Best OS

[prof.goofy]

As systems administrator, part of my job is to take care of security concerns of all the users. So i keep trying out new OS's, this is what i felt.
for newbies: windows 95,98,ME
reason : ease of use, not much technical details necessary.

for intermediate users : windows 2000 advanced server, linux,
UNIX, BeOS
reason : gives a good environment, provides a
good understanding of various
components of the OS.

for hardcore programmers : Sun Solaris
reason : an excellent environment for prog.,
as it leaves u completely open to
the working of the OS, thus
providing u more power to combine
with ur prog.

[knightmb]

MS/DR - DOS: Beginner-- all those console commands make more sense if you have experience with them. Someone who has never seen a Linux console could probably get around well if they had experience with these earlier ones. Just a matter of knowing what to type in place on the OS you are using.

Windows 3.11/95/98/ME: Advanced Beginner -- Tired of typing console commands, wanting some point n click stuff to play with. Getting used to how the whole GUI thing works.

Macintosh: Advanced Beginner -- Same as above, getting use to the GUI thing.

Windows NT/2000/XP: Intermediate -- Works with it at the office, uses networking, needs a platform that will run most programs from the win3.11/95/98/ME without killing the system.

Linux, UNIX, BeOS: Advanced Intermediate-- A good understanding of the previous ones, makes these easier to work with (concept wise). People don't usually use these unless they just want more powerful, flexible, secure, operating system. This isn't something your mom would use or even need to, but for power users, they love this.

Sun Solaris: Advanced-- Like what was said earlier, excellent environment for high power applications/programming.

Personal OS: Hardcore-- You are so into computer technology that you write your own OS for whatever you are using. An OS isn't defined by pretty graphics or support for every single device every made, let me remind you

In summary, I can't say one is the best because they all have their place. Just like I wouldn't run a web server from a windows 3.11 box, I wouldn't give my mom a Unix box to check her e-mail with

[mitymousse]

As a GEEK with a love for techie toys,

Here is what I have:

Work:
Sun Ultra Sparc 5 maxed out with 2 processors and RAM. Running Solaris 2.6 Although I am upgrading to Solaris 8 next week.

Sun Ultra 1 standard build with Solaris 2.6.

Home:I have 100mh Ethernet run thru my house with a commercial T1 for internet access.

IBM P200mmx with 64 mgs of ram (for the wife and kiddies) I am running Windows ME on it and it is pretty stable. Actually I have not had ANY issues since loading it almost a year ago. I keep it running without rebooting it for days.

I have a Micron Dual Process PII 450 with 512 mgs of ram running WIN2K Advanced. I had professional running but the o.s. crapped out on me and I had to rebuild it after about 5 months. With the current service pack everything seems fine. I leave this one up for weeks at a time with no issues.

I also have a Dell CPx Latitude with PII 500 and 256 mgs of ram running Win98se and travel with this alot. I have it set up with 2 different docking stations. And on various networks with ease!

I also have another Dell CPx Latitude with PII 500 and 512 megs of ram. I have a 14 gig hard drive and have a triple boot system with RedHat Linux Professional, Solaris and WIN2K professional.

They all work well, and I have not encountered any issues with those.

I am not bragging, just stating my case.

Solaris on a SPARC is the most stable and reliable system available for development. Matter of fact I connect VIA SSH and use Hummingbirds Exceed as an X server client. I run my whole Solaris Desktop thru my Micron Server.

I would say that second is a tie with Win2k and Solaris for Intel Platform.

I do not develope much in Linux but RedHat seems solid and a very close 3rd.

Win98se is very easy to configure and very capable, but lacks the server support needed for heavy enterprise development. Plenty of client apps but no server stuff.

WinME is okay, and I do not have any problems with it. BUT I would never develope under that OS platform.

My humble opinion!!! :-)

[linuxcomando]

heres my 2 bits
If security and easy is what you want go with openBSD very very very secure. Redhat has some security issues you have to worry about um Suse is ok but if you are going to go with a linux based system you should really go for slackware. Secure and best of all it has a cool name The thing i like bout using a bsd based box i can compile just about anything and it will friggin work.but thats just my biased feelings.

[casper3699]

Originally posted by gstudios
For the developer's out there, and those who enjoy trying out real new OS's... There is AtheOS I haven't tried it yet, seeing as how I only have a 1 gig HD right now (had a bad month for hardware :/)
But from what I have read about it, I am quite anxious for its development to speed up. So it'll be more useful for everyday use for the non-developer.

Has anyboy tried this yet cause I can't figure out how to install it. I follow the instruction to the letter and hey won't work.
When I get to the part where they say that you need to make the floppies they don't work. Could anybody help me on this.

[Tony]

First off, my congrats goes out to Antionline users for not turning this into a huge flame war like every other site I've visited...

At the moment, my OS of choice is win2k pro -sp2, it's stable and secure, atleast compared to other MS choices, haven't tried XP though. However, this is changing little by little as I slowly convert to Linux. As far as *nix goes my two favorites are slackware - real secure, and mandrake - real easy, atleast to set up.