Well for me. I love win 98.. But compatibility sucks as the new years roll on by. As for vista this is the worst thing ever. It eats up too much PC processing power poorly managed rescources and a totally new gui to learn. Which makes it alittle fustrating to learn as compared to all past windows version after 3.11.

HONESTLY EVEN WITH MY LOVE FOR WIN 98 AND BEING A WIN XP pro USER. I WILL STILL HAVE TO SAY THE BEST IS THE LATEST. EVEN WITH CRASHES AND WHAT NOT, IF WE GET A GOOD PC WHICH ALLOWS THE OS TO RUN WELL WE WILL HAVE NO
Are E G are E T S
A new OS will not be invented to be worse off then the previous version. Hardcore programmers and PC users love win 98 because of the "don't want to learn new code" syndrome. Compatibility is hell being either a problem of the software or the OS in itself.
Old java programmers don't wanna move on to higher gen languages because of new codes and what ever, and later OS don't support the old programming languages due to security reasons. I really like this thread btw :D

DarkScorpion/// Hard Core Gamer of Trinidad & Tobago
Spend your money on a good PC and upgrade hardware and software every day... Best way to stay up to date :D "which is friggin impossible"

Go for a 900GHz processor quad core of course PeNtIuM 20
900THz or ram "lol" 4DDDRAM
Multi liked AGP 99999999 series

-reply by Marcus

Reply

undefinedthanks alot

Reply

Windows 3.11 All The Way!
The Best Version Of Windows

For those of you who have never messed with a Win3.X series machine before, let me tell you its a heck of alot different than its replacements. For one, the way the entire system was built was different. This was a true DOS machine, meaning you could actually close Windows and go back to a DOS prompt for all of those low level file system tasks. Also, Windows at the time was more of a friendly user interface for DOS. I still miss the days of writing assembly code using the DOS "debug" feature. I still have a Compaq Prolinea 4/50 under my bed with a 500 MB hard drive and 18 MB of RAM running Windows 3.11 For Workgroups. Still, after 15 years, it still works fine. It was an office computer before I got it, so its cool to look at all of the spreadsheets and documents and the like and get a feel for what office life must have been like in 1993 when the PC was just picking up good steam.

But I do have to say that I'm partial to 98SE. I like it because its simple, and it works (most of the time). Also, its somewhat nostalgic to use it, it was one of the last operating systems Windows made before they decided that the operating system was more intelligent than the user and they started with the whole "Here, let me, the operating system, screw this up for you and not tell you anything about what I did wrong." type attitude.

-reply by Rale

Reply

Don't we just all love Windows 3.1? Heh, kidding, kidding. My first was a Windows 95. I don't remember much about it though--I was only around five then. I do remember seeing a lot of bloatware (wow, firefox spell check recognizes this as a word!) installed on it, but that isn't really the fault of Windows. Afterwards my dad bought Windows 98, which I ended up using extensively as well. I didn't really notice that much of a difference from 95 back then, but then again, I was only a kid.

Later on he bought Windows 2000, which we used for many, many years. I never had many problems with Win 2K and rather liked its minimalist style with graphics. (I'm not a big fan of fancy graphics unless I'm looking at a print ad or unless it serves a major purpose.) I didn't get as many blue screens of death as everyone else seemed to report.

I had an extremely short experience with XP and very quickly moved to Vista, which I find fine. I haven't had many problems getting things to work on Vista. The graphics I don't particularly like, but that's fine because I've also managed to disable them, so now the graphics run just like Windows XP and don't take up any extra memory.

I've also got Ubuntu installed, but I still haven't been able to get my wireless working (oh, thou art disgusting, Broadcom!). I would go and buy a more Linux-compatible wireless card, but I'd need money for that (which my cash-strapped self does not have...) I've tried installing the drivers and then getting ndiswrapper, but none of the methods I've found have worked. I think I might work on settling Ubuntu on a desktop instead so that I can avoid the hassles with wireless.

Reply

My first Windows computer was in 1999, Windows 98. It came with a CD to optionally upgrade to 98SE. It was good, but the first thing I did was open up a Command Prompt window and try things in there (like fdisk)

I don't do a whole lot of gaming, but initially I thought that Windows 98 was really slow, especially at startup. That was because Compaq put tons of software on it like Easy Access Keyboard, Compaq Support, McAfee VirusScan (had like 8 different components to load). The programs were good, and things that I got out of cereal boxes (Scrabble, Boggle, Clue) actually worked.

In 2003, 4 years later, I got Windows XP. It was fast and easy to learn. I still had Command Prompt, and the wizards and stuff were quite new. That's when I discovered Firefox and found it to be so much better than Internet Explorer. It had a Pentium 3GHz processor and Task Manager kept things to not become memory hogs so everything was good. Only problem was Office 2000 didn't work, didn't know about OpenOffice.org back then.

Now I am running Windows Vista and it is working great! The visual effects are good and networking tools have improved a lot. It is much suitable for new computer users with all the tips and stuff though.

I am running Ubuntu and I must say that it is better than Windows in a lot of ways. Except for program compatibility (and yes I have WINE installed). I have tried a Mac and found those to be far too easy to use.

So as for Windows versions, I would stick with XP as my favourite. After all, I've only seen Windows 3.1 on some videos and screenshots and stuff, loks interesting.

Reply