Worst OS?
- Thread starter Mikoyan
- Start date
Anything with Microsoft stamped on it. 
I'm sticking with Win98 though - I've got an "older" scanner (still works like new) that doesn't have any drivers for the newer OS's. My friend had problems with Win 2000.
I'm sticking with Win98 though - I've got an "older" scanner (still works like new) that doesn't have any drivers for the newer OS's. My friend had problems with Win 2000.
penvzila
Prince
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2001
- Messages
- 362
WinME is the worst ive worked with
winxp actually is pretty damn good. I've never had one software or hardware issue that wasn't easy to resolve, and it's only ever crashed once (when i tried to enque 2065 mpcs into winamp, and it tried to load a separate instance for each one). I've had winxp ripping audio from two drives, and encoding to mpc, AND listening to music, and no crashes/speed issues. But maybe that's just my badass system. Sorry for turning this thread't topic upside down
winxp actually is pretty damn good. I've never had one software or hardware issue that wasn't easy to resolve, and it's only ever crashed once (when i tried to enque 2065 mpcs into winamp, and it tried to load a separate instance for each one). I've had winxp ripping audio from two drives, and encoding to mpc, AND listening to music, and no crashes/speed issues. But maybe that's just my badass system. Sorry for turning this thread't topic upside down
Rheinmetall
Interplanetary Assassin
Win ME. I was at a LAN-party with my friends. One of them had Win ME installed. While playing I heard numerous curses concerning Win ME about every 15 minutes when it crashed on him.
TrailblazingScot
I was kittenOFchaos
Windows ME...having formatted and moved onto XP Home Edition I now can see how god-damn awful ME was!
I'm in love with XP
I'm in love with XP
Perfection
The Great Head.
No wonder your title is "fool"
I think I'll give out my worst of worst awards
Unreliability:
Win ME, runner up is Win 95
Evilest microsoft products:
Win XP runner up is Win 95
Overuse of stupid user-freindly features
Win XP runner up is tie between Mac Os 9 and Win ME
Networking nightmares
Dos with Win 3.X shell runner up is any Earlier Mac OS
Overall worst OS
Win ME runner up is Win XP
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2001
- Messages
- 3,136
Maybe your title should read "fool"
ME does win, but in my 5 years w/95 I only had to restart due to system failures about 10-20 times.....one of the most reliable OSes I've seen(aside from DOS/CPM
)Again, XP does win....but 95 is in no way the runner up. I think ME at least deserves a runner up spot here
Not off by that much, but I personally would've flopped the 2(3). Mainly opinion there
Not a breath of arguement...windows for workgroups wasn't too bad though, but it wasn't really 3.11
Your first choice is very credible, but I'm afraid to say and I'm not alone in saying this, that XP is most definately not deserving of the runner up position here. In fact, if you are looking for compatibility and tons of features XP is really the top of the line. In any upgrade you lose compatibility but XP has done a good job of stopping that.
Booooooooooo!!!!!!
GenghisK
...
A friend had a really annoying bug under XP. She had 10 computers at her office and asked me to install Norton internet security 2003 on all of them. Everything went well, until I installed on the only XP machine... Crashed. Then reboot. I tried to uninstall it to reinstall it more properly. No way. XP won't let me uninstall it, saying I was not a superuser therefore I couldn't uninstall anything. Well, I was logged under the main administrator of the machine... No comment. 
Xp... as someone said, with 95 we were in front of a cliff, with XP we made a big step forward... I guess I was right working under Linux at work, like anyother colleagues...
Xp... as someone said, with 95 we were in front of a cliff, with XP we made a big step forward... I guess I was right working under Linux at work, like anyother colleagues...
Perfection
The Great Head.
Guess you got lucky, for me win 95 was extermly buggy, maybe I got a bad copy.Originally posted by gonzo_for_civ
ME does win, but in my 5 years w/95 I only had to restart due to system failures about 10-20 times.....one of the most reliable OSes I've seen(aside from DOS/CPM
I was going for at the time of release, ME was just a screwed up versian of 98Originally posted by gonzo_for_civ
Again, XP does win....but 95 is in no way the runner up. I think ME at least deserves a runner up spot here
At the time they wern't bad but at all now they are getting really hard to network with windowsOriginally posted by gonzo_for_civ
Not a breath of arguement...windows for workgroups wasn't too bad though, but it wasn't really 3.11
Retrospectivly I was skewed by my massive anti-microsoft bias here.
Oh boo yourselfOriginally posted by gonzo_for_civ
Booooooooooo!!!!!!
hbdragon88
haunted by blackness
WinME is one of the worst, I think. My dad's co-worker hates it as well - he told me that the System Restore backed up his whole hard drive, filling it up, and tech support didn't believe him on that issue.
What's the deal with anti-Microsoft? Microsoft is one of the best! I resent people that go up on tv and tell you why you should switch from a MS to an Apple. Microsoft has an easy interface and works to improve it. The error report thing that they have when a program shuts down is great and Windows Updates always insures that I'm protected.
What's the deal with anti-Microsoft? Microsoft is one of the best! I resent people that go up on tv and tell you why you should switch from a MS to an Apple. Microsoft has an easy interface and works to improve it. The error report thing that they have when a program shuts down is great and Windows Updates always insures that I'm protected.
Perfection
The Great Head.
Microsoft is an evil corperation dedicated to increasing its own power in the marketplace regardless of who they must destroy, Windows is a very buggy OS and MAC OS and LINUX are much better, My favorite saying is, "the ideal OS has the flexibility of LINUX, the ease of use of MAC OS and Minesweeper from Windows"
hbdragon88
haunted by blackness
Linux is strictly for the geeks. Computer geeks and all that understand Linux. Even with its new Lindows and all it's still not up to steam with Windows. And if you download Linux you gotta download all the programs yourself as well.
I resent Macs because of their commercials, they really drive me nuts. I tried Macs once and didn't see the glamour and hype that the switch people say. Maybe if I owned one I'd see but $1300 for the sunflower mac is a bit high.
I resent Macs because of their commercials, they really drive me nuts. I tried Macs once and didn't see the glamour and hype that the switch people say. Maybe if I owned one I'd see but $1300 for the sunflower mac is a bit high.
Sionide
Chieftain
w00t linux rocks, windows is just.. made by..monkeys! hehe
Plexus
Architeuthidae puericomedentis
I remeber using Mac OS8 on school computers a couple years ago... I can't recall a day that it didn't crash on me...
Linux sucks. Most useless OS I ever installed.
Currently on my computer I have Win XP Pro and Linux Slakware 8.
I never even ONCE experienced a crash from XP, but Linux, other than being totally redundant, got stuck once.
When I had Windows 2k Pro, which is a wonderful OS by itself, it crashed exactly ONE time when I tried to run a very old Dos game.
Windows 2K has reliability that is on par with Linux, and tops Mac OS 9 and X.
Windows XP is basically 2k with added compatability, user friendly features, etc. I can't say anything against it.
Other than the fact that the Toyish GUI is more system-heavy than the good ol' style that was first introduced with 95, I must say I have nothing against XP.
95 was Okay, it was quite a breathtaking improvement from 3.11, but it had performance and reliability issues for me. Too many times the computer got all bungled up.
98 (Not SE) was Awful. Crashed all the time.
2K was enormous. Excellent OS, almost no Crashes at all, very fast.
XP for me is just like 2K but more compatible with Everything. It's like a Wish come true.
Linux Slackware 8 is... Reliable but useless.
Since XP works so smoothly, I so no need for using Linux.
Currently on my computer I have Win XP Pro and Linux Slakware 8.
I never even ONCE experienced a crash from XP, but Linux, other than being totally redundant, got stuck once.
When I had Windows 2k Pro, which is a wonderful OS by itself, it crashed exactly ONE time when I tried to run a very old Dos game.
Windows 2K has reliability that is on par with Linux, and tops Mac OS 9 and X.
Windows XP is basically 2k with added compatability, user friendly features, etc. I can't say anything against it.
Other than the fact that the Toyish GUI is more system-heavy than the good ol' style that was first introduced with 95, I must say I have nothing against XP.
95 was Okay, it was quite a breathtaking improvement from 3.11, but it had performance and reliability issues for me. Too many times the computer got all bungled up.
98 (Not SE) was Awful. Crashed all the time.
2K was enormous. Excellent OS, almost no Crashes at all, very fast.
XP for me is just like 2K but more compatible with Everything. It's like a Wish come true.
Linux Slackware 8 is... Reliable but useless.
Since XP works so smoothly, I so no need for using Linux.
Similar threads
