Atmosphere XG

I don't know what happen to the Windows 98/95 forum lately. The hostility I've seen these days when others choose not to follow the trend and set their own goes against the whole meaning of using Windows 1998 much less 95 in 2008. Is it that hard for them to understand that everyone has their own needs when surfing the Internet thus, opinions will vary as well?

Opera has been my primary browser since 2001. The only reason I kept Firefox this long was due to Opera having difficulty organizing pictures properly on Ebay. Whether Acid 3 plays a factor or not, I am happy Opera remedied the problem.

Thanks. I am planning to install Windows 98 OEM on my old computer and with Opera 10 passing the ACID3 test (100%) I do not need to bother with Firefox as an alternative anymore when browsing Ebay.

I'm not on Windows 98 so, I was wondering if Opera 10 is compatible with Windows 98 Thanks.

I would say how someone drives will hold more weight than, wearing a seat belt. Why you are so confident someone is going to crash while driving is beyond me. : Nevertheless, I never came looking for anyone's approval in what I am doing and, I haven't had any issues as of yet. Fifteen days left to go and counting. My main computer is running on a Pentium II 233 Mhz. Apart from embedded Flash (I use the stand-alone player and YouTube downloading services) and Java, I can do anything I want. I can relate totaly to this. I rarely if any watch Youtube based on the standing picture while the sound is playing. No gif animation whatsoever. I've learned to do without throughout the years. When I finally got a machine that could manage all that flashy movement, I turned it all off. Websites that offer Flash home pages I bypass by using Google's search. I don't remember the last time I ever used Java. This is my life using an old computer throughout the years. I know you've been using 95 for as long as I remember seeing your screen name. If there was a way I could make this Pentium 4 work on 98 (Sata Drive, Intel 915 Chipset) I would go right back to it.

I want to thank everyone for there input. It seems this thread has turned into what I was not aiming for. I made this post for Windows 98 & 95 users to see where they stood in terms of popularity and, mentioned with Windows 2000 being so similar in statistics I've had better luck security wise with Windows 2000 and Windows 98 First Edition than Windows XP. I find myself defending my choice of operating systems because many feel they know my surfing habits better than I that never changed (But in fact decreased) within a 10-year period. For the record, the last version of Internet Explorer I used was version 5 when it was considered the latest version. I left IE 5 and went to Opera and, never looked back. I do use a router for the two computers online. All my bookmarks are saved on a HTML page so, typing web addresses is something I rarely do. All I do is right click, "Open in background page." My trashing of registries came from my early experience of Windows when I didn't fully understand what registries did. I'm sure we all remember our first Windows tweaking experience. This was never about me using Windows 2000. It was about 98 & 95 users security and, how I attained nearly trouble free (Based on Viruses) service using Windows 98 First Edition and, 2000 for a 10-year period. Seeing that I spent 90% of my Internet experience on Windows 98 first edition (1998 - 2007), I do relate more to Windows 98 users than those of Windows 2000. This is the reason why I created the thread in the Windows 98, 95 &, ME forum. I can guarantee many who are saying I am running a risk of using an outdated system for the Internet have different surfing habits than I. Many run Windows 98 SE and, 95 out of sheer pleasure and, have an XP or Vista machine. Well, I only had Windows 98 (2007 - 1998) & Windows 2000 (2008 - 2007) because my machines were not strong enough for XP or Vista. How many of you are running an AMD K6 500 MHz, or a Celeron 500 MHz in this day in age? There are many things you just cannot do today with Computers that old on the Internet. Hence, comes compromise and, I used the Pentium 4 with Windows XP with that same mentality. A Pentium 4 is outdated by many on here due to having dual and, quad-core processors at their disposal. For me, the Pentium 4 is a brand new computer. I buy them cheap on ebay ($60.00) for making music. I came into some money and, decided to treat myself with a strong (IMHO) Pentium 4 to experience the Internet in a more up-to-date manner using Windows XP Service Pack 3. That's when my Internet pleasure turned into turmoil. So, it does seem logical based on my experience to go back to Windows 2000 on my Celeron 500 MHZ. As I mentioned in my previous post, if I encounter some type of virus within a months time on 2000, I will need try to determine what is the problem. If all goes well, I will look for Sata drivers (Which means Windows 2000 must be updated to SP4 from Non-Service Pack) and install it on my Pentium 4. Thank you.

Thanks for your input. My registry trashing days were around 1999 - 2000 playing around with the root of Windows 98.

You only need to go to your first post, click "Edit" and you will find the title box open to rectify it. About security, Windows 98 is not open of course to viruses which demand the use of NT. Under Windows 98 I've eventually got the message "kernelnt.dll not found". It was a virus for NT and the OS had acted as an antivirus. Thanks for the reply. Its experiences like that I've read from many 98 users. If my Pentium 4 were adaptable I would install 98. But, it is an Intel 915 Chipset and, uses USB Keyboard/Mouse connections, with a Sata drive. All the things Windows 98 is unable to handle.

I understand your point of view and, thank you for trying to explain the risks. I am not a Windows XP Internet user. I use it primarily for music production which all Internet functions are disabled. I spent 10 years (9 on Windows 98, 1 on Windows 2000) on older operating systems for the Internet that offered very little issues within that time period as far as Viruses is concerned. I cannot just put that aside when I am constantly encountering viruses on Windows XP SP3 within a 4 month period upon first installation. From an IT Standpoint you make logical sense and again I thank you for sharing your thoughts. However, from a user standpoint I'll just need to take the risk for I am tired of re-installing XP. If Windows 2000 fails using Nod32 on my 500 MHZ Celeron within a months time, I'll at least know it was a issue on my end. If doesn't I'll search if for Sata drivers and install 2000 on my Pentium 4.

You are correct. But the fact that is was Windows XP SP3, the most updated XP version available that gave me the problems, I do have to sit back and wonder here. Everything was up to date and it failed constantly. Nod32 did it's job. I'm just surprised the amount of the attacks Windows XP gets over Windows 2000. I've reinstalled Windows XP 4 times in four months as I would have done 98 in 4 years. Which leads me back to thinking what the chart states. The most dominating operating system may get the most Viruses and least used will get a very small amount. Kinda like Internet Explorer vs Opera.

this logic is flawed. the internet has changed a LOT since 9x was a hacker target. 9x stayed relatively secure for 3 reasons: 1. lack of always-on internet connections available at the time prevented machines from being infected remotely Not for me. I ran Windows 98 First edition all the way to 2007. I was on AOL before going to Cable and, one thing about AOL, once you log in you don't log out unless you are certain you will not need to log on for a longtime. So, my connection would stay on 12 - 24hours a day. Sometimes, just logging out to give 98 a fresh boot. By the time I got cable it stayed on just as long. I do remember any small viruses that occured disappeared once Microsoft ended Windows 98 support using an ethernet connection. The remotes can be disabled. I have Windows XP on other machines and everything is disabled that doesn't pertain to audio. Not based on my experience. Only when I update my computer to the latest (Hence Windows XP SP3) is when I encountered problems. I ran Windows 98 first edition for 9 years without an update and, only went to 2000 because it handled memory and, music software better than 98. Surfing habits play a factor far greater than anything. The average computer user is the youtube, myspace, bit torrent generation. I on the other hand, am the message board, google group, microsoft word user. That is typical 1995 surfing. So as you can see, I shouldn't encounter the issues based on my surfing habits. And when an old operating system causes no problems opposed to a more up-to-date operating system that I need to re-install due to becoming crippled with a virus doing the same task, I'm going to stick with my old un-updated operating system that is not swarmed with viruses every month. I've read numerous times Linux an Mac are less prone to viruses because they are not in the spotlight. Well, Windows 2000, 98, & 95 offers a lower user base than Linux and Mac. So why would a person who creates viruses focus on these operating systems when they have a lower user base than Linux and Mac? There are plenty of software products that specify the type of processor in addition to the RAM and CPU speed. I had the same thoughts as you until, I encountered software that proved me wrong. It would install but, when you try to fire it up nothing.

Kelsenellenelvian, I really believe that many of these Trojans are not only operating system dependant but hardware as well. It is just my experience of having difficulty with some trial programs that would not load on computers with the right operating system but the wrong processor type. Nod32 is what I use. It works very good. However, I had to reinstall because it rid my computer of viruses so well on XP that nothing would load anymore! I couldn't even get the recycle bin to work.

Only one: Rule 12. You gave your thread a cryptic title. Thank you. Let me see if I can change the title.

Yes, I have. Ever wondered why there are so many and none of them is still the best? If my surfing habits haven't changed from using an AMD K6 machine on Windows 98 and, a Celeron on Windows 2000, I shouldn't be faced with installing Windows XP numerous times doing the same surfing habits on a Pentium 4 machine. What board rules were broken? I'm using Windows 2000 non-service pack. It is just as related to Windows 98 as it is to Windows XP. I can install all my Windows 98 programs on Windows 2000 non-service pack and they work fine. Unfornately that is not the case with Windows XP. I thought it would be nice to see how un-popular Windows 98 & 95 is these days which means less attacks directed towards those two platforms.

So after re-installing Windows XP every month for four months due to being contaminated with Viruses & Trojans, I decided to turn off my Pentium 4 and use my Celeron with Windows 2000 as my main Internet PC with the Pentium 4 using Windows XP as the back up. One thing I remember about Windows 2000 and, 98 is using them for nearly a year without being contaminated with viruses. I actually re-installed because I used to destroy the registries accidentally. I do not use the Internet for Pornography, Peer To Peer or, Bit Torrent so, I didn’t see why I was getting so much viruses. Upon researching the average Windows 2000 user brought forth this chart then, it made sense. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp Looks like I will remain on Windows 2000 and, I’m sure 98, & 95 users can relate why. With Linux being more in demand on the Internet than 2000, 98, & 95 the chances of being infected is minimum to none. We are officially out of the limelight and, Virus/Trojan developers will not waste their time attacking those operating systems anymore.

Have fun! http://www.mdgx.com/

I found out the best way to transfer zip files from a CD/DVD Drive is to have the zip file in a folder. I remember having major issues with Windows 98 transfering files until I started to put zip files in their own sub-folder.

It would be wise to buy a CD Burner. When I purchased my AMD K6 in 1998, it offered a CD ROM Drive only. A year later I decided to purchase a CDRW and, everything I downloaded on my huge 10 GB hard drive was recorded on CDRs. Ten years later, I have a lot of old programs stored on CDR Discs that were geared for a computer of that speed (400 MHZ 64 MB RAM) which is beneficial when using such an old computer in 2008. I knew I was going to have this computer for a long time and technology would surpass it. So, I prepared my self for such a transition. You see, most of the programs designed today are aimed for 1 GHZ and above CPUs. So, trying to run something as simple as a browser can really slow things down. As for DVD, Windows 98 FE will support it. Your AMD K6 will not handle video (Playing DVDs) but, for all means of storage it will not be a problem. Mine came with USB support as well in addition to a killer 10 Mbps Ethernet connection. Of course, I upgraded to an 100 Mbps Ethernet card and it worked perfectly. You may need to download a free program in order to burn your work for bundled DVD software today will only go as far back as Windows 2000. However the Drive will work in your AMD K6 using Windows 98 FE. In my final days of Windows 98 FE, I had 1 DVDRW Drive, 3 internal Hard Drives (120 GB) and, 768 MB of RAM on my AMD K6. I even upgraded the Processor from 400 to 500 MHZ and had to change the clock speed so it could recognize the higher processor. As you can see, I pretty much took full advantage of the AMD K6 Motherboard. The only thing I never explored was the video card. Partly because I never had a slot to install a secondary Video Card. So, I used the internal 4 MB card. I'm not a huge video person and, by you using an AMD K6 with such a low memory and, slow Processor I would imagine you are not either. Speaking of Memory, buy some. Ebay has tons of PC 100 going for next to nothing. That will benefit you in the long run. I learned a lot from Windows 98 FE and, helped me fix many computers that were running Windows XP and, Vista. Sorry to say that XP and above offers so much protection from user error, first time computer users that experienced XP and above are less computer savy than 2000 and below users. Have fun!

Maybe you can explain what you are trying to acomplish using Windows 98 FE. I used Windows 98 FE for 9 years beforing going to Windows 2000. The majority of the 98 users are on Second Edition which offers different characteristics than Windows 98 FE. Personally, I never fancied Windows 98 SE which is why I went from 98 FE to Windows 2000 on my old AMD K6. You are pretty much on your own when using 98 FE which I found out throughout numerous websites years go. I am willing to help you if you find yourself in some kind of dilema. However, a lot of perks that works with 98 SE will not work on 98 FE. Windows 98 FE is more similiar to Windows 95 than, Windows 98 SE.

I used a computer like that for close to 10 years and the best Operating System I found that worked just as fast as Windows 98 FE with no crashes was Windows 2000. Applications are usually the older version to whatever is considered up to date today. BTW, if it's a Compaq, you can add more memory beyond the recomended specs providing you have the available slots. Mine offered three, with a 384 maximum capacity when it came with Windows 98FE. I actually have 768 MB of RAM and the motherboard does not reject it. A clean install of Windows 2000 will only need anywhere from 40 - 64 MB of RAM to function with no problems.

You may want to check your XP configrations (AKA Registry). My Windows XP machine used for only audio editing purposes will run on 14 processes and 56 MB of RAM idling. That's not even a N Lite version. You can use Windows 98 if you like, but do remember some third party plug-ins (VST) will not operate on Windows 98 (Been there, done that) without some type of error or worse won't install. That was the main reason I updated to Windows 98 to Windows XP when I was on a 500 MHZ Celeron using 192 MB of RAM years ago. During that time, I used an N Lite Version of XP so it would only consume 40 MB of RAM. Unless your machine is lower than 500 MHZ, I don't see how you can't tweak XP to run faster. I'm not a Reason user (Samplitude and Wavelab only) but I'm sure it would be more stable on Windows XP with the amount of workload involved. Good LucK!

This is an interesting topic. I believe I have every version of Opera available and, find 8.5 to be the best for my needs. Its only pitfall is not functioning on one of my E Mail accounts. I’ve tried 9.27 and it seems to work fine however, the extra features are something I’ll never use. As for version 9.5 Final Version, It runs faster on my old AMD K6 but, I don’t notice a difference on my Pentium 4. Surprisingly, Alpha 9.5 is the fastest on my Pentium 4. Unfortunately, it had difficulty determining what type of file it was saving when you downloaded PDF files. Has anyone noticed (Or possibly I just can’t find it) that version 9.5 Series doesn’t offer the opera6 configuration settings? I’ve never had any problems saving URLs in folders an having Opera retrieve them.

What Pepper is refering to is a certificate that offers numbers in order for Windows to function. In the event you try to bypass the segment, the computer will shutdown. It's totaly different from the product key. I actually got one when I purchased my Compaq 10 years ago. It's not on the booklet but on a post card type of document. Pepper may be using an OEM Version of Windows 98SE. The only time I was prompt for the Certificate Of Authenticity is when I tried to install Windows directly from the CD without all the Compaq bloatware.

And all this time I thought it was an IE shell. Thanks for the link, it sounds neat. Do remember that the core of Firefox is Gecko. K-Meleon and SeaMonkey (browser only) will give mostly the same experience webpage-wise, as they use the same core. Even not K-Meleon? Even on my Pentium II 233 Mhz it starts up pretty quickly. I do have K-Meleon. When I want a change from Opera that's what I use. I've actually tried every browser at one time or another. K-Meleon is full featured like Opera which I like. I would be a waste to use it only for HTML files. I remember installing Norton Ghost 2003 and it required IE 5.0 Minimum at a time I was using Windows 98 with IE 4.0 Hey, I don't even use IE 6.0 on Windows 2000 It's 5.0

A standard Windows 2000 Professional CD will give you the option to upgrade or fresh install.