Re: trying to get an Apple II GS going for fun...

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

nobody@wavetech.net (Greg Buchner) wrote:

>supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer) wrote:
>
>> GS/OS (the operating system in System 5.0.4, System 6.0.1, etc.)
>> is the IIGS' equivalent of Windows 95.
>
>You've got that backwards.  Windows 95 is the equivalent of GS/OS.
>
>Wording it this way implies that GS/OS came first and could be better
>than Windows 95.

Good point.  ;-)

I've always thought GS/OS was a spectacular operating system.  It
is so modular and logical.  Components can be installed and removed
as individual files.  Windows 95, although pretty on the surface, is
a nightmare underneath.  Even MacOS is not as streamlined as
GS/OS, especially in the way it allocates memory for fonts, etc.,
and the way extensions and file systems are handled.

Win 95 and MacOS are as powerful as they are today because the
hardware continued to improve while GS/OS was limited by
Apple's deliberate stunting of the IIGS.  Had Apple not blocked
the IIGS' development, I have no doubt that GS/OS would have
bested Win 95 and MacOS.

I've tried to look around for an OS as modular as GS/OS, but have
yet to find one.  OS/2 looked like a prime candidate, but even it
has inherited some nasty "ini" stuff from Microsoft.