Giveaway of the Day Forums

1. 

   mikiem2
   Moderator

   howtogeek[.]com/795478/windows-31-30-years-later/

   3o years ago today is when it all really started. Before that, using DOS meant every app had its own drivers, though some folks used Unix. IBM PC clones had just become a thing, and while still very expensive, they sold WAY below IBM prices. Win3.1 let you add a soundcard, which was how after a few years you'd connect a CD drive. You also had to develop pretty good tech skills, & loads of persistence [i.e. stubbornness] to make stuff work. There were tons of .ini files for Windows and software that often required editing, along with 2 critical files for configuration, autoexec.bat & config.sys. It was not uncommon to have to edit several of these files to get hardware, software, & drivers working, and that too often meant breaking something else. The internet was still in its infancy -- we could log on through a local university, but the web was still in the future -- so you were pretty much on your own.

   The linked article threw a red flag however saying that Win3.1 introduced the registry. Several other articles said the same thing -- I disagree...
   devblogs.microsoft[.]com/oldnewthing/20120521-00/?p=7573

   Trivia, FWIW...
   wikipedia[.]org/wiki/AUTOEXEC.BAT
   networkencyclopedia[.]com/config-sys/

   On July 14, 1995, everything changed again, with Windows 95. PC hardware development was going full tilt back then, and Win95 started the era of needing new hardware for the new OS. Win95 also meant new software -- at first you had very few choices that were compatible. Win95 introduced what we now know as the registry, and included a registry repair utility that if memory serves, hung on for Win98 & Win98 SE a few years later. The WinME [Millennium] that followed was a bust [maybe Microsoft's biggest Windows failure], but it was short lived, arriving September 14, 2000, to be replaced by XP in October 2001. Initially no one had a clue that this version was going to become so vastly popular -- remember that back then if you were even running Windows at home you were likely a bit of a tech -- with Frequent criticism that the new OS had a Fisher Price GUI.

   wikipedia[.]org/wiki/Fisher-Price
   "... an American company that produces educational toys for infants, toddlers and preschoolers..."

   Posted 2 years ago #
2. 

   gergn
   Member

   I did not have any problem with Windows Millennium. It was more stable than W98.
   Did you ever use W1, W2 or W3.0?

   But I agree that XP was a fine product. As was W7. I still use it daily virtually, to test giveaways.

   Posted 2 years ago #
3. 

   gergn
   Member

   
   

   Posted 2 years ago #
4. 

   mikiem2
   Moderator

   Did you ever use W1, W2 or W3.0?

   We'd just gotten our 1st PC not long before Win3.1 came out -- didn't have time to even learn that there were earlier Windows versions. The 1st store selling IBM PC clones had just recently opened in the closest large city [Orlando], & I remember they had to order in some of the parts. Businesses in the area using mainframes were just starting to look at PCs -- Disney & Raytheon were the 1st two I was aware of -- so it was all quite new to everyone.

   I don't remember much about WinME. I *think* that Microsoft pushed it out to OEMs for new hardware, but didn't do much marketing otherwise, like they did with other new versions of Windows, but relying on memory, I could be wrong. Also if I remember correctly, we were barely aware that ME existed. I think it was sort of a pre-XP, including many of the new features that would become part of XP, just like Win7 was built on Vista, or Win11 on top of Win10, so it makes sense that it was a better, more stable OS than Win98 SE.

   FWIW, I dual-booted Vista & XP Pro, but never found good reason to use Vista rather than XP. Unlike lots of people I never found Vista to be terrible -- I just didn't see any improvement over XP when it came to getting stuff done. When I replaced Vista with the beta of Win7, I used Win7 about 50% of the time because I got into Microsoft's Insider program. Back then they monitored how Win7 was performing with a logging app that sent metrics etc., and they paid you with licenses for Win7 Ult & Ofc97. I probably wouldn't have used Win7 so much otherwise -- since almost all software was 32-bit, and Win7 was so large & bulky compared to XP, XP was slightly faster at stuff like encoding video, which I did often, even though it could only use 4GB RAM. Win7's Media Center eventually won me over, once they got it working -- using a network box with a cablecard I used it like a DVR. When Win8 came out I bought 3 licenses for $35 each when Microsoft ran a promotion, but neither me, my wife, or our son wound up using it much.

   Though I don't use it much anymore since they stopped offering the extended updates, my XP VM was my favorite for testing & monitoring software, since there was quite a bit less clutter in the recorded registry changes compared to Win7. Based on Win7's XP Mode image, it Really ran well in V/Box. While I've got 10 & 11 VMs, I also prefer Win7 for testing & monitoring for the same reason I used XP -- less clutter.

   Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.