Which OS are the worst and the best?

[Hammer]

@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…

[uncharted]

Hammer wrote:

@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

[Hammer]

I might install Windows 2003 on a spare hard drive just to see what it's like.

Has anyone tried it yet?

I have tried and currently using  Win2K3 EE on another machine.

Default installation looks like Windows 2000 GUI with near-brain-dead wizards for server maintenance.  Windows XP GUI and I.E 6.0’s scripting engines was not activated by default.  

It some issues with MS-SQL 7…

[Hammer]

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

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.

[uncharted]

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.

[smerf]

Hi,

The best OS's I have ever used are listed in the following order:

Mini code, (I like playing with nibbles)

CPM (This was a great OS)

DOS (Wonder how fast it would run on today's machines)

Windows 2000 (this os is fantastic)

Windows XP (Seems pretty solid to me)

Windows 98 (Great for game machines)

Windows 95 (a crash OS)

Amiga DOS 1.0  ( Why did they use DF0: instead of C:)

Amiga DOS 1.1 (really made me mad lost my favorite game Arctic Fox, wouldn't run on anything but a A1000 and 1.0 DOS, another exclusive game by Electronic Arts)

Amiga DOS 2.0 ( lot of games quit playing on this one especially if they were copy protected, the thing I liked about 2.0 was its support for hard drives, the thing I hated was most of your software was copy protected and couldn't be put on a hard drive)

Amiga DOS 3.0 / 3.1 (even though the OS looked like it was improving the copy protection stopped you from putting any good games on your hard drive, any improvements in the OS at this time was literally useless for the Amiga, the Amiga was at its height but the software developers made it suck)

Amiga DOS 3.5 ( major improvement but for what, the Amiga is dead at this point and any improvement even major improvements did no good)

Amiga DOS 3.9 ( possibly a good OS but who can tell there is nothing or anybody supporting it.  The people who are supporting Amiga are only doing so hoping with their last dying breath that Amiga will do the impossible and be the Pheonix out of the ashes but the only bird the Amiga fanatics will get is the one on thier hand called the middle digit.

have fun computin
smerf
 :-P  :crazy:

[AmigaMac]

Well I've had my share of experiences in the land of Operating Systems:

Worst:

DOS - My hatred for this OS dates back to my teenage years, it sucked PERIOD!

WinNT - like Wacoon said, it was not as stable as people made it out to be.

Win98 - it was more buggy than Win95!

WinXP - though probably not as bad as previous versions Windows, it's still quirky, clunky and unpredictable.

Mac OS X (10.0) - Though I like Unix based OSes, this one was just plain SLOW!

Best:

VMS - probably one of the best networking type OS out there.  It was very stable as well, it's a shame that DEC got bought out by a half-baked PC company called Compaq :-(

Solaris - This is probably the next best OS behind VMS with the same +s.  I've worked around this OS for nearly a decade now :-D

BeOS - Just a cool all-around OS that would practically turn any slow PC/Mac into a fast performing machine.  I still use this OS now.

Linux  (the RedHat distro is my most favorite) - Though a few years ago I probably wouldn't have listed this OS, I quite like it these days.  A very good and cheap alternative to the more expensive/proprietary Unix Oses out there.

Mac OS X (10.1 and up) - though I was not exactly happy with the intitial release of OS X, I have been a satisfied user since the release of 10.1 and I am looking forward to Panther's release soon.

AOS - what's not to like?  :-P  :-D  ;-)

[Insanity]

Finally someone starts trashing NT4, because it really deserves it.

If you Internet explorer, notepad and word, then you can use almost any os (except windows 1.0, etc).

The saddest thing about IRIX and Solaris, is that the hardware required to run it cost $$$£££€€€.

But then again, sun makes laptops, ranging from 120000 SEK ( 8.1 SEK = 1 $ ) and up.

And we're talking SCSI and no crap here.

Wonder if it even has the option of running on battery.

[Wain]

I REALLY HATE TRS-DOS!!!
(This was the DOS for the TRS-80 line of computers)

After that I hate Windows 2000 because it just ate itself today and I've noticed that my files are much less recoverable due to difficulty in getting boot disks that support NTFS among several other things, like being in the console repair mode logged in as Administrator, and STILL not being allowed access to half my directories!

I like Win98 Second Edition.  I never had problem with it for over 3 years, I had one blue screen of death from something that was competely my fault, and should (not that it did) it decide to claw the MBR, kernal dll, and several other pieces of itself from my hard-drive, I can still get into my directories to copy any valuable data off before I reformat with any MS-bootable floppy.

I also hate all deciples of windows 3 (3.0, 3.1, 3.11)

the 4.x series of MS-DOS sucked too!

Actually, now that I think about it, the only good MS-DOSes were 3.1, 5, and 6.22  those all pretty much worked the way they were supposed to.  The rest of the 6 series would've been good if doublespace didn't have a tendency to trash your hard drive.

I am however thankful that I never have to use edlin again to fix a stupid autoexec file.

I have always found MacOS to be obtuse and annoying.

Linux scales the range from treating me like I'm a newborn baby infant (Redhat) to being nearly user hostile (slackware) if you're a relative beginner.

I liked Be.

I find I have little complaint even with the early versions of Workbench.

Yah, I'd have to say TRS-DOS was really my enemy (I don't remember which version) tho'

[Atheist]

Why does windoesnot suck?

windoesnot pro sp1
C:\windows
contains: 7,198 files, 369 folders
Size: (972,913,055 bytes)

WTF??? Is this some kind of joke??? This is before application programs, games or personal files. Are drivers in there too? Probably not.

I REFUSE to believe it is necessary to have that much code to turn on your computer, have a GUI, operate a mouse, ser/par port and kb. The either net card is just a port like the ser port is, does it really need that much code to work? I just don't get what's going on in there!!!!!

It's madness, madness I tell you!!!


AOS4.0 is gonna rock, even though it'll be bulky due to being done with RISC code.

Call me biased, but AOS just works the way I expect things to, that's all, we're in sync with each other.


AmigaOne! The best OS no one ever heard of!!!!

[Atheist]

Gaidheal wrote:

AROS:  well I am working on the project now, so I am hardly an objective observer.. but my thoughts are as follows;

Okay, I have some questions that aren't clear, and I have been to the website already.

1) Will I be able to boot into 1.3.3, and 2.x with AROS? I know it's a 3.x thing.

2) Does it support OCS and/or ECS and/or AGA graphics?

3) Can I play all of my games? Will it support catweasel, so I could boot off of stubborn copy protected games?

4) It will boot directly into AROS off the HD, no need for windos, and the filesystem on the HD will be FFS? (Except it will need the drivers, obviously.)

5) Will AMOS Pro work on it?  :-)  :-D  Must...have...


AmigaOne! The road less traveled.

[Ni72ous]

Why does everyone hate win me? i found that it was much better than win 98/se, more stable and more stuff worked.

[bhoggett]

@Atheist

I think you misunderstand. AROS is NOT an emulator. It's an operating system.

So, you can't boot into 1.3 or 2.0 or 3.x, and you won't have support for OCS, ECS or AGA unless you use something like UAE on AROS.

[duesi]

Best:

- AmigaOS 3.x
- Windows2000
- red-hat Linux

Worst:
- Windows ME
- Windows NT 4.0

[NyQuil]

The Win ME installation on my laptop is about the most stable OS I have ever had. I know everybody hates it and says it's shait, but I really never had any problems with it. That said, it's far from the best.

Best : Windows XP Pro

Worst: Mac OS 8

[Jupp3]

Not really "worst OS" but it has one feature, OS'es should NOT have...

C64 GEOS, it has copy protection, sure, you can use original disk to
just boot, and after booting, replace it with copy of it, and it does
work... Untill your original "boot disk" breaks up... Then, you cannot
access any of your works untill you get another original GEOS disk...

Sucks... I think, latest versions didn't have such protection
though...

But didn't Microsoft just introduce much similar system for Windows
XP?

You know, "artificially" prevent user from taking full backup of
(finally) working system, for easier (re-)install later...

Then, about the "good" OS'es, I guess, dr. DOS is best DOS for PC's
(Isn't it called "Freedos" nowadays?)

MS-DOS isn't that bad either; Most likely becouse it wasn't created by
Microsoft in the first place :-)

One rather new OS worth mentioning is Arachne, multitasking graphical
operating system... For unexpanded C64!

Comes with TCP/IP, Web browser and Telnet client