With the enshitification of modern windows what was your favorite and Linux fags this isn't the thread for you so move on.
Windows 7 was mine
>>108755282Windows XP - besides classic current day crap like online account, ads, forced telemetry, ai etc... Bimbows XP just worked i never had issues with it.Next would be 7 of course but still it had UAC which was annoying that time.
>>108755282Windows 2000 is objectively peak windows.
>>108755309>still it had UAC which was annoying that timeIt's funny how everyone complained about it even though you can turn it off
>>108755331Yeah but you didn't for good reason because script could start executing programs on it's own and you would be fucked if you downloaded something sketchy. So even if annoying it probably helped more then actually damaged the system it was first time that it appeared in Vista but 7 was universally loved version.
Windows 7 Manami Edition
>>108755321This had the best UI by a long shot, but no support for gaming.Personally I'd have to go with 7 as the boring predictable answer.
>>108755557Windows 7 is the last version of windows that is just barely usable, and even then its only just usable. I am using it right now and I hate it so much.> no support for gamingWindows 2000 was perfectly capable at running games. I have ran many games under 2000.
>>1087552821) Windows 2000 professional RTM to SP42)Windows server 2008R23)Windows XP4)Windows 7 professional/ultimate5)Windows 95 OSR26)Windows NT4 SP57)Windows 98 SE8) Windows 3.119)Windows Server 2003R210)Windows 10
>>108755321>Windows 2000 is objectively peak windows./thread
>>108755557it ran directx better than fine.
>>108755282I don't have a favorite but Windows ME was the worst.
>>108755604ten is usable but annoying, it's just nowhere as nice but 7 was only good because you could still use it and make it look like windows 2000 professional by tuning out the bullshit..11 is like they went full on to make it as irritating, frustrating and annoying to people who had been using windows for 20-30 years as humanly possible
98
>>10875569098 sucked at least get it righ and say 98SE which is what you mean. 98me sucked ass too. Jowever windows 2000 pro fucking crushed windows 9x in every way.
>>108755282Imagine a world where they just kept making XP better and better instead or throwing everything out and releasing bloated messes. I wouldn't be using linux if that was the case.
>>108755680There were many dumpser fires95 RTM98 RTMVista98meWindows 8Windows 11Server 2008 RTMNT4 RTM and SP 1-3Windows NT 3.5.1Yeah I'd put windows 98me high up that list too
>>108755702XP was good as 32 bit but the 64 bit version of XP was dogshit. No we would not be better of still in 32 bit computing.
Win2k was honestly the last time I didn't feel hassled by windows.Even as far back as windows genuine advantage and other horse shit in xp, it was annoying.
>>108755721> 64 bit version of XP was dogshitXP-64 was only available on ItaniumI assume you are falling for the common misconception, that an amd64 release of xp exists, which it does not. Win2k3 was the first version of windows that supported amd64. The XP-x64 that you might have seen is just a resource hack.
>>108755671Aside from slightly higher system requirements, what makes 98 SE worse than 95 OSR2?
buydered xp 64 for my first build in 2007pirated vista not long afterpirated 7 in betaskipped 8 throught 10 for linux (arch btw)now buyded 11 pro retail
>>108755716All RTM versions are ass. W10 was also ass before the Vibranium updates starting in 2020
Windows 7. Too comfy to upgrade
>>108755282XP, was faster than modern stuff with shittier hardware
>>108755671>10)Windows 10kino...
>>108755910why>>108756031does it still treat you well?
win2kpro and 7 ultimate
>>108755282windows 7 because it was the one I had growing up so I have the most nostalgia for it
>>108755282windows 2000 and xp are my favorite2000 is just the best, xp is the last "just works" one>>108755557>no support for gamingwhat? no, it ran games just fine, as long as you had drivers and directx installed.
>>108755721xp x64 and 2003 x64 are the same, the only difference is the SKU. and they were both rock solid.
>>108755282XP for the visual styles, if I ignore that then probably 2000
>>108755321correct answer. I love my windows 2000 machine to death and run only retro softwares/games on it
>>108756438>>>108755321>correct answer. I love my windows 2000 machine to death and run only retro softwares/games on itI am going to have to agree.I hacked in everything from Windows XP black, back into it, and it ran fine:I had to use the advanced server edition, because it was an early i7...and dual booted with Windows XP Black,but it was a powerhouse,I can never remember it crashing
>>108755282Best to worst:>Windows 3.1>Windows 8.1>Windows 7>Windows Vista>Windows XP>Windows 95>Windows ME>Windows 10>Windows 11>Linux fags this isn't the thread for youIt is possible to regularly use more than one OS. Depending on the task at hand, I could be using Windows, OS X, Linux, or Android at any given moment.
Glad to see 2000 being the favorite, mine is as well, unfortunately I was just too young to enjoy it as I wish, still had the pleasure to build a retro PC and use it for a bit
XP/7, but generally not for gaming. With a virtual machine you can run almost anything using those two, but I prefer XP because it is more compact on disk. While 8/8.1 had low adoption I think it's alright too because it allows what would only run on W10 to execute, and from what I saw when using the pro version the installation size wasn't that bad compared to W10/W11, which created bloated VMs easily exceeding 65GB if you are trying to do anything but the most basic tasks. W10 natively occupies 100GB under normal use, W11 is probably a little better but I still think anything exceeding 50GB is insane because 14+GB/30+GB is sufficient for XP/7.
Brahmin tier:>Windows XP>Windows 2000>Windows 7Kshatriya tier:>Windows 98 SE>Windows Vista>Windows NT 4.0Vaishya tier:>Windows 95>Windows 10>Windows 11>Windows 3.1>Windows 3.51Shudra tier:>Windows 8.1>Windows MeDalit tier:>Windows 8>Please wait a while before making a post or verify your email here.
you niggers have to remember that 7 is just a skin of Vista with a cucked Superfetch
>>108756624Windows 3.1 wasn't that great. Half the time it felt more like a superfluous gui for DOS.
>>108755309I felt 7 'just worked' better than XP, but that might have been because I was a coomer and I was always downloading spyware and shit. I still was with 7 of course but that was the first version with defender built in
>>108758960>coomerheh, being a coomer led me to find out about linux, never had an issue downloading coom material
>>108759010Yeah as a matter of fact these days I have Bazzite on a second ssd. My idea getting it was to see how gaming on Linux was, but in practice I ended up just using it for cooming and I do everything else on Windows
>>10875528295.going from 3.11 to 95 was the single greatest moment for microsoft and its users. i'll concede this was also because of huge innovation in hardware during those times.
>>108759025and then I started developing shit to hoard more cooming material and combined with my linux experience I managed to get a job
I used 98/98SE longer than any other version of Windows. I switched to OS X Snow Leopard after XP instead of going to Vista or eventually 7. Then instead of using 7 or 10 after I got tired of Macs I just jumped balls deep into Linux. So XP is the last version of Windows I ever used.
Give me XPs start menu and ease of finding shit with 7s smooth sailing
>>108755282Win98SE was the epitome of comfyI could run all my old DOS games and all the new Windows games.32bit browsers (Netscape) and other productivity applications had all come into their ownit wasn't perfect, but it was everything most people neededand I was an OS/2 guy since the early 1990s
>>108759910I half agree.There was one issue though and that's needing to reinstall at least once or twice a year...
>>108759055Big part was that games that came out around that time were forcing 32-bit and the game demos that were on the PC Gamer Magazine Demo CD were something you looked forward to every month and if you were still running 3.1 you couldn't play half the shit.
>>108755282Win7. Despite it being way more annoying than XP (network sharing made me seethe more than once) it was the apex of computing. Everything that came later was significantly inferior in one way or another.I'm sure you could create a Frankenstein between more modern stuff in Win 8.1 (like the task manager or Nvme support) while keeping Win7's UI.
>>10875528298SE I guess.Every upgrade has always felt like>ok it takes more resources and you can't run some of the stuff you used to run but you gotta upgrade because you just have to ok?
>>108755282I am quite fond of Vista. It introduced that funny picture puzzle widget that I would spend hours playing with instead of doing my job. Anyone who dislikes Vista is genuinely too young to have actually used it lol. It wasn't that bad.
Windows 95, could run on potato PC
>>108759910>Win98SE was the epitome of comfy>I could run all my old DOS games and all the new Windows games.It supported DX9.0c and could still run things like GTA San Andreas, Half-Life 2, The Sims 2, Max Payne 2, Need For Speed Underground...... 2And yes, real DOS mode
>>108755282everyone who didnt say win10 is just fanatic roseglassed retard
>>108755282For nostalgia sake, it has to be Windows 7, always.However, if I'd just want raw performance and no bloat, it would be Windows 8.1.
Why can't Microsoft recreate caveman technology like Windows 95 with feature-completeness of Windows 11? I know, it would poke a hole in their business model. But what if they just split professional and home again and recreate Windows NT 4.0 with feature-completeness of Windows 11 but without gaming support? That would also poke a hole in their business model.So what if they just sold an old-school Windows mode as an Expansion Pack like games do?
>>108760670I mean, they used to sell enhancement packs for 95 and 98.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Plus!
Obviously whatever the current Version of Windows 11 is the best, it is the accumulation of decades of development and improvement of Windows
Win 95, it was all downhill after that and I threw up my hands and ran off to Linux in 2000
>>108761011I remember you needed to be big dick mcgee with 4MB of RAM to be able to have an actual image as your background
Just cuz I use Linux doesn't mean I can't have a favorite Windows, retard. I used Windows for 30 years.Windows 2000 is mine by the way. It's the last time I used Windows and I wasn't mad about it.
>>108760742True, but only after you've removed Satya's subscription-kiosk elements.
>>108761011MS-DOS based Windows 95/98/Me was always garbage. Absolute flaming turd garbage.I remember that when XP came people started trying to one up each other with uptimes that spanned weeks, because you sure as shit wouldn't be able to use 9x ones for days without slowing to a crawl or freezing.
>>10875528298SEI was younger then so the themes were neat and there were tons of great games to play. XP is a close second for similar reasons.W7 had a lot of the same perks. Windows has only really gotten worse since then.
>>108761011so you dislike NT?’
7, any other answer is just contrarian.
Windows was always shit. You just remember it being better when you were a kid (when Windows 7 was out) because you didn't know any better. Zoom zooms.
>>10875528295, 98, 2000, XP, Vista and 7 were peak for me... after 8 it just sort of died.
it's all downhill from 7
>>108761244Normal people in that era also shut their home computer off when they were done using it.Windows 95-98 was garbage in the absolute sense across time, but as the PC-Compatible OS in the 90s, it delivered. And its base UI organization was the one that stuck for 30 years. They tried something different (retarded) with 8, and then went back to the Win95-based design when that flopped hard.The only real competition to Windows in the 90s in the home/office/education markets was Mac. Stuff like Amiga was fading away. Linux was not a factor, and the DOS-based OS's didn't seriously try to compete with high-end Unix workstations. (Though I remember using a Windows 98 PC on an internship to do development in a facility with SPARC workstations connected to an Intel Paragon supercomputer. The joke was that you could log into the windows 98 machine with the Escape Key. Which was true, but if you did that, you wouldn't be able to mount network resources.)Compared to Mac (System 7 at the time), Windows on a PC was the cheaper, more flexible and practical option for geeks and businesses.
>>108762126I am using 7 right now. Compared to 2k/xp 7 its a mangled broken mess. They did massive amounts of damage to the code base. Pretty much every single change was bad. Of course its still tiers above the abominations that came later, buts its not good.
>>108755282Windows 7 Madobe Nanami edition
>>108755557>no support for gamingHow to tell someone you've never used Windows 2000 without telling them you've never used Windows 2000, in a nutshell. It ran basically every game Windows 9x did and so much more reliably. No more having to clench your arse every time you Alt+Tab in a full screen game wondering if the system will freeze up like it did half the time in Windows 9x was a killer app in itself. VDMSound for DOS games was great. Next you'll be telling us XP64 didn't have any drivers.
>>10875528295 for a nice, new shell.98SE for a more stable system.2000 for NT excellence, extreme stability, and a minimal GUI.XP for functionality and speed.Vista for increased security.7 for polish and beauty.8.1 for graphics acceleration and HiDPI.Everything else after these has been 100% dogshit. Although 11 is kinda pretty visually.
>>108762126>>108762753The thing you both have to understand about 7 is that it's really just the last decent Windows before it went off a cliff. If your measure of "peak" was "peak design given the era" then 2k has an edge. But objectively Windows 7 has better support for newer hardware, which is especially relevant because the 2010s is the era where computers reached a point of being far more powerful than the average person will ever need. The computer I'm typing this on is from 2016. It's running Linux now, but the only real reason I had to upgrade from Windows 7 is so I could painlessly use newer NVMe hard drives and USB devices (eg a wacom tablet). It's fast for everything I use it for, except running local AI models (and that's only because my GPU is old). All the other reasons people move to a new OS are BS or coercive.>>108762903>How to tell someone you've never used Windows 2000 without telling them you've never used Windows 2000,I only used Windows 2000 server, which definitely didn't ship with support for games. Only used XP pro at home
>>108762903Different anon here.There was a caveat, though, and that's 2000's remarkably poor accelerated video hardware compatibility on launch. Proper DirectX and video driver support did not materialize till years after it's initial release, and that's why WinXP (sp1 at least, original was unusable) had the edge for video games, though they'd eventually level off.
>>108762903> It ran basically every game Windows 9x didThat is a straight up false statement. It ran a lot of games, but nowhere near all of them. For example, if I recall correctly the windows port of tomb raider would crash on NT because it had random enable/disable interrupt instructions in the code. Presumably these were left over remnants from the original dos version. Win9x would silently ignore these instructions.
>>108755282Up until my current laptop (Windows 11), I got lucky enough to have the *good* versions of Windows on all my PCs - 3.11, 95 (which was an upgrade on the PC that had 3.11), 98, XP, 7, and 10. I don't really have a "favorite" version because as long as it doesn't fuck up, I don't have a problem with it, and I've never had to deal with a massive fuck-up. Even with 11, disabling the annoyances (including all the AI shit) was easy enough that, Start menu aside, it feels pretty much like 10.I might switch to Linux if 11 makes AI shit mandatory and always-enabled, though.
None. Fuck windows. If I want something I'll wine or VM it.
>>108763125Windows 7 was very much already off the cliff. Windows 7 was not the last good version of windows, it was the last usable (barely). And sure windows 7 has better support for newer hardware, but that same argument applies to 8/10/11 as well.As an aside, my NVMe drive works perfectly in windows 7.
2000 but xp is easier / lazier to install >why?directx9 is all you need
Ever since XP, Windows has increasingly behaved as though your computer belongs to Microsoft, not you
>>108763125Maybe, my last memory of Windows 7 was when I was a teenager (late 2018) so the most technical thing I was doing was installing Half Life mods and playing with ConEmu.I never used 2k in any real capacity, but I can see how it could be the best NT kernel. Microsoft has a reverse unix philosophy that almost grantees it will get worse over time as legacy systems have to be jerry rigged and butchered to support new designs.Unfortunately 2k was insufficient for the technological developments that followed.
>>108764033> Unfortunately 2k was insufficient for the technological developments that followed.There have been no technological developments, computing has gone backwards.
>>108755282Windows XP, which was my daily driver until 2020, at which point I switched to 10, and now 11 (still local account).Windows 95 was my first one so it holds a sentimental value but I've achieved the most on XP.
>>108764295> at which point I switched to 10How did you even stomach the downgrade. I "upgraded" to 7 in 2020 and nearly had a full on psychotic break. It took me like 4 years to recover.
>>108763180>Windows 7 was very much already off the cliff.In what way? The specifics are the point.>And sure windows 7 has better support for newer hardware, but that same argument applies to 8/10/11 as well.You're failing to understand both the position and the details. The position is that there is a "balance," an equation between the good and the bad. EG OS capability improves linearly but the BS detracts exponentially. So the peak is the point where exponential enshittification outpaces the capability advances. My belief is that 7 is the last version before the BS outpaced the good qualities. So no, you cannot "apply the same argument to 8/10/11" because by then, the BS had become intolerable. Furthermore, I also argue that the improved hardware support is far less valuable now than it used to be. There are no features in modern OS's that are anything like going from 32 bit to 64 bit addressable memory. It's all more subtle.
>>108765697Windows 7 has no good qualities beyond support for newer hardware. In regards to being off the cliff, widows went over the cliff with Vista. They did significant damage to a number of core systems. The worst thing they did is completely destroyed the graphics stack, removing all hardware acceleration from the GUI, destroying the lowest latency user interface that ever existed. All to make windows transparent. What a waste.
win11 but using win10 since machne no have tpm2.0.
