[gmueckl]

Windows 95 is a kludge by today's standards and it's been the little brother of the more complete Win32 implementation in the NT line. As a result, it is missing a ton of things that are essential parts of modern Windows. I don't see any value in that.

[ChrisSD]

Arguably, the kludge is supporting Win32 on an NT kernel. The win32 layer on top of NT is a mess of backwards compatibility hacks with more modern NT and NTFS features hammered in. The native NT layer is much better but officially it's unstable.

Compared to that, Windows 9x was less kludge and more a straightforward implementation of Win32, though of course lacking modern features.