Hacker News Reader

Comment by lelag | Hacker News Reader

The pattern of MS releasing badly received OS every other major release is well known. XP -> hit, Vista -> miss, Windows -> 7 hit, Windows 8 -> miss, Windows 10 -> hit, Windows 11 miss. With this track record, it's not surprising people expect Windows 12 to be good...

View on HN

This conveniently misses out versions such as 2000, ME, and 8.1. The "miss" of Vista can also be largely attributed to lazy hardware manufacturers that didn't want to rewrite their device drivers.

2000 -> hit, ME -> miss, XP -> hit, Vista -> miss, 7 -> hit, 8 -> miss, 10 -> hit, 11 -> miss

8.1 is more like a SP for 8.

That should cover all the major desktop releases for the past 23 years.

Windows 2000 doesn't really count any more than WinNT 3.x or WinNT 4 do as they were for business use and weren't very popular on desktops.

Win1 -> miss, Win2 -> miss, Win3 -> better, Win3.1 -> hit, Win95 -> ok, Win98[SE] -> hit, WinME -> miss, WinXP -> hit, ...

XP needed a few service packs to be really good. It broke everything at launch because of the kernel switchover. By SP3, most software was caught up or covered by compatibility layers.

I love this meme. It's one of my favorites. But Win10 was actually a turd and Win11 was a polished turd with a stinky one of an ad-on: more ads and more fingerprinting.

I xpect Win12 to be more turd and Win13 to be diarrhea.

I was going to post the same. Calling Win10 a hit is a gross exaggeration. It was pretty much universally hated at release.

And largely still is. There was mass resistance to leaving windows 7 which was the last release they basically worked like people had learned to use it.

Getting stuff like user mode drivers and bitlocker and all the is nice but almost nothing had been added to the core product that users themselves much cared about.

3d object collections pinned to opening labels and the only way to get rid of it is registry hacks. Who was that "feature" ever even for?

I think you guys must be in an echo chamber of Windows 10 hate. By and large almost everyone I know who is remotely techy, and even some who aren't actually like Win 10

My work laptop has been on 10 LTSC for years. I don't "hate it" but I've never heard anyone talk about liking it so much as tolerating it to run the stuff they care about.

Maybe it's super great on those surface tablets but all the techy people I know using tablets on are iPads.

It was less hated than 8 at release, so by comparison it was loved

Does 10 really have less ads and telemetry, though? 10 is still getting updates and a lot of annoying "features" seem to get back ported (like the "fact of the day" thing in the search bar that always opens Bing), and I've never seen any proof that 11 actually does collect even more data than 10.

Not defending 11 here, it's just that 10 was pretty ill received here an hn and ever since 11 came out, the opinions suddenly changed, which seems a bit weird to me.

Was XP really a hit? I remember rejecting it in favour of SP4 for Windows 2000 for the longest time. It was only once XP SP2 dropped in 2004 that it became usable

XP SP2 was a huge hit. And it had a long run after it dropped until 7 was released (many people skipped vista)

For consumers, XP had most of the stability of 2000 but the drivers and game compatibility of 98. While I loved 2000 as a huge improvement over 98, I really liked XP and found it (relatively) trouble free and resource light.

Compared to Windows ME, I remember it as a hit. Windows 2000 was a homerun though

I remember similar things. Running Windows 2000, even going back to Win98 on my first PC (shipped with XP before SP1) and also running Windows 2003 Server at some point, all just to avoid XP. After SP2, it was fine.

Yes, XP was a hit. It was perfectly usable, and quite popular, well before SP2.

The student edition was particularly well received around campuses

Reply on news.ycombinator.com