I'm still constantly baffled by just how absolutely beyond shit modern computers are
@OpenComputeDesign x86 was a mistake? :)
@OpenComputeDesign
16 bit was a mistake?
transistors were a mistake?
how modern are we talking? :)

@kabel42 @OpenComputeDesign

16-bit/early-32-bit was my favorite era. (Basically, the #68k era ;)

Computers were just becoming capable, but not too big for their britches.

@rl_dane @kabel42

Yeah, tbh, we really should have stopped at 32-bit

@OpenComputeDesign @rl_dane I had a good time with my first amd athlon 64 but sure, simpler times :)

@kabel42 @OpenComputeDesign

I think computers were honestly better when they were limited to absolutely no more than 1GB RAM, no more than 256 colors, and no more than 1024x768 screen resolution.

1GB RAM: no LLMs
256 colors: no horrid low-contrast soupy interfaces
XGA Resolution: no horrid empty spaces and bloated interfaces

I keep wanting to make that as an OS 😄

(If only I had the skillz)

@rl_dane @kabel42

Yeah, older GUIs were _so much better_ it's actually impressive just how fast and how hard GUI design has fallen off a cliff

@OpenComputeDesign @kabel42

Yeah, and the pushback I get from statements like that is insane to me.

"But we don't want to go back to Windows 95."

I don't either, it was a crap OS, but the interface was better than the crap interfaces they're shipping today, so ?!?!????!?

@rl_dane

I'd rather w95 with its software suite and interface than w11 with its.

W11 is a worse OS than w95 was.

@OpenComputeDesign @kabel42

@pixx @OpenComputeDesign @kabel42

It does have memory protection, though. That was Windows 95's most glaring weakness.

Edit: I meant to say that it doesn't. derp.
Edit2: No, I was saying that W11 has memory protection. lol

@rl_dane @pixx @kabel42

Modern software still absolutely _sucks_ with anything to do with memory. Any claims modern OS's make are, at best, just giving people a false sense of security.

@OpenComputeDesign @pixx @kabel42

Brofam, Windows 95 used to crash on me daily.

Linux? Basically never.

FreeBSD? Maaaaybe once a week.

@rl_dane @OpenComputeDesign @pixx i had to reinstall win95 about as ofthen as i reboot linux :)

@kabel42 @OpenComputeDesign @pixx

Oh yeah, I had my CD Key MEMORIZED. XD

(Of course, the keys were a lot simpler and shorter back then ;)

@rl_dane @kabel42 @pixx

Last few times I installed and activated (much more recent) versions of windows, had a problem where they'll accept the key, activate, then after a few days, deactivate and make you enter the key and activate again. Windows _is_ terrible. It's just, _all_ modern software is terrible as well.

@OpenComputeDesign @kabel42 @pixx

Yes, but some are terribler than others. XD

@rl_dane @kabel42 @pixx It's true, 10/11 are well beyond 95 levels of terrible. It's just that linux is also working it's hardest to surpass 95 levels of bad, too

@OpenComputeDesign @kabel42 @pixx

No, I wouldn't compare the jankiest modern linux distro to Windows 95.

95 was terrible.

@pixx @OpenComputeDesign @kabel42

98 was the meagerest refinement.

Win2k or go home.

@rl_dane @pixx @OpenComputeDesign @kabel42 I will gladly insert myself into this thread just to say that XP was the first good Windows. Everything before was a crash-fest.
@rl_dane @pixx @OpenComputeDesign @kabel42 I was super young back then so my memories of 98 and 2000 blend together. It might have been more stable than 98? The XP to 7 era design is just so iconic though.

@jp @pixx @OpenComputeDesign @kabel42

There were basically three separate Windowses:

1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s |20s Windows 1.x -> 2.x -> 3.x -> 95 -> 98 -> ME NT 3.x -> NT 4 -> 2000 -> XP -> Vista -> 7 -> 8 -> 10 -> 11 [-------Windows CE--/-Mobile>Zune->Phone-]

W2k had the stability of XP without the Fischer-Price hilariously-bad copy of Mac OS X's interface.

I'm sure that XP had some features that 2k lacked, probably in the DirectX department, but 2k was plenty useable.

Actual dates:
1985-11-20 Windows 1.0
1987-12-09 Windows 2.0
1990-05-22 Windows 3.0
1995-07-14 Windows 95
1998-05-15 Windows 98
2000-06-19 Windows Millennium Edition

1993-07-27 Windows NT 3.1
1996-07-31 Windows NT 4.0
1999-12-15 Windows 2000
2001-08-24 Windows XP
2006-11-08 Windows Vista
2009-07-22 Windows 7
2012-08-01 Windows 8
2015-07-15 Windows 10
2021-07-24 Windows 11

1996-11-16 Windows CE
2000-04-19 Windows Mobile
2006-11-14 Zune variant of Windows CE
2010-10-21 Windows Phone 7

@rl_dane @jp @pixx @OpenComputeDesign @kabel42 IIRC the big architectural change from XP to Win2k was moving access to the GDI out of ring 0. Network stack "improvements"?

It was such a quaint time. I may have hurt myself puling forward those memories. Ha.

@RootMoose @rl_dane @jp @pixx @OpenComputeDesign I only remember signed drivers, but i think those were only mandatory on 64bit

@kabel42 @rl_dane @jp @pixx @OpenComputeDesign come to think of it - GDI change may have been NT->XP.

Why am I thinking about this!? <old man shakes fist at WinXP background grass> lol

@rl_dane @jp @pixx @OpenComputeDesign @kabel42 Win2k was the first Windows I could really trust. PS: at the 3.1 epoch I was a student.

XP was not bad either, but I still prefer W2k. After that, things only got worse. I completely abandoned Windows in the beginning of Win10. Now I have to use Win11 on work computer, but it's still bad. Even on Microsoft cloud, with Microsoft infra, using only Microsoft software with mostly default options, it is still buggy. Arch gives me a more stable productivity feeling than Windows.