From day one of Windows 11, I wrote that Windows 11 felt like an unnecessary replacement for Windows 10. I’ve since changed my mind about that, in part because Microsoft has pivoted toward features like Windows Spotlight and adding AI capabilities like Copilot. MacOS Tahoe looks and feels somewhat like Windows Vista’s Aero Glass design language, but you can’t hold that against them—some of Microsoft’s early Windows efforts were fondly remembered for their UI.
Oh so he doesn’t know what he is talking about. How has 11 gotten better with ‘AI’ or anything else.
Also, they don’t seem to remember that Mac OS X 10.2 used Aqua and glassmorphism in 2002 to match their iMac’ brand new translucent style 5 years before Windows Vista was released (2007).
I feel like I was the only person who liked vista. XP looked like shit, so I used win 2k instead and switched to Vista, never had any issues with it at all.
That, and it had a lot of technical changes that broke a lot of drivers and programs. All the technical changes also had lots of bugs that needed to be fixed. And also, Microsoft OK’ed Vista for 512 MB RAM when it should have had at least 1 GB.
When everything started to smooth out, bugs fixed, drivers and programs updated, and computers came with 2GB+ RAM, then Microsoft released Windows 7, based on all of this, and that made Windows 7 shine.
People say that Windows Vista should never had been made but without it, Windows 7 would have suffered the same fate as Vista.
Yeah, my mum bought a laptop that only had 512mb RAM and that ran like shiiiiiit. Trying to troubleshoot for her left absolutely certain that Vista was a dog.
Haha yes, I had to go to client with a new desktop with Windows Vista… that only had 512 MB. It was swapping all the time and was useless and I looked like an idiot for bringing a defective computer that we had selected for him. Upgraded to 1 GB and it was fine.
but without it, Windows 7 would have suffered the same fate as Vista.
Alternatively they could test their shit in advance. It’s not like Microsoft is too poor to afford an array of average computers and a dozen of testers.
Alternatively they could test their shit in advance
A big part of the problem was 3rd party programs that was not ready. A big change was introduction of the User Account Control (UAC) that more or less started to force programs to behave better: Install into program file, save stuff in user profile, don’t do dumb admin stuff if not needed, making programs start to behave more like they lived in a multi-user operating system. It was a change that had to be done and it was never going to be a good experience.
It’s not like Microsoft is too poor to afford an array of average computers and a dozen of testers
I think you underestimate how many testers and how much work actually goes into testing both Microsoft’s own software and work with 3rd party software vendors to make sure their software worked. This has changed somewhat, with Windows 10 and forward, where you have a lot more beta testing in the public.
I agree that there should have been spent more time on testing Vista and given more time to 3rd party to test their stuff. However, 3rd party software and drivers took, in some instances, 1-2 years after Vista release, before they updated their stuff to work with Vista. There were just not a lot of companies interested in spending the money and time to make make it work as Vista got a (deserving) bad reception, but a big part of the problem was these companies. A chicken/egg situation.
Oh so he doesn’t know what he is talking about. How has 11 gotten better with ‘AI’ or anything else.
It’s got what shareholders crave
blood of slave labour children from the rare earth metal mines?
Who’s “he”, and where did that quote come from? I only see an image, did I miss an article cross-posted or something?
EDIT: Apparently, it’s from PCWorld.
Source: him
“That’s what”
She
Copilot is literally the last nail in the coffin for me to finally switch. 365 has been bad for some time now, with copilot it’s basically unusable
Also, they don’t seem to remember that Mac OS X 10.2 used Aqua and glassmorphism in 2002 to match their iMac’ brand new translucent style 5 years before Windows Vista was released (2007).
Also, everyone hated the UI in Vista at the time.
I didn’t mind it at all, but I had decent hardware, which apparently made all of the difference.
I hated XP’s FisherPrice UI as well…
Yeah, the classic UI was better (and saved you a couple of pixels of useful screen real estate).
I feel like I was the only person who liked vista. XP looked like shit, so I used win 2k instead and switched to Vista, never had any issues with it at all.
Man I loved Aero and I’m excited for iOS and iPadOS 26. Shit looks beautiful.
Well, hopefully their opinion changed from “unnecessary replacement” to “replacement with degraded performance and unnecessary malware.”
Context I had no idea what was going on until I found this at the bottom of all the comments.
THANK you. Thought I was going crazy…
Didn’t Vista get a ton of hate for its new UI?
IIRC, vista got hate because to run it a massive number of users would have to…upgrade…their…hardware.
That, and it had a lot of technical changes that broke a lot of drivers and programs. All the technical changes also had lots of bugs that needed to be fixed. And also, Microsoft OK’ed Vista for 512 MB RAM when it should have had at least 1 GB.
When everything started to smooth out, bugs fixed, drivers and programs updated, and computers came with 2GB+ RAM, then Microsoft released Windows 7, based on all of this, and that made Windows 7 shine.
People say that Windows Vista should never had been made but without it, Windows 7 would have suffered the same fate as Vista.
Yeah, my mum bought a laptop that only had 512mb RAM and that ran like shiiiiiit. Trying to troubleshoot for her left absolutely certain that Vista was a dog.
Haha yes, I had to go to client with a new desktop with Windows Vista… that only had 512 MB. It was swapping all the time and was useless and I looked like an idiot for bringing a defective computer that we had selected for him. Upgraded to 1 GB and it was fine.
Alternatively they could test their shit in advance. It’s not like Microsoft is too poor to afford an array of average computers and a dozen of testers.
A big part of the problem was 3rd party programs that was not ready. A big change was introduction of the User Account Control (UAC) that more or less started to force programs to behave better: Install into program file, save stuff in user profile, don’t do dumb admin stuff if not needed, making programs start to behave more like they lived in a multi-user operating system. It was a change that had to be done and it was never going to be a good experience.
I think you underestimate how many testers and how much work actually goes into testing both Microsoft’s own software and work with 3rd party software vendors to make sure their software worked. This has changed somewhat, with Windows 10 and forward, where you have a lot more beta testing in the public.
I agree that there should have been spent more time on testing Vista and given more time to 3rd party to test their stuff. However, 3rd party software and drivers took, in some instances, 1-2 years after Vista release, before they updated their stuff to work with Vista. There were just not a lot of companies interested in spending the money and time to make make it work as Vista got a (deserving) bad reception, but a big part of the problem was these companies. A chicken/egg situation.