B00tDisk wrote:
Lack of choices in OS?
I've got a PC here that will run:
Linux
Windows of any vintage
Unix
MacOS
BeOS
AROS
OS/2
...
Hmm. so, we've got UNIX; Windows; UNIX; UNIX; an operating system you can't get, afaik - certainly I'd love to dl beos, but my googling has been fruitless; AROS (I'll come back to this); and DOS.
UNIX: UNIX is UNIX, I really don't care whether your GUI is unique or different - the services the OS provides are consistently antiquated.
Windows: Enough said.
BeOS: Haiku is a work in progress, from what I understand. Certainly looks like it _will be_ nice, though. But it's not a real option at this point.
AROS: The website for AROS indicates that native operation is still in testing. Running it on Linux is running Linux as the OS, whatever may have control of the screen. This pretty much means that I can't use AROS on a system that I intend to do paid work on.
I just can't take the chance that there will be a software error that forces me to spend hours installing and configuring software. I'd use it for my media center, but I have AC97 audio, not a Creative 10k based soundcard, and my system doesn't have a usable open PCI slot.
DOS: Honestly, OS/2? Does it even have drivers for modern hardware, much less support for multi-core processors? AFAIK, it does not. I don't think I could even get OS/2 drivers for my video card!
So, adding up the viable operating systems, there's UNIX, and Windows. That's two choices, neither of which I'm happy with. UNIX is a multiuser server operating system, always was, always will be. You can rig it to run as a desktop operating system, but that's like buying a Mack truck and commuting in it.