Nov, 1985: Windows 1.0
Dec, 1987: Windows 2.0
May, 1990: Windows 3.0
Oct, 1992: Windows 3.1
Aug, 1995: Windows 95
Jun, 1998: Windows 98
Sep, 2000: Windows ME
Oct, 2001: Windows XP
Nov, 2006: Windows Vista
Oct, 2009: Windows 7
With all these comparisons, you can tell that Windows have come a long way, for the past 24 years.
For details, visit this link, via BBC
Has it really come that far?
ReplyDeleteI never bothered to get Vista as XP worked fine.
Now, looking at the 'What's New' in Vista, I don't really see anything compelling at all!
Sure, new look, but all this transparency does is slow down the machine. New toolbar - big deal. Really, there is no 'must-have' feature at all.
Seems like no reason to upgrade apart from the fact that you are forced to by the collusion of hardware & software vendors. My next computer will undoubtedly have Windows 7, but only because it has to.
@Anon: My computer is still runing XP SP3 - to make use of the multi-core processing power.
ReplyDeleteOne thing about XP is that, half year down the road, the OS will start to slow down - this isn't quite evident in Vista, which I believe it'll be even better with Win 7.
A test by BBC even showed that Netbook running Win7 (with 2GB RAM) is faster than XP.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8317005.stm
This is really something to consider, as well.
Again, as I mentioned in another post, I'll wait till the second release of the bug fix patches by Microsoft, before I'll do the upgrade.