• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    17 days ago

    Win95 did not suck. 3.1 was trash compared to 95. 95 has a real desktop UI, tcpip built in and a 32 bit preemptive kernel.

    98 was great. It wasn’t any more buggy than 95.

    You ignored NT 4.

    • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      People used 3.1 and 3.1.1 for years even though it was running on top of MSDOS but show me someone who used 3.0? Or 1.x, 2.x? Unheard of. Version 3 started off with some problems that needed a more or less immediate large update.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        Yes people used 3.1. I used 3.1. Windows 2.1 was very popular because of Excel and Word. The Windows/386 version of 2.1 gave 32bit preemptive multitasking to DOS. It was a big enough hit that MS gave up on OS/2 which was 286 only.

        But Win95 was on a whole new level. That’s why I said Win3.1 was trash compared to Win 95.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      I’m speaking from experience in using theses OSes, not from a list of features they had. I didn’t use NT 4 personally (and that’s way outside the scope of personal computer OSes), so I didn’t talk about it.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        So you continued to run 3.1 after Win95 came out? I listed the features because it’s why it was so much better for me and everyone.

        Trumpet was amazing because it worked, not because it was reliable. Win95 was far more stable than 3.1 because the tcpip stack, along with much of the OS was preemptively multitasked.

        The desktop UI feature was far more usable than Win3.1 progman. You needed to install Norton or Symantec Desktop to get an equivalent experience.

        If you claim that the desktop UI doesn’t matter because it’s a feature, then Windows 8 becomes a great version. Because it’s only problem was the UI. It’s speed and stability was better than 7.

        If NT is out of scope because it’s not consumer then you can’t have Windows 2000 in your list. Consumer NT kernel OS’s started with XP.