Why I Still Use Windows 95 • Hacker News Board

Re: Why I Still Use Windows 95

#31

Post by DougBTX » Sun, Jul 06, 2008, 10:59 AM UTC

dcurtis wrote: post #17

tomjen wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are still people who swear to a fountain pen. Not all old tech is useless.

I love fountain pens. The idea is that a ball point pen is far more practical for every day use.

I think the advantages of a ball point pen were more to do with having the ink reservoir inside the pen, rather than the ball point itself. There are plenty of pens with internal reservoirs on the market, whether ball, fountain or fibre, I've been using one of these[1] almost continuously for the past 6-7 years.

[1] http://www.amazon.co.uk/stainless-fountain-cartridges-conver...

Re: Why I Still Use Windows 95

#32

Post by nailer » Sun, Jul 06, 2008, 12:06 PM UTC

ctkrohn wrote: post #2

There's a definite pleasure in using old, well-designed pieces of technology that were state-of-the-art in their time and have managed to remain competitive with newer equipment. I love my record player, I still use a high-quality CRT, I ride a steel bike, and I print documents with a mid-90s HP LaserJet. Many of you would cite LISP, a 50-year old language, as a perfect example of this phenomenon. Windows 95, however…

Man, mid 90s HP Lasetjet. Maybe a Laserjet 4.

Two hundred bucks on eBay, ink isn't overpriced, and you can beat the living shit out of it with a baseball bat and it will still function.

Re: Why I Still Use Windows 95

#33

Post by nailer » Sun, Jul 06, 2008, 12:12 PM UTC

toki wrote: post #25

andrew turnbull is completely right. i used windows 95 too, as long as possible (2006). windows 95 has many good things that the modern version of windows have lost or never had: - lightweight (Doesnt even use memory - very fast - total cost of ownership = 0 - functional (office, opera, etc: everything works somehow) - easily replaceable (ebay) - robust (works even with damaged hardware - somehow) - security (through…

I've read that the 95 kernel fits in the CPU cache of current Intel CPUs.

Re: Why I Still Use Windows 95

#34

Post by brandonkm » Sun, Jul 06, 2008, 3:31 PM UTC

rufo wrote: post #5

lpgauth wrote: post #4

I wonder why he doesn't use Linux, seems he could build whatever he needs and forget the bloatware of windows. Specially with a distribution like Gentoo he could build a custom system and not have to have the technology drawbacks of Windows 95.

That was my first thought as well: "Hasn't he ever heard of Linux?" But then again, if he's got all the apps he needs, running as well as he needs them, and isn't bothered by being unable to run newer applications (which he pretty clearly states at the end of the essay): well, more power to him, I guess...

Exactly. This is definitely one of those cases of use whatever works for you. I really can't fathom using windows 95, but reading over his reasons for doing so it seems like those are valid reasons for him. Still makes for an interesting read on a os no one ever really talks about anymore.

Re: Why I Still Use Windows 95

#35

Post by deathbyzen » Sun, Jul 06, 2008, 6:53 PM UTC

juanpablo wrote: post #8

deathbyzen wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He wants to play old DOS games natively. I bought a surplus PC ($40) for just that reason as well, so I can understand.

http://www.dosbox.com

Again, I wanted to do it the old fashioned way. It just feels nice to start up the old dos prompt and type "rott"

Re: Why I Still Use Windows 95

#36

Post by rcoder » Sun, Jul 06, 2008, 10:16 PM UTC

I still have NT 4.0 install media around, and have even tossed it on an older box a few times to remember what it was like back in the days when Windows could be a decent developer OS.

Unfortunately, anything older than Win2k leaves you pretty much out of luck for mobile computing (power management, WiFi, and display switching) as well as most modern peripherals (USB support being notably lacking).

For even more retro fun, though, I recommend firing up a copy of Mac OS System 7 inside Basilisk II or SheepShaver -- even under emulation, it absolutely screams through day-to-day tasks.

Re: Why I Still Use Windows 95

#37

Post by workpost » Mon, Jul 07, 2008, 1:46 AM UTC

toki wrote: post #25

andrew turnbull is completely right. i used windows 95 too, as long as possible (2006). windows 95 has many good things that the modern version of windows have lost or never had: - lightweight (Doesnt even use memory - very fast - total cost of ownership = 0 - functional (office, opera, etc: everything works somehow) - easily replaceable (ebay) - robust (works even with damaged hardware - somehow) - security (through…

Great points, actually. I was running it in Virtual PC recently and marveled at how incredibly few resources it used. I was surprised by how much software I could get to run on it as well.