this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2026
734 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

78828 readers
2469 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"On systems with Secure Launch enabled, attempts to shut down, restart, or hibernate after applying the January patches may fail to complete."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bryndos@fedia.io 1 points 1 day ago

DOS and win2000 (debloated) was the only ones i could stand.

XP debloated was almost tolerable, but 2000 was nicer for reasons that i cant remember.

I'm not sure about calling windows the OS before me/xp though (whenever they put the NT kernel into consumer) - i think before that it was still effectively just MS-DOS as the operating system. Windows was more like a desktop environment in linux terms.

For example i think I used the same windows 3.1 or 3.11 across several operating systems, dos 5.0, 6.0, 6.2, 6.22. Windows 3 never really seemed to do any basic OS stuff , like configuring memory or disk drives or setting up IRQs for like soundcards and stuff.

Win95/98 never actually bothered me; it was easy to opt out of the gui (which i didn't like at all).