era.
We tend to remember the final service packs of given version of Windows as "good"and forget the long road that got us there.
7 I think gets a pass because it really was a Vista service pack, and Vista took most of the reputational hit.
8 was the first version I recall that really worked well out of the box, other than the UI. 10 continued that trend and it’s been refinements since.
Even 2k and NT4 took a while to get good. I still recall the bad day that was NT4 SP6.
I think that’s what makes 11 so jarring. It’s been a decade since Microsoft pushed that much change that quickly.