The space shuttles had a viewing window much similar in looks like the windshield of a car, or like the cockpit of a plane. However, neither the Apollo command module (CM) nor the lunar module (LM) had windows that big. If it could be done for shuttle, why not for the CM & LM? Was it merely the technology prevailing at the time of their design or any other consideration?
Windows are kept small because they are heavy
Windows need to be thick enough to survive micrometeoroid impacts and the stresses of spaceflight, and to provide radiation protection. They also need cushioning and seals. This makes a window heavier than the equivalent area of sheet metal bulkhead.
The Shuttle needed just the delta-v to get into low Earth orbit. Apollo had to do not only that, but also the additional delta-v of getting to the moon and getting back. The lunar module also had to land and take off from the moon. This made the weight budgets of the Apollo spacecrafts smaller than the Shuttle. So the Apollo windows were made as small as possible while allowing sufficient visibility.
The structural design philosophy for the LM windows was to provide a window of minimum weight with maximum crew visibility, which led to the selection of the single- pane-window concept using chemically tempered glass. The design consisted of a single structural pane and an external pane for micrometeoroid and radiation protection.
Apollo Experience Report: Spacecraft Structural Windows, NASA Tech Note D-7439, p. 8
The vehicles had different requirements.
The CM splashed down in the ocean, the LM landed vertically on the moon, the shuttle landed on a runway.
Requirements drive design.