The question is silly; after all, Win 7 really is better. But are we living in a more brilliant technological age, fueled by the evolution of Microsoft Windows, compared with 20 years ago?

Let’s see what you could do with Win95:

• Browse the Internet, download stuff, customize your browser
• Deck up your desktop with pictures of pretty girls (or hot men, depending on gender and orientation)
• Use MS Office, Photoshop, any music player you wanted

I can do all of these with Win7, and not much more. The only difference between then and now is software and CPU horsepower, which have nothing to do with Windows.

So why so many releases — 95, 98, ME, and on up to Win7 and then Win8? Well, no-one has a problem with the number of releases, but people are pressurized to upgrade. They feel sad if they don’t have the latest version.
And the money on upgrades! Sure, most of us just get pirated copies — and this was true even in America way back in 97 — but there are large numbers of gullible people (and I know a few) who paid precious money for a Windows upgrade. Again and again.

Win95 crashed a hell of a lot. But that was pretty much fixed in Win98, and gone by the time of XP.

But how many people will admit that what we’ve received over 20 years is eye candy? Dare to do so and you’ll be damned by people around you. [“Wink, wink, say no more” is the motto here.]

And let’s not forget the Office 2007 release, with the Ribbon or whatever they call it. Why, after that, the millions of downloads of “Office 2003 menus for Office 2007”? You could put it down to a learning curve, but I, for one, don’t want to learn something new if I don’t need to.

Just tell me you've giving me a sweeter version of an OS. Don’t give me spiel-words such as “all-new” — is all I’m asking for!

Tags : Win 7, Windows 8, MS Office, Office 2007, Windows 95