• A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yep, I’ve said this before.

    Windows 7 was the last great OS by microsoft.

    It was light enough to not be a bother on even used hardware.

    It was exceedingly stable and didnt need regular reformat and reinstalls like all previous windows OS’s.

    Didnt need to be constantly rebooted every time you exited a big task like previous Windows.

    and you were able to do pretty much anything on it easily and without much fuss.

    and, outside of like driver installs, the OS pretty much stayed out of your way.

    It was brilliant. It was the best.

    It was the peak of the curve. 3.11/95/98/ME/NT/XP all built up to 7, and 8/10/11 are all falling further and further away from 7.

    The only reason to get rid of windows 7 is that there was no further way to monetize it since it had pretty good market saturation. If it wasnt for that Win7 would probably be the default OS for another 10+ years.

    • blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      There’s the RAM limit that would need addressing. Also UEFI struggles with the Windows 7 splash screen, but that could be replaced with a simpler logo.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I dont want to do the whole “640K ought to be enough for anybody”, but I cant imagine most home users, average and production, hitting the ram limit of windows 7 which is like 200gb or there abouts.

        I would think anyone running loads that would require that much are probably running linux, like servers and such.

        but even so, I’m sure it could have been expanded if there was an actual need.