The Worst OS

Terr Fangbite · Post by **Terr Fangbite** » 2004-08-12 09:21pm

awhile back on another forum I introduced the question to what was the best operating system and why. In the end, the answer was dependant on what you did. My question to all you people out there, is what was the worst operating system to come out? I've seen everything Microsoft has come out as well as some linux, but I wonder what people think is mankinds greatest failure in an Operating System. Also since I'm too inquisitive to let it lie at that, why was it so abysmal?

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2004-08-12 09:29pm

Windows ME~

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2004-08-12 09:34pm

Hamel wrote:Windows ME~

Agreed. ME- unstable as shit. For 2nd shittiest place, Win9x. Best- Debian Linux and derievatives.

GoldenFalcon · Post by **GoldenFalcon** » 2004-08-12 10:10pm

ME isn't THAT unstable...I've run it for 5 years with (nearly) no problem.

On the other hand, how can anyone ever forget Win98 FE?

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-08-12 10:12pm

Pu-239 wrote:
Hamel wrote:Windows ME~
Agreed. ME- unstable as shit. For 2nd shittiest place, Win9x. Best- Debian Linux and derievatives.

He said "the greatest failure as an operating system", not necessarly one that was still in use or even recent: Therefore, I nominate MS Windows 1.0...

Terr Fangbite · Post by **Terr Fangbite** » 2004-08-12 10:16pm

For everyone that has posted, WHY!!!!
Yah, ME was unstable but does that make it worse than MS windows 1.0? BTW, what was wrong with windows 1.0? I've only seen windows as early as 3.x and dos 5.something.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2004-08-12 10:32pm

Terr Fangbite wrote:For everyone that has posted, WHY!!!!
Yah, ME was unstable but does that make it worse than MS windows 1.0? BTW, what was wrong with windows 1.0? I've only seen windows as early as 3.x and dos 5.something.

It shouldn't need an explanation~ In the case of ME that is~

Crashed constantly for myself and every single person that I knew to have it. Win 95/98 crashed like the dickens but not on the same level as ME. What did MS do to make it so prone to blue screens? The world may never know.

GoldenFalcon · Post by **GoldenFalcon** » 2004-08-12 10:38pm

Hamel wrote:It shouldn't need an explanation~ In the case of ME that is~

Crashed constantly for myself and every single person that I knew to have it. Win 95/98 crashed like the dickens but not on the same level as ME. What did MS do to make it so prone to blue screens? The world may never know.

ME at least ran. Win98 FE outright refused to boot.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-08-12 11:14pm

Anything based on Win9x has my vote. The worst part was that I didn't know how damn fucking unusable they were until I got ahold of Windows NT 4.0 and learned what a real operating system was like.

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2004-08-12 11:17pm

Ma Deuce wrote:
Pu-239 wrote:
Hamel wrote:Windows ME~
Agreed. ME- unstable as shit. For 2nd shittiest place, Win9x. Best- Debian Linux and derievatives.
He said "the greatest failure as an operating system", not necessarly one that was still in use or even recent: Therefore, I nominate MS Windows 1.0...

I ran Win98FE for quite awhile with no problems. Anyway, from what I've heard, Windows 1.0 is the worst.

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2004-08-12 11:23pm

What about SCO UNIX for recently released stuff?

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2004-08-12 11:25pm

1 of my friends has windows 1.0 running on a system now. I don't know exactly why though...

Sokartawi · Post by **Sokartawi** » 2004-08-13 01:15am

Windows ME, based on what I used.

Haven't used win1.0.

Win98SE is still the one I like most.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2004-08-13 02:58am

Win95, 98, and ME. Fucking SUX0R Crashy pieces of shit which I will maintain upon penalty of perjury to the SCOTUS itself physically damage the hardware they're being run on when they crash!! Fuck you M$!

Faram · Post by **Faram** » 2004-08-13 04:28am

Blah whiners!

take a tour of DosShell and you will know hell!

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2004-08-13 04:30am

ME. When I was using it all it had to do was last two days and I wouldn't need it ever again. It managed to crash six times during that period.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-08-13 05:18am

Mac OS9. So disgusting.
*runs away*

White Haven · Post by **White Haven** » 2004-08-13 11:32am

...no one has mentioned Win95 /A/

*whimpers* Now THAT was a hideous operating system. And yes, ME is, indeed, The Devil ini ts buggyness, but in its defense, it DOES detect USB jumpdrives without additional drivers, which as a tech I find /very/ handy at work.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2004-08-13 12:52pm

Worst OS?
DOS. If you meant recent OS...

I nominate Windows ME, and for runner-up, 95. For it's time, DOS was a good ripoff of CP/M and UNIX, after all

(j/k)

Best OS is OS X 10.3, worst is Windows ME.

Terr Fangbite · Post by **Terr Fangbite** » 2004-08-13 12:58pm

I mean the worst OS in the entirity of computing history. And no more ME, everyone hates it because i crashes, so I say thats a good nomination. Anything else? And what is 98FE?

White Haven · Post by **White Haven** » 2004-08-13 01:11pm

98FE is 98 First Edition...the baby brother to the /decent/ version of 98, SE. And hey, no DOS-bashing, CLI rocks, even if it is a hacked-down UNIX.

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2004-08-13 01:38pm

White Haven wrote:98FE is 98 First Edition...the baby brother to the /decent/ version of 98, SE. And hey, no DOS-bashing, CLI rocks, even if it is a hacked-down UNIX.

Command line is almost intolerable w/o completion like the ones in bash and zsh... if you do lack completion like sh and csh and maybe ksh, then at least the commands are less verbose- "cp" vs "copy" and "rm" vs "delete". Besides, DOS had no multitasking while versions of UNIX did. Not to mention lack of a whole bunch of other UNIX features. So yes, DOS sucks. I wonder what would have happened if Microsoft XENIX was used more than DOS? Then again, I suppose for it's time, it was great, and did contribute to widespread use of computers. About Windows 1.0- I don't think it's considered a "complete OS"... so the only thing left is ME.

For recent OS, the current SCO Unix

.

I also hate MacOS < X.

White Haven · Post by **White Haven** » 2004-08-13 05:16pm

The pre-95/NT versions of windows were shells, not really OSes. Hell, they ran from inside a full install of another OS...more of a Linux DE, really, than an OS in its own right.

Sokartawi · Post by **Sokartawi** » 2004-08-13 06:24pm

White Haven wrote: And hey, no DOS-bashing, CLI rocks, even if it is a hacked-down UNIX.

What's CLI?

Loved DOS, at least it never crashed... And didn't slow your computer down tremendously like any version of windows seems to do.

I used only DOS and occasionally Win3.11 (which I loathed) until 1999 or something. Then I got Win98SE because my games couldn't run on DOS anymore. Never had 95 or 98FE. Used win95 at a friend's PC, but hated it and it deterred me from installing it. I remember that that was the first time ever I had seen a computer crash, and I really was surprised about it, never had seen anything like it happen nor did I understand how such a thing was possible. Used NT4 at schools which I could tolerate but didn't see the usefulness of it and sticked to DOS.

DaveJB · Post by **DaveJB** » 2004-08-13 06:27pm

Sokartawi wrote:What's CLI?

Command Line Interface.

Worst OS I ever used would be Windows 3.0 - not just annoying to use (like Win 3.1x), but unstable as fuck.