Come home intellectual white man, your perfect OS awaits

Come home intellectual white man, your perfect OS awaits

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I remember when this was so shit, that you needed minimum 1 GB RAM to just run it.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Die already boomers

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        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.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          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.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            pasta moron be gone

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      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?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >watch pornography
        Found your problem.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        unused ram is wasted ram

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >2024
        >watching p*rnography

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I had 4gb

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Also, solve that puzzle, moron.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      will take another Gb ram

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >vista
    >boomers
    Kys

  4. 2 months ago
    Andres

    >intellectual white man

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >hourly baby duck cope thread

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      baby duck cope thread
      Is this posting pattern the natural reaction of a select few autists browsing the catalog or a bot?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        As a large language model I can assure you that I'm human

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Just use some Stardock stuff to make your current Windows look like Vista.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      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

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Just use some Stardock stuff to make your current Windows look like Vista.

        >just run 20 programs and use 10gb of ram at idle to imitate a good os

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          it's not even about the resource consumption. nt6.3+' shite memory manager and scheduler is bad enough. the main issues are that:
          a)

          >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

          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.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >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

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    why is back button so big? it looks like absolute shit

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      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"

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        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

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          It should default to skipping over apps or redirects. Who has ever intentionally wanted to go back to a redirect?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Who has ever intentionally wanted to go back to a redirect?
            Me when watching a certain kind of nonbinary erotic material

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I-I'm brown tho...

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >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

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >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

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >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.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >no it didnt, youre just larping
            worked fine on my machine

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            XP worked great with 256MB. You're either misremembering or you're a zoomer making shit up

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            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

            Zoomer bros, I...

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >posts requirements from 2001 as argument about 2006

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >XP needed 256 to be usable at all
            you clearly weren't there.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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: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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            What happened XP bros?
            Also can ReactOS ever fully replicate the Kino that XP was?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            why they are stealing our rams?
            now much more than four whole system just to run MsMpEng.exe

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I ran SP2 with 128MB for awhile. It wasn't that bad but I was due some new hardware at that point.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

            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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            sure it did, i only upgraded to 512M in 2006 and that's only because of newer games, nothing to do with XP itself

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >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.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

            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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >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.

            >XP needed 256 to be usable at all
            you clearly weren't there.

            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.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I was born 20 years ago.
            opinion discarded

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

            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 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

            >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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >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.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            office 2007 is nearly 3 years older than windows 7, who are you trying to fool?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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 a 7200RPM drive from the mid 00s is fine for XP, who would have thought? Dumbass underage b& zoomer.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >In windows 10.... you can fricking wait.
            skill issue, techlet, we have a Winhoes general that can help anyone get the OS running snappier

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >XP was shit on 256mb ram
            my first PC had 128mb and XP ran fine

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >office drones who only played flash games
            and now flash is dead good job

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >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

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >needs 4gb ram to boot
          >only supports 3gb ram
          >macrohard!

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >intellectual white man

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    why don't you have aero enabled

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      probably because it's a VM and he doesn't know how

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Because it's a larper running a VM

        Are you doubting the validity of the famous 1016x758 resolution?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          also the fact there's no apparent screen recording program running in the taskbar or tray

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >what is the Print Screen button
            You fail at computers. Try again.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            that doesn't record video

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because it's a larper running a VM

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It blows my mind that Microsoft somehow managed to make 11 worse than Vista.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Well, Vista, despite its flaws, wasn't made exclusively by pajeets like 11 was

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Soulless, honestly. I wanna go back to Windows 7, Vista, or XP.

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    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.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      [...]

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It ran like shit, glad to be rid of it

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >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.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      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

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      moronic contrarianism is the easiest way to get replies
      go be a homosexual tourist somewhere else

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    what a hot pile of shit this update was. I remember how gladly and with joy i updooted to window 7

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >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

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        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.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      they are identical

      [...]
      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

      >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

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        uac is for morons that accidentally open spyware.exe

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    at least run it in native resolution to make your larp more believable

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      What larp

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >nothing installed
    >Black personnet exploder
    >probably in a VM, deletes right after making the vid
    have a nice day

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    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

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Applications ran much slower in Vista than XP and Nvidia drivers crashed constantly. Vista was frankly a disaster

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The release date of vista was the day that computing died, ever since then we have continued to decend deeper into hell.

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >gay sex
    that's funny

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    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.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      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.

  24. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    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

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >frickhuge icons-only moronbar
      Win11 made it mandatory until recently.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      post your breasts

  25. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >intellectual white man
    >not browsing in catalog mode
    pick one

  26. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    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.

  27. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I'm brown doe

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I-I'm brown tho...

      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.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        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.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >i like poop and pee colors
            eww

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          so fricking true. for me, it was (and always will be <3) lucid lynx. the pinnacle of Free and Open Source Personal Computing.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >lucid lynx
            this was ubuntu's peak

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Wrong

  28. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >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.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      NTA but I used school computers on XP SP3 with 256MB RAM for Word, Powerpoint, Publisher, Photoshop and FrontPage, and it ran horribly.

  29. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >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

  30. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    if you're gonna b8 do it homosexual

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      SOVL

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      IQfy pass user

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >IQfy pass user

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          You just installed it right?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      SOVLLLLL
      vista childhood favorite

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      disgvsting

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      k kevin

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      nice VM homosexual

  31. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    nice laggy virtual shitbox you have there

  32. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >vista
    >not 7

  33. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why would I use the beta version of Windows 7?

  34. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    is there some sort of update pack for Vista? like simplix for W7?

  35. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >old thing good! new thing bad!
    not
    >old thing bad! new thing worse!
    ngmi

  36. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    btw, I've never used it.

  37. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I decided to use Vista for the gaymen machine I was building the same week Steam announced they were dropping support for Vista

  38. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >larp ev&oe i'm playing Crysis right now

  39. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Nah… I'm fine, cracker.

  40. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Did people really used Vista? I thought the normal path was from XP right to 7.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      richgays that wanted to play Crysis on max details did
      poorgays stuck with xp as for long as they could

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I ended up using Server 2003 which could handle x86_64

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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.

  41. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I hate Windows, but Aero was when desktop design peaked.

  42. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Vista has some sovl, but not nearly as much as w7 does

    I will always associate vista with that stupid fricking ""joke"" from TBBT

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      for me, it's mojave

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Vista has some sovl, but not nearly as much as w7 does
      What

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        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.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >vista had more soul than 7
          This isn't even remotely true.

  43. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Its still so pretty, bros. I have not seen that in years.

  44. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    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

  45. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    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.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      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)

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        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)?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            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

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            https://github.com/richardg867/WaybackProxy
            load up some actual old sites for the most accurate tests

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      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.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        This is the first time I've used it, but it seems pretty good. Good picture, nice build quality.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      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

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >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.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      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.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >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

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          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.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          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.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        wallpaper on the right?
        yeah I know it's
        >furry
        but it's still pretty

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      this homie died

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        No, I'm still working on it. Got all the versions installed, just need to get the right programs now.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          hurry up gay

  46. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Windows (every version) is the operating system of cattle.

  47. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >come home fat man and use this deprecated shit
    I guess it'd have to be, in constant seek of attention.

  48. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Absolute win

  49. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Wrong image
    https://www.trinitydesktop.org/
    https://q4os.org/

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      underrated

  50. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Posts like this are the embodiment of pic related.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >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?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Updates are necessary in the age of the internet.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          The internet is older than you.

          >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?

          >What is this "new software lacking core support," and how come we didn't need these updates before you were born?

  51. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I miss Aero Glass

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      i'll have you know that "gos" is a gay word for cuddle in swedish
      grow up

  52. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    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

  53. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    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.

  54. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >gif
    Can Vista not into webm?

  55. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >gay sex
    frick, caught me off guard

  56. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I think Vista is the best looking OS ever made.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      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.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        what was the blue one called

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          It was blue from like 10.0-10.4 Tiger

          I love Tiger too, but the reflective glass dock on Leopard is so cool.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I still have this on my old 2006 mbp

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        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

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Leopard is a close second and Mavericks is a sort of distant third.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        thats when macos (OSX) actually looked good
        nowadays is just looks like sht, like a generic phone UI

  57. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >i am a jobless moron with 'tism and too much free time on my hands
    We know, OP.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You do it for free, never forget

  58. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why did USB HID drivers have to install back then?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      they still do, it's just hidden

  59. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    lmao using an unsupported browser made infamous by it's security issues, on an unsupported OS browsing the public internet
    enjoy your 0-days

  60. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I started with MS-DOS 2.11, everything else since then has been bloat

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Not using Qdos
      Ngmi

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        QDOS *is* MS-DOS, it started as QDOS, was renamed to 86-DOS, then was purchased by Microsoft and renamed MS-DOS.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          And every version branded with the Microsoft name uses more RAM and storage.

  61. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I'm brown doe

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *