• DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    No. They’re all bad, some are just worse than others. You’ve all just been stockholm syndromed into thinking better of the “less bad” ones.

    • DacoTaco@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Everything after w7, id agree. Windows 7 was actually legit. It ran fine on my amd athlon with 512MB ram. Ran dolphin back in the day too. Now after that it was all shite

      • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        No 7 sucked too. It just came off the back of Vista which was a real hot mess, so 7 appeared better.

        The thing is, Microsoft has always had an adversarial (or abusive) relationship with its customers, forcing things on them that most of them don’t want. Like active desktop and IE integration in Windows 9x, “activation” and Fisher Price UI in XP, bloated (for the time) Aero UI that required a 3D capable GPU in Vista, UAC in Vista, forced automatic updates in 7, abandoning the start menu in favor of that awful tile UI in 8.x, telemetry you can’t disable in 10, a start menu that acts more like an app store and advertising place in 10, forced TPM and Microsoft accounts in 11 … the list is endless. And then when they back down on one thing, people are like: “Hurray, the czar heard us! Windows is actually good now!” … forgetting all the other things they have been forced to swallow in the past.

    • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      W7 was fine. I cut the cord and went Linux before W10. It sucked for a year, and now I look at the trash they sell and everyone pays actual money for… And I laugh XD.