Fun fact, people dont like upgrade ( windows developments)

Many if us notice new breakage when some software get an upgrade or update
And it is frustrating i know
But beside that
For example I started using PC from MS Dos
The fay windos 3 was avalable I Moved
3.1 -95-98-ME-xp-long horn edition-vista-7-8-8.1-10
As soon as windows 7 came out I updated to and never wanted to get back to xp
But I remember many people were hating 7 and i had to put effort on fixing their xp issues
And now after a fee years on w10 here
Again many people now love 7 and hate 10 this time
I loved when w8 had faster boot up speed and new look
The only w that gave me headaches was Vista disaster but yet I didn’t switch back to xp even then
Same thing on Mac , Ios and android

I have managed to make the transition smooth and painless each time by either making my current OS look and behave like the next one, or the new OS look and behave like the last one.

Moving to Windows from Amiga was more comfortable due to using old Windowblinds and an Amiga OS 3 theme.

By the time I moved to XP from 98 my 98 had lots of ME and XP grafted into it.
Much of the lack of support in 98 was not because it couldn’t do stuff, but because it was simply missing the system files.

Moving from XP to 7 was very easy because I used a Win7 transplant package, which not only adds all the icons, themes and even the startup, but also beats real Windows 7 on several features.
Using a patch I also had DirectX 10 support in XP so could run newer games and software the OS was not supposed to handle.
Again proving it is because MS chose not to, not that it could not support it.
My XP install is still very useful, though the old CPU lacks functions new software often needs.

Up to this point we still had the ability to opt for Windows Classic theme, which again levels the playground to a very familiar look and feel.
With each version of Windows MS have hidden more and more explorer icons (remember Win9x with cut/copy/paste/delete icons ?), but you could resurface them if you knew how.
Now we have OpenShell to fix explorer and the start menu.

Now with moving from 7 to 10 I had the same option of a 10 transplant pack to make 7 look and behave like 10.
…Yeah right, as if I would want to make my desktop and GUI look awful and less inspiring than Windows 3.
No thankfully I have managed to resurface plenty of the Win 7 GUI and un-hidden the light theme which has a coloured border on the edge of the windows.
With OpenShell and desktop gadgets once more installed, my Win 10 environment is much more what I the user desires.

1 Like

Most of the time I just adapted. While I was still using my Amiga 4000, I was using Windows NT 3.51 and 4.0 at university (and SunOS and Solaris). When I moved to Windows full time it was 95 OSR2. I transitioned through 98, ME, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1, 10.

Through all that I didn’t really make one OS look like another - I just adapted. Maybe it’s because I use multiple OSes and it would be a full time job trying to make one look like another. I just learnt the different environments and adapted. These days most concepts are the same and working in a command line there is even less distinction between OSes.


Yeah I can understand that, I guess because my Amiga OS desktop is highly customised to my taste and I use Scalos as a Workbench replacement, I simply expect more from what I have.
I bring things up to my standards rather than me go down to the standards of the basic OS.
eg. the default copy routine in any OS. Poooo !
I like to have the ability to pause, filter, restart stalled files and throttle file transfers, especially when transferring over a network.
I have used a replacement or enhanced start menu and explorer since win98.

As an Amiga user with more RAM and an HD you will know the insane flexibility of anything made with the Magic User Interface libraries.
Any window or gadget can be literally what you want.
My media player has an oak surround and beech inlays, granite buttons in a style I like, and bubbling water in the drag bar spaces.
All the arrow gadgets on the drag bars are the size and style I want and where I want.
The Windows, Mac and Linux world never had such user flexibility even with software like window blinds, so it is much easier to settle for what you have in those worlds.
In these world you have to be a skin/theme maker or coder to achieve the same results.

for me it has always been about me making a statement of who is in charge. me or the machine.
At work it was very easy to become the servant of the machine with the NT, 98 and Linux mix.

Sure, I modified AmigaOS massively with MUI and there were a lot of concepts that were very innovative at the time, such as datatypes. Commodore mismanaged the Amiga though and the platform did not move forward.

I am pretty platform agnostic and I think the basics are the same on all platforms. The OS should be invisible. It is the applications that matter so as long as I can run what I need to run, the underlying OS doesn’t really matter as long as the basics are there. So I don’t really go in for modifications as long as I can launch the applications I need to quickly. The basic operations such as file copy, copy and paste etc do not really change. Linux is infinitely configurable with different window managers and desktops, but the basis are the same. Once you are in an application, it’s the same.

I upgrade the OS for the latest underpinnings and support services, so how the UI looks and behaves is not that important to me. I’ll take it how it comes and don’t do a huge amount of customisation to make an OS look like another OS, but will embrace any new OS features that help me do my work.

1 Like

I agree %100 I still have Denny Atkin’s book, Best Amiga Tips and Secrets. .

I’m the same. I just move from one to another. I like the new, I like seeing things change.

I started with VAX/VMS and home computers of the 80s, which were all BASIC based. Some CP/M and MVS and VME, George, Mac System/Mac Finder, AmigaDOS, TOS, Ultrix, Solaris, BSD UNIX, Linux, Windows 2, 3, 3.11, 95, 98, ME, NT 3.51, 4, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1, 10 and OS X/macOS.

They all do the same things, just slightly differently, if you can use one, you can use most of the others with little or no training, if you are open minded. But that is the big point, even going from Windows 7 to 8.1 or 10, there is little or no difference for the average user (who looks at the control panel once in a blue moon). They can set up the new Start Menu to resemble the old Windows 7 start menu with a few mouse clicks, no add-ons needed. But a lot of blogs build on the paranoia of people who don’t like change, drumming up the new into something scary.


For people who like windows 7 I suggest they use start 10…

I totally understand it is a philosophical matter, as having friends with Amigas and HDs I saw a huge variety in what people find useful or appealing.
A friend had 12 floppy drives, 8 HDs and 2 CD-ROMs attached, just because he could not because it was useful.

In simplest of terms if it were not for annoyances and horrible design choices in software, I wouldn’t feel compelled to fix them.
When I moved to Windows I used Netscape navigator mainly because it let you tear the GUI apart and put everything where you wanted it. When they got rid of that I moved to Opera. Now I use Vivaldi which allows the user full control of the UI via CSS.
There are a variety of modern tools I have, that use so much desktop space in a non-scalable UI, that on a basic laptop means the buttons and functions are off-screen and unusable. Simple DNSCrypt is a good example. On a Dell laptop (as issued to staff at the local Uni) you cannot see or use all the functions in the blocklists tab.

On Windows 10 I have the option of scaling the whole desktop but only to make it bigger, which is no help.
With Amiga you could either have a bigger desktop than the viewable area and just scroll around, or simply change the settings for that 1 program made by someone that assumes we all have the same hardware they have.

User choice as and when needed, that is all I expect. By having an OS operate at the lightest touch and behave as I want, it saves me time fighting against someone elses chain of logic.
I would rather move from 1 machine to another as if they were the same to use but with different skills under the hood. I compare it with using surgical gloves or boxing gloves.
When I have the XP box switched on it is part of the swarm with the 7 and 10 PCs. I have shared mouse and KB on any machine I sit at, and can see all the screens.
I can drag items between any screen/desktop and treat them as 1 PC.
The fact that they are different OSs is not obvious at first, so no mental adjustment needed until you have to change system settings.

However, I have never gone so far as a friend did.
He was getting fed-up with his iMac (when they first went intel), so installed bootcamp and XP.
He was using the XP side more often because he could play more games, but missed his beloved Mac UI. I found FlyakiteOS for him and he installed that in XP.
That level of camouflage was too confusing for me, but hilarious when you got someone else to use it.
You were sat at a real Apple iMac, looking at the current OS, yet when you launched iTunes a digital miracle happened and you were presented with trusty old Winamp.

I just stick to fixing the individual aspects which need improving, such as the start menu for the most basic and useful change (especially for Win 10).
I have tried Start 10 as suggested by @waxman80014 but I prefer OpenShell as it also lets you put back old explorer icons.
I know MS have put all the possible functions in a ribbon, but all I want is 4 small buttons, not a plethora that is so big it is optionally hidden.
Mostly I use KB controls so only want a few basics on display for when I am not at the KB.

I do not like the ribbon, what was wring wt menus, you could customize them in office anyway…