What is your best operating system that microsoft has made.
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows NT
Windows 2000 Sp1 sp2 sp3 sp4 sp5
Windows xp pro or home
Windows vista.

For me windows xp pro sp2

windows xp pro sp2 by far

Windows 2000 at the top

This was a pretty big leap forward and was Microsoft's last pure user OS. There are no hidden nasty features, no built in DRM, no subversive Microsoft marketing.

Windows XP second place

Microsoft committed a few sins with Windows XP that some people have forgotten. The most visual one was splitting off the deficient Home edition. Introducing DRM technologies is bad one.

Windows Vista third

Vista hasn't proved itself, so it's hard to rank. Another factor is, there are too many editions. It's DRM'd up the wazoo. A lot of features seemed to have dropped off the radar. To its credit, there have been a few welcome strides forward. Vista future is as either a Windows 98 (Watch for Vista SE), or as an XP. It's too early to tell.

Windows 95 fourth. Did the job.

Windows 98 was a cock-up. SE didn't improve things much. I always had problems with it and ended up moving to Linux Mandrake.

You've missed Windows ME off the list. I personally believe this was not only the worst OS on the planet, but perhaps, in the entire universe. If there is life out there, I very much doubt they are as stupid as us.

Windows NT and 3.1 can't really be judged side by side with the others.

Why are you called windowsvista then? :P

__________________
Add Computwiz@hotmail.co.uk

I am always about if you need a quick answer to how to fix a problem

to be new and innovative?

__________________

I dunno, let him tell us

__________________
Add Computwiz@hotmail.co.uk

I am always about if you need a quick answer to how to fix a problem

Because i use to have windowsvista.
I dunno i like the username

__________________
Windowsvista

Until you probably became a victim of fraud or a trojan lol no offense i just mean that Vista atm sucks to many flaws in it.
I personally ain`t used all OS but from the ones i have used probs say.
Windows 98
Taught me he basics of computers
Windows 2000
Helped me improve/get competent at using a computer
Windows XP SP2
Is the one i`m using now and have no problems against it.

The only good thing i can think about vista is the chess

Carl

You said it. I agree 100%

At the minute you're actually more likely to get a torjan or virus with XP.

Vista may be crap, but give it a couple more years and you'll be complaining how crap the next version is and how much you love Vista.

Don't disagree with that now, just wait and see.

Since I have only ever used '98, XP and Vista, at the minute i'd have to say XP is the one i've got along with the most.

__________________
I Beat Anorexia.

If I have helped you, please consider donating a little cash to Cancer Research UK

You might be but I wont. Until Vista gets a lot better I'll be staying with XP Pro SP3 and OSX. When and if Microsoft fixes Vista or makes an OS thats better, I'll give it a shot. I refused to be pressured into crapware.

So why do you run XP?

Same thing happened when XP was released. It was hated. Same thing will happen when the next one is released...

Vista doesn't need "Fixing". People need to learn how to write software for it. I agree with you, it's a terrible operating system, but just wait and see.

__________________
I Beat Anorexia.

If I have helped you, please consider donating a little cash to Cancer Research UK

Like I said, it may well get better. Another service pack and a few updates, and who knows. XP is stable and rock solid and has been for years now.Its got about 6 years of work that make it that way. Vista even with SP1 still feels like a beta product.

I was never pressured into XP. When it first came out it was not that great either. So I went back to 98. After the first SP things got better then I made the switch.

When Vista can show me that its just as fast as XP on my system and it gives me reasons to upgrade, I will.

I have to say, some people need to just get real.

Life is full of change; change you cannot control; change you can barely keep up with. It's one thing to dig a little bunkers and refuse to acknowledge that fact, but it's another to devote time to attacking change. By steeling yourself to fight the battle against this perceived threat, you become incapable of understanding what that change actually represents. Eventually, you become incapable of rational argument, and in time, incapable of rational thought on the matter.

So Vista is a bit slower; honestly, who cares. There are more important things in this world to worry about. File copy speed; what does it matter. UAC is a bit of a bother, Tough. Every minute spent complaining about this change and that change could have been spent learning how to take advantage of what's really new. But no, there's a firm insistence that if you remove the fire guard and plunge your hand into the fire, your burns are someone else's fault.

The amount of regurgitation on the matter is ridiculous. Every new Microsoft OS is greeted with Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. People's fragile little worlds have suddenly been turned upside down. A few years later the penny drops and they realise they have to change or get left behind, then, oh, it's the best thing since sliced bread. Some of us were there all along saying "Yes, it's slower. Yes, there's some more restrictions. But look at all the advantages".

DRM...yes now, that's a serious concern, but get off the Vista haters bandwagon and figure out who is responsible. That's the battle you should be fighting.

Life is constantly presenting challenge. Some change requires that you make a commitment to understand and be ready.

Bottom line: catch up or shut up.

Interesting choice of words syphus. You admit that you know about Vistas many flaws. How it falls short of XP in many ways. But then you say "catch up or shut up"?

So, let me see if I have this right. Even though Vista is slower , bugger, and more restrictive on what you can/can not do we should grin and switch to it or we will be left behind?

You said I give bad advice. Why? Because my thoughts about Vista don't jive with yours? If I think a program is junk I will try to steer people away from it. I'm pretty sure the only real advice that I have given on here was to put XP on a new setup that a member had. Why is that bad advice? Recommending a faster OS is bad?

About 4-5 years ago I was a Nero guy. I thought it was the greatest burning program out. I recommended it to anyone who would listen. Then along came version 7 and it sucked bad, it was bloated ,slow and worked sometimes. I then went to something else. Same with Norton. Why recommend shoddy software when there are better alternatives?



If you want to kick me off the forums for disagreeing with you then just say so. But don't say its for giving bad advice. I'm just speaking my mind and telling people what I think about certain things.

You act like people have no choice but to install windows Vista so they should learn to live with it. Why is that? There are other operating systems you know. XP, XP Pro , OSX, Linux, among others. People have a choice, and I feel they should know about them.


Remember this thread is called Best OS. I'm giving my opinion on what I think is the best OS. I'm not flaming or name calling. If you like Vista, great. Use Vista.
If you have not noticed, I'm not the only one on here that dislikes Vista.