Windows NT Release History
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows NT Release History:
Right, I wanted something that shows a far more complete picture. Once you have it all together, it is so much easier to visualize how far away something like XP is from today's releases.
Still love XP.
-
Only 500 some odd days until Win 7 is out of support.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Windows NT Release History:
Ah so that is how you make tables here.
Standard markdown.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows NT Release History:
@dustinb3403 said in Windows NT Release History:
Ah so that is how you make tables here.
Standard markdown.
Yeah yeah. . . I obviously don't use markdown often.
-
@kelly said in Windows NT Release History:
Only 500 some odd days until Win 7 is out of support.
Which is not very long at all, in migration to something else terms. Time to get moving on that stuff.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows NT Release History:
@kelly said in Windows NT Release History:
Only 500 some odd days until Win 7 is out of support.
Which is not very long at all, in migration to something else terms. Time to get moving on that stuff.
Eggzactry
-
@scottalanmiller Yeah your right, we did our Windows 10 migration last summer
-
@brrabill said in Windows NT Release History:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows NT Release History:
Right, I wanted something that shows a far more complete picture. Once you have it all together, it is so much easier to visualize how far away something like XP is from today's releases.
Still love XP.
My favorite Windows out of all of them was 2000. All the good stuff from NT4, without the boot drive limitation, which actually did bite a colleague once.
-
@travisdh1 said in Windows NT Release History:
@brrabill said in Windows NT Release History:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows NT Release History:
Right, I wanted something that shows a far more complete picture. Once you have it all together, it is so much easier to visualize how far away something like XP is from today's releases.
Still love XP.
My favorite Windows out of all of them was 2000. All the good stuff from NT4, without the boot drive limitation, which actually did bite a colleague once.
The classic destop theme was my favorite when using XP, Vista and 7.
-
@travisdh1 said in Windows NT Release History:
@brrabill said in Windows NT Release History:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows NT Release History:
Right, I wanted something that shows a far more complete picture. Once you have it all together, it is so much easier to visualize how far away something like XP is from today's releases.
Still love XP.
My favorite Windows out of all of them was 2000. All the good stuff from NT4, without the boot drive limitation, which actually did bite a colleague once.
That was my least favourite. NT4 was the best I ever worked with, XP was like 2000 but fixed. 2000 was all the legacy of NT4, but without being updated or modern.
-
I prefer the start menu in windows 7 as well, the start menu in windows 10 is just horrid. Just things in windows 10 seems like a longer process, like changing network adaptor settings... more clicks involved...
-
@stuartjordan said in Windows NT Release History:
I prefer the start menu in windows 7 as well, the start menu in windows 10 is just horrid. Just things in windows 10 seems like a longer process, like changing network adaptor settings... more clicks involved...
What I think you meant was "more idiotfied".
Idiotfied: to be made more intuitive for users who generally should not be involved in something.
-
@dustinb3403 They should of branched off another version called "Windows Idiotfied Edition" and left it how it was for businesses and people that actually use their machine for practical work.
-
@stuartjordan said in Windows NT Release History:
I prefer the start menu in windows 7 as well, the start menu in windows 10 is just horrid. Just things in windows 10 seems like a longer process, like changing network adaptor settings... more clicks involved...
@Romo and I were just talking about how it is IMPOSSIBLE to figure out if an app is installed. You type in its name, it doesn't come up. There is zero reliable way to deterministically get the same app list from the same actions time after time.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Windows NT Release History:
@stuartjordan said in Windows NT Release History:
I prefer the start menu in windows 7 as well, the start menu in windows 10 is just horrid. Just things in windows 10 seems like a longer process, like changing network adaptor settings... more clicks involved...
What I think you meant was "more idiotfied".
Idiotfied: to be made more intuitive for users who generally should not be involved in something.
I don't think it is. It's more "confusified" to make it less useful.
-
@stuartjordan said in Windows NT Release History:
@dustinb3403 They should of branched off another version called "Windows Idiotfied Edition" and left it how it was for businesses and people that actually use their machine for practical work.
That's the branch they have now.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows NT Release History:
@stuartjordan said in Windows NT Release History:
@dustinb3403 They should of branched off another version called "Windows Idiotfied Edition" and left it how it was for businesses and people that actually use their machine for practical work.
That's the branch they have now.
Very true!
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows NT Release History:
@stuartjordan said in Windows NT Release History:
I prefer the start menu in windows 7 as well, the start menu in windows 10 is just horrid. Just things in windows 10 seems like a longer process, like changing network adaptor settings... more clicks involved...
@Romo and I were just talking about how it is IMPOSSIBLE to figure out if an app is installed. You type in its name, it doesn't come up. There is zero reliable way to deterministically get the same app list from the same actions time after time.
We discuss that on here like a year ago or so and I disagreed with you then and I still disagree with you just because you can’t do something right are you set some setting that nobody else has a problem with doesn’t mean the entire system is wrong
-
@jaredbusch said in Windows NT Release History:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows NT Release History:
@stuartjordan said in Windows NT Release History:
I prefer the start menu in windows 7 as well, the start menu in windows 10 is just horrid. Just things in windows 10 seems like a longer process, like changing network adaptor settings... more clicks involved...
@Romo and I were just talking about how it is IMPOSSIBLE to figure out if an app is installed. You type in its name, it doesn't come up. There is zero reliable way to deterministically get the same app list from the same actions time after time.
We discuss that on here like a year ago or so and I disagreed with you then and I still disagree with you just because you can’t do something right are you set some setting that nobody else has a problem with doesn’t mean the entire system is wrong
I think the defaults on a Windows 10 install suck, but that's been a well-known thing since release. If someone doesn't have a script to clean the **** out yet, it's really their own fault anymore. Should be part of the price of using the platform.
-
@jaredbusch said in Windows NT Release History:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows NT Release History:
@stuartjordan said in Windows NT Release History:
I prefer the start menu in windows 7 as well, the start menu in windows 10 is just horrid. Just things in windows 10 seems like a longer process, like changing network adaptor settings... more clicks involved...
@Romo and I were just talking about how it is IMPOSSIBLE to figure out if an app is installed. You type in its name, it doesn't come up. There is zero reliable way to deterministically get the same app list from the same actions time after time.
We discuss that on here like a year ago or so and I disagreed with you then and I still disagree with you just because you can’t do something right are you set some setting that nobody else has a problem with doesn’t mean the entire system is wrong
Yes, but the standard Windows 10 install doesn't do it correctly and shows bad info. You disagreed with me, but I disagree with you. It's broken. If the function doesn't work and shows incorrect results, it's not working. The entire system IS wrong.
That you "can" get it to show "possibly working" results "sometimes" doesn't imply that it's deterministic and correct. But that I can easily demonstrate it not working over and over and many systems from many setups, most importantly from pristine ones, proves it is not working.
