Which version of the Mac OS is your favourite

[zerohour]

I have not tried all of the version out there but for me the most popular of mine was OS 8.1

 

[macgeek417]

System 6!

 

[Scott Baret]

I'm going with System 7.

My reasoning: it's got a nicer overall appearance on color systems than its predecessor, runs just about anything from the late 80s to early-mid 90s, doesn't use a ton of RAM or hard drive space in its earlier versions, can run from a floppy (barely, but it still does), and provides the classic Mac experience with some modern conveniences.

System 6 is a close second, followed by a tie between 8 and 9, then the 1-5 versions (too old to really be usable), and OS X is dead last on my list.

 

[QuadSix50]

I'd have to say OS X overall, followed by OS 9, 8, and 7.

 

[Charlieman]

I voted for System 6 because I love its economy. Incidentally System 5.0 and 5.1 really belong with System 6 in any classification. System 5.0 introduced MultiFinder and Apple File Exchange, and was very different to anything earlier. Treat 5.0 and 5.1 as public betas for System 6.

 

[Gil]

I'll go with System 7 (7.5 or later, particularly). I like the appearance. If it weren't for that, I'd choose 8.6, since most recent apps that work on Classic Mac require it as a minimum.

 

[MrMacPlus]

System 6, though Mac OS X is loads more usable.

 

[joshc]

OS X Leopard, then System 7.6.1.

 

[II2II]

System 7.1, mostly since it could run most of the software written prior to the release of Carbon. It is also lean. It also looks nice.

System 6 is the next runner up. I love its memory economy and blazing speed, and most of the applications for it reflect that. I also love the economy of the user interface and features. I love stuff that is to the point and gets the job done.

NetBSD would be close on the heels of System 6, at least in the 1.3 and 1.4 era. Yeah, I know it's not Mac OS but I included it for a few reasons. First of all, I used it most extensively on the Macs. Second, it defines (in my mind) the ideal of Unix. Just like System 6 defines the ideal of Mac OS.

Since I included one non Mac OS operating system, I may as well include a second: Mac OS X 10.3 earns fourth place. (I consider Mac OS X to be a rebranded version of NeXT.) 10.3 included the last feature that I found really useful: X11. After that, Apple just started adding cruft. Alas, using Mac OS X is like riding a roller coaster so I probably won't buy a Mac ever again.

 

[macgeek417]

Come on! This is supposed to be the 68k Macintosh Liberation Army, not the OSX Macintosh Liberation Army!!!

...But it appears that most everyone here prefers OSX over the classic MacOS!

If you like OSX the most, then start the OSXmla!

 

[Temetka]

For me it's OS9.

I switched over during 8.6 and was really happy when OS 9 came out. I love the platinum theme, spatial finder and the ease of use throughout the OS. If OS 9 had a decent browser and support for auto memory allocation it would be perfect for me. That being said I still use my 8500 and BeigeG3MT on a weekly basis.

Some things are just easier on a Mac.

 

[tmtomh]

For me, it's OS X, hands down.

I love Classic Mac OS, but in my view the fact that OS X is so much more stable is enough to make it #1, without even considering all the other aspects in which it rocks.

My least favorite Mac OS version, I think, is 7.5.x. It's slower and less stable than 7.6.x, and more complex and RAM-hungry than 7/7.1. Also, if you want the OS 8-style Platinum appearance in OS 7, you can do it with 7.1. So all in all there's really no need to use 7.5, except that it has relatively modern networking built-in and it's free.

M

 

[Morrick]

I voted System 7, my favourite Mac OS version being 7.6.1. But I love Mac OS X too, of course.

Rick

 

[equill]

Come on! This is supposed to be the 68k Macintosh Liberation Army, not the OSX Macintosh Liberation Army!!!
...But it appears that most everyone here prefers OSX over the classic MacOS! ...

Horses for courses! I earn my living with my OS X machines. I'd be mad not to do so. You can believe that OS X is therefore my work OS of preference. That doesn't in any way diminish my appreciation of Systems 6 to 7, or OSs 7 to 9, on the Macs that were designed to run them. If my IIci/50MHz/128MB could support Tiger I should still not run Tiger on it, but OS 7.6.1 does very well indeed. On a 40MHz '040 IIci, OS 7.6.1 screams. Tiger runs better on a G4/MDD/DP, and that's the size and extent of it. I will not run OS 9.1 on even an upgraded 1400/G3/400MHz when a 9600/G4/800MHz runs 9.2.2 far better. I understand well enough that members of this Army with fewer Macs may wish to experiment, and even to try to push the boundaries of their Macs, but I have no need to do so. As one result of that policy, I have fewer cases of little people turning to me with stubbed toes and skinned knees when they can't deal with their system's demands.

de

 

[MrMacPlus]

My least favorite Mac OSes were the ones before 3. No HFS support, though it certainly tries if the support is in the ROM. :-/

 

[Mac128]

My least favorite Mac OSes were the ones before 3.

It is odd that the Macintosh chose to use MFS, especially since Apple had been using HFS-type filing systems since the Apple III in 1980, as well as the Lisa. Even more perplexing when one considers that it actually takes more RAM and CPU time for the Finder to "fake" single-leveled psuedo-HFS in a machine that was starved for both.

However, the Mac was conceived as a simple-to-use, user-friendly appliance and in that regard MFS served it well. Its flat filing system is refreshing, even on a large volume. It is much easier to find a file that way than on intermediate HFS systems. Even OS X with its advanced search engine still taxes one with an interminable list of results that must be further sifted through. It is no wonder OS X is my favorite, since for the first time since System 3, I have a shot of quickly finding things on my disk. But I say that as a matter of productivity. Like equill, I use OS X, like I used the latest OS Apple produced that would run on my earlier Macs – it is a tool.

My appreciation for Pre-System 3 and MFS most likely comes from a nostalgia for a time when the Mac was intended to empower the average user, to inspire them to be creative through it's friendly hardware and System interface. It was simple, intuitive and fun, unless you tried to use it for business productivity. So for those reasons and many others, give me System 1.0 through 2.1 any day. I tend to draw the line at System 3.2, the last that will run on the 128K. But, it really ends with System 3.0 when the trash-can reversed its lines. In the true Mac, trash-can lines should always face left. :beige:

 

[returningmacuser]

OS 9, for the simple fact that it ZOOMS on G3 and especially G4 Macs (I'm a proud user of Mac OS 9.2.1 on my 500 Mhz Quicksilver G4). No other version of the Mac OS I know of runs as fast as OS 9 does on any other Mac.

 

[tmtomh]

OS 9, for the simple fact that it ZOOMS on G3 and especially G4 Macs (I'm a proud user of Mac OS 9.2.1 on my 500 Mhz Quicksilver G4). No other version of the Mac OS I know of runs as fast as OS 9 does on any other Mac.

You've got a point there. I never actually used OS 9 on anything more recent than a 7300 until a couple of months ago. Then, late last year, I ran 9.2.2 on a 300MHz beige G3, and it was absolutely smoking.

Except for startup time and Web-browsing, that is.

 

[zydeco]

I'd say leopard, but my favourite of the classics is System 7