Hacker News Reader

Comment by john_moscow | Hacker News Reader

It continues a decades-long tradition where every other Windows version is borderline unusable and universally hated. As long as I remember:

* Windows 3.0 was perceived as buggy

* Windows 3.1/3.11 was a major improvement

* Windows 95 was extremely unreliable

* Windows 98 sort of addressed most of the issues

* Windows 2000 was a weird amalgamation of the NT kernel and 98/ME look'n'feel that wasn't received well

* Windows XP fixed that

* Windows Vista was universally hated

* Windows 7 addressed most of its issues

* Windows 8 was a nonsense with phone-style UI on desktops, tablets and servers

* Windows 10 fixed it

Now it's time for another crappy release to get people really excited about upgrading to Windows 12 in a year or two.

View on HN

> * Windows 10 fixed it

Windows 10 is biggest garbage fire POS Windows version yet, because of their new update model. For the last several months, I've been unable to install the mandatory (for non-enterprise users) feature update patches. They fail to install with a cryptic error code and get rolled back. If I don't get this figured out soon, I'm not going to be able to get security patches anymore.

I should be able to get a version that's stable (enterprise licensees get access to LTSC versions that never are required to install feature updates), but they've denied everyone else. The best I could do was buy professional, which let me delay the patches for up to a year (instead of only a week or two). My understanding is MS laid off most of their Windows QA team, and replaced it with home users drafted to become guinea pigs plus telemetry, and the lack of it shows.

Meanwhile, updates work for me but don't ask for user consent after downloading them.

I just come back to find my PC randomly rebooted overnight.

Better that than the Internet being attacked by botnets full of machines that users never patch because they're constantly "doing important things overnight".

> Better that than the Internet being attacked by botnets full of machines that users never patch because they're constantly "doing important things overnight".

Force updates are debatable for security patches, but they're entirely unacceptable for new features.

In case you weren't joking, no, that's not "better" at all. Even when it's about your own life at stake, and therefore an argument for overriding your decisions may have a better standing, you are still allowed to refuse treatment even if it comes from professional people that even took the (Hippocratic) oath to make your well-being a priority. Now let's get back to the personal computing and what's happening here with these forced updates, which is more akin to breaking and entering, when are not being authorized by the owner. How the hell did it come to this?

Is a fresh install not an option for the system you're describing? I'm not suggesting that it's a sane thing to have to do, but after a couple of hours of resesrching the problem with no leads it seems like the best choice.

A fresh install is the solution to every windows problem. The issue is that we are not young anymore and we don't have the time to do it. Windows 10 being a quality disaster does not help either.

> Is a fresh install not an option for the system you're describing? I'm not suggesting that it's a sane thing to have to do, but after a couple of hours of resesrching the problem with no leads it seems like the best choice.

A fresh install with my original media failed in the same way during updates.

A fresh install (on a spare HD) with the media creation tool worked once, but crashed and burned after the first time I ran Windows update. I might try again, but I'm a little worn out.

I actually wasted hours with MS chat support, but they offered no insight except running me through a fresh install script. Once I hit the end they started talking about BIOS updates. However that's an entirely different wall, because apparently my MB shipped with an update that's not recommended for my CPU, but I cannot downgrade. I'm now debating whether to shell out $$$ for CPU upgrade (not even to current gen), but the ones I want are out of stock and only being sold by iffy sellers.

Yeah. I had the same issue and could not stand the update nagging anymore.

Thankfully, a buddy of mine pointed me to SetupDiag, which parses the logs to get you more info. In the end, the update was failing due to an accelerometer driver (!!).

Paying for MSDN to get LTSC is worth it.

Yes - Windows update is one of the most unreliable pieces of software I've had the misfortune to use. On one of my machines checking for updates hangs indefinitely. The whole update service is stuck and can't be stopped. I can do some hacks involving deleting the update catalogue in safe mode, but it just breaks again a few weeks later.

> Windows 10 fixed it

Good joke. There is nothing I can do in Windows 10 that Windows 7 didn't do better.

From start bar search to window decorations. Windows 10 has actively gotten in the way of what was a great practical experience.

Windows 11 makes the window decorations a little better (still inconsistent with poor design choices), but adding a bunch of crap that I can't opt out of on install (like teams, skype and whatever other bloatware is installed).

I have to use an actual debloating script on fresh Win 10 installs, the script only gets bigger with Windows 11.

Come on Microsoft...

> There is nothing I can do in Windows 10 that Windows 7 didn't do better.

For devs, WinRT as COM evolution, using .NET Native and C++/CX.

Basically what .NET 1.0 should have been all along, a better way to write COM with AOT compiled language, following up on what VB 6 was already capable of.

And Delphi / C++ Builder have been offering since they exist.

Unfortunately internal politic games, and messed up execution kind of killed that.

Maybe, but just really maybe, gaming? I'm genuinely asking

VPN handling.

L2PT in Win 7 either auto-guesses your routes, or you have to add your own - after each connection, as a local admin, with ever changing interface name. You don't have scoped DNS either.

Windows 8 (!) fixes both these things: you can set up routes together with the connection for once and all, you can have scoped DNS, and you have complete control over cipher suites. As a bonus, you have Powershell API to that.

Windows 10 inherited this from Windows 8.

So this is one datapoint, what Windows 10 does way, way better than Windows 7.

Windows 2000 was an excellent OS. Clean, frugal and and rock-solid.

XP was bloated in comparison.

I had loads of non-UI issues with 8, 8.1 and even more with 10. For example suspend was completely broken on a Surface Pro on 10, while on my desktop it would mess up the filesystem on a drive every few days. They fixed most of them eventually but it took a long while. I’ll prolly upgrade somewhere just to get the free license (I assume there’s gonna be a cutoff date again) and then go back to 10 right after

IFIR Windows 2000 was extremely well received by professionals (which at that time still was the target market). Windows XP was just the "consumer relesase" of Win2k and didn't actually add all that much except a new weird-looking UI theme.

Very true, I also preferred Windows 2000 and ran it until XP SP3 appeared, or so.

Where's Windows ME?

Probably a repressed memory.

It should be in Windows 2000's place. ME was a Windows 9x system, 2000 was part of the NT family.

It is too long ago to properly remember, but during this time when building my desktops I always insisted on getting NT and then Windows 2000 in place of the consumer versions. Had some funny discussions with shops when buying licenses.

I also remember using NT 4.0 (with the "hit Ctrl-Alt-Del to login" quirk) and then 2000 at home as a kid. Dad, being a sysop/dev/IT manager/"tech guy", really liked the stability of NTs. It took the first Service Pack for XP to really start catching on. Good times!

Yeah. Windows 2000 was rock solid compared to 95 and 98 and became the underpinnings for future consumer releases of windows...

We do not speak of Windows ME

Didn't fit the narrative.

It's crashing. Seriosly is a good thing that they did not mention it although some people claimed it was stable on their computer.

Vista was fine, no idea what's all the hate about.

by the end of its life it was fine, but it took waaaayyy too long to come out, the 64bit support was ahead of its time with no alternative, it was buggy, new access control model was too restrictive (bombarding users with escalation prompts for mundane things), and a bunch of other things that the sands of time caused me to forget.

it was not a great launch. usuable by the end.

Not if you had limited RAM. Less than 4GB was unusable.

Vista SP1 was fine. Vista before that wasn't, really.

It was a performance and memory hog, which wasn't helped by Microsoft underselling its minimal hardware requirements to an extreme. I still have a laptop from that time lying around with a Vista Capable label, Aero never worked on it and it ended up stuck in an eternal update loop because the hard drive did not have enough space for an up to date Vista.

Microsoft had to extend the life of Windows XP one last time when Netbooks became more common because Vista barely ran on a high end laptop.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com