News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by dusted on Monday November 18, 2024 @01:48AM (#42170325)
Raymond Chens blog and book (The Old New Thing) is an absolute delight! I always had a big respect for how intuitive the Windows 95 GUI is, and reading his description of the thoughts and methods behind its inception, it's no surprise that it became so good. It seems like Microsoft was extremely pragmatic and reasonable in many of their endeavors back then. It's a wonder how it degenerated into the absolute unit of sh*t that is modern Windows (even if the filesystem and kernel is arguably a lot better, everything on top seems to be developed by an army of interns)
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by rqtwteye on Monday November 18, 2024 @05:19AM (#42171191)
Army of interns should about right. I always suspect that Teams is developed by some beginners who are learning Scrum.

But yes, Windows 95 to Windows 2000 were a huge jump in usability. From Windows 8 on and the “Metro” interface they threw it all away.

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by Cumpiler69 on Monday November 18, 2024 @06:46AM (#42171598)
>I always suspect that Teams is developed by some beginners who are learning Scrum

I get the same feeling from Google's android and Pixels. Lots of neat features keep getting added, but the SW and HW issues that end up in the final product make it seem like an incredibly amateurish effort for such a wealthy company hiring top talent.

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by hulitu on Monday November 18, 2024 @07:09AM (#42171702)
I think they rotate the interns every year. That will explain the GUI^WUX advances. /s
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by Cumpiler69 on Monday November 18, 2024 @07:57AM (#42171934)
UI/UX keep getting shittier over time is an industry wide phenomenon. To me everything kinda peeked in late 2000's and has been on a downwards slope ever since.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by treve on Monday November 18, 2024 @11:15AM (#42173809)
Perhaps controversial but I think the ability to ship continuously is also a factor. You just have to pass and fix the things with the most complaints after. A holistic view on the general user experience will never make it to the top of a pile now.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by rqtwteye on Tuesday November 19, 2024 @04:12AM (#42181395)
I think yearly releases were much better. I feel a lot of sites and software now have constant change you can’t keep up with and often the change doesn’t really improve anything. Reddit would be a good example. I constantly have buttons disappear and rep appear or move around. Same in YouTube. Much friction for no benefit.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by andai on Monday November 18, 2024 @06:50AM (#42171616)
>filesystem is a lot better

In my tests it was 6-7x slower than on Linux (in VirtualBox on Windows). I assume by better you mean more features?

On a related note I used one of those system event monitor programs (I forget the name) and ran a 1 line Hello World C program, the result was windows doing hundreds of registry reads and writes before and after running my one line of code.

Granted it doesn't take much time but there's this recurring thing of "my computer being forced to do things I do not want it to do."

I also — and this is my favorite, or perhaps least favorite one — ran Windows XP inside VirtualBox (on Windows 10). When you press Win+E in XP, an Explorer window is shown to you. It is shown instantly, fully rendered, in the next video frame. There is no delay. Meanwhile on the host OS (10), there is about half a second of delay, at which point a window is drawn, but then you can enjoy a little old school powerpoint animation as you watch each UI control being painted one by one.

(Don't get me started on the start menu!)

Twenty years of progress!

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by jraph on Monday November 18, 2024 @07:36AM (#42171830)
> I assume by better you mean more features?

I would guess better on current Windows than on Windows 95. I don't know about faster, but NTFS is most probably more reliable than FAT32. And also more features of course, and fewer limitations. At least the file size limit (4 Gb) and ownership / rights metadata (ACL).

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by PaulHoule on Monday November 18, 2024 @07:56AM (#42171926)
Depends how you use it.

If you are handling a stupendous number of small files (say doing an npm build) then metadata operations are terribly expensive on Windows because it is expensive to look up security credentials.

Maven is not too different from npm in how it works except instead of installing 70,000 small files it installs 70 moderate sized JAR files that are really ZIP files that encase the little files. It works better in Windows than npm. Npm got popular and they had to face down the problem that people would try building the Linux kernel under WSL and get awful times.

Microsoft knows it has to win the hearts and minds of developers and they believe in JS, TS and Visual Studio code so they’ve tried all sorts of half-baked things to speed up file I/O for developers.

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by akx on Monday November 18, 2024 @08:41AM (#42172197)
No filesystem is great in the lots-of-small-files case, partly simply due to syscall overhead.

There's a reason https://www.sqlite.org/fasterthanfs.html , SquashFS, etc. are a thing, or why even Europe's fastestest supercomputer's admins admonish against lots of small files. https://docs.lumi-supercomputer.eu/storage/#about-the-number...

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by whoknw on Monday November 18, 2024 @11:25AM (#42173942)
The reason LUMI is advising against many files is that it uses the Lustre parallel filesystem, which is notoriously bad with small files. See here: https://www.lanl.gov/projects/national-security-education-ce... .
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by red_admiral on Monday November 18, 2024 @08:48AM (#42172253)
I guess that's where the "sqlite competes with fopen" part might help.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by mech422 on Monday November 18, 2024 @03:16PM (#42176439)
That used to be ReiserFS's claim to fame - tail packing small files. Doesn't seem like any FS has really optimized small file handling since then.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by PaulHoule on Monday November 18, 2024 @04:52PM (#42177502)
It is not so much the wasted space that bugs me as all the metadata and processing of that metadata.

For instance, the 70,000 files in your node_modules do not need separate owner and group fields (they all belong to the same user under normal conditions) and are all +rw for the files and +rwx for the directories. If you have access to one you have access to all and if your OS is access checking each file you are paying in terms of battery life, time, etc.

On Windows it is the same story except the access control system is much more complex and is slower. (I hope that Linux is not wasting a lot of time processing the POSIX ACLs you aren’t using!)

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by account42 on Tuesday November 19, 2024 @04:35AM (#42181557)
SquashFS is a (read only) filesystem designed for small files.

Which shows that even if you don't want to call any filesystem great here, they differ vastly in just how bad they handle small files. Windows' filesystems (and more importantly it's virtual filesystem layer including filters) are on the extremely slow end of this spectrum.

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by EasyMark on Monday November 18, 2024 @05:14PM (#42177699)
As someone who has done some fairly extensive reboot testing of “power failures” for fat32 and ntfs I can guarantee you that NTFS is far more robust but it’s not bullet proof
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by hulitu on Monday November 18, 2024 @07:06AM (#42171686)
> Twenty years of progress!

Well, it does have more ports normally open and starts connecting to MS as soon as possible, so yes, it is a progress. /s

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by heraldgeezer on Monday November 18, 2024 @09:11AM (#42172406)
>On a related note I used one of those system event monitor programs (I forget the name) and ran a 1 line Hello World C program, the result was windows doing hundreds of registry reads and writes before and after running my one line of code.

You were probably using Sysinternals process monitor. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/pro...

Windows does a tonne of things in the background, yes. If I run that and let it monitor everything, things will happen even if I do nothing. It is an OS and complex.

>It is shown instantly, fully rendered, in the next video frame. There is no delay

THIS is true and also crazy to me. I forgot how fast XP was. Especially on modern hardware. I TeamViewer into a laptop with an i5 CPU and Windows XP (medical clients...) and it felt faster than my more powerful local machine!!

I have set my sysdm.cpl performance settings to this, and it does help a bit to get rid of the animations and crap.

https://imgur.com/a/jlre36e

Yea... I like the 10 start menu but they destroyed it in 11...

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by andai on Monday November 18, 2024 @11:17AM (#42173846)
And it was considered bloated at the time!
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by dusted on Monday November 18, 2024 @09:31AM (#42172567)
Oh, i meant that ntfs is a lot better than fat16/32. I mainly use linux, and I like ext4 and love zfs, but ntfs is also reasonably stable.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by cpursley on Monday November 18, 2024 @08:05AM (#42171979)
Interesting take, I feel like the current iteration of the Windows UI is actually really good. Microsoft seems to be continually tweaking and improving it.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by heraldgeezer on Monday November 18, 2024 @09:03AM (#42172340)
With heavy tweaking, 11 is okay... but the standard right click menu is a disaster for power users. And many other settings like the start menu they destroyed.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by EricE on Monday November 18, 2024 @10:23AM (#42173175)
Open Shell has been a first install for me since Windows 7.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by int_19h on Tuesday November 19, 2024 @06:46PM (#42189311)
Tweaking, yes. Improving, not so much. If anything, things have been regressing lately - for example, we were able to make taskbar vertical ever since it became a thing in Win7, and it makes perfect sense to do so on any landscape-oriented display for most efficient use of display space. The new redesigned taskbar in Win11 killed that option outright.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by red_admiral on Monday November 18, 2024 @08:46AM (#42172243)
I've heard tales of when working at MS was the job everyone in "dev" aspired to, like for Google and the like in their heyday.
Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by Sylamore on Monday November 18, 2024 @12:23PM (#42174602)
I know at one point Microsoft and IBM both invested significantly in studying UX research. It doesn't feel like that's happening or if it is, I guess I must be drifting out of touch with what's considered intuitive in user interfaces. It's not just MS either, I feel like the ability to discover what you can do in an app/site any more is hidden by aesthetic choices over functional ones.

I remember being pulled into user surveys and usability studies while wandering the mall back in the day and being given series of tasks to accomplish on various iterations of a windows GUI (in the Windows 9x era) while they observed, and then paid $100 for my time for each one I participated in.

Re:Why did Windows 95 setup use three operating systems? by int_19h on Tuesday November 19, 2024 @06:44PM (#42189294)
These kinds of studies are still very much there at MS, and not just for Windows.

The problem, in my experience, is that when some manager really wants to do something, they'll find a way to justify that with a study. Pretty much every UX decision that ended up being universally panned later had some study or another backing it as the best thing since sliced bread.