3 ms·
Almost all releases of the NT line were good (including Win 7). Was there any OS contemporary to NT 3.51 that was better than it at anything (beside win 95 whe
by ido 16y ago
Almost all releases of the NT line were good (including Win 7).
Was there any OS contemporary to NT 3.51 that was better than it at anything (beside win 95 when it comes to compatibility with more software & hardware)?
- sprout 16y agoNot on the desktop, though when it comes to the server pretty much all of them beat and still beat NT on stability and filesystem support.
- Luyt 16y agoI quite liked NT 3.5 as a development platform back then. I came from WfW 3.11 and used Borland C++ 4.5, and nasty programming bugs would hang 3.11, but not NT 3.5.
- hga 16y agoPerhaps; I thought it peaked in quality of releases after 3.51 SP1. Better than SCO Unix of the period as a desktop.
- rbanffy 16y agoSolaris 2.5 was a very solid OS and better than NT 3.5 in most respects unless a defining criteria for "better" is "runs well on PCs", which it didn't. OS/2 was also a good OS for x86 PCs. At least as good as NT, unless, again, you want it to run software designed for Windows.
- ido 16y agoI wasn't really into OS/2 but I concede that it was probably about as good as NT at the time. I would, however, much rather use NT 3.51 as a desktop OS than Solaris 2.5 with CDE and its 80s-style command line utilities (luckily it seems they are using GNU stuff nowadays?).
- rbanffy 16y agoYou always could get the GNU stuff and compile it yourself. My own installs felt very GNU-ish at that time.
- access_denied 16y agoNextStep?
- Keyframe 16y agoIRIX (RIP)