Forum Rules - Formats - Spotlights  -  Home - Library - New Additions

which ms os do you like

Rodney01Rodney01
edited April 2007 in Software
just wanted to know which classic OS's do you like

Comments

  • anantha92anantha92
    Windows 3.x because it's the newest on the list.
  • Rodney01Rodney01
    i reakon personally that windows 2.1/386 or windows 3.1 is the best but thats why im hosting this poll to see what others think
  • 16bit16bit
    I would have to give my vote to Windows for Workgroups, it introduced me to networking and I built my first small LAN using that OS.
  • alexzarachalexzarach
    WFW 3.11
  • QQ
    DOS was such a classic, my vote goes to it.

    -Q
  • Lupinthe3rdLupinthe3rd
    MS-DOS as its the only OS on the list the rest are shells :P But I would say 3.1 out of those as I've used that the most out of all of them listed.
  • FedeArgFedeArg
    windows for workgroups 3.1x ; )
  • KirkKirk
    Windows for Workgroups 3.11! smile.gif I used to love that OS back in the 486 days.

    -Kirk
  • BashBash
    DOS. Has essential tools even for today. Namely things like BIOS Flashers, and hard drive utilities.
  • BlueSunBlueSun
    DOS has its place and uses I suppose.

    But I perfer a GUI, so I'll go with wfwg 3.1x

    Mainly because networking in 3.x was a bitch and a half. I still never sucessfully got it working in 3.1 but it was a breeze with WFWG 3.11 and I use my network so much that any OS that doesn't support it is usless to me.
  • UglynGreyUglynGrey
    networking for 3.1 was networking in DOS basically, fairly straight forward if you've done it a jazillion times. Maybe I should post a VHD of that.
  • anantha92anantha92
    Personally i hate dos. It isn't as powerful as the GUI ones, and is much mroe difficult for those who arn't really into computers. ALthough it does have utilities for today, Vista is still much better at doing these kinds of things.
  • Constitutional DefenderConstitutional Defender
    I should put DOS as classic windows are NOT os's.
  • BlueSunBlueSun
    I was wondering when someone would point that out.

    Supposedly, networking under DOS was straight forward, it certainly seemed that way.

    But it still never worked! :-|

    Actually, correction, I remember recently trying that on one of my old 486's

    It was working, I was able to map a network share or two, but then it stopped working. I'm not sure what happened, or why it just stopped.
  • QQ
    BlueSun wrote:
    ISupposedly, networking under DOS was straight forward, it certainly seemed that way.

    But it still never worked! :-|

    Sounds like AppleTalk/LocalTalk with my SE(/30)s: It seemed so simple, but NOTHING ever showed up.

    -Q
Sign In or Register to comment.