No one oblige you to use a computer and understand what's under the hood. But in that case is better to not try do a lecture on OS internals. Seriusly win 95 was a hybrid 16/32 os which was just a little more than a GUI on top of the DOS. XP is a full 32 bit OS, and it was the nephew od win NT3. Which in turn was partly based on OS2 by IBM and VMS by Digital Equipment. A different OS with a similar GUI and a (partial) DOS compatibility layer. That is XP.
Thank you for tjhe monolog . If you want to argue argue with people like Enthusiast and Abodil who also said / say that win 11 is just basicly win 10 with a new look. You couild also read the serious computer press that also says the same . When you talk to me dont post vain s**t like that and at least try to talk about what i said and not chnage the subject and talk irelevant s**t .
You're welcome Its too much to ask to you to read also opinion my back in this thread? Maybe too much to ask from someone who missed the basics of the history of windows in the last 25 years. Perhaps you are now moving the target, an internet classic, I joked about your opinion about win95/xp not win 10/11. Revolution v.s. evolution.
Yes, they are very secretive about hardware, kernel, and abstraction layer changes. WDDM 3.0, Storage changes, CPU scheduler, memory changes, power optimizations, display interaction and features... I have no clue to the specifics, but consider the following example: I am now fully relying on W11 to handle game mode and even enabled HAGS permanently. For me personally it feels incredibly smooth and stable. I don't feel the need to go tweaking beyond the Overclock and basic telemetry stuff. I am pretty sure that they have done some major changes under the hood, and my guess is they are closely related to the PCI(e) architecture. Storage, GPU, USB, even LED and temperature sensors are pretty much all covered by PCI(e) now. It would also seem like an efficient way to finally cooperate with AMD/Intel and the peripheral manufacturers. It is as close to a common architecture that they will come. And it seems like it would make sense to invest in it, especially considering the experiences they can share with the XBOX teams. There are also clues to be found when you consider that the sound menu now promotes enhancements and spatial audio. I can't imagine they would do that if they don't feel like it's going to be changing/improving soon. I can't imagine MS doing 'reskins'. I do hope enthusiasts and experts realize how Windows has to manage a vast plethora of different hardware and software platforms. And they have to manage this in a way that the end user still gets a very predictable and familiar feeling, no matter which device he's working on (laptop, work pc, azure virtual desktop...). UI related things are ALWAYS the most difficult and most critical aspects that are lacking in beta/preview phases. UI is notoriously difficult. So yes, I find the current way that I have to use W11, with the limited start menu and taskbar, lacking. In part due to it being a work in progress, and in part because I had my work flow all tailored to W10. Both parties have to adapt, and hopefully find that they gained some Quality of Life in the usage of these tools. And they are very important tools, extensions of our hands. I personally use them 40h per week for work, and 12h per week. Being critical is fine. Having expectations is fine. Realizing said expectations are subjective is important. Being disappointed is fine. But I am happy I was granted the ability to look past my expectations and appreciate what I had not foreseen, but is just as good, or better. I never expected that W11 preview would be this stable and this fluent to transfer to. They have started to embrace that others can teach them things too. They cooperate with Citrix, with AMD, with Intel... And I feel their Azure platform play a significant role in this. But seeing things like their Github repo, Winget, WSL2, Sandboxing, and even the openness about their telemetry... It makes me believe it will improve, and that we will feel more a part of it. TL;DR: Reskins would be impossible and wouldn't make sense. You would truly KNOW if that were the case.
Cooperating with Citrix isn't exactly a novelty. Winframe released in 1995 or so was in fact a custom built Win NT3.51. And was compiled by Citrix, not MS They had the whole WinNT 3.51 sources!!!. Not sure if that's happened again with any company The remote desktop protocol that MS introduced first in Win2000 Terminal Server was also half based on Citrix work, which means that also MS had some sources written by Citrix
Kernel level drivers WAS a huge improvement - with a sting in the tail. They were able to run faster and more efficiwntly, because they were kernal level. The sting was they could take down the whole OS, again because they were kernel level.
XP was Win95 with things improved? You do realise that Win95 was still just a shell running on top of Dos? It literally booted Dos first and then executed Windows from there. Its successor was Win98, which was then succeeded by ME. All of these booted Dos first then Windows. You could even exit completely from Windows back to the Dos prompt with them. While this was happening, MS were developing NT, which has no Dos running under it. In NT, you cannot exit from Windows back to Dos because there is no Dos. NT 4 came out around the same time as Win98, and its successor, NT 5, was called Windows 2000 and released the same year as ME. Some people confused the names of these, and still to this day some think Windows 2000 was the same thing as ME - but of course they're totally different. After ME the Dos line of Windows was killed completely - there was no successor to ME. NT 5.1 was released quite soon after NT 5, with the noveil name of XP. So no, XP is most definitely NOT the same as Win95.
I meant that MS advertised opposite moves as big improvements in different times. Which is funny but at the same is true. kernel level drivers are fast but can crash easily the whole system, user level drives are slow but less prone to crash the sysem