I don't think it's trolling based on the following point. As a purely intellectual exorcize, the article bases an argument on an unproven stated fact -- that version "x" of Windows sucked or didn't suck followed by a version that reversed the trend. While the merits of why an OS will or won't be "good" may seem completely subjective to me, unit sales data as a percentage of in-use computers around the world would provide a nice starting point for debate. Windows 95 (for me) was a watershed OS that has influenced how we use MS OS's _to_this_day_. I just don't have sales figures to support my claim, therefore mine is just an opinion -- like the original article.