I think a lot of that could be brought back to something closer to resembling immediacy if you go and take the time to remove all the stuff they introduced along with vista (The fadein/fadeout animations especially)
replies(1):
Nothing will change my mind about this, ever. It's been downhill since then.
My guess is: yes, it will.
Somehow, in the past 15 years, "progress" seems to include "software keeps getting noticeably worse, but anyone pointing this out has to be shot down because progress."
Sure sounds like there's a ton of gaps in things I really want out of my operating system on Windows 2000...
Does the switch to 64 bit slow things down enough to explain what happened between Windows 2000 and XP?
Does the operating system have to support virtual machines? Seems easy enough to install vmware then run operating systems inside it for most use cases.
I mean, you can keep 'what if'ing me here, but, is it really worth having all the features that you, clearly as a power user or professional, use installed on every computer everywhere? No. No it really doesn't. It's bloat.
That's a way different experience than running Hyper-V.
> is it really worth having all the features that you, clearly as a power user or professional, use installed on every computer everywhere? No. No it really doesn't. It's bloat.
I also didn't realize that managing WiFi networks or using display scaling are things only power users and professionals would want on their machines. I guess supporting Bluetooth natively in the OS and a modern sound stack is just bloat for most people.