What is the best Windows version ever?

[OldCrapEnthusiast]

XP is really nostalgic to me

[acidiclight]

Grew up on XP and later 7. While I love XP for the nostalgia, Windows 7 is much better from an accessibility perspective. XP's Magnifier can't do fullscreen zoom but 7's can, and I rely on that to even be able to use a computer.

Windows 7 was also the last version of Windows to not include malware, spyware and adware out of the box. What do I mean by malware? Well the spyware and adware is obvious, but the later OSes like to futz with your privacy and other settings (or, at the very least, nag you to change them) without your consent. That's malware. Leave my damn computer alone, Microsoft. No, I will not finish setting up my PC by switching to Edge and a Microsoft account, it's fine the way it is.

[Shaddow798]

I think I used xp for the longest. But I think windows 7 was just the best mix of everything. and was just so usable.

[flatrute]

I would have picked 2000 due to my nostalga using it during my primary schooling but after seeing Hardcore Windows by Kugee I think 95 is the peak of Windows as a whole and 2000 is merely the calm before the storm...

[MattKC]

I voted 2000 because I think it made most of the significant improvements to the Windows scene that XP takes credit for. IMO XP's biggest innovation was bringing the advancements that already existed in the NT series (including and especially 2000) to the home market, and made very few of its own besides a (admittedly iconic) user interface redesign.

[acidiclight]

This reminds me of how one of Windows 11's biggest selling points was the virtual desktop feature. I guess Microsoft thought people didn't know Windows 10 already had it. In fact the Windows 11 UI is virtually identical to the UI for it in Windows 10 RTM.

[Dev32_]

windows 7 all the way

[ashifter]

I have always had a massive bias toward Vista - I would argue that it was just as important of a step in introducing a modern Windows 'framework' (WDDM, DWM, etc.) as Windows 2000/XP in terms of moving away from DOS. It still looks incredibly classy too, I miss it lmao

[MattKC]

I have always had a massive bias toward Vista - I would argue that it was just as important of a step in introducing a modern Windows 'framework' (WDDM, DWM, etc.) as Windows 2000/XP in terms of moving away from DOS. It still looks incredibly classy too, I miss it lmao

Honestly yeah, I think you could make the same argument I made about 2000/XP that you could about Vista/7, in that Vista made most of the advancements that 7 took credit for (and as we all know, took all of the heat for the risks).

[Shaddow798]

I have always had a massive bias toward Vista - I would argue that it was just as important of a step in introducing a modern Windows 'framework' (WDDM, DWM, etc.) as Windows 2000/XP in terms of moving away from DOS. It still looks incredibly classy too, I miss it lmao

Honestly yeah, I think you could make the same argument I made about 2000/XP that you could about Vista/7, in that Vista made most of the advancements that 7 took credit for (and as we all know, took all of the heat for the risks).

Well I feel like it can be summed up as this.
windows 98 se and 2000 are far from the same
windows xp and 2000 are basicaly the same
windows xp and vista are far from the same.
windows vista and 7 basicly the same.
windows 7 onwarda are basicly the same.

Vista made a huge amount of changes to the underlying of windows. that many of which have only minerly been updated.
Like as far as I can tell Windows 11 is still nt6.4

Windows 8 made alot of changes from 7 to make windows run on arm, and adding proper support for uefi without csm etc.

Alot of the changes in windows happen overtime and in gradual steps but alot of the changes that people credit a os for usualy happend in the previous one.

[andreizabest]

Windows 95 and 98 generally feel like a mess overall. The stability issues made the OS;s feel like a mess in comparison to modern systems who can mostly handle most types of hardware and hardware changes seamlessly.

Windows 2000 probably shouldn't be included since that OS wasn't really dedicated to consumers, or if it's included then other NT versions of windows up to that should also be considered.

I seriously do like Windows XP and it's overall look. Significantly more stable than previous 9x based versions of Windows. It was perfect for it's time.

Windows Vista despite all it's initially deserved hate did become a good OS but never managed to gain traction due to the bad reputation it had gained initially. To be fair the development of Vista was also troubled too, needing a full wipe like halfway through it's development cycle before becoming what it is today.

Windows 7 is just Vista rebranded for the most part. I do still really like the OS and it is the one I spend a good chunk of my childhood using. But it's interesting to see how it completely overshadowed Vista despite at the core and even visually in many ways being similar to Vista.

Windows 8/8.1: runs ok, but the UI is a complete mess. Forcing desktop users to use a tablet interface for the start instead of the original one was just a mistake. I'm somewhat surprised everyone just A-OK'd all of this and didn't stop to think whether it would be a good thing. The best approach would be what they have done in Windows 10 with tablet and desktop modes. This is also where tracking and privacy bullshitery started creeping in.

Windows 10: good OS overall but could be better. Even a worse tracking and privacy wise compared to previous versions of Windows, maybe going enterprise could help but idk. Lots of advertising and the biggest annoyance is the mess of UI's. They started transitioning a lot of the UI element to the newer W8/W10 style but never finished it. So now you have the old control panel and new settings app and I find myself always having to go to in control panel options to adjust sounds, uninstall apps etc. while the new settings app and it's options are just an impedance to me and all the things I do. I hate it when I type sounds in the search bar and the settings app option shows first which doesn't have any of the settings I need such as adjusting volume of the mic, amplifier, disabling/enabling devices, etc. It just annoys me. If you're going to do something at least do it properly. Not to mention the bloat that comes with a fresh windows installation. NO MICROSOFT FOR THE THOUSANDTH TIME I DON'T WANT TO PLAY CANDY CRUSH ON MY GAMING PC STOP INSTALLING IT EVERY TIME I INSTALL WINDOWS.

Personally if I could today, I'd still be running Windows 7 on all of my machines, no stupid bloatware, no mess of UI's. Just a simple functional OS that does everything I want it to.

[flatrute]

Windows 95 and 98 generally feel like a mess overall. The stability issues made the OS;s feel like a mess in comparison to modern systems who can mostly handle most types of hardware and hardware changes seamlessly.

Comparing to its main competitor Mac OS, Windows 95 is way more stable with its preemtive multitasking while able to handle years of MS-DOS and Win16 legacy almost seamlessly which is ridiculous from programming standpoint. Its (iconic) interface is also easier to navigate than 3.x for many users. I think most of its stability issues just boils down to those legacy hurdles which ME tried to sweep out radically. Windows 98 do deserve more of its bad reputations it should have had due to its embedded Internet Explorer into the entire OS though.

Windows 2000 probably shouldn't be included since that OS wasn't really dedicated to consumers, or if it's included then other NT versions of windows up to that should also be considered.

Except its Professional edition was already adopted by many normal consumers. It is simply rock stable and has features that are considered "consumery" such as Plug And Play and DirectX 7 (upgradable up to 9). Unless you have to deal with MS-DOS drivers and/or softwares that NTVDM cannot handle it is a no brainer to spend more for less BSODs.

I seriously do like Windows XP and it's overall look. Significantly more stable than previous 9x based versions of Windows. It was perfect for it's time.

I recommend you watching this video and then reevaluating your opinion.

No comments on the rest.

Edit: Missing words added.
Edit #2: I forgot not everyone are into light mode

[andreizabest]

I recommend you watching this video and then reevaluating your opinion.

That video hasn't really changed any of my opinions of Windows XP.

One of the first things they do is criticise the Luna theme then proceeded to praise one of the beta themes which is basically just glorified windows 2000. It is a matter of preference but it is fair to say that most people who ended up upgrading and using Windows XP didn't have a problem with the theme at the very least. The Luna theme is one of the things that makes XP so memorable and that people look back on to.

Another things is the setup theme. The thing users might not hear at all due to lack of audio drivers, and those that do will only really hear it once. Criticised because it was reused from the IE3 starter kit. Besides the fact that it doesn't really make a difference whether it's reused or not, recycling sounds is relatively common for Windows that IE3 starter kit song was also used in Encarta 98 as the north america virtual flight song.

Also the complaints about the differences between Home and Professional versions of XP. Do people seriously expect feature parity between two versions of Windows with a 100$ price difference? This divide already existed earlier with Windows ME and Windows 2000 which he praises so much. And no, most people back then didn't make use of GPEDIT, file encryption or other administrative tools, and those that needed those feature would have known to get Windows XP Professional instead be it illegitimately or legitimately.

Also the end makes the whole thing feel like a glorified Linux advertisement.

Oh and the way the whole video was edited made it feel like a fever dream.

[flatrute]

That video hasn't really changed any of my opinions of Windows XP.

One of the first things they do is criticise the Luna theme then proceeded to praise one of the beta themes which is basically just glorified windows 2000. It is a matter of preference but it is fair to say that most people who ended up upgrading and using Windows XP didn't have a problem with the theme at the very least. The Luna theme is one of the things that makes XP so memorable and that people look back on to.

Another things is the setup theme. The thing users might not hear at all due to lack of audio drivers, and those that do will only really hear it once. Criticised because it was reused from the IE3 starter kit. Besides the fact that it doesn't really make a difference whether it's reused or not, recycling sounds is relatively common for Windows that IE3 starter kit song was also used in Encarta 98 as the north america virtual flight song.

Also the complaints about the differences between Home and Professional versions of XP. Do people seriously expect feature parity between two versions of Windows with a 100$ price difference? This divide already existed earlier with Windows ME and Windows 2000 which he praises so much. And no, most people back then didn't make use of GPEDIT, file encryption or other administrative tools, and those that needed those feature would have known to get Windows XP Professional instead be it illegitimately or legitimately.

Also the end makes the whole thing feel like a glorified Linux advertisement.

Oh and the way the whole video was edited made it feel like a fever dream.

Perhaps I myself am the one in fever dream...

Whatever. You keep your opinion. I just think XP is overrated as hell.

[flatrute]

Perhaps I myself am the one in fever dream...

Whatever. You keep your opinion. I just think XP is overrated as hell.

On another note, maybe I should not have defeated myself so soon

One of the first things they do is criticise the Luna theme then proceeded to praise one of the beta themes which is basically just glorified windows 2000. It is a matter of preference but it is fair to say that most people who ended up upgrading and using Windows XP didn't have a problem with the theme at the very least. The Luna theme is one of the things that makes XP so memorable and that people look back on to.

Except that people hated it at first.

It was only until SP2 that people would look past many of its problems. Also in the video he is fine about Royale/Energy Blue which is basically a much more finished looking Luna.

Another things is the setup theme. The thing users might not hear at all due to lack of audio drivers, and those that do will only really hear it once. Criticised because it was reused from the IE3 starter kit. Besides the fact that it doesn't really make a difference whether it's reused or not, recycling sounds is relatively common for Windows that IE3 starter kit song was also used in Encarta 98 as the north america virtual flight song.

It is not simply about assets reusing. It is about Microsoft artificially taking old stuffs and advertising them as if they were brand new, never been invented before.

Also the complaints about the differences between Home and Professional versions of XP. Do people seriously expect feature parity between two versions of Windows with a 100$ price difference? This divide already existed earlier with Windows ME and Windows 2000 which he praises so much. And no, most people back then didn't make use of GPEDIT, file encryption or other administrative tools, and those that needed those feature would have known to get Windows XP Professional instead be it illegitimately or legitimately.

You are right that ones needing such advanced features will get the pricier but then there is Windows 98, a home release of Windows, capable of doing things considered "professional" out of the box.

Also the end makes the whole thing feel like a glorified Linux advertisement.

Understandable. He had just switched to Linux a few months before the video was made.

Oh and the way the whole video was edited made it feel like a fever dream.

He is a maroon whale.

Happy New Year (Eve)

[Shaddow798]

Windows Vista was so radical that it changed alot, and there was just not enough time for polishing.
And nvidias vista driver at first just sucked. Which caused a large percentage of the vista crashs at release.
But by the time seven shiped alot of thoses issues were ironed out.
And since vista had a large negiatve public peception.
7 was marketed heavliy and quite well.

[pizzaboxer]

Ouch, I'm only one of two people who voted Vista. Not to take away from 7's greatness, but as others have mentioned here, it really is just rebranded Vista with Vista having done most of the true innovation, and unfortunately having also taken most of the scrutiny for its compatibility issues making it as unpopular as it is. However, there's one thing that I believe Vista does considerably better than 7. Vista's UX and aesthetics are just immaculate, and I strongly believe no UI design language is ever going to look as good or be as functional as Vista. While Vista and 7 both use Aero, I personally prefer Vista's greenish colour scheme over 7's toned-down blue tint.

[CrabHead]

Ouch, I'm only one of two people who voted Vista. Not to take away from 7's greatness, but as others have mentioned here, it really is just rebranded Vista with Vista having done most of the true innovation, and unfortunately having also taken most of the scrutiny for its compatibility issues making it as unpopular as it is. However, there's one thing that I believe Vista does considerably better than 7. Vista's UX and aesthetics are just immaculate, and I strongly believe no UI design language is ever going to look as good or be as functional as Vista. While Vista and 7 both use Aero, I personally prefer Vista's greenish colour scheme over 7's toned-down blue tint.

You have a point. I just voted windows xp because it was just good. Every time im using it is a good expierience. I wish it had modern driver & app support like im sayin all the time.