Tony ([info]quikchange) wrote,
@ 2006-10-23 08:28:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood: nostalgic
Current music:Raspberry - I Mother Earth
Entry tags:vmware

NT 4.0
In the interests of backward compatibility, I decided to see if my code would handle a Windows NT 4.0 guest OS. It did (after a minor modification) but what struck me was how refreshingly clean that OS was. While it wasn't bereft of some of the things I still find annoying about Windows, there was very little of the crap that seems to have been added in the years since: no automatic system updates forcing me to reboot every few days, no security centre nagging me about the lack of an antivirus, no Windows Messenger that won't go away, no crayola-inspired UI, no reminders that I need to clean up the infrequently-used icons on my desktop, no popups asking whether I really want to let some program I'd just launched access the network, no automatic hiding of my systray icons... It just worked :)


(Post a new comment)


[info]thewizard
2006-10-23 04:34 pm UTC (link)
I find your conclusion here rather silly. One can argue that Windows is not designed properly, but ... you don't like how they are trying to keep their system patched? You are against how they get the user to be security conscious? The Crayola is an aesethic thing that some like and others do not, it can be disabled.

If you're going to argue that they are kudges, I would accept that. I suppose if you are isolating a system to its user interaction, then I may accept that. But Windows NT 4.0 has all the same issues that the newer systems do, except it doesn't do anything about it. In this regard, you have just downgraded.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]quikchange
2006-10-23 06:14 pm UTC (link)
Well, yes, I've obviously downgraded. I wasn't saying that people should use NT 4.0 instead of XP or Vista, just that the user experience was a lot less annoying back then.

Some of that is necessary because most people using Windows have no idea what computer security is. I just wish there was a quick and easy way to disable all that stuff for people like me who aren't in grave danger of accidentally infecting the system with a virus.

A better designed system would be ideal but I realize that in practice that requires too many compromises.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]zedinbed
2006-10-24 02:43 pm UTC (link)
That's pretty much my view on the popups. Windows is the most commonly used OS and obviously results in it being the platform of choice for worm and virus attacks. As a result, the people at Microsoft have to make security that much more of a priority. As most Windows users are average joes, its pretty convenient to provide them with notifications that ensure the system's security rather than leave it upto the user to remember to apply said security measures. After all, if you do end up being the occasional non-average joe user, you can turn off the notifications like I've done with the XP install on my computer.

I can see certain users feeling that they are being treated as being dumb by default, something regretable in any UI but I stick with the motto "better safe than sorry".

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]quikchange
2006-10-24 03:58 pm UTC (link)
I don't disagree; I just want a way to easily disable all that annoying crap at one shot instead of having to doo a whole bunch of different things every time I am faced with a fresh Windows system. It gets pretty tiresome after a while.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]caffeinemonkey
2006-10-24 04:48 am UTC (link)
My "favourite" Windows was Windows 2000. Similarly simple, as solid as it gets with Windows, and generally just "not annoying" overall.

One of my pet peeves with XP is all the stupid notifications you mention. Grrr! Anyway, fortunately I'm not subjected to Windows (in any incantation) often, so my blood pressure remains pretty manageable.

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…