 |
|
|
|
 |
Sand Leaper
Tension hunter
Registered: Jul 2001
Location: Oslo, Norway
|
|
|
 Oct-09-2003 12:48 
|
|
|
|
|
LiveTheDream
Senior tranceaddict
Registered: Sep 2003
Location:
|
|
|
Windows 2.0 (at school)
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows 98 SE (which is what am useing now)
Windows 2000 (at college)
A mate of mine also asked me to install cable onto an XP computer, i did it but i had trubble at installing the driver! as i could not find my way around XP.
|
|
Oct-09-2003 12:51 
|
|
|
|
|
MOSCHINO
Suspended User
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: i(6aR,9R)-N,N-diethyl-7-methyl-4,6,6a,7,8,9-
|
|
|
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows XP
Windows 2000 Pro
OS390
NOVELL all versions, including Groupwise
Programmed In C, C++, fortran, pascal.
IBM maiframe (TSO, ISPF,JCL)
Mac OS all versions.
___________________
Yeah…you like to get cookie…a lot…you like the cookie when its late at night….you like the way the cookie tastes, you like the way the cookie smells….you like how the cookie makes you feel…can I have a bite of your cookie – COOKIE DOUGH DYNAMO!
MOSCHINO LOVES YOU...
|
|
Oct-09-2003 13:32 
|
|
|
|
|
aloep
REDIICULASE!!
Registered: Nov 2000
Location: Dumfries & Galloway, Scotland, UK
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by mr. poopyhead
windows 2.0??? whoa... and i though using 3.1 was old school, =P
what about dos? i used dos 5... |
I've used many versions of DOS, however it's just a text based command prommpt therefore I didn't list it.
My opinions on these:
Windows 2.0 - Laughable. Just use DOS instead. It was installed on my Dad's old 286 and never even used.
Windows 3.0 - A huge improvement visually. This could display at True Color 800 x 600 and 256 Color 1024 x 768. Seeing a real photo on a PC monitor seemed incredible  . However, positive comments stop there. It was horribly unstable and crashed about every 20 minutes.
Windows 3.1 - This is whot got Micro$oft where it is now and to be fair, back in 1992 it was a huge step in the right direction. This could run at up to 1024 x 768 True Color mode.
Windows For Workgroups 3.1 - Windows 3.1 with Networking software.
Windows For Workgroups 3.11 - Again, same as Win 3.1 but with Networking software and TCP/IP support. I had a lot of fun with this on my 486 and this was the OS I first surfed the internet with so it still has some sentimental value to me. 
Windows Chicago Beta 1 (95 Beta) - WFW 3.11 with Win32s and an underdeveloped Win 95 interface.
Windows Chicago Beta 2 (95 Beta) - Same as above, but with an even further developed interface which looks almost the same as the final release of 95.
Windows 95 - Had a very nice interface for it's time and I ran it for more than 4 years without much problems. However, when I tried installing it after my HD crashed early this year, it was a lot less than I remembered it to be.
Windows 98 - In simple terms, Win 95 with Internet Explorer 4.0 and all it's "Active Desktop" and the webby Windows Explorer. Obviously there is more than that, but all the IE4 "Active Desktop" nonsense made it less stable than Windows 95.
Windoww 99 (98SE Beta) - Same sa the above but slightly more stable I reckon and bundled with some odd programs.
Windows 98SE - Same as the above but with IE5 and generally more stable than the former 2 versions.
Windows ME - Windows 98 + IE 5.5, minus the exit to DOS feature and any stability (at least for me).
Windows NT 3.51 - My favourite version. This was released only 2 months before Win 95 but with the old Program Manager 3.1x style interface. Since it's basically the same as NT 4.0 but with the old interface, it's able to run many modern 32 bit apps. Screenshots of it running a few can be seen here and here.
Windows NT 4.0 - Windows NT 3.51 plus the interface of 95. Adding the new interface lost a bit of the stabililty from the previous version, but still not a bad OS, just getting a bit old now as it's over 7 years old.
Windows XP Home Edition - I managed to keep a huge uptime in this without any crashes. However, I did have problems with some games that worked in XP Pro and my IE java totally fucked up.
Windows XP Professional - Definitely better. Apart from my internet connection suddenly disspearing, I've had no trouble with this. It's run several games that didn't run in XP Home and the java problems have never taken place in this version. It gets my thumbs up as the version of Windows to use nowadays, although I'm not sure about 2000
IBM OS/2 1.3 - It's over 10 years old and all I did with it was mess with a few applications and saw the interface. So not much there.
Mac OS 7.5.3 - Is it just me, or does this have the least user friendly interface of all time?
Microsoft Bob - HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. This was a GUI aimed at kids or novices that sat on top of Windows. Instead of the Program Manager/Start Menu you have "Rooms" and objects in the rooms are the icons to launch programs. It was bundled with a simple word processor, email client and silly kiddy educational question and answer programs. Microsoft expected it to be huge and were planning to release more programs to go with it. However it utterly flopped, therefore no additional programs were released for it, making it utterly redundant. It's hilariously bad, and I'd even reccomend installing it for a laugh .
|
|
Oct-09-2003 13:49 
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:40.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|
)
