Why I Still Use Windows 95

There's a definite pleasure in using old, well-designed pieces of technology that were state-of-the-art in their time and have managed to remain competitive with newer equipment. I love my record player, I still use a high-quality CRT, I ride a steel bike, and I print documents with a mid-90s HP LaserJet. Many of you would cite LISP, a 50-year old language, as a perfect example of this phenomenon.

Windows 95, however, really doesn't strike me as one of those things.

I assume he also drives a model T, writes with a fountain pen, and uses a cell phone from 1995 as well?

Seriously, though, the advances from Windows 95 to Vista are less about improving the "tool" and more about improving the experience of using the computer. I don't think you can really call a computer a "tool" anymore, anyway. It is the communication, entertainment, and productivity center of many people's lives. It serves far more value than a hammer or a pen. It has the ability to morph into practically anything. Back in 1995, when the real value of a computer was still somewhat ambiguous, people called them tools because that was the closest metaphor to a a familiar paradigm. Today, the computer is the paradigm.

The argument this guy uses is kind of stupid and reminds me of the short-sighted, extremely stubborn attitude of the most geeky people I know. He doesn't like Internet Explorer 4, so he refuses to use an operating system based on IE. While IE 4 was a terrible internet browser, it served Windows pretty well; using the idea of back and forward buttons for browsing files/folders is still used today in Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows. Sure, Windows 98 sucked at it, but that's exactly what Windows XP improved on. (Arguably, Windows Vista improved on this as well.) That's why people upgraded.

In the end, by using Windows 95, he is just torturing himself. He might gain pleasure from the novelty of writing stories like this one and getting strange reactions from people, but in the end, his experience of using his computer is just... terrible.

This article reminds me of my father. He still uses what we call "lefebvre books" to do his business's payroll by pen. When I was younger, I thought he was an idiot. Eventually he rationalized it to me for long enough that I thought it was charming and really interesting that his business is like a snapshot of how things were run in the past.

Right now, his company grew to more than 20 employees and he's selling it because his tools and methods don't work in his changing environment and he refuses to adapt to new tools.

Don't get me wrong, he's by no means unhappy, but his business is no longer running at it's full potential. I think a comparison can be drawn here. I believe that your output is a function of your methods AND tools.. I don't care who you are, you can't build facebook in DOS.

If your environment is changing and you still want to excel in that environment, I believe that you have to adapt.

I wonder why he doesn't use Linux, seems he could build whatever he needs and forget the bloatware of windows. Specially with a distribution like Gentoo he could build a custom system and not have to have the technology drawbacks of Windows 95.

I admire and salute this guy. He's one of those that keep our whole geek society interesting. He's a bit like a writer who still uses a manual typewriter rather than a word processor. It's very charming.

(On further browsing of his site, he seems an interesting chap. These mid-late 90s style sites chock full of various types of content are far more interesting than most of the vapid personal sites nowadays that have nothing besides blog entries.)

Every time a new (microsoft) OS is realeased, you find tons of people who say that it isn't any better and there's no need to upgrade. Then a few years later everyone says, "you're still using previous_version?". (Vista actually seems like it may be the exception...)

It seems to me that this is an extreme case of the above situation. This guy has something that works for him. I would say works well, but until you've used something for a while and understand how it enhances your productivity, you really don't see the error of your old ways.

Some are asking why he doesn't install Linux. My thought is that if one of your decisions when choosing an OS is maintaining compatibility with your DOS games, you're probably not an ideal candidate for linux. Note that it doesn't matter if you Can play DOS games on linux; it's just a completely different mindset.

At first, I was looking for the publishing date hoping I would find April 1st somewhere, but I guess not...

Win95 c'mon, lets help this guy with other cooler ways to getting attention and being "different".

andrew turnbull is completely right. i used windows 95 too, as long as possible (2006).

windows 95 has many good things that the modern version of windows have lost or never had:

- lightweight (Doesnt even use memory <128 MB)

- very fast

- total cost of ownership = 0

- functional (office, opera, etc: everything works somehow)

- easily replaceable (ebay)

- robust (works even with damaged hardware - somehow)

- security (through obscurity)

- i have an idea how it works (in modern version of windows i have somehow lost the overview)

- no need to update (just accept how the system is)

- free of distractions (no widgets, sidebars, audoupdates)

:)

Assuming he is using it, how exactly is he running Firefox 3 (he has an entry about it's release on his blog) on Win95? I haven't tried it but the OS isn't showing a message and then denies the possibility to install FF3? And what kind of productivity do you get with, let's say, 6 or 7 year's old software? I wonder, really, what kind of development/usage is he attributing to that machine.

I still have NT 4.0 install media around, and have even tossed it on an older box a few times to remember what it was like back in the days when Windows could be a decent developer OS.

Unfortunately, anything older than Win2k leaves you pretty much out of luck for mobile computing (power management, WiFi, and display switching) as well as most modern peripherals (USB support being notably lacking).

For even more retro fun, though, I recommend firing up a copy of Mac OS System 7 inside Basilisk II or SheepShaver -- even under emulation, it absolutely screams through day-to-day tasks.

I think the best reason for him to switch from Win95 to WinXP is Office 2007.

Security Updates?