Atmosphere XG

I've used Windows XP registry tweaks on 98 with no problems. If the registry is there, the tweak will work even if it's directed towards XP. You will find more tweaks directed towards XP because computers are a standard in homes today. In the days of 95 - 98, it was more of a luxury to own a computer.

Problem solved. I just installed (Upgraded to) Windows 2000 on it After searching Google last night, I found out Windows 2000 can indeed run on 32 MB of Ram providing you turn off a few things. It's slow to boot up but, other than that, it works perfectly. Suprisingly, I still have 10 MB of RAM available on idle. So I increased the swap file to 900 MB and that's that. I'm only going to use one program and, it can run on 8 MB of RAM, so I'm in the clear. The program is based on calculations btw. As for the IBM 12 - 13 inch Monitor, it can run on 800 x 600 (Even 1024 x768 & 1280 x 1024) I was using it on another computer configured to 800 x 600 settings for years up until last month, when I got my hands on a 15 inch replacement. It was easier for me to just work on the laptop with the 17 inch monitor (Seeing that it is used on my main internet PC) than pulling down the IBM. I've swapped these two many of times, and never had to re-adjust the settings based on the different brands. Now I can install my Cable CD pull out the vintage program I was trying not to erase, wipe the drive clean, and give Windows 2000 a fresh install.

If you are referring to going into Device Manager and, reinstalling the Driver I have. However, I require having the Windows 98 FE CD to insert. Well, I don’t own a Windows 98 FE CD. I only own Windows 98 SE, and the Upgrade to enable Windows 98 FE to transfer into Windows 98 SE. So, I’m stuck. As for the 256 issue, upon popping in the Cable install CD, it states in needs 256 pixels minimum in order to continue. So, I’m back at stage one.

Thanks for the help. The monitor I'm using as reference (A 17 inch) is always on 800 x 600 settings. It's been like that for 10 years. When I have the settings configured to not restart upon making changes, it still wants to restart. And here's the kicker. I cannot install my cable network (Using a USB connection) because it needs a minimum of 256 Colors and, the laptop is stuck on 16 colors. This prevents my idea of transfering my rare program to a free storage site So, I need to get the screen back to 800 x 600 with a 256 minimum setting before I can do anything.

So, I have this really old laptop that was given to me last year. The screen is busted but, everything else works. I got an old IBM 12 - 13 inch Monitor and, I was planning on using this computer for a design program that I use time to time. The Laptop is a Fujitsu Lifebook, 233 Mhz Pentium II, 32 Megs of Ram. There is no hope for this thing in terms of being upgradable so, I'm sticking with Windows 98 FE. I don't remember what I did but, the screen refuses to leave the 640X480 setting, despite it was originally 800X600. I've upgraded Windows FE to Windows 98 SE, in addition to using the unofficial service pack I believe was 2.1 (I downloaded it some time ago and burned it on a CD). Please don't suggest the right click -> properties method for, I've must've had the "Windows Is Restarting" 5 times and still defaults back to 640x480. Oh! I can't do a fresh install until I extract this old program from it's harddrive that is no longer in production. And, this Laptop is pre-dating CDR days. So, I need a way (Registry possibly) to default it back to 800 x 600 for the pixels are just a mess. Thanks.

I was wondering if 2000 would run faster than XP. This PC is the one my family use and if an application doesn't load in at least 10 seconds they'll just keep clicking on the shortcut until the PC freezes and then they'll wonder why. Also they all know very little about PC's so i'll be surprised if they even notice it's changed to 2000. Thanks for all the info Jeremy, I've done everything specified in your post but its still running slower than I'd like. Windows 2000 runs better on slower systems than Windows XP. The best way to tell is by memory usage. Windows XP, draws 100 - 120 MB of RAM on idle. Windows 2000 draws 64 - 70 MB on idle. In addition Windows 2000's system requirements are lower. What you lose out on Windows 2000 is more graphical perks. Most programs that run on XP can run on 2000. Windows 2000 is known for its stability for, it offers less consumer stuff and is/was aimed more towards business oriented usage.

I whole heartly agree! The closest thing I use that is Virus Protection is Adaware and, I use it manually. I've been doing this for years (7) and don't have any issues. By the way, I just upgraded to Windows 2000 as of this year. Pre-dating that I was on Windows 98. I feel my surfing habits (Being more on technical forums & sites) and browser choice (Opera) makes a huge difference.

Oh! You have a Laptop. Make sense to conserve the battery. I only use desktops.

Are you sure you are not confusing hibernate (Windows XP) with stand by (Windows 98)? Yeah, because Windows 98 offers standby not hibernate. It will shutdown the monitor and hard drive, but everything else is still running. Windows 98 also had a habit of going into stand by and never coming out of it. I guess you could call ita coma. You would need to flip the master power switch (Or plug in and out the power cord from the wall outlet) to get it back running again.

Never mind. I did a fresh install

I'm not sure what I did but, I cannot left click on My Computer, Browsers, folders to launch anything. What can I do to fix this.

I was A/Bing the two, and found that to be true as well. I actually enjoyed using it. When you think about it, Windows 2000 had a very short shelf life and, many (Including Myself) never really paid it any mind to it. After a little investigating, I found out that its highly underated and only a few use it. I wouldn't be surprised if there are more 98 users than 2000.

Yeah. Microsoft has abandoned Windows 98 for good and, I'm pretty sure other companies will follow suite (If they haven't already). I guess all those programs I saved on CDR were well worth the hours upon hours of downloading using America Online.

I don't know how many of you actually compared Windows 2000 Professional but, this is my take after running it on a computer I got free. First, a little background on the computer. AMD K 6, 400 MHZ, 384 MB of RAM I'm a die hard fan of Windows 98, and, I do own a PC offering Windows XP. However, if I had to pick among the two (XP -vs- Win2K) as an alternative of 98, I would choose Windows 2000 Professional. Here are my reasons 1. Windows 2000 will operate on a 133 MHZ Minimum computer with 128 MB of RAM (Recomended) XP's processor Minimum is 233 MHZ, and 256 MB of RAM (Recomended). 2. Windows 2000 manages memory really good. I was shocked to find out 384 MB, Windows 2000 only consumed 62 MB of RAM on idle. Windows XP is 110 MB sitting on 256 MB of RAM at idle. 3. Opening and closing browsers and, media players throughout the day (5 - 8 hours) put the memory back at 62 MB of RAM usage at the end of the day. For the record, memory comparisons was with nothing starting up in the background, and both using classic windows GUI. So, the only thing being run is the operating system and the Opera browser. 4. Simple GUI. It really reminds me of Windows 98. I'm just not a huge fan of eye candy task bars, & wall papers. 5. Download Speeds. On Windows 98, I average 9.6 and peak at 13.6 mbps On Windows 2000, I average 15 mbps, and peak at 22 Mbps. (I should only be getting 15 Mbps Max, but I'm not complaining ) On Windows XP, the average and peaks are the same as 2000, eventhough XP is sitting on a 2.8 GHZ, Pentium 4. What it boils down to is Windows 2000 performing very efficently on a computer dating before Windows 98 Second Edition. Hope this helps those looking for an alternative to 98.

Hey Everyone. I got my hands on another old computer. It uses Windows 2000. The only problem I see is it automatically reducing the volume (To zero) when I try to raise it up. How can I stop this from happening? Here's an AVI Video on what's happening http://www.sendspace.com/file/h1wwrl Microsoft's Remedy http://support.microsoft.com/kb/279442 Unfortunately, what they say is not listed in my registry. http://www.sendspace.com/file/4bc5gw The Sound Drivers are ESS 1869 and, they work provided the volume would just stay up. I have everything running as planned. But, without sound, this computer is pretty much usless. Can anyone think of a way to fix this problem? I don't have the CD btw, the computer was given to me free (No keyboard, no mouse, no power cord). The Computer is a Compaq 5240 http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/documen...;product=93149# Thanks.

More like a downgrade. It's Windows 95 + IE4, including the s***ty new shell. And some bugfixes. Although I sold Windows 95 computers, I never had the oppertunity to really use a Windows Computer until I purchased my own in 1998. So I couldn't say how both differs in terms of functionality.

You couldn't be more wrong, if you do some homework you'll find out that:1. XP is faster, even on less ram 2. You can just disable the themes if you don't like them 3. If you want to nit pick XP's "extra features" simply disable any service you don't want or need. XP is much better than 2000, but it's been covered enough times already that I'm not going to beat that horse anymore. Don't take my words lightly, I used 2000 as my workstation OS since it went RC0, and I've used XP extensively a few months after it came out. All the above is non essential for my needs. My requirements is having an operating system that will work with little to no eye candy. Enabling me to swap components on my motherboard without phoning Microsoft everytime its done. That alone eliminates me using XP for my needs (I'm 100% against the Product Activation method on operating systems). In terms of software, all the applications that I would use that requires XP will work on Windows 2000. And if I want it faster, I'll dip in the registry. Not to mention RAM is cheap

I'm actually happy Windows 98 user base is low. I'm also happy Microsoft no longer supports Windows 98. It's not like I ever did a "Windows Update" anyway. I would actually move over to Windows 2000 for Internet use, than XP based on the charts. This is of course, if I can no longer access the net with 98. Although I do own an XP Computer, I wouldn't rely on it for online usage until the user base is as low as Windows 2000. And seeing that Windows 2000 and XP is basically the same.....

CptMurphy is correct. I asked the same question here last year. I wanted some programs to install that wouldn't under Windows 98 but would on Windows 98SE . Windows 98SE is a totaly different operating system than Windows 98 Gold. My Windows 98 Codename is *Chicago* whereas, 98SE Codename is *Memphis*. I actually found that out searching through some dlls one night. *Chicago* is Windows 95. So, Windows 98 FE is more an upgrade from Windows 95. I'm assuming that's why Microsoft never called it First Edition (FE) but Gold. I would also imagine this is why Microsoft never gave a free upgrade for users of Windows 98 to 98SE. This leads me to understand the reasoning behind Windows 98 SE Upgrade Disc, and a Full Install Disc (Which couldn't be used as an upgrade for Windows 98 FE). Check your stamp date. Mine is 4.10.1998 If yours is the same, you're probably in the same boat as me.

What's C:/Rem TShoot It just brought it back EDIT Found the culprit searching for Autoexec.bat in files and folders. Deleted it, and all systems go! Thanks.

I like how you just say it so "Non Chalant" after I spent over an hour last night trying to get rid of it. and failed Thanks!!!

Hey! So, I've been tweaking my registry after finally getting the courage (And having an Internet Ready Computer on standby) after owning this computer for 9 years. Lots of tricks I'm enjoying at the moment. I went back to "No Splash Mode" upon start up, and got this error upon booting. C/Progra~1/McAfee/VIRUSS..... This came pre-installed with my computer back in 1998. Thus, it's a 1997 Version. I have no use for this thing, and have already unistalled it. However, I can't find C/progra~1 to delete this error. Can I kill it in the registry, and where should I look to find it. Thanks.

This is the only thing that I make it my business to do MSCONFIG -> Startup -> Uncheck everything except Load Power Profile.

Unless you have your heart set on Internet Explorer 6, why not use a current Firefox or Opera browser? I never use Internet Explorer so, I'm still on version 4 Internet Explorer 7 is Microsoft's current browser. You can download a more up to date browser from Firefox or Opera than worrying how long Internet Explorer 6 will install. You also need to understand that a 200 Mhz computer is going to take time installing programs based on it's processing speed. So, you need to set some time aside. Direct X relies more on processing speed than what platform you are planning to use. A computer of that size is good for web browsing and emails. But, if you are trying to play videos and up to date games, you'll recieve processing speed issues faster than what operation system you choose.

Your computer is perfect for Windows 98. Not sure about ME though... Windows 98 System Requirements http://www.tdbennett.com/samples/31235-2/01/01.html