In generally I would say far more stable and far more features.
But this of course is in the metrics of how you measure. Windows 3.1 for example was a huge crashing piece of crap that was locking up all the damned time. MacOS at the time wasn't that much better. Now I can leave windows up for a month at a time between security reboots. Specialized Windows and Linux machines in server environments on a reduced patching schedule will stay up far longer, but generally security updates are what limits the uptime.
I remember running Windows applications and receiving buffer overflow errors back then. If you got a buffer overflow message today you'd think that either your hardware is going bad or someone wrote a terrible security flaw into your application. And back there were security flaws everywhere. 'Smashing the stack for fun and profit' wasn't wrote till '95, well after consumers had started getting on the internet in mass. And if you were using applications like Word or Excel you could expect to measure 'crashes' per week rather than the crashes per month, many of which are completely recoverable in applications like office.
I'm on Win11 for 1.5 year or so (Win11 Insider Beta channel) and before was on Win10 Beta/Dev channels - so what I remember so far, I was warned multiple times, suggested to pick a time and only after user (me) not shown any cooperation, system was forcibly rebooted, which for consumer grade (I have Pro version) edition is fine, from my PoV. I don't want [my] system and systems around me be a part of botnets like Linux boxes of all sorts.
> For many applications Windows 10 saves state and comes back right where you started on a security update reboot.
This needs application support, by this broad definition all operating systems "saves state and comes back right where you started on a security update reboot".
But this of course is in the metrics of how you measure. Windows 3.1 for example was a huge crashing piece of crap that was locking up all the damned time. MacOS at the time wasn't that much better. Now I can leave windows up for a month at a time between security reboots. Specialized Windows and Linux machines in server environments on a reduced patching schedule will stay up far longer, but generally security updates are what limits the uptime.
I remember running Windows applications and receiving buffer overflow errors back then. If you got a buffer overflow message today you'd think that either your hardware is going bad or someone wrote a terrible security flaw into your application. And back there were security flaws everywhere. 'Smashing the stack for fun and profit' wasn't wrote till '95, well after consumers had started getting on the internet in mass. And if you were using applications like Word or Excel you could expect to measure 'crashes' per week rather than the crashes per month, many of which are completely recoverable in applications like office.