5 ms·

Around the year 2000, I was studying computer science at a university. Most of their PC's ran on Windows 3.1. I was using it at home. But one day, Microsoft

Around the year 2000, I was studying computer science at a university. Most of their PC's ran on Windows 3.1. I was using it at home. But one day, Microsoft sent me an offer: I could purchase the student release of Windows 2000 workstation for a mere $25.00. I went for it, and found it better than the Windows NT nap-sayers at school said. I don't know why I was contacted. Probbably because of other Microsoft programs I'd bought at the student bookstore.

tracker1 2y ago
Windows 2000 was a pretty great OS. Used to enjoy using a Litestep shell instead of explorer. While it wasn't great for a lot of games, many did run fine. I liked it a lot better than OS/2 that I ran previously. I generally ran 2-4x the amount of RAM as most did. Still do. Pretty sure this made a lot of the difference.
- blkhawk 2y ago
  Hey, Listestep what a blast from the past :) I rain it until it wouln't run sensible anymore in Windoes 10. I then ditched Windows for Linux soon after - I can recommend KDE Plasma if you want to have something thats sorta configureable enough like Litestep was.
  - cout 2y ago
    I remember running both litestep and windowblinds. I can't remember which one I liked better.
    - blkhawk 2y ago
      windowblinds is a window decoration customizer - LiteStep does nothing of the sort :) LiteStep completely replaces explorer.exe as the shell host and you can then customize what functions you want to have in your UI. The windows themself would stay looking the same.
autoexec 2y ago
Windows 2000 Pro was what I used at home for a long time and it was great. NT 3 and 4 were absolutely terrible which might explain your NT naysayers at school. I never once had to reapply a service pack in Win2k
- ZiiS 2y ago
  Still remember the first time I touched Windows NT 4. Half an hour into work experience: Opened up a printer dialogue set a setting that hard crashed the PC; then slowly every other PC in the building as soon as they tried to print (i.e. just as they had _finished_ whatever they were working on; but often just before they _saved_ it).
- cout 2y ago
  I liked NT4. The only reason I upgraded to 2000 was for a newer version of directx (6.0 I think?).

tracker1 2y ago

Windows 2000 was a pretty great OS. Used to enjoy using a Litestep shell instead of explorer. While it wasn't great for a lot of games, many did run fine. I liked it a lot better than OS/2 that I ran previously. I generally ran 2-4x the amount of RAM as most did. Still do. Pretty sure this made a lot of the difference.

blkhawk 2y ago
Hey, Listestep what a blast from the past :) I rain it until it wouln't run sensible anymore in Windoes 10. I then ditched Windows for Linux soon after - I can recommend KDE Plasma if you want to have something thats sorta configureable enough like Litestep was.
- cout 2y ago
  I remember running both litestep and windowblinds. I can't remember which one I liked better.
  - blkhawk 2y ago
    windowblinds is a window decoration customizer - LiteStep does nothing of the sort :) LiteStep completely replaces explorer.exe as the shell host and you can then customize what functions you want to have in your UI. The windows themself would stay looking the same.

autoexec 2y ago

Windows 2000 Pro was what I used at home for a long time and it was great. NT 3 and 4 were absolutely terrible which might explain your NT naysayers at school. I never once had to reapply a service pack in Win2k

ZiiS 2y ago
Still remember the first time I touched Windows NT 4. Half an hour into work experience: Opened up a printer dialogue set a setting that hard crashed the PC; then slowly every other PC in the building as soon as they tried to print (i.e. just as they had _finished_ whatever they were working on; but often just before they _saved_ it).
cout 2y ago
I liked NT4. The only reason I upgraded to 2000 was for a newer version of directx (6.0 I think?).