Comments on: CyberNotes: A Visual Tour of Windows 1.01 – Vista

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:30:20 +0000

I started with Windows 1.0. I have loved every version of Microsoft Windows

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:29:30 +0000

I started with windows 3.1. I have loved every version of microfot windows.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:28:41 +0000

FFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKK YYYYYYYYYOOOOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUU

By: Aero

Aero — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 02:24:26 +0000

I start with win98. Still I love it.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:44:23 +0000

Chris wrote:

Why is Vista’s boot screen like that…? That’s one of the things that’s annoying me.. (although you could use the hidden bootscreen, but it still doesn’t get the logo..)

Microsoft had said that adding a bootscreen adds significantly to the boot time (I think it was a second or two). I think they are just trying to shave off as much time as possible. Personally I don't care either way whether there is a boot screen, and if my computer boots faster without one then that's what I prefer.

By: jacques

jacques — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:49:24 +0000

Times they’re a changin’ -Dylan. I started with Dos 2 in the 80’s, then big change with dos3.3, till a page turned with dos4 and his dosshell introducing the window and program links concept- 90’s.
Souvenirs- in testing win 1.0, 2,0. Win 3.11 -w.f.workgroups- was great in this epoch. When came the challenge of 95, new features, new designs with their new behaviour problems train.
Happy indeed with Vista today.
About the calculator:
Still here, for free, MS Calc+, a light weight calculator for current use and multiconverter with an amazing skin for a MS product.

By: Syahid A.

Syahid A. — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:38:06 +0000

Personal favorite: Windows 2000, Win 98
Personal hate: Windows Me.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:05:53 +0000

Why is Vista’s boot screen like that…? That’s one of the things that’s annoying me.. (although you could use the hidden bootscreen, but it still doesn’t get the logo..)

By: Michael Dobrofsky

Michael Dobrofsky — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 23:02:22 +0000

James wrote:

did not know there was so many versions of windows, we’re so lucky technology changed and the current windows doesn’t look like the 1.01 or 3.0

If you dig deep into Xp or Vista, you can still find elements of Windows 3.1 so don’t think you’re outta the woods just yet

By: Ryan

Ryan — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 20:39:57 +0000

Google wrote:

Windows 95 was the big leap.

It definitely was, but it also introduced a lot of problems.

ph15h wrote:

I owned: 95, 98, 2000, ME (sigh…), XP Professional, XP Media Center, Vista Home Premium.

I've owned 3.11, 95, 98, 2000, Me, XP Pro, XP Media Center, Vista Business, and Vista Ultimate.