I know, I know, "never read the comments". But sheesh...
This is the single most inaccurate, error-ridden piece of computer reporting I have ever seen. Almost every single claim is wrong.
#9 Corel LinuxOS
This wasn't "designed by Debian". It was designed by, as the name says, Corel, but based on Debian, as is Ubuntu, Mint, Elementary & many other distros. For its time it was pretty good. I ran it.
"Struggled to detect drives" is nonsense.
It begat Xandros which continued for some years. Why was it killed? Because Corel did a licensing deal with Microsoft to add Visual Basic for Applications and MS Office toolbars to WordPerfect Office. One of the terms of the deal that MS insisted on was the cancellation of WordPerfect Office for Linux, Corel LinuxOS, and Corel's ARM-based NetWinder line of hardware.
"Offered absolutely no security". Correct -- by design. Because it came out of what later became the GNU Project, and was meant to encourage sharing.
#6 GNU Hurd
Still isn't complete because it was vastly over-optimistic, but it has inspired L4, Minix 3 and many others. Most of its userland became the basis of Linux, arguably the most successful OS in the history of the world.
#5 Windows ME
There is a service pack, but it's unofficial.
It runs well on less memory than Windows 2000 did, and it was the first (and last) member of the Windows 9x family to properly support FireWire -- important if you had an iPod, for instance.
#4 MS-DOS 4.0
Wasn't written by Microsoft; it was a rebadged version of IBM's PC-DOS 4.0.
The phrase "badly-coded memory addresses" is literally meaningless, it is empty techno-babble.
It ran fine and introduced many valuable additions, such as support for hard disk partitions over 32MB, disk caching as standard, and the graphical DOSShell with its handy program-switching facility.
No, it wasn't a classic release, but it was the beginning of Microsoft being forced into making DOS competitive, alongside PC-DOS 4.0 and DR-DOS 5. It wasn't a result of creeping featuritis -- it was the beginning of it, and not from MS.
Symbian was a triumph, powering the very successfully Psion Series 5, 5mx, Revo and NetBook as well as multiple mobile phones.
Meanwhile, there was no such device as "the Nokia S60" -- S60 was a user interface, a piece of software, not a phone. It was one of Symbian's UIs, alongside S80, S90 and UIQ in Europe and others elsewhere.
Symbian was the only mobile OS with good enough realtime support to run the GSM stack on the same CPU as the main OS -- all other smartphones used a separate CPU running a separate OS.
Its browser was fine for the time.
Nokia only moved to Windows Phone OS when it hired a former Microsoft manager to run the company. Before then it also had its own Linux, Maemo, and also made Android devices.
"The open source distribution of Linux" is more technobabble. A distribution is a variety of Linux -- Lindows was one.
Its UI was Windows-like, like many other Linuxes even today, but Lindows' selling point was that it could run Windows apps via WINE. This wasn't a good idea - the compatibility wasn't there yet although it's quite good today -- but it's not even mentioned.
Like Corel LinuxOS, it was based on Debian, but Debian is a piece of software, not a company. Debian didn't "expect" anything.
Almost every single statement here is wrong.
#1 Vista / Windows 8
Almost every new version of Windows ever has required high-end specs for the time. This wasn't a new failing of Vista.
Windows 8 is not more "multi-functional" than any previous version. Totally wrong.
It didn't "do away with the desktop" -- also totally wrong. It's still there and is the primary UI.
JavaOS and Windows 1.0 are by comparison almost fair and apt, but this is shameful travesty of a piece. Everyone involves should be ashamed.