Linux - if it installs completely - is a breeze. There are at least a dozen full install versions that are reliable. I wish more people used it. I admit that Windows W2K and Xp Pro are a vast improvement over Win95, and Me but there was lots of room for improvement. Not so sure about Win98; it's still a reliable OS for routine uses but loading drivers is a pain when the install disk is missing. Not much recent experience with Apple. I suppose it still lives up to its reputation.
Win 2000 is a stable platform but it is a slow dog in many ways, particularly booting up. I suspect Microsoft considers it the final round off of the 'NT branch' of their family. I guess the thing I like about it most is how it does multi-booting, which was a bit of a pain before this point. From an organizational standpoint it is quite solid. As far as running apps, it sucks a bit as far as compatibility with some widely used games and apps, which meant it never really gained a proper following - Microsoft didn't seem to care as they had other fish to fry...
Win 98SE doesn't get the credit it deserves. Sure it has problems but I have run my main machine with it for years and don't really miss XP and VISTA and their WPA nonsense. That attacks the good user which is stupid way to protect content. I go way back in computer history and I find that none of the concepts and tricks ever did diddly against the bad guys. If they had taken a different tack with SE to fix the thing with drivers and recovery...SE would still be crankin'
Windows 2k has a great platform for reliability and security, not so great for multimedia and DVD editing, its really meant for networking. 98&98SE are one in the same, just with a few fixes for the second ED. Not really what anyone wants after working with OS's that actually works. ME was a flunk!! XP almost broke the mold for multimedia and gaming. Its great untill you have to many programs running at the same time. (your asking for a freeze) But its defiantly an all around system. Vista has many great things to say about itself, it just needs all the hardware to catch up to it.
You should try the sp2 for win98se..you can get it from msfn - they are currently working on a sp3 for win98se also. You're not really being fair about 98 and 98se...the problem was that Microsoft abandoned it before the good stuff could be put in place. They were at a crossroads with updating NT4 and also the 95/98 line at the same time and they didn't have their act together at that point. Microsoft seems stuck in a fuzzy wuzzy we'll take care of y'all mode...My this and My that, and fuzzy fonts and soft plushy colors that make my eyes ache. Ubuntu is looking better and better all the time! I like being able to call the shots with MY computer and I don't appreciate makers and vendors telling me how it should be. As for WPA, I don't like and have never liked being made the whipping boy for the rip off guys that Microsoft can't find. Few customers appreciate that and companies shoot themselves in the foot when the antagonize their customers(that's the selling no-no number one y'know). That is the reason dongles etc etc have failed in the end because the bad guy arent't stopped for a second by any of it...
Definitely Ubuntu Linux. Ubuntu is free, fairly quick and easy to install (ever tried to install XP or Vista from once CD???) and has a very intuitive interface. There's tons of good software out there now, too. If you're using firefox and google aps most of the time anyway, you may as well be in Linux, and Ubuntu is the top of that heap in my opinion.
I was thinking of going with Windows Vista Home Premium 64 bit.No matter what is said Windows is still one of he best OS's out there.True that they have had there problems and in some ways still are but theyre usually right on top of it.I've used windows for years and XP and Vista are great products in my book.Most problems the typical user has have already been taken care of.For the others,"Are you sure you arent the bad guys?".That IS what the extra protection is there for.
This is a great question, I feel a little out of touch on some of the latest OS besides Windows. I like the Linux kernel, many flavors of it which includes even the Mac OS X which has BSD (FreeBSD 5.0) and Mach 3.0 (all together makes DARWIN) for it's kernel. I would say an OS would have to have great cohesive intercommunication layers of abstraction. A firm ISA (Instruction Set Architecture) with a great superscalar processor, of course this is another processor endeavor. As far as hardware catching up, It's the other way around. The hardware is here just no great push to utilize all the potential that processors have. How many of you are using True 64bit Games on a True 64bit system...what? Just a few? Lets get all the teams together so we can utilize the full potential of the system and make the programmers aware of the options they are missing. Just not enough communication or innovation when it comes to push the product to make the deadline!
You pick the OS for the type of processor is more like the question that is asked. I would ask "What is the best OS for this processor?"
If you where to say, Best OS for Sun UltraSPARC? I would say Solaris. If you where to say Best OS for P4? I would say what are you trying to do with this system? Pleasure or Work/Business?
If pleasure, how serious do you want to get...lol. Again, we assume we have a fantastic system that would support all the functionality that a game would need to exceed in. Performance is the name of the game and who is making it? What platform including GPU was the program intended for? 64bit or 32bit, single core, dual core, quad core and even as high as 64 core on the die (Tile64).
My feelings about OS's concern the purpose of the system.
Pleasure / leisure Microsoft Windows XP SP2: most games that the industry creates games for. Ubuntu isn’t bad for fun and pleasure, you can run Wine which is an Open Source implementation of the Windows API on top of X, OpenGL, and Unix. Bad thing is more layers of abstraction and slower translation or interpretation before it finally executes.
What other operating systems are out there besides some flavor of Linux, Unix, Windows, or embedded systems.
I would like to say I prefer for pleasure Video Game Consul Systems (PS3 = Cell Broadband Engine Architecture) since the OS (program) is tightly coupled to the processor in a single purpose and not a general purpose system.
WIN 2K-PRO.......only best os out there in my opinion.....even if not 2k-server pro.....2k is hard to knock out of the loop..... my 2k totally boots up in 3.5 sec's but I have a P-III CUSTOM BUILT SYSTEM BUILT BY ME FROM SCRATCH power system...... use it for all my e-bay and photography and graphic's work.....super os and engine!!!! THOM W. MICRO-X BEAVER CREEK, COLORADO/OHIO
Windows XP Pro is the best recent OS. Vista could be great, it's just not supported like XP. A lot of software/hardware companies havent fully supported their old software and hardware to run with vista. After service pack 1 Vista should be fine.
I agree that this is a magnificent question that should bring the fanboys running from their caves. I am of the opinion that every operating system has its place. Take Linux for example. In working with Linux I have found that, as a whole, I don't believe that it's ready for the desktop market simply because the average user would be dumb founded trying to compile certain applications that are not available in the repositories. On the other hand, there aren't too many applications that your "average users" would need that aren't available in the repositories. Two sides to every coin I guess.
The office I currently take care of runs strictly apple hardware with our outside sales staff running PC/Windows. We have a xServe running filemaker pro, samba, and http services. This job was my first experience administrating an apple server and I have to say it has been a pleasant experience. Do I think that OS X does best at server applications? No. That would be left to Linux. Linux has been the leader in that category for years. In my opinion OS X is well suited to office applications and productivity. The OS has a fluid feel to it and is very easy for your average user to use. I don't have to spend hours training the new person how to use their computer. This may sound kind of fanboyish, but just like the commercials say "it just works". My time is better spent teaching them how to use our database or company specific applications.
Now we get to everyone's favorite... Windows! Since I was a kid I've always used Windows as a gaming system only. I try to keep in mind that I am a geek and that things are a little easier for me than your average Joe (sometimes), but I still can't see why anyone would want to use such a buggy operating system for extended periods of time. If you have any experience with OS X then you will know what a pain Windows can be. Windows 98SE was one of the best gaming systems around. Then XP and now Vista. Yes, I said Vista, but why? I only say that Vista is a good gaming machine because of DirectX 10. While it is not used for any of your older games and mostly not by newer games you will see more and more games taking advantage of this newer technology in coming months. The more games that require it in the future will mean more sales for Microsoft because gamers always have to have the latest and greatest. Honestly, I have used Vista (because I have to). I have even been successful at making it semi-stable. It does, however, take a little tweaking and I'm sure that one day in the future Vista will be as stable as XP (even though this isn't really saying much).
In conclusion my opinion is that every OS has its place and these are the rules that I try to live by. Gamers: XP or Vista (depending on the games). Server applications: Linux. General Office and Productivity Machines: Apple.
Hello there all. I am new to the neighborhood, I just want to put my 2 cents in for thought. all that have chimed in about Linux is great. I use and have use many OS's. But remember 99% of computer users are using MS or Mac which is very sad to say. I think its just because the 1% of us don't fall behind in technology and are not afraid to experiment. My percents may be off. The the avage-J does not have a clue to what's out there let alone even to begin to know how to install or what to do with any other os's. The big os's Mac and MS are the main ones for home users, which I think make up a very large part of the 99 percent. I don't know just my thoughts. and just rocking the boat a bit.
)
)
