Hey, for cheap thrills, I decided to install the full version of DOS on my older computer, then 3.1, then 98, then XP - all upgrades... to see what would stay in XP and all that. If that doesn't make sense, I don't blame you. I'm kind of obsessive. Anyway - that's not the point. My point is, when I installed DOS, and 3.1, I found some great utilities. I found a program, Microsoft AntiVirus - which cleanses viruses. Undelete, which undeletes programs. QBASIC. And, who can forget the good ol' DOS editor? Now - what happened? Where did Microsoft Antivirus and Undelete go? I think that Microsoft would be so much better off if they had an antivirus module like they used to. I heard Longhorn would bring back that feature, therefore "going back" all the way to the time of DOS. Why did Microsoft get rid of those programs in 3.1 and above? I suspect because it was under Symantec, and Symantec didn't want to do business with Microsoft, so they stopped letting Microsoft use their software. Just a wild guess in the dark. From my observations - in reality, with each release, Windows slowly went downhill in a way and became more bloated. 3.1 was truly the best - ran pretty smoothly, no bloatware at all, a simple interface, etc. Sure, it was hard getting around, but I was brainwashed by 95, 98, Me, 2000, and XP with the "easier access" desktop concept. Anyway, 3.1 was simple. Sure, it was kinda unstable, but it worked better than 98. When I installed 98 on my computer, it was kind of buggy. ME actually performed better. XP is the best, but my computer is getting pretty old (it's a 2000 model), and I recently got a laptop (hence the flashy hardware specs - my old computer is way more outdated than that) so now my old computer feels slow in comparison. Ahh, sorry for rambling, but I just wanted to tell you how I feel and my experiences with Windows. And - to ask you some questions - what happened with the programs? Why did Microsoft get more bloated? Etc, etc. Please don't delete this post and deem it offpoint. I trust this forum (XP) the most, I know alot of people here, and everyone has good opinions and reliable advice. So, let's see your $0.02, everyone. ;) -Andrew

Good post! I do remember Dos, 3.1... and so on. Which is why I have been disappointed ever since. The basic concept of an os/file management system has been slowly forgotten about, and now with XP, it is completely lost. There are 3 basic things that a system like these were built for: 1) Give true statistical data with regard to your hard disk. For various and complicated reasons XP fails to do this honestly. 2) Show ALL files on your hard drives for you to be able to manage. XP not only hides files from its owner, but it also creates files without the owners permission. 3) Give the owner AT LEAST readable access to ALL files so that the owner knows exactly what is on the drives... and of course we all know that XP fails at this. The long and short of it is that Microsoft has completely lost sight of the main objectives of an os/management system. I'm hoping that they get back on track with Longhorn and stop playing tricks on us consumers!

Amen Door. MS has never really listen to its consumers. The good things they do away with and the bad stuff they just patch. Now where did I put my Unix disc... I may be crazy, but I'm not stupid...

Good post and all you guys are right on. Microsoft seems to be getting constantly more controlling, with XP getting more bloated weekly. I shudder to think how fat Longhorn will be, even with the cuts MS has been making in order to shove it out the door on the belated schedule. One thing is certain: it won't be ready when it's released, and will be as full of holes as...(insert metaphor here).

I agree with you, Ben... I know that Longhorn will probably be completely bloated and not include any real under-the-hood improvements - only on the surface. Take XP as an example - Microsoft claimed it was an all-new operating system... and it sure looks/acts that way on the very surface, but if you look closer, it still has MANY old features and icons like Windows 98... even 3.1 in a very few ways. I wish that Microsoft would just rebuild their operating system right from the bottom. Take Apple as an example... the operating system kernel and appearance stayed practically the exact same from System 1 to 9... then OSX included a whole new kernel and appearance - everything was consisent and new - barely any old features left. And, the old features ran in a seperate "emulated" Classic environment. So, I think Micorosft should do that - build a whole new conceptual operating system from the bottom up and include integrated tools and a whole new idea. More comments... feel welcome to hit it up! -Andrew

Let me add that when you look at it - have the whole operating system concept really chianged from Windows 95? Look at Notepad, Wordpad, Calcuator, Paint, Character Map, etc... have those tools changed at all or improved? Nope. Microsoft tends to add new things on top of the existing kernel and introduce new ideas, but they don't improve much of the under-the-hood stuff. I'm not a Microsoft hater. Far from it. I just think Microsoft should improve their products more. But, they have done a pretty impressive job overall - it's really hard to appeal to everyone in the masses. -Andrew