Microsoft keeps releasing new versions of Windows.
They say each version is better than the previous one.
Is there some truth to this ? Or is this mostly marketing bullshit to push people to spend money?
Microsoft keeps releasing new versions of Windows.
They say each version is better than the previous one.
Is there some truth to this ? Or is this mostly marketing bullshit to push people to spend money?
If you worked with Windows NT you’d see that there hasn’t been a lot of change. Probably the biggest code changes include control panel and start menu.
My preferred Windows versions, 3.1, 98Se, 2000, 7, and 10.
Win98 SP2 and Windows 7 for me. Windows NT blew my mind. You are telling me that an application could crash without compromising the stability of the rest of the system??? Witchcraft!! (And I know other non-Win systems that did this existed long ago before Windows, but I didn’t know in my teen years.)
I liked Windows XP though I hated how insecure it was.
Insider, there’s been massive change along the way.
Yea, fundamental paradigm hasn’t changed from a UI perspective, but that’s just to keep people from having to re-learn too much at once.
Under the hood, the change from NT3.51 to 4 was noticeable from a stability standpoint, then from NT4 to Win2k was massive - true plug-n-play, dynamic event capability, performance and stability were significantly improved. XP was a small increase over that.
I had to reboot NT4 every day, often multiple times if I changed hardware, like using a vendor dock even.
Then Win7x64, another massive increase in performance and stability.
Win8 can die in a fire, because it wasn’t any better than 7, with some dumb stuff in the UI and the beginning of MS really scewing up control panel.
Win7 is the high water mark to me, though Win10 is virtually identical to server, it even runs exactly the same Hypervisor framework. The differences from 10/11 to server are mostly tuning, how updates are managed, and server lacks some user-focused services.
I’ve run Server Core and Win10 (for Hyper-V) on the same hardware and the performance difference wasn’t visible. It would take running a large server and heavy VM workloads (eg databases, regular VM migrations, etc), to see the difference.
I don’t see a major performance increase going to Win10 as a single-user machine, but virtualization is much faster than if I were running even Win10 with VMware workstation (naturally).
Heterogenous scheduler support for big.LITTLE CPUs seems like a big deal to me, especially with the Advent of P+E core Intels.