I mean sort of except 10 was bad too. They’re just all bad since 7
I’m losing track, but don’t they usually go good, bad, good, bad?
98 good, m.e. bad, xp good, vista bad, 7 good, 8 bad, 10 good, 11 bad, so maybe 12 good?
Obviously I’m over simplifying and I skipped over 2000. But at least since 98 I feel like the trend has been pretty reliable.
scott@lemmy.org 3 weeks ago
01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 2 weeks ago
- 98 bad
- 98se good
- m.e. bad
- xp good
- Vista bad
- 7 good
- 8 bad
- 8.1 ok? Sort of
- 10 goodish
- 11 bad
- 12 personally, I think it will be worse
supernicepojo@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Only if you ignore the NT and server releases. Otherwise, sure why not.
sorghum@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
2000 was marketed as business and server only, like NT before it.
aeronmelon@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Consumers knew about 2000 because Me was such dogshit regular people started using 2000 despite the drawbacks.
Most consumers didn’t know or care about Windows NT, or Windows 2003, 2008, and so on.
floofloof@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
10 felt good compared to 8 and 8.1. But that was a very low bar.
sorghum@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
7 was the last good iteration of windows imho being that it wasn’t loaded up with a bunch of telemetry being sent to Microsoft like 10 and 11 and didn’t have the terrible UI stuff like 8 and 11.