ITT we name things that improved from XP to 10

ITT we name things that improved from XP to 10

Umm... multimonitor support? And even when you can have a clock on both monitors... In 2016 you can have a fucking 2 CLOCKS ON YOUR FUCKING TASKBAR. FUCKING AMAZING.

Why is microshit so shit?

>ssd support
>x64 support
>filesystem
>display scaling
>power management

I'm so mad I wrote shit.

I mean you can't have 2 clocks. One one each monitor.

Well XP and 7 were both quite legit. I'm not quite sure between 95 and 98 which was better but afaik 98 was decent. Right now we're in some weird stage as far as software is concerned. They're fucking us in the ass with a strap-on without even hiding and it looks like most people either don't know what's going on or are willing to take it.

So literally only display scaling yes?

SSDs and X64 and power management are just new hardware features. Not related to Windows at all...

I'll give you half of the filesystem. But thats more a result of hardware again same shit as ext4...

>x64 support

Completely pointless at consumer level.
Nobody should need more than 4GB.

>nobody should need more than 4GB

Objectively speaking to a casual user.

The difference between XP and 7 is basically Aero..

Technically you're right but all browsers these days easily suck up 2 GB if you have like 20 tabs open...

I think it's more than aero (which I don't use anyways and I have my bottom bar to look just like 98) it's mostly the way it manages registry. I remember XP getting slow as fuck after a certain period of time and you had to use registry cleaners and shit Windows 7 can run way longer without slowing down.

freetard delusion: the post

m$ should have been a company writing/controlling drivers nothing else

no (thinking) - they have screwed that up consistantly since the early vista mess

Plug&Play
security (UAC)
Search
Networking
Multiple users on one device
Still fully compatible with really old PDAs and such
Self recovery after fuck-up
Built-in backup solutions

He isn't wrong, though.

The way you post is giving me space aids.
>only difference between 32 and 64-bit x86 is more RAM
Cred Forums in a nutshell

public safety

They made Windows much harder to use since Windows XP. Only improvement is the detection and better 64-bit support.

>UAC
That's not improvement. At least not as its implemented
>backup
XP has a great backup tool which you fully controlled
>Self recovery
Well that depends on how bad the fuckup

>tfw running XP right now

Thats true. Only reason people need more for basic Internet browsing, printing and writing documents is poor optimization and bloated OS. On modern Ubuntu, which is a definition of bloat in Linux, world you can hardly use more than 3 GB of RAM without gaming. And thats for desktop tasks. My debian sits around 1GB with firefox/facebook + steam + vlc playing a 1080p video. Still i own 16 GB of ram for vidya and graphics editing reasons (yes i went over 8GB of ram playing plannetary annihilation, its a shitty written game)

API changes

What?

also x64 bit optimizations are not really seen on consumer level. Normies don't really care, to them an SSD equipped celeron laptop is faster than a i7 equipped PC with a HDD unless they try to play games or use some kind of heavy 3D/Cad/video editing software.
Example: How long did mozilla and google wait with delivering a 64bit browser on windows, while on Linux it just was there for years?

64bit support. Better multitasking scheduler (you'll notice if you run at high load).

And the Windows task manager and file copy popup dialogs.

What does people buying 8GB of ram have to do with people actually needing more than 4GB of ram?

98 was a bugfest.
98SE was good.

>plug in a graphics card with 4GB of memory
>cant use it because it maps to the same memory

If they kept windows xp up to date I would still be using it. There haven't been major OS developments in 15 years (when Microsoft ditched the win9x line of products in favor of NT).

I don't think that mozilla and google delaying 64-bit versions of browsers had anything to do with optimizations, and more to do with the fact that Linux embraced 64-bit nearly immediately and Windows lingered in 32-bit. Anyone remember XP 64-bit? No? The two people who used that aren't here I suppose. Perhaps Vista 64-bit? Okay, bad example. The first reasonable 64-bit Windows version was 7, and even you had to go through hoops to make VS compile your code in 64-bit. I'm out of the loop now, but I expect that Microsoft got its act together and made 64-bit compilation more appealing than crawling through molten lead.

>tfw running windows

That's cute as fuck.

i actually used XP 64 bit for some time, so you better watch out who are you replying to mate :^)

>tfw things have gotten so bad I had to install Ubuntu

good night sweet prince

Everything improved from XP to 10. Everything improved from XP to 7 as well. Kill yourself you Luddite faggot.

>What is PAE
pic related, 2GB GTX 760 + 16GB RAM on a 32 bit system

>mfw people can't differentiate the different 'classic themes' between OS-es
>there are people who assume you're running "Windows 98" if they see a classic theme, even though it has modern icons in the taskbar

What the fuck, man? I'm using the Classic Theme on XP right now, and every time everybody says "Are you running 98, lol" to somebody on Cred Forums who uses the Classic theme on Windows 7" I die a little. Surely people can't be that dumb, right?

>pic related, 2GB GTX 760 + 16GB RAM on a 32 bit system
why not use the 64 bit version?

The only issue I had with 64bit XP was the lack of drivers for certain accessories

>Search
>Multicore
>PnP improvements
>x64
>WDDM
>Compositing
>IE9+
>UWP
>Faster boot times
>Task Bar
>MAJOR start menu and control panel improvements
>Powershell
>DX12

the list, literally, goes on

>That's not improvement. At least not as its implemented
Explain.

>On modern Ubuntu

dropped

>Nobody should need more than 4GB.

Everybody remembers XP64-bit you fucking newfig

>window snap works with dual monitors
this is all i need t b h

Surely nobody should need more than 640GB though right?

you realize its not 2010 anymore

>>x64 support
??? XP had that and even Itanium support

And what advancements in application and OS design made them require so much more memory in the last 6 years?

what kind of question is that?

A simple one.

>SSDs and X64 and power management are just new hardware features. Not related to Windows at all...
Are you serious my nigga

A stupid one

giggle

Well, there's virtual desktops now. That's something.

pointless

Start menu

A. Lot improved from xp to 7

From 7 to 10 though you're right. We actually lost features (like classic mode)

>classic mode

literally no reason to disable compositing

x64 support
>Install W10 on 4GB machine
>2.8GB RAM free
>Install XP on 4GB machine
>3GB usable, 2.8GB free
Literally the same.

>display scaling
Still shit on W10

>ssd support
You can install Windows 95 on an SSD with no problems, let alone XP.

>Install XP on a 4GB
>2GB used up by the VRAM
???????

i ran live USB for presentation purposes.

well its a modern system with recent firefox, so you people wont say i compared XP with ff 36 to a windows 10 64bit with chrome. Also it has one of the most bloated kernels in linux world and most bloated services and deamons running.
I don't see the source for your autism here.

I can easily make my own recovery media.

>We managed to barely achieve basic minimum functionality everybody should expect from a 2016 computing device! Praise Windows! How can Linux compete?

>How can Linux compete?

Poorly, apparently.

Most of Cred Forums is underage so they won't remember, but windows 95/98 used to freeze/BSOD at least once a day. XP did it every other day. Still every day if you did anything more "advanced" than watching pictures and reading e-mail.

Vista/7 was complete day/night difference in terms of stability.

why? it's not some universal law that things have to bloat out quadratically, computers are still used for pretty much the exact same shit they did just fine in 2010 or even 2006 barring edge cases like meme reality and other gayming paraphenalia

>display scaling
Wait are you being serious? Try using multiple screen resolutions it's fucking hilariously bad.

sounds like you're the underage here if you were retarded enough to make NT as unstable as 9x

even when I was daily driving XP I couldn't remember more than maybe 2 BSODs ever, and practically none on my legacy boxes now that weren't caused by shitty drivers or hardware failure

"nobody ever needs more than 40K of ram"
- Steve Jobs / Bill Gates

>I don't read patch notes for each release/update so I'll just spit out the extent of my knowledge and shit up Cred Forums further.

5/10 - I responded.

>tfw falling for the 4GiB RAM meme

You run VMs or something?

disk fragmentation.

XP was an HDD killer, newer NTFS is a lot better.

>he uses this out of context quote unironically
>he actually thinks 2010-era hardware even remotely compares to the even then visibly compromised and limited toy hardware of the early 1980s enough to make the use of this quote relevant

Reminder that Linuxfags are worse than muslims

>display scaling
don't tell me you're dumb enough to use that shit on windows

i just extracted a RAR file and winrar used 12gb of ram

>Multicore
Two fuckin keks.

How about things W10 has fucked?
I'll start with start menu search

You're just one of those typical borderline asperger freetards on this board who are scared of the slightest change and can't adapt.. god knows what other troubles you face in your daily life.. like tying your shoelaces together. poor you.

>push windows button and start typing control panel
>press enter
>it doesn't open despite it being highlighted and the only fucking search result
Nice OS, fag

wtf are you talking about?

>works on my machine :^)

lol.. it's more like you have fucking broken your machine because you're clinically retarded

More like microshaft broke my machine's search function with its retarded automatic updates. Fuck off Hans Al-Sahbid

I can use up 16gb easily
and I have 32gb to play with

>ad hominem

>I don't know what an ad hominem is

>DX12
literally what uses it? vulkan is the future

I completely agree - I never use more than 2GB of my 4GB RAM on this computer, and my last computer did just fine for 10 years with only 1GB of RAM

I wish I were you, I'm forbidden by Lenovo to go before Windows 8

>hating the registry

God when will this meme end. Databases are far more efficient than scattered files with settings in plaintext. On top of this, how do you reference data without using the registry for something that could be installed anywhere? Like a patch to a game.

>let the user remember and decide where to put it!
Tedious as fuck

>have all the settings in one place
So you basically have a registry, but instead of a small, extremely efficient, database, you use a bunch of text files with settings in them that take up 10 times as much space.

Ok gamer faggot.

but gay mans

I really hate Windows these days. Trying to dig into my older memories to find something to post that's relevant but nothing is coming to me really. I guess I liked the sound changes from XP to 7. They were similar but less jarring and old sounding. Like pianos replacing NES era sounds.

I haven't used Windows regularly since XP. Except for that laptop in high school which had Windows 7, but I had that set to use the classic interface.

>faster
>better
>prettier
>newer
>more features
>better
>Cortana
>meme support
>keeping USA safe by spying on you
>supports more than 4Gb of ram\
>made by ethnically diverse group of people
>faster

is this a daft punk song?

well, what did you expect from an indian?

laughed hard

win10 search is actual fucking trash
half the time it does not give results in the same order, and one letter difference can get you a different result, especially for control panel settings
>prin
>print
give two totally different results (prin brings up print management first, print brings up devices and printers first), and half the time it doesn't order them in the same order anyway

win7 never had this problem

Currently at 58 (mostly not loaded) tabs. At comfy 1024 MB.
Loaded every single one and its pendling around 1330 MB. Browser is up for mutiple days.
Maybe because its mostly docs, wikis, github, trapporn and hackaday.

It's precisely the same, otherwise you couldn't pull a HDD out of an XP machine and put it in one running 7+

>Umm
>$currentYear
I'm a full on linuxfag, and I find that you're a goddamn faggot.

>we name things that improved from XP to 10
Botnet integration

>who are scared of the slightest change and can't adapt..
I know these posts are bait but they're seriously dumb, so here's the attention you're so obviously begging for with that statement:

not all change is good solely because it's change
recognizing this does not mean you fear it in its entirety

likewise, it's hardly "change", there's no "adapting" with new windows versions, it's the same old windows 95/NT4 interface in every respect that matters with some new optional features tacked on with every version

adding to this, how the fuck can you even be "afraid" of a shittier search algorithm? let alone "adapt" to it? there's nothing to adapt to, it doesn't behave any differently than the old search, it just returns shittier results

You and me dude.

>ITT: poorfags trying to justify using sluggish, 10+ year old technology

lmao dude why the fuck do you type like that wtf man how high are you xDD