OS 3.9 vs OS 3.5

[stefcep2]

Sorry guys but all posts say "get os3.9, its better" but other than getting multiview to show jpegs and gifs by clicking on them, no-one says why its better, and what features you can't live with that are in OS3.9.  

Personally I think the ONLY thing you can't live without is large hard disc support, if you have a hard disk bigger than 4.3 gig.  

I have 3.1,3.5 and 3.9.  I HATE the reset on cold boot that happens with OS 3.5 and 3.9, i can get multiview to show jpegs band gifs in 3.1, and the 3.5/3.9 icon scheme is nice but only if you have a graphics card otherwise its too slow.  

IMHO if you use the native displays and have hard disk less than 4.3 g then just install OS3.1 with MagicWB, MagicMenu, Toolmanger for a dock or two, toolsdaemon, clicktofront commodity, diropus4, some ak datatypes, viewtek, ppshow, hippoplayer, your choice of cdplayer, mpega and you have everything you need and 5 second boot-up on an 50mhz 030

[stefcep2]

pVC wrote:
I think the best thing for 3.9 is fully working TCP/IP stack. With 3.5 you only got time limited demo version. There are some discussions about legality of the 3.9's stack, but that doesn't change the fact that you got it and it's the best stack for most

Oh and other stuff which you should have paid getting separately like CacheCDFS, Amplifier, XAD etc. Those things made it worth for me at the time, not particularly the OS itself (I was/am Magellan2 user anyway).

I already had Miami deluxe and a cd filesystem (funny that you needed to already have a cdrom installed to install OS3.5 or OS3.9, but that you got cachecdfs on the cd). Looking back I bought both OS3.5 and Os3.9 because I wanted to support Amiga hoping for a revival.  And at the time i was more of a sucker for OS upgrades that meant a nicer-looking icon scheme.  Not anymore, function wins over aesthetics.

I recently installed OS3.1 with the MagicWb icon scheme, Dopus4 toolmanager on my A4000 68060 with CV64 on a scsi card and on a A1200 with 40 mhz 68040: Its quick to boot, quick to draw icons, easy on the eye, easy to launch programs with, its what amiga was always about.  I look at Amikit,- yeah it looks nice, lots of new features, i appreciate the work thats gone into it, but you know i found it hard to find my way around it (and i know amiga), what with start buttons and menus, task bars, weird menu items its a great OS if you want a Windows-Amiga hybrid.  It just didn't feel like the amiga experience i know.  But maybe I'm just a ludite...

[stefcep2]

On a desktop A1200?