Tommy

It's in Windows 2000 actually, which is my main system but I'm using the Windows 98 color scheme. But I can try something like WinAmp and see what happens.

Okay, so call me stupid but I've had very little to no experience in USB audio devices. Is that something that just plugs into the USB port, runs a driver, and then just works? That would be very useful in something like for example, a laptop that has nothing but high definition audio codecs.

I took video and audio and uploaded it to my YouTube channel, so it should visualize what the problem is. Sometimes it's a bit more aggravating than this, but this is basically what it does.

I have a Creative SoundBlaster X-Fi extreme audio sound card and there's a slight issue that's been plaguing me for a long time. It's nothing major to speak of, but still annoying and I don't even really know how to search for it because whatever I put into Google, is not my problem. Okay, so here it goes. Say I play an audio file, but then I stop it in the middle of the file and play something else, I'll get a fraction of a second worth of the last audio that I was playing before what I just selected starts. Sometimes it's almost a slight little pop sound but other times you can really tell it was what you last played. I don't know if it's the sound card/drivers doing this or what but I don't remember my 24-bit audio soundblaster doing this. Anyone else experience this?

Oooh, I see. Well, I have totally done this with both Office 2000 and Office 97. And it does seem to work just fine. I've used it on Windows 98 as well and it seems to have worked just fine if I remember correctly, but then maybe I didn't use it for anything too complicated to begin with.

I didn't even know this was possible. So, my question is, what benefit do you get from doing this? Is it just a security thing, or hotfixes as well?

Gas prices were too expensive, so that's why the pump crashed.

It's really a matter of preference. How fast is your Pentium 1? 150MHz is the minimum it calls for and unless you use a switch to install it, it actually will not install on anything less than it which is surprising because XP would install on a 100MHz processor. I tried it once and it took almost 4 hours to install. lol But either way, I was never a fan of Me just because it didn't treat me too well. But as I said, it's a preference thing. If it's more stable on your computer, by all means, run Windows Me. I just felt like Windows Me was a bit of a crap shoot because sometimes it would work alright and then on other machines it would be just horrific.

Absolutely not. XP is not obsolete, not even with SP2. Vanilla or SP1, more than likely that would be a yes. SP2 added a big, important component, a firewall. Now, time for a bit of a rant about XP and MS. Microsoft is just telling you it is obsolete so that you have to shell out more money to buy a newer, inferior OS from them. Windows 2000 is my day to day main operating system and while a few things are getting harder to do with it, I wouldn't consider it obsolete. The only thing that makes it obsolete is all the random doodads that really don't mean anything. I won't get for the life of me how Microsoft Office cannot run on Windows XP anymore, what was truly added to it to make it not run anymore? My money is on nothing, that they just added just enough new extensions so that it calls upon dlls that do not exist in XP. It's exactly the same kernel, from NT to now, it's the same dang thing except up and sometimes downgraded, like the last OSs that came out. Windows 2000 and Windows XP are literally the same OS except for some enhancements to XP but many of the inner workings come straight from 2000 itself. But there was such a big compatibility difference between the two since somehow XP incorporated 9x workings as well so that many programs for 9x could also run without the error messages from being an NT OS which was a big problem in the 90s. But I'm elaborating too much. Honestly, I don't care what people say. It has aged a lot, yes. But it has aged gracefully. There is really no reason why Windows XP cannot be used for another 10 years. Security holes will always exist, there will never been an entirely iron clad OS, there will always be security updates and hotfixes. As XP becomes more incompatible, it'll probably take the same route as Windows 98 where many new worms and viruses will not run simply because it requires dlls that do not exist. There might be things that will always harm the OS, but worms generally attack what is being ran the most throughout the world. XP might still be a target now since many computers still run the OS, but so many have jumped ship to Windows 7, 8, and even 10, that attacking XP won't be economical for them to do anymore, which is what I believe Windows 98 is at right now. It just doesn't make sense to make backwards code for it simply because few people run it anymore, and if they do, some aren't even online with those machines. Many people on here will run XP until there's nothing in the world that will not run it anymore just because they are that diehard of a user. It's not because they're stubborn, it's because they prefer to stay on what works for them. As far as I'm concerned, NT6 is a resource hog and slows down quickly after a while if you do too many projects with the machine, especially video editing and the like. That's my two cents though. As for SP3, I don't think I'd necessarily jump to it. Most hardware that does support XP requires SP3 but if you don't need it, I don't think I'd necessarily install it unless you're having problems with security. I never really liked SP3 myself, it just felt a bit clunky.

Microsoft always "fixes" what isn't broken, typical idiots. And here's what I ultimately want to know. What is with the overuse of the word app, like seriously? As much as I loathe that word to begin with, I feel it belongs on a completely mobile base, not PC based. The impression I get from such a lazy word is that it's a watered down version of some sort of program. I think it's Microsoft trying to sound hip, but then again what do you expect from a company that thinks white toolbars and titlebars is cool? Why not just have it look like a basic Microsoft Word document, white with black text if this is the case. I think even DOS looked more interesting than what they've come up with in the last year. @Darkenmoon87: I absolutely agree. I have one long word for all this "flat design" from all these companies. Boooooooooooooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnngggg!!!

Wait, so here is a question. When you say we have to surrender our previous OS installation, does that mean we permanently lose our ability to go back as in the Windows 10 activation cancels out your ability to reactivate your old OS, or does it just mean that you can go back but you'd have to wipe the drive clean and start over again?

I don't know if this was ever discussed, but I chose not to install IE6 so it's at stock IE5. RP9 did warn me that IE6 was highly recommended but I didn't know why. So anyway, I installed it and it seems to work fine regardless except for one thing. I lost the ability to resize my quick launch toolbar. Even uninstalling or going into safe mode does not bring back that ability so now I have a few icons hidden permanently because it exceeded the space alotted for the quick launch bar and I cannot resize it to fix it. Does anyone know how to restore this ability? And no, it doesn't change by rechecking and unchecking lock taskbar.

That's my problem, you shouldn't have to add 3rd party extensions just to make Windows functional. It should do that straight out of the box. Windows 10 out of the box with defaults loaded, is garbage.

I won't even touch Windows 10, I don't care how fast, new, shiny, or powerful it is. Microsoft betrayed us by adding a bunch of spying utilities into the OS to help track our activities. I think even activation to this day is unnecessary because it just makes it a hassle for genuine users to update their machines as time goes on. Pirates will always find a way to crack activation, generally through the means of giving your machine a virus in the process, but it can be done and will be done. So honestly, activation should be retired. But I totally agree how bland and boring it looks. Whoever thought all white backgrounds looked great must've been on crack or something. Windows 98 looks more beautiful than what I've seen of Windows 8 or 10. Plus...this doesn't look so good: http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/09/12/microsoft-confirms-windows-10-now-forced-onto-windows-7-and-windows-8/ I guess this is a reason for Windows 7 users now to just turn Windows Update completely off.

The computers are on a surge protector that I just recently replaced about a year ago. The monitors are actually just fine, since I'm using both of them right now. Even all the other hardware survived since I just transfered just about everything over to the new board except the processor because I went from AMD to Intel. So maybe it just went south for whatever reason. Hard to say.

Any idea how it could just go like that? Or does it just happen?

I installed the post-Office XP updates and I'm still having issues. It seems it only really is an issue when it connects to the server and retrieves my mail.

Are you looking to build a system just for 98, or are you looking to build a multiboot system that can be used for other things on later operating systems? Makes a lot of difference as to hardware choice, because if you want one strictly for 98, then I would recommend say, board x. But if you want a "higher performance" system for XP as well on the same machine, I would recommend board y. I'm in the process of experimenting with Windows 9x on post-9x supported boards, but unfortunately I don't have a lot of success to report so far. Whatever you do, do not attempt to use an Intel-branded board later than the D875PBZ. Some third-party boards based on Intel 9xx and later chipsets have possibilites, but not those built directly by Intel. Also, Intel or AMD, or does it matter? I don't have much experience with AMD since the good old K6-2 Super Socket 7 days. I'm pretty much looking to just have a single boot system with Windows 98 on it. I do have a few AMD Athlon 62 X2 processors laying around, but not many, I have more higher end Intel processors that I can use in something so I have more choices with Intel than with AMD. And something with four RAM slots rather than two would be sweet as well since I have the Rloew RAM patch.

I'm looking for a decent motherboard that will somewhat support Windows 98, even if I have to have addon sound and video, that's not a problem. The one catch is that I'm looking for a board that uses Award software for the BIOS. Does anyone know anything besides Gigabyte that uses AwardBIOS and is at least somewhat fairly recent, like in the last 7-10 years? I don't mind using Pentium D or even early Core 2 processors either. Anybody have any suggestions?

We do have version 5.5 I believe it is which works on Windows 2000 with the extended kernel. I'm also about to try 3.8 which was modded for Windows 98, it runs and detects my webcam and I can make calls so I'm thinking it works and it doesn't come with bloatware ads like the new versions do.

We do have an (in)active conversation going on about Skype on Windows 2000. Let me ask you, why is 4.2 so special to you? Is there a particular reason you want to use that version?

Hey Jumper, thanks for replying. I should've probably specified moreso, it happens if I open it up and it downloads new email....then that's when it happens, particularly if I haven't opened it in a days time. It doesn't do this if it's been open for a while, but as soon as I open it and it starts updating headers and downloading email, that's when it happens.

Alrighty, since nobody answered my question or seems to know what's going on, I have a picture. Outlook is definitely the cause of this....but why? As soon as I kill the program, everything returns to normal, without even having to reboot.

I'm having another problem as well that has been ongoing, installing either UURollup or the kernel update on my Dell Inspiron 1525 breaks the Intel Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG Network software. Each time you reboot, it says that there is no adapter found and you need to do a repair installation and then it'll work for that session. But if you reboot or shut down and bring it back up, it'll be the same story over again.