Here goes a small archaeological gem:

The Windows® 95 User Interface: A Case Study in Usability Engineering

Compare the research, testing, and careful attention to the consumer needs and limitations that Microsoft deployed back in 1995, with the destruction of the desktop environment and the imposition of the Sesame Street tiles of today.

I remember like it was yesterday the first time I saw and heard the W95 interface. After five minutes of exploring the feeling was: 'Wow, this rocks, bye bye 3.11 & DOS'.

Seventeen years later after 5 minutes of enduring W8 my feeling was: 'WTF is this joke? I want my Se7en back!'.

TELVM wrote:

Here goes a small archaeological gem: […]
Show full quote

Here goes a small archaeological gem:

The Windows® 95 User Interface: A Case Study in Usability Engineering

Compare the research, testing, and careful attention to the consumer needs and limitations that Microsoft deployed back in 1995, with the destruction of the desktop environment and the imposition of the Sesame Street tiles of today.

I remember like it was yesterday the first time I saw and heard the W95 interface. After five minutes of exploring the feeling was: 'Wow, this rocks, bye bye 3.11 & DOS'.

Seventeen years later after 5 minutes of enduring W8 my feeling was: 'WTF is this joke? I want my Se7en back!'.

Even as a pirate MS couldn't even pay me to use Win 8 let alone give it away for free. Terrible os with only gemmics to offer as improvements

No really. W95, she really looks kinda cute. Like your old high school girlfriend that never grew old:). Yes she doesn't do Dx10/11, SSD, USB2+/SATA,multicore - and forget about 64-bit, but she basically does everything you want!

tincup wrote:

No really. W95, she really looks kinda cute. Like your old high school girlfriend that never grew old:). Yes she doesn't do Dx10/11, SSD, USB2+/SATA,multicore - and forget about 64-bit, but she basically does everything you want!

I'm sorry to be *that* guy, but I had many issues with Windows 95 back in the day and was an everyday OS/2 user until I had to jump into the Windows 98SE bandwagon.

No Windows version had truly satisfied me until Windows 2000. However, Windows XP, XP x64 (even with its difficult driver support) and 7 have thoroughly impressed me.

I had Windows 8 installed since the days of the CP and in November I finally installed the retail version obtained through DreamSpark. A week ago I wondered why I should suffer an OS I deeply loathed and went back to Windows 7.

Scylla wrote:

...I'm sorry to be *that* guy, but I had many issues with Windows 95 back in the day...

Nor argument with you there. As I said in a previous post, back in the day W95 couldn't hit the bottom of the garbage can fast enough. But nowadays, by comparison and with a s&%t load more skill in setting up a system - it's really quite nice and refreshing.

Windows 95 was the last operating system that Microsoft dedicated massive resources to human-computer interaction research (user interface design, etc.) That's what makes it so fascinating all these years later, particularly the early betas where things were dramatically changed from one build to the next.

Someone thought they could get away with that on Windows 8... without the expensive research part, AND cram a touch interface into it. As expected, users are balking. Instead of management burning money on all that advertising, they should have spent it on the research! This was General Motors' downfall, hopefully it doesn't take Microsoft down too. The full screen Metro apps also destroy the concept of multitasking (wasn't that the whole point of having windows?). There is a 3rd party utility from StarDock called ModernMix which window the apps AND adds a close button to those windows. What a concept! Right now to close a Metro app, you have to press Alt-F4.

Yes, Windows 95 was pretty lousy, but it was a big compromise. Microsoft maintained backward compatibility with 16-bit apps AND drivers for the most part, and had to support a crap ton of hardware from various vendors. Consolidation in the PC hardware market and of various hardware standards since then has made their life easier.

Windows 2000 was their perfect OS. It was the first OS released that was built on the stable NT core, and supported all the hardware and Win32 API advancements from the past SEVEN years (full DirectX, power management, USB, hot swap/PnP to name some). NT 4.0 really was a circa 1993 OS with a pretty 1995 UI tacked on. In a way, OS/2 had the same problem. Even OS/2 4.52 (MCP2) had that "viva le 1993" vibe to it and MMOS/2 was still a half assed separate install when it should have been integrated into the OS a long time ago.

Working in a computer store until two years ago, I can assure you that we didn't sell as many XP copies as when Vista was released. People tell me that the very same is happening with Windows 7 and Windows 7 🤣

The problem is that tablets and desktops don't mix. Multitasking and Multi-Windows are important for a desktop environment.

Unfortunately MS decided to design the interface for people like the teens who are seen swiping away at their smartphones and tablets at the restaurant.

I see Windows 8 as the pipe-cleaner, just like Vista. So hoping that the next version will have a "desktop mode" or something like that. In the mean-time I'm staying with Windows 7. Haven't run into much that needs Windows 7, apart from Visual Studio Express for Windows Phone 8, which I wanted to muck around with...

What is weird is that Microsoft must have received tons of feedback with the pre-release version, but it must have been a marketing decision to ignore them.

Scylla wrote:

Working in a computer store until two years ago, I can assure you that we didn't sell as many XP copies as when Vista was released. People tell me that the very same is happening with Windows 7 and Windows 7 🤣

You know, you may be onto something. My appreciation for Se7en grew EXPONENTIALLY after I tested W8 🤣 .

It could be a psychological warfare tactic to periodically revitalise the market 😁 .

TELVM wrote:

You know, you may be onto something. My appreciation for Se7en grew EXPONENTIALLY after I tested W8 :lol: . […]
Show full quote

Scylla wrote:

Working in a computer store until two years ago, I can assure you that we didn't sell as many XP copies as when Vista was released. People tell me that the very same is happening with Windows 7 and Windows 7 🤣

You know, you may be onto something. My appreciation for Se7en grew EXPONENTIALLY after I tested W8 🤣 .

It could be a psychological warfare tactic to periodically revitalise the market 😁 .

I've already seen that pic on the Internet and I don't quite agree.
Windows 95 wasn't as bad as was revolutionary. Windows 3.11 was a fart, and if you wanted to work in a network, which was its main selling point, there were a lot of better alternatives at the time. Although it was quite revolutionary in many ways: first Windows version to make use of the registry and the first one to imitate the Mac System Software in being able to work with files as icons (dragging a file to an application window, or to a printer) although not that many Windows programs made use of that.

It also omits Windows 2000 which is still considered by many the very best version of Windows ever made considering its predecessors.

That being said, you have a point. It seems that Microsoft, even if it's unintended, makes one Windows version as a sounding board and another one where they actually address the concerns of their customers.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/microsoft-windows/ … indows-8-208963

Right, I'm going to install Win8 just to find some hacks to make it like 7 again... very smart 🙄

The quirks or Windows 8 wouldn't be an issue, if Microsoft did not intend to end the "life support" for Windows 7. But still, updates will be available for Windows 7 till 2020. There is no reason to jump into using Windows 8 yet, just because it's the latest OS. I'm sure Windows 9 will be released before 2020. Let's see how Win9 will be then. As stated and known, Microsoft has a tendency to release alternating good and bad products. Windows 8 is in the bad cycle.

It seems as if Microsoft's "strategy" had changed substattially. Not only did they apparently put more effort into the interface with Win95, they also went to great lenghts to ensure backwards compatibility. I remember once reading an article about that - they wanted to be sure it worked with EVERYTHING.

What makes me the most irate about the way things are going is the dropping of backwards compatability - not just in the operating system, but in the file formats as well. You get a new computer and suddenly half your programs won't run, that is just plain ridiculous.

R.I.P. Microsoft Windows (deceased 2012). It was good while it lasted.

Windows Blue Alpha Build 9364 Leaks

Beware of Windows Blue

Blue, the Windows 8 they hope you dont hate

Why Windows Blue heralds the death of the desktop

ncmark wrote:

It seems as if Microsoft's "strategy" had changed substantially.

You can bet on it, it's exactly the opposite today.

ncmark wrote:

Not only did they apparently put more effort into the interface with Win95, they also went to great lenghts to ensure backwards compatibility. I remember once reading an article about that - they wanted to be sure it worked with EVERYTHING.

Today the priority is to make sure zero backwards compatibility. 'The desktop must die, long live the Tiles!'

ncmark wrote:

What makes me the most irate about the way things are going is the dropping of backwards compatability - not just in the operating system, but in the file formats as well. You get a new computer and suddenly half your programs won't run, that is just plain ridiculous.

As a matter of fact it makes a lot of sense from their current position: By purposely destroying the desktop, and hence any backwards compatibility, they force you to swallow the Sesame Street Tiles and land head first in their own version of Apple's walled garden, to become their prisoner and to be milked at leisure.

Apparently Microsoft regards its customers as complete retards nowadays, and expects us to behave as such.

Time will tell if they are right.

Simply don't use this shit and that's it. Win8 didn't come out of nowhere, most people use smartphones and tablets as their main devices anyway so the market is there. M$ knows what they have to do to maximize profits and rambling here won't change anything.

Also I remember rumors saying that Intel will solder all processors directly onto the motherboard starting from 2014, so no upgrading anymore. Wintel doesn't have the brightest future ahead of it, that's for sure 😀

I'd be more than happy to not use it. There is just one small problem with that - you cannot get a new computer with widows XP. and soon 7 will be gone as well

I see loads of new XP discs on ebay.

integrated releases are even better...