Discussion in 'Windows 11' started by PolidelticusFire, Jul 9, 2021.
You need to login to view this posts content.
A lot. Windows 11 10 8 7 vista are from the same family (NT 6.x)
In the end of the day... NT 6 proved to be a very good base then.
Most of the evolution since vista is about the userland rather the kernel, the only real improvements are the deduplication (which itself is mostly userland + a small kernel driver), WSL 1 and containers.
Even WSL2 is more a specialized Hyper V application rather than a whole new kernel feature.
It was. It is.
Vista was doomed by the rushed arrival on the market released on machines which where thought for XP (single cores, just 512 MB of ram and so on).
But even today if you install Server web 2008 (that practically is just Vista w/o the bloat and w/o any server role) you get a rock solid and very light system, perfect for a bit aged machine, even better than Win7 based Thin PC.
Really ? An 14 year old boot animation ?
Why would they leave such things behind ?
It's true as you can see on the video.
I believe you could try this on a VM by booting the Windows 11 installer in legacy/BIOS mode.
All the same core technologies from Vista are still here.
WDDM and of course, DWM / DCE being good examples.
Backward compatibility is what makes windows.... windows.
Try to run a 5years old linux binary in the latest distros. Try to use a program made for Macos Cheetah on Big Sur which doesn't even runs 32bit executables, then tell us if leaving old stuff is stupid or brilliant.
Im more like baffled...that this originally was supposed to be Windows 10x...I have no idea how to comment on this...
Its just the 10X's shell/UX sitting on top of regular NT 6.x core. (and this is not a bad thing).
Windows 10X however is / was a different thing... based on Windows Core OS (WCOS)...
Well, according to MS, the foundations for Windows 11 IS CoreOS, and it is already RTM. That's why the 22000 build number won't change.
You need to login to view this posts content.
Windows has been fundamentally the same OS since Vista. They've obviously improved features and implementation a lot, but the overall design is roughly the same. Don't get me wrong, it doesn't perform the same. Vista performs like hot garbage. I wouldn't run a Vista system if you paid me. It just goes to show you how improving the kernel and runtime improvements can make an os go from terrible to great.
Always keep in mind that OSes are moving targets, the thing is that vista improved hugely with SP1 and SP2, then improved further when W7 was already a thing. So most people (including myself) marked vista as awfully and either stepped back to XP or upgraded to 7 w/o noticing the improvements made to vista over the years.
I remember that when vista was released I spent like 8 hours a day, as a technician, doing just one thing: removing vista and installing XP on brand new machines, and that lasted for years.
I even had a badge as "Autorized Vista uninstaller"
The thing is that, today, a fully updated Vista system (or even better a fully updated server 2008) is not any worse than 7.
The only thing one may miss is the lack of bootable vhds, easily attainable using SVbus and Grub4dos (good also for XP and w2k) and the inability to mount vhdx disks (same as w7), but imdisk fixes this as well.
I suggest you to give a try to web server 2008, using mypal as browser, you'll be surprised by how fast and rock solid that thing is.
The major issues with old operating systems are securities followed by incompatible new software. I often go for the latest operating systems when making choices.
That's what big companies like you think.
Security issues are really overrated as the main security flaw is usually the user itself, and a stupid user is still a stupid user no matter if he runs win 2000 or win 11.
As for SW a long as you have a good browser, you have solved 90% of the problem. And as today we have still good browser running on XP, vista, Macos Snow leopard and so on.
In short always use the oldest OS you can run on your HW
No, that's bs. I've tried fully upgraded vista. I worked very hard on a Vista SP2 with the latest upgrades release. I also worked with Server 2008 and integrated the latest service pack into it for a superAIO I was working on. I tested these OSes pretty extensively and they are still hot garbage. Vista from the time it came out until right now had and still has a constant hard drive performance chug. Everything you do on that OS is laggy and delayed. It is a bad OS. All of the gripes I have about the pointless bloat of recent Windows 10/11 builds are exemplified in Vista except worse because it's the OS itself that is slow. It's not just bloated. It's bloated and slow.
I don't know how someone sharing their -- it would seem, rather extensive -- personal experience with something would summarily get stamped as spewing "bull sh!t". It is so detrimental to openness in discussion. Not agreeing with someone is not the same as insulting someone. MDL could be better than the typical toxic tech forum.
Aside the point on vista, you should learn that if you expect that people respect your opinion you should start respecting other's one
I replied to you very kindly although I think what you wrote is a bunch of stereotypes, and I expect you do the same.
But looks like you missed the last good manners service pack, have a nice day.