Εγκατάσταση Steam
Σύνδεση
|
Γλώσσα
简体中文 (Απλοποιημένα κινεζικά)
繁體中文 (Παραδοσιακά κινεζικά)
日本語 (Ιαπωνικά)
한국어 (Κορεατικά)
ไทย (Ταϊλανδικά)
Български (Βουλγαρικά)
Čeština (Τσεχικά)
Dansk (Δανικά)
Deutsch (Γερμανικά)
English (Αγγλικά)
Español – España (Ισπανικά – Ισπανία)
Español – Latinoamérica (Ισπανικά – Λατινική Αμερική)
Français (Γαλλικά)
Italiano (Ιταλικά)
Bahasa Indonesia (Ινδονησιακά)
Magyar (Ουγγρικά)
Nederlands (Ολλανδικά)
Norsk (Νορβηγικά)
Polski (Πολωνικά)
Português (Πορτογαλικά – Πορτογαλία)
Português – Brasil (Πορτογαλικά – Βραζιλία)
Română (Ρουμανικά)
Русский (Ρωσικά)
Suomi (Φινλανδικά)
Svenska (Σουηδικά)
Türkçe (Τουρκικά)
Tiếng Việt (Βιετναμικά)
Українська (Ουκρανικά)
Αναφορά προβλήματος μετάφρασης
People don't think about tech. Imagine if MS came out with Windows 11 and it was completely different and all their enterprise customers had to retrain all their staff and change their workflow. Windows stays the same because their customers WANT it to stay the same. That's why KDE Plasma 5 is popular, because it's almost exactly like windows explorer, it's what people EXPECT. And also because GNOME 3 shat the bed.
You're pretty much right. They were similar to previous iterations but did (in most cases) improve with each release. A good case of one walked so the next could run.
95 was really something quite new when it came out, especially with the new 'Start' menu when compared to 3 and 3.1. 98 was a vastly improved 95. When you compare them side by side, you can really see the difference. Operationally, there were some great additions such as plug and play.
ME was... ugh. I'd say a cash grab, really.
Windows 2000 was built on NT technology from the Windows NT line. It really had problems when trying to use any kind of software designed for Windows 9x systems as they general had dependencies on DOS. XP was based on NT as well, but it came with compatibility layers to assist with running software for 9x systems which really helped it with being adopted into many systems. It was supposed to have been the last Windows OS that just relied on updates hence why it didn't have a year suffix.
Windows Vista was slated because it wasn't really understood, and a wave of bad press really hindered peoples' perception of it. Windows 7 was very similar to Vista but Microsoft learned from the bad press. Tweaks were made and people understood it better.
Windows 8 went with a touch screen focused UI which really went against the grain for a lot of people. 8.1 had a lot of changes under the hood and to the UI, but people associated it with Windows 8 because of the naming convention used. It might have had better success with a different name.
Windows 10 is mostly an OK operating system in a user-facing way. The real pain I have with it is the telemetry, spying and forced updates. I think if these were removed it'd be a much better system.
I do enjoy using Linux, too. But the problem I generally had was proprietary software just refusing to work properly. I could get most games working after some tweaking but some creative software was just stubborn. I could go with open source software but sometimes after spending years learning a certain software package and owning a license for it, it isn't always your preferred option to just up and move. I look forward to the day where Linux is far more widely accepted and catered for.
I remember in the mid 2000's there were even online operating systems such as YouOS, where you could log in via a browser and have your own hosted system there ready and waiting. Never really took off though - perhaps it was too early for its time.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see what this apparent new Windows version has to offer, but I have little hope it'll address the issues presented with Windows 10 and might even add more.
well i can understand that some windows versions are more of an evolution instead of an ,,entirely" new system.
But from i can see when watching leaked screenshots and videos, it really just looks like a new design and not much more. But maybe this is just because they are leaked screenshot, not even a dev build. But as of right now, this is nothing microsoft can't do with an update. But updates don't sell licences...
Is anyone actually running Windows 11 (or whatever) right now? Did it give you any problems while it was d/l or installing?
So if you are reading this Game Devs, you will continue to support Windows 7 or it's No Sale. I will get Windows 11, but I am not bothering with Windows 10 this late in it's life cycle.
Why do people even stick so much to windows 7?
I can understand if you think 7 is better than 8 or 10. But why keep using 7 even when microsoft wont fix security problems.
But if all the leaks are true, then i totally agree in just skipping 10 (and8) and switching to 11 as soon as possible.
I have a feeling it's primarily the gui, becauseI remember that's the main reason I didn't want to leave Windows 7.
Strange reason given people that want a Windows 7 look and feel could just use a skin
I just hope Win11 is a major update/overhaul and not something entirely different from the early statements.
And I hope it's not mandatory to run "everything" but, as plenty of stuff nowadays is, it will probably be. Wack.
I don't find it strange. I've tried some of those themes from Deviantart and even though they're great attempts, they aren't as fluid as real custom themes. Or not sure if it's the issue of patching the theme engine or whatever. And from what I can tell they're not even 100% accurate replicas. I'd rather just deal with the Windows 10 theme.
They said the same thing as XP. When they said this about 10 I just didn't believe them