"...The idea is to convince the skeptical and the incredulous just how much PCs have changed."
Except they haven't changed, have they? Apart from a few whizzy colours, Windows 7 of today isn't really any different from the Windows 95 machine I used years ago. Ok, under the hood it may have changed quite a bit; I don't really know. But from a user's perspective, it really has not changed a jot. It does the same job (and fails in the same ways; even the bugs haven't progressed much!), it runs the same software (or would do, if the software didn't keep bloating out of all sense - Office anyone?), and ...errr ...well that's it really. Because that is ALL an OS does; it runs applications and provides interfaces to the outside world. All the extra sugar that keeps piling on top is mostly functionally useless nonsense that 99% of people never use anyway.
Like I'm sure many people do, I tire of the "innovation" nonsense MS keep spouting. MS have not innovated anything since they first stole the WIMP idea from Apple (who stole it from Xerox, of course). Since then, virtually nothing has happened; in the last ...ooo ...20 years (?), Windows hasn't moved. It's got bigger and more demanding. But functionally, what's changed?
I really DO blame MS for the lack of progress in the software world; by now, PC's (or tablets, or whatever) should be miles and miles ahead of where they are. Progress has been severely held-back; primarily by MS and the drones that follow in their shadow. With all their resources and cash, how have they managed to achieve so very very little over the years.
With all this tablet stuff in vogue at the moment, and mobile stuff exploding, I'm sure MS must be getting quite worried. Especially as these are two areas that they have demonstrably failed to succeed in many many times in the past despite the billions they must have spent of R&D by now.