So what really is Microsofts worst system in the end?

Ralph Bromley

Extraordinary Member
Now seeing the title above I am sure most will say "ME!" but lets take a look one of Micrsofts biggest issues: Inconsistencies between OS versions.
Now as a linux user I have had my fare share of UI changes, features given/removed, nitpicks and nags but since it is more or less a community driven OS I am willing to let it all slide as after all linux is free.
Microsoft however does not have the luxury of such an excuse, here is this big commercial OS that has many under its thumb and yet the company seems to have a very strange case of multiple personalities.
If its one thing i like about Apple is overall its product has been consistent from each version, even when the classic apple era died and the new one began if you go back and use an old apple machine it would still feel the same in many areas.
Now Microsoft does have consistency but its on a far more loose basis, its the underbelly of the OS itself that is where the issue lays.
In early versions of windows it was easy to loose consistency as Microsoft was taking its baby steps into making a UI that would look and feel good to the end user.
Its very easy to forgive this era for me but when 95 came out everything changed.
It was the first windows version to be truly made for the common user and while not perfect it got the job done.
Then came 98 which had some major issues, now not everyone hated it but both 95 and 98 did have some growing pains.
And again this is where we can be forgiving on microsoft, its not easy fine tuning an operating system to suit ones needs.
But then came ME.... dear god ME.
Microsoft really dropped the ball there big time, its no wonder why its perhaps the most hated OS of all time.
It really makes me wonder what in the flying heck was going through their minds with that abomination.
Honestly as much as i think a lot of us hate windows 8 at least it doesnt crash just after loading like ME often did on my experience with it.
No windows 8 sucks from a UI standpoint not a performance one.
For me Microsofts biggest saving grace was Windows 2000, Win2k hands down is my favorite of all the Microsoft OS's as it struck a good balance between security, stability and general ease of use.
Now sure Win2K wasnt perfect but it was the first real times in Microsofts history where the planets all aligned to make a very good and well put together OS.
Now XP well I know I made a topic about it here already so i wont go into too much detail about it.
Safe to say I think XP may be the only Microsoft OS to share a dual title of Microsofts best OS and worst OS for all of what I said in this topic here
Now Vista... again I did mention it a little in the above topic but lets observe why it was so bad at its first release.
Vista was just too big and overambitious, with loads of things that many computers could not handle even ones that promised to be Vista compliant.
That said most calling Vista the worst maybe misjudging and I dare say that Vista is very sadly under rated.
7 is my current Windows system and one that next to Win2K I think 7 gets the best blend of security, stability and general ease of use.

Dammit Microsoft again you were doing so well there, even with Vista in the mix you still did some good things in the last few years and in your idiotic want to be the next iOS or android you screwed up big time.
And the thing is if you spend all that time you need to get windows 8 to be more like 7 its not that bad but man the changes here are both asinine, minuscule and downright insane.
Ever wonder what happened to those escaped mental patients out there they are either in congress (ooh political joke!) or in Microsofts head offices!
Now is 8 the new ME? No
But it certainly is a good contender.

But lets go to the question at hand though, what really is Microsots worst OS in your opinion without giving the blatantly obvious of course (heck might as well say dont post about ME as its already a given, perhaps a runner up is in due)


Senior Member
It's hard to pick a best or a worst when each version gives you something to really like and something to really hate. Maybe one measure of "best" is a release that gets the job done without your noticing one way or the other--it's familiar while it solves problems or shortcomings of the previous version. "Worst" would be having a generally good, stable OS that everyone is familiar with, going after a totally different market, deciding that the needs of that market should dominate everything else, introducing a new look and feel that makes sense for the new market but not for the existing one, and while forcing all existing users into new territory, with its own incompatibility problems, provides little of real need or benefit to justify it.

For me, Win 8 has no socially redeeming value and no reason to even put it in the best/worst list. It's like the gadgets that are hawked on TV infomercials--nobody in the existing base needs it, it doesn't fill any real requirement, and the only way to sell it is to show pathetic actors who have non-existent, exasperating problems with the old solution. Win 7 wins for both best and worst. It was best up until maybe 18 months ago. Then Microsoft totally crapped it up so that it has so many problems, people are forced to move to Win 8 (or Linux). Microsoft made a Linux user out of me so in that sense, maybe end-stage Win 7 was the best after all.