This article missed out Windows 2000. It was released around the same time as Windows ME, but was more stable. I used it for several years even after XP had come out. I seem to upgrade in leaps, because before that I had Windows 95b, which was full of problems and nothing but a pain in the ass. After a few years of Windows 2000 I did eventually get XP, which was good. I skipped Vista, because everyone said it was shit. I'm on 7 at the moment, and I've skipped 8 because everyone says that's shit. For a company as rich and popular as Microsoft, getting it right only about 50% of the time is a rather dismal track record.

I actually can't believe they made such a bad mistake with Windows 8. They jumped too fully on the whole touchscreen thing, to the exclusion of standard mouse-and-keyboard PC use. Any idiot will tell you that using touchscreen to control a desktop PC will give you terrible posture-related pain problems. Microsoft messed up big time by not having the option to choose between the keyboard-and mouse style desktop and the new touchscreen one. It's obvious. Even a kid could have told them that.

I think Microsoft need to provide options for people, because they can't please all of the people all of the time. The touchscreen interface is great for tablets, but a disaster for desktops. Since it's just a cosmetic difference, it doesn't even need to be two different versions of Windows. Just allow the customer to choose when they first install it, along with screenshots and explanations to make it clear, and recommendations based on the type of hardware it's being installed on. But then the user should be able to change it whenever they want. It should be as easy as changing the desktop image or whatever.

Interesting trip down memory lane for sure. I stayed with 98 then jumped to XP., then I dumped Windows XP and moved to Linux and never plan to go back.

[This comment was removed]

It's been 30 years already?