Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: drewz21 on February 09, 2006, 09:13:47 PM
-
Which OS would you run on your Amiga if given a choice and why?
OS 3.1
OS 3.5
or
OS 3.9?
-
What, you've not listed 1.3? :-D
For a stock Amiga, especially just a 68000-based one, 3.1 is fine as the later versions just add bloat.
But for an accelerated Amiga with graphics card, I'd go for 3.9 to get the pretty icons!
- Ali
-
OS3.9 because it has many things you would need already included.
-
Agreed - OS3.9 saves having to trawl round Aminet to get the basic stuff installed.
- Ali
-
drewz21 wrote:
Which OS would you run on your Amiga if given a choice and why?
OS 3.1
OS 3.5
or
OS 3.9?
This is strictly a matter of personal preference. OS3.1 was the last version released by Commodore. OS3.5 and 3.9 were contract developed by a German company (Haage and Partner), released through Amiga Inc and are really nothing more then a bunch of third party applications bundled into a mildly updated OS3.1. If you are willing to do a bit of internet searching, you can get anything that comes as part of OS3.5 or 3.9 and install it on OS3.1, much of it for free.
I personally do not like OS3.5 as it had stability issues, IMO. OS3.9 was a much smoother update and if you have an accellerated AMIGA with an '060 or PPC then updating to OS3.9 is worth considering, if only for bundled convenience. Anything less then an '060 AMIGA is just as well off with OS3.1
Regards,
Ltstanfo
-
Why did you not include OS4?? I would definitely want to run that if i had the hardware for it.
But for now i stick with os3.1, because i simply doubt i have enough fast ram to upgrade to even 3.5
-
Why did you not include OS4?? I would definitely want to run that if i had the hardware for it.
Maybe it runs only on PPC and he wanted to know for the Classic line?
-
Well the reason I didn't include OS4 is I don't think I can run it now plus it's not an offical release as of yet. Still in testing I believe.
I just bought this today which is the main reason for my question as I'm trying to see which OS will meet my needs until OS4 comes out.
Commodore Amiga 4000/040/25mhz Desktop Computer
SuperBuster rev.11, Motherboard rev.B
68040 25mhz CPU & FPU A3640 rev3.1 Accelerator
3.0 Kickstart ROMs
3.0 Software Installed, 3.0 Disks Included
2mb Chip RAM, 16mb FAST RAM
1.76mb Internal High Density Floppy Drive
Battery seems to be ok, no damage to motherboard
1 Seagate Medalist 4gb Harddrive Installed (Boots & runs FAST)
Internal Lite-On IDE 40x CDROM Drive
with Audio cable hooked to internal Amiga audio
External Audio connectors work with CDROM drive audio!
Software Disks included are:
Amiga Version 3.0 - Install, Workbench, Extras, Fonts, Locale & Storage
AsimCDFS v3.6b CDROM Install Disk
It looks like I can run anything up to OS 3.5 without any problems based on what I saw on AmigaKit.com. Probably going to order my 3.1 ROMS, 3.1 OS, and 3.5 OS for now. After I get everything installed and stable I may look at 3.9. Would 3.9 have any problems running on the above system?
Thanks for all the help!
-
If it was on my A500+, I would choose WB2.04 or 2.1.
On my A1200, I'm using 3.0. I will change to 3.1 when I get my 3.1 roms. I will then upgrade to 3.9 when I get an HD and a CD drive.
-
After I get everything installed and stable I may look at 3.9. Would 3.9 have any problems running on the above system?
I would skip 3.5 and use 3.9 instead.
-
OS 3.1 definitely but only if I get my Miami back.
-
aros
or os3.1 with all the stuff 3.5 and 3.9 give you downloaded from aminet for classic hardware.
-
steve30 wrote:
If it was on my A500+, I would choose WB2.04 or 2.1.
Why? 3.x is much faster than 2.x and nicer in almost every way!
-
Since when has WB3 worked on KS2 roms?
It hasn't. Therefore my only option is WB2. Or WB1, which isn't as good.
-
I run OS 3.9 on my miggy, (specs in my sig).
It runs well, altough quite often I find myself going back to OS 3.1, but mainly because I am more use to it, and it seems a bit faster.
:-)
-
steve30 wrote:
Since when has WB3 worked on KS2 roms?
It hasn't. Therefore my only option is WB2. Or WB1, which isn't as good.
Well I thought you actually prefered WB2 over WB3 on a slow computer (which would be wrong :-) ). And you can always buy 3.1 roms
-
I would go with 3.1 on that setup. If you had more ram, then i definitely would have upgraded to 3.9. It meets the minimum requirements, but i doubt you have much reserve for other software.
-
Workbench 3.0 here... I've heard 3.1 slows down SCSI boot times unless you add a dongle to the IDE interface to make it believe there's a drive in there.
Anyone got pics of OS3.9's HDToolBox? I've read it has SCSI integrity testing features...
-
If you ask me, 3.1. You can always add the bells and whistles later.
-
I would use 3.9 on any Amiga that meets this specs:
KS: 3.1
RAM: 8+MB
CPU: 030+
Graphics Card
Otherwise I'd stick to 3.1.
-
3.9, if only because of the complete TCP/IP stack that doesn't time out after 30 minutes, or need a couple of hours configuring like amitcp...
anything with a 3.1 rom, an 020/030, a couple of meg fast should be able to run 3.9...
if i can run windows 3.1 under PC task on a 25Mhz EC030, 3.9 should be fine ;)
-
leofoe wrote:
I would use 3.9 on any Amiga that meets this specs:
KS: 3.1
RAM: 8+MB
CPU: 030+
Graphics Card
Otherwise I'd stick to 3.1.
Thats what I used on my A1200 (still do when I dust it off occasionally! ;-))
Spec:
A1200 Apollo1230Lite (68030+68882 25MHz) 8MB KS3.1 AGA only, Silversurfer.
I regularly used it for the Web too !
I always found there was an improvement in my system after upgrade, once I'd got it 'right'.
although my preferred choice is OS4.0 on my A1XE. :crazy:
-
Well I have 3.9 on one of my Amigas. The other two have 3.0. I guess since later they are going to be pushing toasters it really wouldn't make sense to use anything past 3.1 I guess.
You could always be freaky and install NetBSD/68k or something :-D
-
I prefer WB 3.1, but if you've got a graphics card, 060 or PPC, or if you like to use only default configurations, then go with 3.9.
if i can run windows 3.1 under PC task on a 25Mhz EC030, 3.9 should be fine ;)
Impressive. I always wanted to try that, but thought it would be way too slow on my 33Mhz 020. I also didn't want the nightmare of attempting to install Windows.
-
I never did manage to get Win3.11 running on PCTask4, probably because I never came across the original disks.
It's a shame that nowadays with USB and Mediator that PCTask/PCX didn't continue to be developed as Win'98 would be pretty handy if it was emulated on Amiga.
Anyone know about HDToolBox SCSI bus testing on OS3.5/3.9?
-
You could always use basiliskII to emulate a mac and then use the mac to emulate windows, but I'm not sure if there is something for 68k mac that will emulate 98.
I know you can emulate win95 with softwindows on 68k mac.
-
I think PCX on Amiga could do Win'95. PCTask may have mentioned it for version 5.
It'd be interesting to hear from Amiga users who actually make a lot of use of MacOS 7.5.5 or Win3.11 via emulation.
-
Hyperspeed wrote:
I never did manage to get Win3.11 running on PCTask4, probably because I never came across the original disks.
It's a shame that nowadays with USB and Mediator that PCTask/PCX didn't continue to be developed as Win'98 would be pretty handy if it was emulated on Amiga.
Anyone know about HDToolBox SCSI bus testing on OS3.5/3.9?
I had Pc-Task working 1 time, win 95 on my Amiga 4000T.
==============================
Check out my Amiga Fourm at
www.islandfriendly.ca
==============================