OSDev.org

Don't you think Windows 95 was the best OS ever? It just has that feel of an OS that has been hacked together by programmers on all-nighters.

The naked beauty of it... in its 16 colour glory. Fantastic. It was an OS that would crash multiple times a day - you really had to work at it to get a job done. In the process, learning all the more about computers and their innards. Unlike 'XP', with its la-de-da themes and its 'New Technology'.

I remember marvelling at Microsoft's over-optimistic use of the word 'kernel', thinking "That sounds important... I'll have to make one one day...".

And here I am, developing a kernel, learning new things everyday. But still, I think back to the 95 days, and I miss the mystery that was surrounding the elusive kernel. And elusive it was, for little did I know it was actually DOS...

The Senaus wrote: Don't you think Windows 95 was the best OS ever?

No.

It was a mix-up of old interfaces and an attempt at cloning a mix of unix and Macintosh stuff, while trying to break with IBM and being the best at marketing. Unstable as hell, a total mess and unprepared for any bit of the future, not even the near.

I would say, from a programmers and/or OS devers point of view, it's almost one of the worst. From a marketing point of view, it's the best.

Not one for a bit of light hearted sarcasm eh? Pity...

The Senaus wrote: Not one for a bit of light hearted sarcasm eh? Pity...

sorry, just had a rough day... didn't see the sarcasm...

The Senaus wrote: in its 16 colour glory.

it supported all graphics modes afaik...

@Senaus: cool. First I've tought: Hey, that guy HAS to be joking. But then, I 've seen, you're enjoying a little game with words, eh? Hehe.

AmigaOS 3.1. Now there was an OS that really was hacked together by a bunch of geeks on all-nighters. You could tell, because it had its irks but worked.

Win95 was the way it was because it was not written by a group of geeks, but a company. Geeks care about their work...

Why is everyone so down on Windows 95? It was way better than Windows 3.x... ;D

Win3.x was abysmal compared to the competition of its time (RiscOS, MacOS, AmigaOS, Unix / CDE, some others I have forgotten but don't want to slight). Win95 was not even up to par with the competition, but it cemented the dominance of Windows in the OS marketplace to this very day.

To add insult to injury, people got all excited over "long file names" and "multitasking" and "intuitive GUI" and "opening an app by double-clicking on the icon" and lots of other stuff which every other OS has had for years already and Microsoft just copied (poorly) by means of raw manpower.

The only ones not "being down on Windows 95" are those who didn't experience those competing operating systems until long after, when their going-out-of-business and Windows being the lone survivor made them look anachronistic and poorly-supported.

Back then, it was like seeing Hitler win the Nobel Peace Price, if you excuse the strong metaphor.

Solar wrote: Back then, it was like seeing Hitler win the Nobel Peace Price, if you excuse the strong metaphor.

<sarcasm>
In germany you would have to give up all your public duties ;D if you compare someone/something with Hitler. Well, perhaps not everywhere in Germany: There is some little "NPD"-ish federal state called "Free State of Saxony", where this could be quite different ;D
</sarcasm>
Just for german insiders (perhaps you want to read the 4. paragraph of this to understand)

If you think I hold any sympathy for Hitler or any right-wing parties, you haven't read my post.

The only ones not "being down on Windows 95" are those who didn't experience those competing operating systems until long after, when their going-out-of-business and Windows being the lone survivor made them look anachronistic and poorly-supported.

Not really. By the time I got Windows 95, I had used half of the competitors you listed earlier. And I don't really look down to it. I used it on my computer for quite a while, and it wasn't really that bad. I do know why it's theoretically very unstable, but I rarely saw any BSODs or crashes. Heck, my mother uses it on one of her computers to this day and since she (not being very tech-savvy) always calls me on what to do in case of crashes, I know they are rare in her case as well. That's from the user's perspective. Which is what was and still is the most important one for the OS's success in larger scale.

But it would fit with the original poster and his views. If he weren't just joking, that is.

(Once I've gotten sober I might find that this post doesn't really fit with my views, in that case I'll delete it, or edit it to confirm the other way around. Feel free to comment in the meanwhile. )

Solar wrote: If you think I hold any sympathy for Hitler or any right-wing parties, you haven't read my post.

Then you misunderstood my post. It was just a joke about these politicians in germany that were forced (note: I don't support these statements) to give up their political duties because of such comparisions (e.g. someone compared Bush with Hitler). I just wanted to add that perhaps in Saxony, where the NPD is in the "Landestag" (something like "federal state parliament") this might be different (alluding to the avoidance from the NPD representants of the commemorative address for the jewish victims of the Holocaust).
I didn't want to insult you and I didn't even know that you really live in Germany (I just looked it up in your profil on MT). I'm sorry about that misunderstanding. It was really OT. Just wanted to criticize german politics, not insult you.

Jeez, nobody seems capable of handling sarcasm today.

On a slightly more serious note, I think Windows 95 is a wonderful example of what Virtual 8086 mode is capable of, and why you should avoid it all costs.

Is mentioning Hitler some sort of taboo in Germany?