What Operating Systems Have You Used

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Originally posted by: Ma8thew Windows is no longer a DOS shell. All 'home' versions up until ME (shudder) were DOS shells. Windows NT is Microsofts other kernal. This was used on the 'business' line, until XP, when all versions of Window were based on NT. Thus, Windows is no longer a DOS shell. BTW, DOS is based on QDOS, standing for Quick and Dirty Operating System.quote>

Quite correct.  The main difference in the NT decor is that it is somewhat machine independent.  The Hardware Access Layer (or HAL, in honor of Stanley Kubrik) lives between the application layer and the hardware.  It handles all the interfaces to the drivers and is supposed to make the O/S look the same to the user no matter what the underlying box is. 

NT5.0 (a.k.a. W2K) actually had versions that ran on different platforms from the Pentium to the Power PC.  NT5.1 (a.k.a WinXP) actually runs on several platforms.  I have an AMD 2400+, there are several Pentiums, and it also runs on dual core machines, treating each core as a separate CPU, which is correct.

Now, it they would just divorce the application house from the O/S house, the kernel would be a lot cleaner and smaller.  All those special deals for IE and Office are a burden on the O/S that are quite unconscionable.  Think of all the legal fees they could have saved if they hadn't been so greedy.

[tchaos713 5]

Hmmm...

Currently Windows XP Pro SP2

Previously:

Windows XP Home and Pro(much different from SP2)

Windows 98

Windows 95

Windows 3.1

MS-DOS 6.0

MS-DOS 5.1

Whatever shells came with the Apple IIc

[Tarkus 6,932]

Currently Windows XP Home Edition SP2.  I'd like to use something else, but there's nothing viable.  Started out with Windows 3.1/MS-DOS 6.0.  Held out for quite sometime to get Win95, then went to WinME and finally WinXP.  Personally, I liked Win95 and WinME better than WinXP.  XP seems to like to overburden the hard disk and RAM, particularly SP2.  I probably won't get Vista when it comes out, and I've actually been toying with switching back to WinME!  I've got one computer I don't use on the internet that has just WinXP SP1, and just an AMD AthlonXP 2400+, and it runs WAY faster than my Athlon 64 3200+ with WinXP SP2.

I've used Macs before and absolutely can't stand them.  Mac OS X is a HUGE improvement over Mac OS 9, though.  I don't like how when you close a program, you actually haven't closed the program.  I certainly won't be buying a Mac now that they have Intel processors.  I stopped buying Intel after I had two of those Slot 1 Pentium IIIs blow up on me over a very short period of time. 

Apparently, Intel doesn't even use Intel processors in some of their office computers . . .

(Hope I didn't offend anyone with my rant about Intel.)

[tchaos713 5]

Don't switch back to Windows ME... If you're going to go back a step, use Windows 2000... Many of the benefits of XP without the larger footprint in memory.

As for Intel vs. AMD, I think it is very telling that AMD has held the larger market share for a few months running. I think AMD makes better chips and the market is finally beginning to bear this out.

[flamesrock 6]

Gentoo Linux 2.6.16

[S70 0]

My brother bought an Apple II back in the day, and that hooked me on the Apple side. That christmas he bought me a Coleco ADAM, with the tape drive and the top-loading slot that would play games from the Coleco game system. (It actually came with "Dragon Slayer", with Dirk the Daring!)

About two summers later I bought an Apple IIe, which I owned until about '92, when I bought my first Mac, an Apple Macintosh LC. (The LC stood for "Low-cost, Color".) The selling point for that was you could get a IIe emulator card and an external drive, so all the 5.25" floppies with all my games would still work on the LC. I think it was running System 6-something. It was a big deal when I upgraded to System 7, big changes! (I think it was the LC that I first started playing SimCity, the original. Remember when you could buy the building-packs that would make the buildings be different eras or places? I forget the details, but it was cool, for the time.)

Then I bought a Mac Performa PowerPC 5200, which got me through System 7 and 8.

Then I bought an iBook G3, running OS X, which is primarily now my wife's computer (or when I want to work in front of the tv) after I got the iMac G5, which right now has OS X.3.9. I don't want to upgrade to OS X.4 Tiger because I'm afraid of how it'll react to all the studio equipment I have that runs with Logic Pro. I had a hard enough time getting my MOTU 828 mkII to work again after the last "minor update".

[GrandCentralParkway 1]

Running XP.  But I can't wait for Vista.

[JohnB 66]

Have used: Windows 1995, Windows 1998, and Windows 1998 SE (Biggest piece of junk on the planet. My computer crashed 2 times) Also used Windows 2000 Pro.

Right now using Windows XP pro. Windows 2000 and Windows XP are by far the best.

[Ratieya455 1]

Originally posted by: tchaos713 Don't switch back to Windows ME... If you're going to go back a step, use Windows 2000... Many of the benefits of XP without the larger footprint in memory.quote>

Very true. Don't go near Windows ME. It is a truly awful O/S. If you are sick of XP then definitely go for 2000 Professional. It runs any games with the SP4 installed (comes with any new versions).

[Tarkus 6,932]

The thing I worry about with 2000 Pro is security.  I've heard it has some security gaps, and that they probably won't be fixed (if I'm not mistaken, Microsoft stopped supporting it).  I also have considered uninstalling SP2.  I've got Norton Internet Security, so I had wondered whether or not SP2 was really doing anything for me (other than slowing down my computer).

Of course, if anyone ever comes out with a viable alternative to Windows that's secure, fast, and runs on a PC, I'll switch over to that.

And thanks for the advice on ME.  I had wondered.  I know it generally has a bad reputation, but I never had any serious problems with it, surprisingly.

[Ma8thew 77]

You are mistaken. Microsoft continue to support 2000, due to the large number of enterprise customers.

[JRmystery 0]

My house has 3 computers...

1) Mine has windows XP on it.
2) My sister has windows XP on it as well, but her computer is not working.  (Its an Emachine)
3) My parents have windows 98

As you can tell my sister and I have the windows XP and parents have the older one (windows 98).   My sister's has the most meomory on it,  I have 70GB on mine, and my parents only has 3GB on it.   Of those my sister and I both have CD burners.  Mine is the fastest, it burns at 48X.  My sisters does not even come that close, it can only burn at 12X.  But when I used my parents computer for something, its slower than mine, where's mine is a bit faster.   Overall Windows XP is better.