4 ms·

The "every other major Windows release" rule has held since Windows 2000. 2000 take. ME, skip. XP, take. Vista, skip. 7, take. 8, skip. 10, take. 11? D

by Pxtl 2y ago

The "every other major Windows release" rule has held since Windows 2000. 2000 take. ME, skip. XP, take. Vista, skip. 7, take. 8, skip. 10, take. 11? Definitely skip.

Madmallard 2y ago
aren't they forcing windows 11 on people?
Dalewyn 2y ago
At least count them properly: NT 3.1 - Good(?). NT 3.5 - Bad(?). NT 4.0 - Good(?). 2000 - Bad(?!) XP - Good(?). Vista - Bad. 7 - Good. 8 - Bad. 8.1 - Good(???). 10 - Bad. 11 - Good(?). And before anyone asks, yes this is a bad meme and doesn't even make any sense.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- toast0 2y ago
  Even numbered Trek Films/FreeBSD releases/Windows releases don't suck? I don't think it quite works though, because NT4 and NT5 (2k) were both good, although NT4 was hard to use with many games and win2k was better but still had some issues. I didn't hate XP on release and people grew to like it. So that's kind of 3 hits in a row, but then vista bad, 7 good, 8.x bad, 10 good, 11 bad kind of fits the pattern.
ralmidani 2y ago
Windows 2000 was the successor to Windows NT 4. On the consumer side, there was 95, then 98, then 98 SE (Second Edition), and then ME.
- userbinator 2y ago
  On the consumer side, there was 95, then 98, then 98 SE (Second Edition), and then ME. ...and with the exception of ME, all of those were actual improvements.
mepian 2y ago
Windows 8.1 was a major release too, and generally considered a "good" one compared to Windows 8.
Krssst 2y ago
Didn't 10 introduce dark patterns to make users create an online account, forced telemetry, forced updates that can lead to unexpected reboots? (though unexpected reboot only happened once to me many years ago, they seem to have fixed that) Windows 8 had a controversial UI but was respectful of user choices. I have a hard time imagining a new Windows version not getting worse on respecting user consent.

by Pxtl 2y ago

The "every other major Windows release" rule has held since Windows 2000. 2000 take. ME, skip. XP, take. Vista, skip. 7, take. 8, skip. 10, take. 11? Definitely skip.

Madmallard 2y ago

aren't they forcing windows 11 on people?

Dalewyn 2y ago

At least count them properly: NT 3.1 - Good(?). NT 3.5 - Bad(?). NT 4.0 - Good(?). 2000 - Bad(?!) XP - Good(?). Vista - Bad. 7 - Good. 8 - Bad. 8.1 - Good(???). 10 - Bad. 11 - Good(?). And before anyone asks, yes this is a bad meme and doesn't even make any sense.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
toast0 2y ago
Even numbered Trek Films/FreeBSD releases/Windows releases don't suck? I don't think it quite works though, because NT4 and NT5 (2k) were both good, although NT4 was hard to use with many games and win2k was better but still had some issues. I didn't hate XP on release and people grew to like it. So that's kind of 3 hits in a row, but then vista bad, 7 good, 8.x bad, 10 good, 11 bad kind of fits the pattern.

ralmidani 2y ago

Windows 2000 was the successor to Windows NT 4. On the consumer side, there was 95, then 98, then 98 SE (Second Edition), and then ME.

userbinator 2y ago
On the consumer side, there was 95, then 98, then 98 SE (Second Edition), and then ME. ...and with the exception of ME, all of those were actual improvements.

mepian 2y ago

Windows 8.1 was a major release too, and generally considered a "good" one compared to Windows 8.

Krssst 2y ago

Didn't 10 introduce dark patterns to make users create an online account, forced telemetry, forced updates that can lead to unexpected reboots? (though unexpected reboot only happened once to me many years ago, they seem to have fixed that) Windows 8 had a controversial UI but was respectful of user choices. I have a hard time imagining a new Windows version not getting worse on respecting user consent.