| Click here to select a new forum. |
| WOW |
Posted by: macintoshman on 2008-04-04 18:39:46
I got a Powermac 7200/75 with 128mb of RAM and a 1gb HD.
The best part:
A Power Macintosh 6100/66 PC Compatable
I cant wait to have a 95/Mac OS 7 Machine! Best of 2 worlds! But, I need the medusa cable.
|
Posted by: Anonymous Freak on 2008-04-04 18:55:11
"Best" of 2 worlds? Sorry, Win95 is not the "best", by any stretch.
If you want a good OS that runs on that era hardware, go for NT 4.0.
|
Posted by: Quadraman on 2008-04-04 21:28:11
"Best" of 2 worlds? Sorry, Win95 is not the "best", by any stretch.
If you want a good OS that runs on that era hardware, go for NT 4.0. NT was more stable, but wasn't consumer oriented. Running consumer grade software under NT wasn't always a flawless operation. It wasn't until the consumer and professional lines were merged in Win2K that the distinction between consumer and professional software began to disappear.
|
Posted by: luddite on 2008-04-04 22:58:46
My 6100/66 had Windows 3.1 on it... it was the worst computing experience of my entire life.
|
Posted by: Dan 7.1 on 2008-04-05 00:46:56
grats man!
and whats wrong with win95? i quite like it, actually...
|
Posted by: macintoshman on 2008-04-05 05:34:55
I agree Windows 3.x was the worst thing ever made.
And, THE 7200s HARD DISK DIED!!!!!!!!!
Anyone have a SCSI Hard Disk?
|
Posted by: Unknown_K on 2008-04-05 06:36:23
Windows 3.1 was just fine.
|
Posted by: John8520 on 2008-04-05 06:52:21
Windows 3.1 was pretty lame, however, Window for Workgroups 3.1.1 was freaking amazing.
|
Posted by: macintoshman on 2008-04-05 07:31:04
Hm. I saved it by using a 3rd party format utility.
|
Posted by: Temetka on 2008-04-05 13:39:34
Windows 1 and 2 sucked.
Windows 3 was better.
Windows 3.1 was even better.
Windows 3.11 with 32-bit drivers was great. It ran circles around all previous 'Windii'.
Windows NT 3.51 was awesome!
Windows 95 was also great. When it hit OSR2 then the goodness really set in.
OS/2 Warp was awesome as well and was primary OS for about 2 years.
Windows NT 4.0 Workstation was my primary OS once it came out. I loved it. It was quick, and stable. Never let me down.
Windows 98 was great, just a much better Win95b. 98SE continued this tradition.
Windows 2000 was the best of both worlds: NT and 98. Not as fast NT 4.0, but it's rich feature set sure made up for that.
XP is just a refresh of 2K IMO.
Vista is XP done right. Minus UAC. That was stupidity.
However:
MacOS is far superior to them all.
Now that it can run on Intel and virtualize other OS's, all I have to say is:
One OS To Rule Them All
One OS To Find Them
One OS To Bring Them All
And in the RDF Bind Them.
OS Really reminds me a lot of NT 4. It's fast, stable, pretty and get's the job done. It doesn't mess around with bad hardware or lower class hardware. It has an attitude, knows it and doesn't care. OS X brings modern memory management and pre-emptive multitasking to the table NT also had these features. To me OS X is the way an OS should be. Just like NT 4.0 was. It got out of the way to let you work.
/me loves NT 4.0
|
Posted by: Temetka on 2008-04-05 13:41:42
I made no mention of Windows ME for a reason.
Like a certain Highlander movie, it should never have happened. 'Nuff said.
|
| 1 |