chinny22 wrote on 2023-02-06, 14:30:
We forget that bluescreens where just a normal part of life upto the XP era. [..]
With the exception of Windows 3.1x, maybe. It was rock solid in Standard-Mode, at least. 😄 👍
Windows 9x is another thing maybe. Especially on post-486 hardware.
PCI bus, ACPI, APM, APIC, AGP, USB etc. All buggy technologies, originally.
On a plain AT-mainboard with ISA and VLB slots and a normal CPU (below 100 MHz),
Windows 95 ran okay, I think.
OS/ Warp also was sort of stable. Version 2.1 and Warp 3 were popular for a couple of years before Windows 95.
The problem with the frozen GUI, triggered by buggy DOS/Win applications, was solved in Warp 4, too.
OS/2 was useful as a DOS replacement with quick HDD access (cache, HPFS), as a multi-tasker, to run games in a window,
as a platform for early computer/console emulators.. Sysops ran BBSes on OS/2, too! They knew what was good.
Windows 1.x and 2.x on original hardware were kind of stable, too,
but many sophisticated Windows applications ran out of conventional memory quickly.
It wasn't until Windows/386 that Windows became sort of mainstream first time.
Edit:
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2023-02-06, 21:42:
Windows ME is Windows 98SE with installed bloatware, gimped DOS mode and questionable stability with VXD driver model. Hardly best what 9x can offer =P
Microsoft added a lot of Windows 2000 concepts and code snippets over to Windows Me in a copy&paste style.
For example, the Windows Desktop is from Windows 2000, the network stack resembles Windows 2000 rather than Windows 98SE..
98 still relied on Winipcfg, for example. Me added support for USB pen drives, the driver library is being copied to HDD..
What it also did was focusing on WDM drivers and removing all VXDs that weren't absolutely needed.
However, Me can still handle VXDs just fine. And Windows 3.1x drivers (*.DRV, *.386).
Moving away from VXDs was just natural, the future was WDM. Universally.
The same happened to the old NT driver model at same time, essentially. It had to go.
Windows Me, 2k/XP were nolonger using drivers that are so.. static.
Changing devices or video settings nolonger required a reboot, for example.
Personally, I consider Windows Me a gift, a giveaway, a gimmick to help users to hold out. To reduce waiting times for the next real Windows release.
Windows Me was shortlived and no one was forced to use it. Some PCs of the time shipped with Windows 98SE and a Me upgrade.
If the user was lucky, both the 98SE CD and the Me CD were in the plastic bag.
So nothing was lost. Windows Me rather was meant to ease the transition away from DOS and crashy VXDs.
The auto-restoration of Autoexec.bat and Config.sys were annoying to us, sure.
But let's think about helpless people who were exposed to bloatware or buggy software that messed up the boot files ?
There were many programs that installed *things* and caused Windows to stop during boot.
Edit: Or worse - those socalled "PC experts" from the neighborhood, of the circle of friends or family who applied their 1985 knowledge of "IBM PCs" to a year 2000 PC.
I know those folks, believe me. They love to apply all of their dangerous, outdated half-knowledge to "fix" things, to make things go faster etc.
Or as we say in Germany "verschlimmbessern" (better-worsing?) - making something even worse, by trying to improve it.
Let's imagine what happened if they succesfully installed some old copy of SmartDrive, a 1990 PC Tools/Symantec HDD cache,
a video speeder from the CGA days, a tool to slow down RAM refreshing (XT days), a DOS-based antivirus guard, a floppy speeder tool, a Windows 3.1 RAM doubler, etc.
Windows Me prevented this sabotage by always using clean files. Users nolonger were stuck in the cryptic DOS environment.
Scandisk also was in GUI mode from now on. To many users all this was a relief.
And to be honest, me, too. If only a true expert or mentally clear, logically thinking user can disable this auto-restoration, only then it works.
- Otherwise, first thing those wannabe experts do is disabling all safety options.
Which maybe make all things work on a superficial level, but is somewhat irresponsible and anti-social on a larger scale.
--
That's why I can understand why Microsoft nolonger allows certain things in home user editions of modern Windows:
The users do repeatedly disable all the safety protocols, just like the crewmen love to do on holodeck on starship Enterprise/Voyager. 😁
End users.. They are like inexperienced kids, they must be protected from them self. As presumptuous as that may sound!
In the past, I was often asked to fix PCs. As I learned over the years: They never tell you the truth as to why the PC broke.
The official story always is: "No idea." or "There was some update, the PC was doing it all alone."
They also never tell you that another friend/acquaintance messed the PC up again after you succsefully fixed it and left the scene last time.
That's what bothered me the most. I wasn't asking for money, there was no need to lie to me. But they did, nevertheless.
This approach is mean in sofar, because they blame you for a failure that wasn't yours.
It also costs time, because you check things over and over you didn't mess up, which were working.
--
In retrospect, Me as a product even made sense, maybe.
I mean, we are the weirdo's here with our affection to VXD drivers, MS-DOS and mid-90s hardware. 😄
We are looking backwards, Windows Me was made to look forwards (in its time).
Speaking of time.. It's in its name. Windows Me was the Millenium release.
Microsoft had to release *something* in 2000, just for the sake of it.
As a company, you simply can't miss out on this oportunity.
Edit: I was just thinking out loud here. I didn't mean to criticize you guys in any way. There was no reason to, anyway.
"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel
//My video channel//