Need some expert 3.1/3.9 advice, making custom 3.1 disks

[murple]

spotUP wrote:
3.9 sucks.

What makes you say that? I have a 3.1 system I'm planning to upgrade to 3.9 soon. 3.9 looks like it has many new useful things. I've never heard anyone say that it sucks and 3.1 is better.

[murple]

That's why I asked the poster why he thinks it sucks. I've never heard anyone say that before. I havent ever used 3.9 yet (3.1 is the newest I've used) but it looks like it has many more features.

Are there any backwards compatibility issues with 3.9 (other than requiring 3.1 ROMs)? Do any programs or hardware not work with 3.9? I have an A1200 accelerator (CSA 12 Gauge) which I hear has some issues with 3.9, but I'm not using it in the machine that will get the upgrade (and I think the problems are a minor thing that only affect the craptastic non-DMA SCSI on the CSA).

Is there some kind of design change that bugs you (the person saying it sucks)? Do you just not like it because its a post-Commodore OS and not "authentic"? I'm really curious.

I likely will install 3.9 anyway on the one machine with new enough ROMs, but I'm wondering why someone would prefer 3.1 to 3.9.

[murple]

Neat find... you try to install it and see what you end up with? If nothing else, what kind of internal version number does it give. I'd be curious if theres anything worthwhile on it that isn't in the published 3.1 OS.

Wonder what the rules on making copies of these are.