Windows 2000 is XP. XP just has a new interface. 7 and XP are for consumers. 2000 and Vista are more like server editions (even the pro versions.)
Vista has Aero but also the classic server(windows NT/2000) UI. Even modern server versions have essentially the same classic control panels. And server versions don’t have all the extra bullshit(7 wasn’t so bad yet, but 10 and 11 are). That’s why I prefer to run Windows server as my desktop.
What made Vista/7 great were the under the hood(kernel) improvements, particularly to the threading model. They made safe handling non-negotiable. This retroactively fixed countless programs and improved overall system stability significantly.
There’s really no other major differences between Vista and 7 besides aesthetics(the shell.)
Right, but none of that is enshitification or contradicts that 7 was an improvement over vista in most every way. As you stated, there were numerous kernel improvements going to 7, as well as improvements on locking logic, memory access and (let’s not ignore the most obvious) driver support. The two operating systems were very similar, but saying there are no major differences other than aesthetic is not accurate. There were less major differences than xp > vista or 7 > 8, but it was a bit more than just aesthetics.
Also, fuck Server 2016. All my homies hate Server 2016…
Like windows 2000 to XP or Vista to 7… 10 to 11
The eternal enshitification…
Windows 7 was IMO decent. Didn’t deviate too much from the old one, and you could still reconfigure it to have same UI style as Windows XP.
Now if you want similar UI get yourself Linux with KDE desktop
Lol, lmao even
7 was better than vista in just about every way.
That’s the thing… 7 is Vista. Just with a new UI.
Windows 2000 is XP. XP just has a new interface. 7 and XP are for consumers. 2000 and Vista are more like server editions (even the pro versions.)
Vista has Aero but also the classic server(windows NT/2000) UI. Even modern server versions have essentially the same classic control panels. And server versions don’t have all the extra bullshit(7 wasn’t so bad yet, but 10 and 11 are). That’s why I prefer to run Windows server as my desktop.
What made Vista/7 great were the under the hood(kernel) improvements, particularly to the threading model. They made safe handling non-negotiable. This retroactively fixed countless programs and improved overall system stability significantly.
There’s really no other major differences between Vista and 7 besides aesthetics(the shell.)
Right, but none of that is enshitification or contradicts that 7 was an improvement over vista in most every way. As you stated, there were numerous kernel improvements going to 7, as well as improvements on locking logic, memory access and (let’s not ignore the most obvious) driver support. The two operating systems were very similar, but saying there are no major differences other than aesthetic is not accurate. There were less major differences than xp > vista or 7 > 8, but it was a bit more than just aesthetics.
Also, fuck Server 2016. All my homies hate Server 2016…
Win98 good
Windows ME bad
WindowsXP good
Vista bad
Win7 good (maybe peak)
Win8 bad
Win10 OK?
Win11 bad
I’ve heard Windows ME bad, but I’ve almost never heard someone call Windows 2000 bad
Yeah I was meaning ME (too late too tired). Edited.