Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Which OS are the worst and the best?  (Read 11516 times)

Description:

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline uncharted

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 1520
    • Show all replies
Re: Which OS are the worst and the best?
« on: July 15, 2003, 01:27:31 AM »
In no particular order.

Favourites
===========

MacOS X - It just does it's job so well without getting in the way of actual apps, and combined with iApps and Apple hardware it's the first TRUE home computer since Commodore bit the dust. It doesn't look too shabby

AmigaOS3.x - Just for simplicity and shear tinkerability

+3DOS - Simple, easy nice with a clear text menu interface

RiscOS 3 - Very nice at the time, was perfect for the education market it was successful in.  My first experience of a GUI, and my introduction to digital art which later lead me to the Amiga.

MS-DOS - I used to enjoy being geeky and making a boot disk for every single game I bought. :-D

Windows 2000 - In my stint as an admin I had to look after lot of Win2000 machines, and I found it a good stable powerful and relatively smooth OS.  The only real issue I ever had was with a driver for a USB-Serial adapter on a laptop (Which wouldn't of been an issue if the dumbass network engineer who went out and bought  laptop would have bought one with a serial port like everyone else had - especially as half it's use was to console into routers and switches via serial :-o)

Worst
=======

MacOS 9.x - I can't believe people prefer this over OS X, it has to be the worst, most unstable, overly cluttered, ugliest OS ever made.  I tried it once on my dual boot eMac and when installing a program is crashed halfway through and killed the system, making it refuse to boot.

Windows 95 - I couldn't believe how bad it was when I was forced to downgrade from DOS/Win3.11.

Windows XP - This is a odd OS, if you run it and have no problems it's a pretty good windows version, but if problems hit, they hit BIG time!  It's telling when the UK's biggest PC reseller has to attach a recovery information leaflet to every recipt of every computer they sell.

Amiga(D)OS 1.x - UGH!  It's no wonder Amigas ended up becoming a toy/game machine when they were supplied with a toy GUI like this one had.  No standards in the UI (even different gadget syles in the OS itself!!!!)
 

Offline uncharted

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 1520
    • Show all replies
Re: Which OS are the worst and the best?
« Reply #1 on: July 15, 2003, 02:24:41 AM »
Quote

Hammer wrote:
Quote
@Hagar: Boy, are you the only other person around here that's used OS/2?! OS/2 is what MS-DOS should have been,

I have used OS/2 Warp  (i.e. given away free with magazine cover CD** and from IBM’s X86 PC software bundle)...

**Should have done it earlier i.e. before Windows 95’s release…


Do you mean given away free before Win95 came out or do you mean produced before Win95?  OS/2 Warp was before Win95
 

Offline uncharted

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 1520
    • Show all replies
Re: Which OS are the worst and the best?
« Reply #2 on: July 15, 2003, 02:51:58 AM »
Quote

Hammer wrote:
[IBM should have played hardball with MS during the Windows 95 era i.e. use cover-CD distribution tactic earlier not later. This is one method to compete with MS's  bundling of "Win95 with every new X86 PC" tactic.


Probably.

I had a Win3.11/OS2Warp dual boot machine shortly before Win95 became available, and to be honest Warp never got much use, as it was slow, clunky and had zero software for it.  It was technically superiour, but lost out to the M$ marketing machine.  Had NT's development gone differently we may all be using Warp now.