The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

  • Category: Pics  |
  • 2 Mar, 2011  |
  • Views: 17775  |
  • Like
  • +76
  • Dislike  |
  •  

1985 - Windows 1.0



1 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

1987 - Windows 2.0


2 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

1990 - Windows 3.0


3 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

1992 - Windows 3.1


4 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

1995 - Windows 95


5 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

1996 - Windows NT 4.0



6 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

1998 - Windows 98


7 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

2000 - Windows 2000


8 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

2001 - Windows XP


9 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

2007 - Windows Vista


10 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)

Windows 7



11 The Evolution of Microsoft Windows (11 pics)


№1 Author: RedArmySLDR (2 Mar 2011 01:10) Total user comments: 23


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +7
  • Like
How do you do that on windows 7?
  Reply       
№2 Author: joffenbaker (2 Mar 2011 03:10) Total user comments: 4968


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +4
  • Like
O.K. this is more my speed, I remember '85 'cuz dos sucked and anything, mind you, ANYTHING! was better and we lived through the progess.. until VISTA! OH GOD! KILL ME NOW! but 7 is the shizzznit thus far ... so I'm happy after 2 decades of progress,,, I still thank God I don't work w/mac. MUCK FAC! 07 Plus you can't overclock an 8088
  Reply       
№3 Author: caddock (2 Mar 2011 03:57) Total user comments: 66


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • -18
  • Like
7 and vista are identical. Anyone who hates vista is a moron.

The issue was that is was so structurally different/better in the way it handled audio and video that companies had to rewrite their drivers to work with it.

Now they have all caught up and Microsoft had to re-brand it as 7 so the idiots that fell for the Apple smear campaign would buy it again.

xp was to 2000 as 7 is to vista.

13

  Reply       
№4 Author: camelwide (2 Mar 2011 05:45) Total user comments: 414


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +10
  • Like
caddock,

My balls are identical... you know shit about Vista & 7.... you gotta be some random user...
  Reply       
№5 Author: TinklingMonkey (2 Mar 2011 07:17) Total user comments: 684


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • -2
  • Like
Yay making computers easier!!!! Im sure soon enough everything will just be voice activated and motion sensor blah blah.... I play the 360 kinect and my wife has the thing on her cell that converts voice mail into text messages. The technology is there just need to put it together.....
  Reply       
№6 Author: capt.huffnpuff (2 Mar 2011 07:34) Total user comments: 2822


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
Egads - 1985? The blue screen of death brought to you by Microsoft for the last quarter of century? Unix/Linux/OS X rules! 14
  Reply       
№7 Author: pedro carlos (2 Mar 2011 07:44) Total user comments: 857


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
they all suck
  Reply       
№8 Author: jai9313 (2 Mar 2011 08:19) Total user comments: 894


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
the avatar computer are my dreams just transfer from a pc to a tablet just used a hand stroke huhuhuh
  Reply       
№9 Author: miscellaneous (2 Mar 2011 08:37) Total user comments: 4179


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
the real question is....

are our lives better for it?
  Reply       
№10 Author: Lord Dodo (2 Mar 2011 09:42) Total user comments: 2064


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
times change... 04
  Reply       
№11 Author: StaticX (2 Mar 2011 09:53) Total user comments: 661


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +7
  • Like
caddock,
Vista sucks, 7 its much more better than that.


I remember the times I used 3.1, 95 and 98 xD But my pc now only works with XP xD.
And 2000 was awful.
  Reply       
№12 Author: Haro (2 Mar 2011 12:33) Total user comments: 551


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
Times change quickly !
  Reply       
№13 Author: sawo (2 Mar 2011 12:45) Total user comments: 95


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • -6
  • Like
StaticX,
I think 2000 was much better than XP. Much more faster, and the most important, no bloatware!
  Reply       
№14 Author: caddock (2 Mar 2011 13:18) Total user comments: 66


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
do i win any internet points for proving my point with facts?

http://dotancohen.com/eng/wind
ows_7_vista.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/tech
nology/2008/jan/31/microsoft.t
echnology

lol!
  Reply       
№15 Author: TresS (2 Mar 2011 14:00) Total user comments: 143


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • -3
  • Like
HMMMMMMM

and where is Win Me ?!?! it was the best OS for gamers at that time

HMMMMMMM

and where is Win Me ?!?! it was the best OS for gamers at that time
  Reply       
№16 Author: yavzas (2 Mar 2011 14:28) Total user comments: 167


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +1
  • Like
i miss win3.1
  Reply       
№17 Author: 2fuzzy (2 Mar 2011 14:34) Total user comments: 10400


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +2
  • Like
I remember loading 95 (called Chicago at the time) on a PC with a huge stack of 3 1/3"' diskettes.
  Reply       
№18 Author: Dallizzt (2 Mar 2011 17:16) Total user comments: 1467


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
caddock,

You don't use your pc for anything but surfing the net if you think there is no difference between Vista and Win 7.

First off, when Vista was released Microsoft had the IP stack so fucked up that transferring files over a network took TWICE as long as XP. It was like that until SP1 was released, months after Vista was out before they fixed it. That was an epic fail for businesses who, as a result, didn't bother purchasing it. Production took twice as long, what company in their right mind is going to pay someone to work slower??

Two, the communication between MS and the hardware vendors was slow and sometimes wrong and that's why you didn't have drivers for a lot of products for almost a year after it was released. If anyone had a Creative Labs sound card or Nivida graphics card, you know what I'm talking about. It was not all the third party's fault for bad or late drivers.

Regardless of how it may run now stability wise, it's still a resource hog. You can put lipstick on a pig, it's still a fucking pig no matter how much you dress it up.
  Reply       
№19 Author: Kool-Aid (2 Mar 2011 17:51) Total user comments: 175


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
Windows 7?
  Reply       
№20 Author: sergiofx (2 Mar 2011 18:16) Total user comments: 719


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
I started with Win3.1 14

Good days, good days..
  Reply       
№21 Author: Pilgrim (2 Mar 2011 18:58) Total user comments: 2288


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +1
  • Like
Shit, Windows 98 was cool
  Reply       
№22 Author: Lu (2 Mar 2011 19:33) Total user comments: 15132


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +1
  • Like
Still chugging along with XP. 04
  Reply       
№23 Author: Hash2 (2 Mar 2011 20:07) Total user comments: 4


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +2
  • Like
i got 2 computers with same spec one with vista and one with 7. the vista pc is mega slow, twice as long to install or update anything everything runs slower takes longer to start up.

my win7 pc has same software but everything is faster and noticably everything runs much better
  Reply       
№24 Author: Arsey (2 Mar 2011 21:25) Total user comments: 149


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
And still not as good as mac
  Reply       
№25 Author: Nsibai (2 Mar 2011 22:19) Total user comments: 5694


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
01
  Reply       
№26 Author: funkotronic (3 Mar 2011 00:41) Total user comments: 363


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
Pointe the first: Caddock, you're a douche.

Pointe the seconde: 25 years later and Windows still sucks the poo out of a monkey's butt.
  Reply       
№27 Author: raymond.wendt (3 Mar 2011 02:02) Total user comments: 9115


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
yeah, in all honesty, I don't think it has changed that much.
  Reply       
№28 Author: compmaster (3 Mar 2011 07:10) Total user comments: 1871


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
64
  Reply       
№29 Author: noxusrules (3 Mar 2011 07:27) Total user comments: 1052


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
Wow I remember waking in the middle of the night just to use my dads computer, Win 95 was my first OS, Vista is the only system that I never really used on daily basis, I used it once and never really felt for it, Win 7 is a whole different story, short story I love it so far, everything runs smoothly but nothing beats XP
  Reply       
№30 Author: StaticX (3 Mar 2011 20:52) Total user comments: 661


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +1
  • Like
sawo,
Faster maybe, but still sucked. XP has better features.
  Reply       

Add comment

Name:

E-Mail:


bold italic underlined strike Insert a video from YouTube
Type the two words shown in the image: