• A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Uh, no.

    95 bad, 98 bad, 98SE good only compared to 98, XP actually decent, Vista only really bad because of the change in how drivers were handled and there not being a robust library of them because of it, 7 THE GOD KING OF WINDOWS OSes…The Best, The Pinnacle. The Peak. The Top of the bell curve, 8 was shit, 10 was more shit than 8, 11 is just spyware.

    • johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you’re calling 95 bad i don’t think you spent a lot of time in 3.1. Resolving IRQ conflicts, configuring winsock.DLL, whatever the hell else. 95 had its issues, especially on the gaming side, but it was leaps and bounds better than what came before. Meanwhile 98SE was good enough to keep people, especially gamers, on it for a long time.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I did, but I didnt feel it was necessary to go into an excruciatingly detailed list of all OS’s from now to all the way back to LEO I in my OS criticism, just to avoid some pissy OS ping pong of “You thought that was bad? You obviously never used (insert older OS here)!”