This. I suppose it can't be helped given the link was posted without context. But yours is the only post here that seems to get it.

For everyone else: This project exists for the joy of the retro-computing community. No one in their right mind - retro-computing enthusiasts included - would ever recommend using any of these versions of Windows for anything other than amusement.

No, DOSBox is not always an alternative.

Retro enthusiasts are quite excited by this project. And for anyone wanting to rebuild an old PC running Win95 for fun, this is going to be a very helpful tool.

Michael MJD (YouTube) covered this yesterday in fact: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbeqLmSVqvs

I'm with you that they could have stopped talking after the word "instead" but the rest is not fearmongering nor FUD: installing operating system patches from a random server on the internet just isn't a great idea

>If you're playing with Microsoft Windows for personal use, that's fine,

Saying you're free to have your hobby isn't tone-deaf.

When you bury it in FUD it is

The "FUD" is clearly describing non-retrocomputing use cases, where everything they said is completely true.

If you're use for this project is personal enjoyment, have fun. If it's an important cog in your business, you should probably fix that.

> That's pure fearmongering FUD.

It is. It's a community project that you can trust, or not. Debian also reports to servers of "unknown provenance" and updates itself from there.

Now, Debian has probably a lot more eyes on it than some Windows Update revival project, but some more niche distros have essentially the same problem.

> Recommending Debian to the retrocomputing community is possibly the most tone-deaf thing I've seen today.

archive.debian.org might be right up their alley