Discussion I think Microsoft produced Windows 7 by mistake

[blueskyx5]

It was an operating system ahead of its time and its engineers gave all the controls to the users. Microsoft senior executives were outraged and felt that fortunes would be jeopardized, something had to be done urgently. This was no joke, it supported up to 192 GB of ram. That was insane! Moreover, it was very stable and users could prevent sending reports to Microsoft if they wished. Perhaps the worst thing was that users had full control over all their updates.

It could stay open for months, even years, and run advanced programs with stability, and its processor and ram support was ahead of its time. And The visual functions were simple, no more, no less. And anything that was not in use could be removed.

The top microsoft official called the engineers and got very angry with them! Do you know what that means, he called out, users won't buy windows from us for years and we won't be able to do sponsorship deals with hardware companies! The engineers were very upset and immediately came up with an idea, windows 8? Then and 10, then 11, 12, even 50, 100...

“This is a great idea,” the official exclaimed. Everything would work great, first there would be no start menu in windows 8. Then with 8.1 they would delight the users with the start menu. Then windows 10 would come and all the controls would be in microsoft's hands.

But some things were needed for his plan to work: Fear. Security, they said, as if ordinary home users are attacked by hackers every day. Couldn't Windows 7 have been improved? Yes, it could have been improved, maybe even users would have preferred updates or not, according to their own scenarios, but it would not have made money.

Up to this paragraph I have been a bit humorous in my narrative, but the truth is,

I admire the engineer who thought of 192 gb of ram memory in an operating system released in 2009, I think he can also find a way to teleport to the future...

Is this a joke? I can still install ram in windows 7... My 7 year old hardware renders 3d software faster than newer computers. I'm a video designer and the “rendering” process goes fast. My operating system has been on for months and years and has never shown any performance degradation.


Also And a user who is careful and knows what they are doing does not need security updates. Security has nothing to do with the kernel of the operating system, if there is a vulnerability, it can be closed in any operating system.

For example, do you think banks change their operating systems every year? Microsoft even supports XP by agreement... So don't be surprised when you see an ATM running XP. But for the end user things are a bit different, because you need money... (You also need to contribute to the budget to support new technologies)

 

[USAFRet]

The "version numbers" we out here se are irrelevant.

XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1, 10, 11....

Layers on a lot of the same codebase.

Also And a user who is careful and knows what they are doing does not need security updates.

That is not the majority of "users".

 

[blueskyx5]

The "version numbers" we out here se are irrelevant.

XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1, 10, 11....

Layers on a lot of the same codebase.



That is not the majority of "users".

I have been using computers for at least 20 years, my experience has been with Windows 98, XP and Windows 7. I can say that I have never been hacked or had my files taken hostage on XP or Windows 7. Yes, my computer was hacked by some small viruses, but they were my fault. It happened because I did not pay attention to the download sources and installed strange software just out of curiosity. Still, software like combofix sent them all to hell at that time.

For example, if your browser downloads an exe file while downloading an image, this indicates a problem. Users who are unfamiliar with some deceptive advertisements can easily fall for such traps. Yes, that's true.

In the final stage, even official manufacturers may have difficulty monitoring operating systems even when all permissions are granted. What I mean is that it is harder for an outside hacker to track an operating system. (A backdoor software has to be injected from outside and unfortunately the user opens this backdoor himself when installing something...) And you have to be in a very important position to be a target. But large and potentially target companies are already very restrictive in their operating systems, and their engineers are good enough not to make a mistake.

In summary, if you really know what you are downloading and your browser's security settings, such as Firefox, are good, sometimes you don't even need an antivirus. It's also important to run the things you really need, including background applications for performance. As a brief example, Windows 7 Ultimate runs some services for the server in the background, if it is not a server you can disable them. It should not be forgotten that how you use the hardware and whether you waste resources is as important as the hardware itself.

 

[USAFRet]

As a brief example, Windows 7 Ultimate runs some services for the server in the background, if it is not a server you can disable them. It should not be forgotten that how you use the hardware and whether you waste resources is as important as the hardware itself.

And when purchased legitimately, Windows 7 Ultimate was $399.
Not many people would do that.

And you have to be in a very important position to be a target.

No.
'hackers' are quite willing to use YOUR PC as a bot resource. ANY PC.

I have been using computers for at least 20 years, my experience has been with Windows 98, XP and Windows 7. I can say that I have never been hacked or had my files taken hostage on XP or Windows 7. Yes, my computer was hacked by some small viruses, but they were my fault. It happened because I did not pay attention to the download sources and installed strange software just out of curiosity. Still, software like combofix sent them all to hell at that time.

And nothing there refutes my comment about "careful users".

 

[blueskyx5]

'hackers' are quite willing to use YOUR PC as a bot resource. ANY PC.

Yep. This is true. Bt miners in particular are now a bigger threat. But still, a careful user can bypass all of them. What is a careful user? This explanation can actually be improved, but in short, a careful user is one who downloads game or business software from legitimate platforms and only sends text and video recordings to the browser. Its browser is safe and blocks everything, including deceptive ads.

Such a user does not install anything they are not really sure about and is careful with download URLs. But in the final stage, it is certain that the real security vulnerability lies with the user herself. Sometimes download sources and URLs are also manipulated and you may even run the risk of downloading fake, spyware. In case of such a suspicion, the user can go as far as verification keys.. (Sometimes I saw people using such bad operating systems that their operating systems were like a testing ground for third-party software.)

 

[stonecarver]

Couldn't Windows 7 have been improved? Yes, it could have been improved, maybe even users would have preferred updates or not, according to their own scenarios, but it would not have made money.

From bouncing off XP to Windows 7 yes 7 was buttoned up security wise 100% better.

Windows 7 was awesome and us/ those users who run it on spare computers still enjoy what it could do.

But just like a 1970's Chevy Chevelle is a classic Windows 7 has now fallen into this category. Can be loved and still enjoyed but is mostly a weekend ride.

I consider older OS's like a screwdriver in the toolbox. There are things that those special "tools" do better is my reason for having it around.

But I also fully embrace when a new Windows comes out. I have to, to be able to repair and fix what wrong in current systems. The only OS I flat out refused to use or learn was Windows 8.0-8.1.

It's to bad like when XP came to EOF there were service pack 1,2,3 that you could download and to this day if you wanted to run XP off line you can put it back together. Retro gaming machine.

Windows 7 it a cat and mouse game finding those same service pack's today. If you know what your doing you can get 7 up and running BUT to the now average newcomer getting the idea of starting fresh with Window 7 it will be full of so many security holes as you just can not find or rather not get those patches one need to make it solid again.

Windows 7 is a classic enjoy it in that frame of mind. Windows 11 function wise does it's job. Again a "tool" added to the toolbox per say.

 

[USAFRet]

But in the final stage, it is certain that the real security vulnerability lies with the user herself.

As is often said...The first line of security is the squishy grey stuff between your ears.

But given all the exploits we see, that often does not work.

 

[blueskyx5]

Windows 7 it a cat and mouse game finding those same service pack's today. If you know what your doing you can get 7 up and running

Unfortunately. When I installed the new Windows 7, I admit that for a while I had to look for old updates for my graphics software like “.net” I now keep a backup of the basic and mandatory update files. These are mandatory things for graphics programs or some tools... Today I can run my software like corel draw illustrator and my processes are fine and stable. Curious and researcher users who are familiar with hardware, Windows culture and forums like "tomshardware" can somehow overcome these problems. But users who want everything ready may not be able to get Windows 7 ready.

There are two important things for me; my graphic drawings and sometimes watching a movie... If I can do these things perfectly, I don't need new Windows. That's what I advocate. Maybe windows 10, 11 may work great for someone else, but they don't work for me. The summary of this answer is that it should not be made difficult to get Windows 7 up and running and it should not be mandatory to use the new Windows, it should be given as a choice.

Microsoft and other companies need to stop pushing this. Because Windows 7 has a kernel that can run everything from movies to graphics to new games. (It just needs to be supported.) Finally, when you open Windows 7, you are not going beyond its time like Windows 95, you see an operating system that is still visually satisfying, rich and responsive. And this operating system can run heavy-duty software like "Render" very well and quickly. That's why Windows 7 deserves commendation. (I'm sure if Microsoft updated the graphics of Windows 7 and released it under the name Windows 12, no one would understand)

 

[stonecarver]

Maybe windows 10, 11 may work great for someone else, but they don't work for me. The summary of this answer is that it should not be made difficult to get Windows 7 up and running and it should not be mandatory to use the new Windows, it should be given as a choice.

I do agree that updates up to EOL should be still there. But also know anything past EOL your on your own.

But it would also encourage users not to move forward.

There are forums out there that are dedicated to Windows 7 you might find enlightening not that we mind talking about Windows 7 here but they have dedicated users keeping 7 alive.

 

[blueskyx5]

you might find enlightening not that we mind talking about Windows 7 here but they have dedicated users keeping 7 alive.

It's nice to see your kindness and understanding. Because when you say Windows 7, there are those who are surprised as if you are talking about the year 2000 BC. Yet fundamentally we all use the same technology. We are separated only by revision differences. Anyone who talks about Windows 7 today is not talking about something foreign... This is the technology of this century, and it's no wonder it's still used, loved, and works. Including Youtube, I can open this forum in a great way, which means I live in the same world as the person using windows 11.

I think this detail is also important,

Maybe it wouldn't be a problem for users who are curious about hardware and operating systems to try out new systems and learn. But it is important to understand that not everyone has time for this. If you are a software developer or graphic designer, you do not want to touch a working system. Because you don't want to be surprised when you can spend time on your work. Every new operating system comes with some surprises and problems, and also some problems or settings need to be relearned and researched. If my current operating system doesn't prevent me from doing my job, it would be understandable if I didn't want to spend time on it. Most people are not aware of this, so insistence on the current system is not actually a spoiled arrogance or an obsession.

I can switch to Windows 10 or 11 right now, yes, I can install it quickly. But I will have to adjust the settings or give it time for the errors I compare. But you just want to focus on your work. I think if there are people who use Windows XP, they have their own reasons too... A technology hardware forum should cover all of them. (New and old should not be distinguished) Therefore, I appreciate that this forum is more understanding about this, resorts to purely technical explanations and does not fanaticize its users. (Because some rare forums act as if they have encountered a devil when they hear the name Windows 7)

 

[USAFRet]

A technology hardware forum should cover all of them. (New and old should not be distinguished)

And we have that: