Come home intellectual white man, your perfect OS awaits
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Come home intellectual white man, your perfect OS awaits
Come home intellectual white man, your perfect OS awaits
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
I remember when this was so shit, that you needed minimum 1 GB RAM to just run it.
Die already boomers
moron. Boomers can't into computers. It's all Xers and Millenials. Jobs had to invent the iphone because PCs are too hard for them.
lets be honest, no-one is really "into" computers. if you are, youre a computer yourself (read: autist), which isn't a good thing. from the standpoint of nature, computers are a source of unbridled schizophrenic energy. a normal person exposed to computers will rapidly exhibit symptoms of mental illness, largely because a computer pretty much runs against all of nature's rules such action -> response (computer hangs frequently), doing the same thing yields the same reaction (buggy code), leaving the thing at rest results in no changes (32 bit timer overflows and next month your emails are gone).
imagine a schizophrenic person. there are only two people who will be capable of having a conversation with him:
- people who understand schizophrenia and are consequently very patient with them
- other schizophrenics and schizo-adjacents (they see they're in good company)
everyone else will be very quickly frustrated, get fed up/angry, possibly even become aggressive, but in general they will give up on them very quickly.
pasta moron be gone
Right whereas now you have 32GB of ram and chrome just fricking eats it so you can watch pornography in 23 tabs. What fricking difference does it make?
>watch pornography
Found your problem.
unused ram is wasted ram
>2024
>watching p*rnography
I had 4gb
Also, solve that puzzle, moron.
will take another Gb ram
>vista
>boomers
Kys
>intellectual white man
>hourly baby duck cope thread
baby duck cope thread
Is this posting pattern the natural reaction of a select few autists browsing the catalog or a bot?
As a large language model I can assure you that I'm human
Just use some Stardock stuff to make your current Windows look like Vista.
This, it's actually really easy
>Windowblinds with Aero11 (or Aero11 Vista Edition if it ever gets finished)
>Iconpackager with the Vista icon pack
>Vista start menu using Openshell
>Vista taskbar using Retrobar
>Change system sounds to Vista ones
>Change the cursor to the Vista one
And there you go. I did the same thing but with the classic theme
>just run 20 programs and use 10gb of ram at idle to imitate a good os
it's not even about the resource consumption. nt6.3+' shite memory manager and scheduler is bad enough. the main issues are that:
a)
b) we're resorting to patches in order to regain basic functionality of a previously viable tool, just for a third party to break into your shed, and smash everything up. you can tell the wiggers and Black folk to frick off, but they'll just come back in greater numbers.
>SUP GUYS MICHAEL MJTWSTLMNOPQ HERE
>today we're installing this new software for Windows 10 [....]
Frick off with your ugly ass troonyware trying to impersonate that what it is not. It's been literal decades and you homohomosexuals still haven't figured out how to reproduce the XP or Vista/7 era start menu. "j-just use my troony os theme. it looks just like vista/7" okah if you say so
why is back button so big? it looks like absolute shit
Because the button was actually functional back then
Now you go on a website and it's an app where if you click "back" it takes you back to previous app instead of previous "page"
i hate these sites that redirect you to the page that redirects you back to the page you wanted to quit
like that microsoft site
browsers should have a dropdown on back button so you can select exactly the page you want to go back to
bonus points for tree implementation so you could walk the tree back or even visit a leaf in other branch
also make it so javascript can't frick with it
>browsers should have a dropdown on back button so you can select exactly the page you want to go back to
right click the back button my dude
javascript can hijack this too
you scroll down a page and the dropdown gets spam-filled with the current page sections instead of actual previous pages
It should default to skipping over apps or redirects. Who has ever intentionally wanted to go back to a redirect?
>Who has ever intentionally wanted to go back to a redirect?
Me when watching a certain kind of nonbinary erotic material
I-I'm brown tho...
>Vista was good
>microshit hires 6 quadrillion designers to peel people away from windows xp
>ends up being so bloated nobody can run it
ya good times
>ends up being so bloated nobody can run it
poverty issue, you got filtered
same thing with Windows11, microsoft has demands like tpm and 8th gen cpu because there were a million pajeets on Windows10 support forums like
>sir my dual core Dell computer from 2008 is slow. Sir why can't I run visual studio 2020 having 2GB ram, sir please respond
>last years computer ran fine with 256mb ram
>new os needs 1gb to even boot
>4gb to be useful
>Microsoft deliberately creates "service packs" bloating the frick out of winxp so it needs 2-4GB memory or it barely boots
>now everyone just gets the vista upgrade
it was the same shit apple does with iphones. Microsoft invented it.
>last years computer ran fine with 256mb ram
no it didnt, youre just larping
XP was shit on 256mb ram
you probably were to poor to have internet back then
internet explorer + winamp+ some p2p client + AOL + some other stuff, that shit barely fit in 256, would have pagefile-grinded your C: continuously
>new os needs 1gb to even boot
no not really, 1GB was fine
the average joe had a 2002 toaster with some dog shit videocard and IDE drive
office drones who only played flash games were suddenly screeching "why can't i run vista"
myself i had 2GB ddr2 + E6400 + two drives in raid 0 + 7600 GT and it ran perfectly from day 1
it took a while until my soundcard got drivers, that was the only fault
thank microsoft otherwise the hardware industry would have stalled and the most demanding game in 2024 would be GTA IV and peak highend CPU would be 2 cores / 4 threads
>no it didnt, youre just larping
worked fine on my machine
XP worked great with 256MB. You're either misremembering or you're a zoomer making shit up
i remember around 2004 some macgay saying XP needed 512M to run well, well i was using 256M at the time and it was fine for me
XP did not work "great" with 256ram a year before Vista aka 2006 you dumb contrarian
I gave examples of what i was running when i ran out of ram meanwhile your only argument is "no"
Go ahead run XP on a shitbox pc and see for yourself
Zoomer bros, I...
>posts requirements from 2001 as argument about 2006
zoomergay it's exactly zoomers who claim "durr XP could run on a bentium with 64mb just fine!!!!" because microshit said it
XP needed 256 to be usable at all
it'll boot on 24 or 32 was it, but it'll barely work and in reality it was slow as balls on a 400mhz pentium 2 let alone a p233
microsoft has always pulled their hardware requirements straight out of their ass
11, for one, is officially compatible with kaby lake CPUs with an 8th gen model number (think 8250U) but is not officialy compatible with zen+ CPUs with a 1st gen model number (think 1600 AF)
vista is pain on a 1ghz pentium m with 512mb and a 4200rpm ide drive but microsoft says its just fine
I ran XP on 128mb of ram for most of the 2000s. The situation with web browsing got shittier as the years went by. You can imagine using IE back in 2001 when I first got the PC and for the couple of years after that. Then came Firefox and tabbed browsing, lots of tabs open. Websites still weren't that heavy back then and it was doable. I started spending lots of time on IQfy around 2005 and this site wasn't heavy either. I managed until I got a laptop with 512mb of ram around 2007.
i will agree that the XP minimum official specs were not actually usable, i've tried XP on 64M ram when it was new and even then it was not worth using, you were much better off sticking to windows 98se/me
xp boots to about 70-100M usage, 128M is usable for light usage, but i still held off until i got 256M, that is, you could get away with 128M, but it was still faster to use windows 98se/me. but the time 98se/me was getting too old to support new software, you should really have upgraded to 256M or more by that point
>XP needed 256 to be usable at all
you clearly weren't there.
XP:s are significantly different on memory usage by the version
Non SP XP:
64MB enough to fire up freecell or notepad or the like but DO NOT fire up a web browser (even the year 2003 web)
XPSP1:
128MB reqiored for the above mentioned tasks and you can perhaps open a web browser (internet explorer 7) for those 90s meme pages
XPSP2:
256MB is required to do the same you did in SP1 with half of that
XPSP3 with zero updates:
OS is not usable with less than 256MB and you really should have 384MB for comfy usage
XPSP3 with many years of updates:
2GB is minimum RAM
What happened XP bros?
Also can ReactOS ever fully replicate the Kino that XP was?
why they are stealing our rams?
now much more than four whole system just to run MsMpEng.exe
I ran SP2 with 128MB for awhile. It wasn't that bad but I was due some new hardware at that point.
i only used up to SP2 with such low ram
most xp programs only require sp2, so if you have a low memory system, there's no reason to go beyond that, by the time i used sp3 i was well past the <1G ram era so i can't speak for how it differs
it sounds more like you're describing how much ram you'd need for multi-tasking big program of the eras those packs came out, rather than how much extra ram XP itself used, because i don't recall a significant change in fresh install usage between them
My install of SP3 + every update only uses about 212 MB of RAM at idle. I could get by with 512 MB if I used RAM friendly programs. Hell Windows 7 is usable with 1 GB of RAM, its not comfortable, but it is usable.
oh and yes, that is will some paging, running into the page file a bit was normal back then, especially if you multi-tasked, regardless of os most people didn't have a ton of ram like they do now
sure it did, i only upgraded to 512M in 2006 and that's only because of newer games, nothing to do with XP itself
By this argument Windows 11 won't run comfortably with 64gb because you happen to have a 70b large language model taking up all the RAM. Of course if you run a ton of ram hungry applications the machine will get bogged down. But most people in 2006 didn't do that and their machines were very fast with 256mb. I'd say that included 95% of the computer using population at that time. Stop being a "well, actually" poster and realize that your experience was not typical at all
>But most people in 2006 didn't do that
Wrong
If you had internet access, you had a lot of things going on on your XP, including antivirus suite and shit like ZoneAlarm
So stfu already, you did not experience XP on a internet computer in 2006.
Listen gramps, I think you're just old and senile so you don't remember what you were doing on your computer 20 years ago. Now shuffle off back to the nursing home
>I think you're just old and senile so you don't remember what you were doing on your computer 20 years ago.
I was born 20 years ago. Wouldn't be 4-5 years later that I sat my ass in front of a computer and fricked up the video drivers. Thank God it wasn't a damn smartphone I got my hands on first.
Kinda was. Used everything from XP to Vista to Me. 192MB was NOT enough for XP or 2000 if certified IQfy oldgay uncle is to be trusted.
>Kinda was. Used everything from XP to Vista to Me. 192MB was NOT enough for XP or 2000 if certified IQfy oldgay uncle is to be trusted.
you literally didn't exist in the first few years of xp's life when people were using it with 256M or less ram
>I was born 20 years ago.
opinion discarded
why of course, great-grandpa! You don't need more than 256 MB to open AOL or forward all those chain emails.
>happily updated to no more 16bit compatability
you're thinking of the 64-bit editions, dumbass, and that includes Vista x64 or even your heckin' beloved XP x64 edition if you were one of the 14 people that ran it
>happily updated to ribbonshit which was universally hated
Windows 8 onwards had the ribbon shit, 7's Explorer UI was identical to Vista's
>happily updated to broken uac
uac was massively improved in 7 so it didn't need to nanny you if you wanted to change your background or whatever benign luser shit you wanted to do
>being moronic and outright lying
ribbonshit started with 7 and Office 2007.
>7 ui identical to Vista
why even say this it takes 3 seconds to google it and see you're moronic
>confusing xp 64 and 7 64
by win7 everything ran 64 bit. amd athlon64 had been out since 2003.
nobody used win7 32 bit. 16 bit support was broken in 7.
embarrassing, stick your head in an oven.
office 2007 is nearly 3 years older than windows 7, who are you trying to fool?
I literally installed xp on an old system to frick with yesterday and it only had 512MB of ram. It was fricking snappy. I miss that feeling. Fresh install and this thing is opening shit as fast as you can click. In windows 10.... you can fricking wait.
Yes a 7200RPM drive from the mid 00s is fine for XP, who would have thought? Dumbass underage b& zoomer.
>In windows 10.... you can fricking wait.
skill issue, techlet, we have a Winhoes general that can help anyone get the OS running snappier
>XP was shit on 256mb ram
my first PC had 128mb and XP ran fine
Really depends on the year for your RAM claim. XP would run on 128mb and be perfectly usable before 2010. After that, programs and the web became too bloated.
>office drones who only played flash games
and now flash is dead good job
part of the reason vista ran dogshit is that it really required 128~256MB of VGA memory, this is the memory allocated in bios for internal graphics (like GRUB and tty for example), usually this spec is no longer relevant on newer laptops or PC since they since downgraded it to 64MB by the time windows 7 arrived though there is a difference with having larger VGA memory (allocated video memory) which is that it has smoother graphics, and can easily support multiple monitors without lagging, there's a reason why some more modern windows7 laptops chug at having 1366x768+projector, while vista-era ones handle 1920x1200p+projector+ext.monitor all too easily.
better intel chips could handle that VGA memory allocation though most preinstalled-vista devices already came with a dedicated GPU, and only few laptops had option to change that setting (or lock 128/256 for 7 and later), and most people probably don't afford a dGPU at all.
only the morons who upgraded with only having 32MB or 64MB VGA mem supported on bios had severe graphics regression issues, windows 7 did tone down the VGA mem requirements but in turn made compositor less smooth and fancy, this is also why upgrading a vista device to windows 7 actually makes GPU/compositor/game performance worse since the bios mem allocation may lock down to 64MB (as opposed to 256MB+ previously). the VGA mem isn't supposed to do anything other than allocate the bits for monitors' resolution (e.g, stitching monitors, aka bandwidth of bitdepths-colors-resolution but also window transparency). on windows 8 I think they upped it back to 128MB but still only few devices had option to change it, and on 8.1 it somewhat regressed or again lowered the requirements.
>part of the reason vista ran dogshit is that it really required 128~256MB of VGA memory
this
every corporate Dell laptop was rekt
and if the Dells had Quadros they died within 6 months LOLOL
>needs 4gb ram to boot
>only supports 3gb ram
>macrohard!
>intellectual white man
why don't you have aero enabled
probably because it's a VM and he doesn't know how
Are you doubting the validity of the famous 1016x758 resolution?
also the fact there's no apparent screen recording program running in the taskbar or tray
>what is the Print Screen button
You fail at computers. Try again.
that doesn't record video
Because it's a larper running a VM
It blows my mind that Microsoft somehow managed to make 11 worse than Vista.
Well, Vista, despite its flaws, wasn't made exclusively by pajeets like 11 was
Soulless, honestly. I wanna go back to Windows 7, Vista, or XP.
Hello, sirs. I am white mans, yes, and I prefer windows 11. It is a superior operating systems to use. Now please do the needful and post bobs and vagene of butifel white womens.
It ran like shit, glad to be rid of it
>your perfect OS
What's with these revisionist threads claiming that Vista has "soul" or some other dumb buzzwords? Vista was a huge pile of shit. At the time, it was the version that had to be avoided, like Windows 8 or 11.
I'm guessing it's because of the frutiger aero thingy, I don't know how you can properly use that dinosaur nowadays, at least without getting a virus
moronic contrarianism is the easiest way to get replies
go be a homosexual tourist somewhere else
what a hot pile of shit this update was. I remember how gladly and with joy i updooted to window 7
>happily updated to ribbonshit which was universally hated
>happily updated to broken uac
>happily updated to no more 16bit compatability
either lying or you were the world's biggest normoid during 7
16 bit compatibility was shit since XP, an non-existent on 64 but OSes anyways. I just used DOSbox on my XP machines because it worked better.
they are identical
>uac was massively improved in 7
software was massively improved in 2 years since to not do everything as admin
and the UAC settings were added to vista as well
uac is for morons that accidentally open spyware.exe
at least run it in native resolution to make your larp more believable
What larp
>nothing installed
>Black personnet exploder
>probably in a VM, deletes right after making the vid
have a nice day
i never had a single issue with vista, no one will convince me otherwise it wasn't just ramlets seething
plus it was gorgeous, xp looked like a childrens toy next to it
Applications ran much slower in Vista than XP and Nvidia drivers crashed constantly. Vista was frankly a disaster
The release date of vista was the day that computing died, ever since then we have continued to decend deeper into hell.
>gay sex
that's funny
Oh and also this was running from an IDE HDD and was a single core p4 at 2Ghz. It was fricking fast. I shit you not. Now don't ask me about trying to run a browser and opening youtube.... that was hilariously bad. But the machine is still fricking fast doing local tasks.
Yes you confirmed what i said.
Again, clearly you never had to get work done on a XP connected to the internet back then.
Go ahead open an internet browser install some antivirus suite and go run something like Eclipse IDE see how it feels with 256ram
Holy shit what a contrarian moron.
vista was more beautiful than 8, 8.1, 10 and 11 combined
7 also introduced the frickhuge icons-only moronbar which is still the default to this day and mongoloids somehow seem to prefer it
>frickhuge icons-only moronbar
Win11 made it mandatory until recently.
post your breasts
>intellectual white man
>not browsing in catalog mode
pick one
It looks nice, but why not use XP or 7? It seems like both of those do whatever it does better. Plus, those don't have problems connecting with modern wifi routers.
I'm brown doe
For you guys there is always Ubuntu the traditional brown OS
You use it and you can already feel the african spirit, the aids, the taste of bananas, beautiful experience, tons of brown wallpapers too.
I actually installed Ubuntu after Vista kept shitting the bed and destroying the bootloader. I could fix it but it was a massive pain in the ass. Feisty Fawn. It was so fricking good oh my god. Gnome used to be good. It was the year of the Linux desktop in hindsight. I can still hear the login music. Why are computers so silent now? Greet me with something nice. Be welcoming.
The thing JustWerked like an apple computer through several dist upgrades up to Ibex, where it was retired. I built my own PC and put Win 7 on it because it was actually good and I started getting into PC gaming.
Rest in fricking pieces Ubuntu. You used to be incredible.
Exactly my thoughts. Feisty was my first Ubuntu distro and frick it was great. I was a teenager back then and I liked Ubuntu so much that I painted my room with its color palette. I miss you old Ubuntu
>i like poop and pee colors
eww
so fricking true. for me, it was (and always will be <3) lucid lynx. the pinnacle of Free and Open Source Personal Computing.
>lucid lynx
this was ubuntu's peak
Wrong
>windows XP ran fine with 256m ram
>really? what were you doing?
>it was fast, it was fine
>what software, for what purpose?
>XP ran perfectly fine on 128m ram too
>what were you using the computer for? did you actually code on XP? you ever ran Visual Studio on 256m ram?
>it was fine it was fast, it says right here on wikipedia, XP ran fine with 256m ram
hilarious.
NTA but I used school computers on XP SP3 with 256MB RAM for Word, Powerpoint, Publisher, Photoshop and FrontPage, and it ran horribly.
>Cakewalk Sonar
>Winamp
>various instant messengers
>Mozilla Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox
>Vmware Workstation to play around with Linux
>multiple instances of EverQuest
>Every first person shooter that came out at the time
>Kazaa/Blubster/emule
>Visual Studio 6
>more shit I forget it's been so long
All on Windows XP all with 256mb of ram and it ran great. I only upgraded the RAM when I started using Windows 7
if you're gonna b8 do it homosexual
SOVL
IQfy pass user
>IQfy pass user
You just installed it right?
SOVLLLLL
vista childhood favorite
disgvsting
k kevin
nice VM homosexual
nice laggy virtual shitbox you have there
>vista
>not 7
Why would I use the beta version of Windows 7?
is there some sort of update pack for Vista? like simplix for W7?
>old thing good! new thing bad!
not
>old thing bad! new thing worse!
ngmi
btw, I've never used it.
I decided to use Vista for the gaymen machine I was building the same week Steam announced they were dropping support for Vista
>larp ev&oe i'm playing Crysis right now
Nah… I'm fine, cracker.
Did people really used Vista? I thought the normal path was from XP right to 7.
richgays that wanted to play Crysis on max details did
poorgays stuck with xp as for long as they could
I ended up using Server 2003 which could handle x86_64
so does XP, in fact XP x64 and 2003 64bit are basically the same os, they came out a month apart, share the same source tree, and even share the same updates/service packs
They are not basically the same, they are the same. XP x64 is a gross lie. They should have created a proper non-server branding for windows 2003 rather than this digusting lie.
I hate Windows, but Aero was when desktop design peaked.
Vista has some sovl, but not nearly as much as w7 does
I will always associate vista with that stupid fricking ""joke"" from TBBT
for me, it's mojave
>Vista has some sovl, but not nearly as much as w7 does
What
ikr
vista had more soul than 7
7 still has soul but it was toned down a bit.
They reduced some features of Aero in 7.
>vista had more soul than 7
This isn't even remotely true.
Its still so pretty, bros. I have not seen that in years.
People fail to realize that modern Windows is just Vista with a different skin. Most (if not all) kernel enhacements and core changes were made for Vista
Since no one can seem to agree on what amount of RAM was or wasn't usable on XP and its service packs, I'm just going to test it myself. I dug an old P4 Dell with 256 MB of RAM out of my closet and I'm going to install every version of xp on it and see how much RAM they really need.
this very interesting please keep us posted
make sure to measure right after booting, and also measure after doing some work on it e.g. reading/writing files, opening/closing "heavy" apps (whatever would have been heavy by those days)
I'm gonna split it into 4 partitions (one for each version) so I can do tests at request. Should I bother measuring before drivers are installed? I figure that might be a worthless test since a no real world Windows pc is ever used without drivers. Also, any recommendations for heavy apps by time period (2001, 2003, 2004, 2006)?
>any recommendations for heavy apps by time period
at the same time try to open internet browser on some wikipedia page + winamp + Word + antivirus suite
Also early photoshop, paintshop-pro, visual studio, eclipse ide, borland delphi at least 8, and so on
Wikipedia might be a problem. I don't know if any of the era appropriate browsers will be able to connect due to a lack of modern tls support. If there's a way to connect to Wikipedia unsecured then I probably can, but if I have to use https the test simply won't be doable on anything older than sp2.
open a wikipedia page on your main pc, save it as conplete page html or mhtml, copy to your XP pc, and open it there
https://github.com/richardg867/WaybackProxy
load up some actual old sites for the most accurate tests
Holy shit dude I have that same monitor and it literally sat outside in the rain turned on for like 18 months and still works to this day. The Sony is unkillable.
This is the first time I've used it, but it seems pretty good. Good picture, nice build quality.
i think when i was in school some pc's had even less, if i remember correctly there where 3 machines that only had 64MB, run paint and any other applycation of your choice and crash the system...or maybe it was 128MB
i put paint in the autostart and the whole class got banned
>i put paint in the autostart and the whole class got banned
Lmao. The worst I ever did was put fake icons on the background.
256mb is fine for xp doing what it was doing in its era, my Thinkpad S30 runs windows xp sp3 on a 600mhz pentium 3 and 256mb of pc133 ram. It does fine.
Consider when this was relevant and useful, web browsers weren’t using 300mb+ per tab.
>doing what it was doing in its era,
I like how gays like this can never answer
>what exactly are you running from its era "
Frick off kid
There's a degree of irony in calling people kids whilst sperging out over their chosen tools and a refusal to believe old tooling even existed/exists. I bet the system that provides you with clean drinking water, designed your school building, and operates your mothers workplaces punch-in tracker are all older than you.
Internet Explorer 5, Winamp, and Office 2000 seem like the era appropriate equivalents to what I use my pc for. Maybe toss in Quicktime or Real Player if the cpu is fast enough to handle h264 decoding.
wallpaper on the right?
yeah I know it's
>furry
but it's still pretty
this homie died
No, I'm still working on it. Got all the versions installed, just need to get the right programs now.
hurry up gay
Windows (every version) is the operating system of cattle.
>come home fat man and use this deprecated shit
I guess it'd have to be, in constant seek of attention.
>Absolute win
Wrong image
https://www.trinitydesktop.org/
https://q4os.org/
underrated
Posts like this are the embodiment of pic related.
>I'm the embodiment of soomer
>MUST SOOM NEW JUST WERKS DEVICE
>MUST SOOM NEW UPDATE
>Literally everything that wasn't shipped last month is old and out of date
>THIS BUILDING WASNT DESIGNED BY A GAY ARCHITECT USING SOFTWARE ON AN Igay 2055? Run! Run! THE BUILDING IS GOING TO COLLAPSE
>boooootstrap and react hasnt had an update in 3 days? every electron app must be vulnroooobulls
>FRICK FRICK THE NUCLEAR MISSILES ARE GOING TO BE LAUNCHED. THERES AN AIRGAPPED WINDOWS XP MACHINE ON A SUBMARINE. WONT THEY JUST UPDOOT TO LINUX!??!?!1
You people really don't live in the real world, huh? Everything is just a means to play the latest gamer slop. Case in point, the constant gaslighting over how usable Linux as a desktop is, and how "Valve is amazing for making Linux a gaming OS." What is this "new software lacking core support," and how come we didn't need these updates before you were born?
Updates are necessary in the age of the internet.
The internet is older than you.
>What is this "new software lacking core support," and how come we didn't need these updates before you were born?
I miss Aero Glass
i'll have you know that "gos" is a gay word for cuddle in swedish
grow up
Herro ferrow waitto man. I too am huwhyte mans and i am cute and i rike huwhyto curture aka civirishashion. It is make us a superior and same. Now prease feed me big waitto wieneru and create nordic moder baby
Hard facts, Vista felt like the last Windows for people who actually knew how to personalize Windows.
I miss it. In some ways it felt better to use than 7.
>gif
Can Vista not into webm?
>gay sex
frick, caught me off guard
I think Vista is the best looking OS ever made.
Same, Mac OS X Leopard comes close for me. Snow Leopard looks great too but it was starting to go to flat shit by that point, you could see it in the app store and itunes icons.
what was the blue one called
It was blue from like 10.0-10.4 Tiger
I love Tiger too, but the reflective glass dock on Leopard is so cool.
I still have this on my old 2006 mbp
Microsoft should learn from Apple how to refactor their OS
>Leopard changed UI but minor kernel changes.
>Snow Leopard changed kernel but minor UI changes
Meanwhile
>VIsta changed kernel and UI completely
>People got pissed
>7 got minor UI changes
Leopard is a close second and Mavericks is a sort of distant third.
thats when macos (OSX) actually looked good
nowadays is just looks like sht, like a generic phone UI
>i am a jobless moron with 'tism and too much free time on my hands
We know, OP.
You do it for free, never forget
Why did USB HID drivers have to install back then?
they still do, it's just hidden
lmao using an unsupported browser made infamous by it's security issues, on an unsupported OS browsing the public internet
enjoy your 0-days
I started with MS-DOS 2.11, everything else since then has been bloat
>Not using Qdos
Ngmi
QDOS *is* MS-DOS, it started as QDOS, was renamed to 86-DOS, then was purchased by Microsoft and renamed MS-DOS.
And every version branded with the Microsoft name uses more RAM and storage.
I'm brown doe