I wouldn’t call it good and bad. I’d say every other release they have a horrific one to scare people and then they have a bad but better than the other one release.
The data harvesting is just getting to be too much though. That’s in every release.
sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 days ago
They have an (unintentional) strategy of alternating good and bad releases. So *if windows 12 comes out and it is somewhat sensible, it will be amazing when compared to win 11, and people will not wait to get off 11 onto 12.
Whereas if 12/came out right after 10, it would be compared to 10 and people would not like it as much.
Prove_your_argument@piefed.social 5 days ago
Broken@lemmy.ml 5 days ago
If you look at the foundations of the OS the pattern becomes clear. They release a concept of an OS, but its half baked and not implemented well. So they fix it and rebrand it, and that’s the “good” version. 95 became 98 ME became XP Vista became 7 10 became 10 - they broke pattern by wanting to stay in a perpetual 10 state and keep updating it (which is why it was around 10 years). 10 was not good when it launched and took years to fix it, essentially becoming its own replacement.