4 ms·
One difference is that in the late 90s, Microsoft themselves offered a non-crufty alternative. NT4 was pretty solid and feee of distractions and fluff, but at t
by kjellsbells 4y ago
One difference is that in the late 90s, Microsoft themselves offered a non-crufty alternative. NT4 was pretty solid and feee of distractions and fluff, but at the cost of requiring better hardware and not always playing nicely with others (eg drivers). Tbh, it reminds me of Linux: when Win11 finally drives professional users crazy, it seems to be linux that they turn to, and linux on the desktop is about the level of (relative) maturity that NT4 was to 95.
- WorldMaker 4y agoNT4 wasn't consumer friendly at all and just about no consumers used NT4. This is a bit like saying "well at least Microsoft offers an LTSC branch of Win11, I'm so thankful they have a version without all the cruft" (which is certainly still true today, though even more than NT4 the LTSC branch of Windows is impossible to get outside of professional environments).
- kjellsbells 4y agoYou're reading an assertion where non exists. I didnt say everything was fine, nor that NT4 was for consumers. My point was that in contrast to today, where consumers have windows, and pro users are turning to non-windows alternatives, in the late 90s Microsoft themselves provided the pro user alternative. Perhaps Microsoft intend LTSC to be that pro alternative, but as you say, thats not available to everyone.