Infographic: The History of Windows

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by ArchiveX, Jul 10, 2015.

  1. ArchiveX

    ArchiveX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2014
    Posts:
    1,016
  2. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,046
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Cool, nice quick overview. I've used:

    Win 95
    Win 98 SE
    Win 2000 (at school only)
    Win XP
    Win 7 (at work only)
    Win 8.1

    I was quite satisfied with Win XP, but I do believe that on a technical level, Win 8.1 is better and more stable. I will most likely upgrade to Win 10 next year, but I'm not sure.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2015
  3. Rolo42

    Rolo42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2012
    Posts:
    569
    Location:
    USA
    I've used Windows since 2. (Until Windows 3, I thought it was called "MS-DOS Executive" heh...only used v2 at work and not very much; at home it was DOS and DesQview).

    :sick: <--me, at Win8.x
     
  4. emmjay

    emmjay Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Posts:
    883
    Location:
    Triassic
    I started on these systems: PC DOS 1-3, IBM DOS 4 -5, OS/2 1-2, OS/2 Warp 3-4 (Microsoft and IBM worked together on some of them).

    My first Windows based PC ran Windows 95. then 98, XP, Vista, and finally W7.

    Compared to IBM they produced very few operating systems., but then they had no appetite for mainframes. They did well building on IBM ideas and produced a better user experience in the end. Unexpected crashes and freeze ups were numerous in the beginning, but they have since produced a very fine product. W10 is the last Windows, they say.
     
  5. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,079
    Nice infographic.
    I've used: 3.1, 95, 98, 2000, XP, 7, 8.1.
     
  6. Rolo42

    Rolo42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2012
    Posts:
    569
    Location:
    USA
    Oh yeah! I forgot about OS/2...I ran that for a while (Warp)...was really nice...ran Windows better than Windows.
     
  7. ArchiveX

    ArchiveX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2014
    Posts:
    1,016
    I am a Windows user since v3.11. ;)
     
  8. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,046
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I forgot that I'm also using Win 7 at work, I've edited my post.

    I have read that OS/2 Warp could have been successful, but IBM made some wrong decisions.
     
  9. emmjay

    emmjay Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Posts:
    883
    Location:
    Triassic
    My own perspective at the time was that IBM seen OS/2 Warp as a business platform and there was no need for all that frivolous , memory consuming fun stuff that Windows was producing on their platform. It turned out that users loved the little puppy (I think it was a puppy) that appeared when you did something wrong or you needed some assistance. IBM also prided themselves on having a mature multi-tasking platform that Windows did not see as being all that important in their fledgling releases but they did not market it as a really cool feature. They chose instead to build on their close business relationship they had with Fortune 500 companies to convince them that the integration of the hardware platform and the software platform had more merit.

    The other killer was that MS marketed to all levels of government in a big way, especially schools (Apple later did the same and pushed MS out of the sector ... and also got themselves a lot of well trained Apple users). Where MS really hurt IBM was on the 'packaged PC platform' which IBM did not have. Windows came with their own integrated business applications, such as a Word and Excel and later Power Point. IBM tried to recapture their market with Lotus, but they were too late. So there were a lot of mistakes that IBM made.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2015
  10. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,046
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Thanks for the summary, I never really read the full story, so it was interesting to me. Fascinating how bad business decisions can cost you quite badly. BTW, I remember that way back, I was a bit fascinated with BeOS, I liked the GUI. I never actually used it though.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeOS
     
  11. Rolo42

    Rolo42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2012
    Posts:
    569
    Location:
    USA
    Another issue for OS/2 was non-spec hardware causing problems in the OS, most notoriously non-bi-directional printer cables.

    @emmjay nailed it. For the home user, we got DOS compatiblity and DirectX...the latter being why I run Windows and not linux.
     
  12. bcsman

    bcsman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Posts:
    91
    Looks like the author forgot about one released version of Windows--ME. Probably because most users also forgot about it..hahahaha. It was released in September 2000 between Windows 2000 and XP. And yes I did try it out, think I still have an install disk somewhere. It never found any footing as users either wanted to stay with 98 or jump right into XP. 2000 was always considered more of an office or business OS and most around my circle never ventured into it. Of course I did and found it very useful. Short stroll down history lane.....
     
  13. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,079
    If you check next to Windows 2000, you'll see Millennium Edition.
     
  14. bcsman

    bcsman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Posts:
    91
    oops sorry, my bad...I didnt enlarge enough to see the reference
     
  15. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,046
    Location:
    The Netherlands
  16. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,046
    Location:
    The Netherlands
Loading...