Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


Gansangriff

Member
  • Content Count

    19
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 Good

About Gansangriff

Profile Information

  • OS
    98SE
  • Country

Flags

  • Country Flag

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thank you very much for your input. Ulead Visual Studio (Version 4.0 from 2000) looks beautiful. It reminds me of 100 year old clocks, just plain inefficency, looking at how much space was wasted for the interface grahpics. The big problem with the old programs are the new formats, containers and codecs. A lot was invented in the last 20 years. Also, an AVI file isn't an AVI file, some work with the old programs, some doesn't. Depends on the codec. A lot to try out, before conclusions can be drawn. The free software VirtualDub (working on Windows 98) looks like a good ally in this fight to get the video formats right. Although letting the video render on a standard PC allows you to make breakfast meanwhile. Also, I have to consider how long it takes to get used to a video editing program.
  2. Which video editing programs did you use on old hardware? Computers around the year 2000 for example. The old single-cores surely required a fat graphics card to be able to render the video at least somewhat. But which programs did you use back in the days? Did Windows XP made working a lot easier compared to Windows 98? Actually I'd like to see, what a Pentium 3 is capable of in productive use. Movie Maker XP's simplicity is beautiful, but it only has one track for audio. The 20 year old professional video software on the other hand is easy to get nowadays. That's what I'm asking about. Which software was good?
  3. Isn't it a shame, that Gates' company has to play the rules of the global market? If they would build the perfect computer operating system, optimise it until it's nearly perfect... But then, no new computers would be sold... The roots of Windows 98 are definetly older. Compare, how much it improved from Windows 95, which nearly looks the same. The cursor movement is one example. This really looked bad on the old system. It's in a much more polished state on 98 SE. They really put a lot of efforts into that.
  4. I feel with them. The Pale Moon developers are like warriors! On the browser war field! It's a bit sad, that the developers have to deal themselves with support stuff (which can be an annoying task). No one can be good at everything... and being nice is definetly not a part of programming. Maybe we as the users have to adopt to other techniques to gather Youtube videos. Here on the screenshot, we have the video search on Startpage, where at least we can get the links from without having to visit Bloat-tube. Next, one needs a good Youtube video downloader...
  5. Maybe it should be considered to search for a Youtube video downloader. Now that is quite a virus-infested field, but it saves a lot of CPU power, as the videos don't have to be streamed and played in realtime. But please consider, that videos as a whole take quite a lot of hard drive space. Basiclly, you can watch Youtube videos on a 20 year old Pentium 3 like that. Sites and programs in this field come and go. But I would be quite cautious there. The site I use is quite dumb and can be perfectly tailored with a Hosts file to have only the functional parts without the scam.
  6. Hopefully, the XP users find creative ways of downloading the videos as a whole! It is still possible to watch online videos, even with hardware that's too weak to stream it in real-time. Meanwhile, I sold two Windows XP computers last week. Whether these machines will go online, is doubtable... but there is more XP out there, than the numbers show.
  7. If you are into playing games and making games on old Windows computers, look what's out there: A current game engine, that supports Windows 95! It's called OHRRPGCE. This seems to be the homepage: http://rpg.hamsterrepublic.com/ohrrpgce/Main_Page In the changelog for its current version, it says: ...Windows 95 is supported again!... This thing supports everything, it seems. Also smartphones, Linux and MacOS. It seems their games are found here: https://www.slimesalad.com/ A lot of projects look very amateur and poorly made, but the so called "best" game is something with dogs and mice in strange outfits. I've never seen something like this to be honest. But it is a new game that works on Windows 95. So who says now Windows 9x is dead?
  8. Wasn't there a difference between Win98 and Win98 Second Edition? I didn't get USB drivers to run on the old Win98. However with Win98SE, I can buy a brand new USB stick and it works with the generic universal USB drivers.
  9. I have experienced big speed differences with Windows 98 and Windows XP on the same hardware, but that was with some other program. It was a compiler for programming scripts, which was 20 times slower on all Win98 systems. The compiler's author thought, that allocating and freeing small amounts of memory would be slow in Win98 (as it wasn't required that much back then). Maybe something similar shows us, that the developers at Microsoft made at least some progress with Vista, Win7... Consindering the browser setup, definetly get rid of scripts for some fine browsing on slow hardware (surely enable scripts for some exceptions). You can use addons like the old Noscript V5 for that. I have a good time here with a single-core Pentium 3 from 2001, using New Moon (No-SSE).
  10. Is QuickView under DOS an option? At least it's fast, but the full version isn't free. (http://www.multimediaware.com/qv/)
  11. After trying several FTP servers to exchange files, the old WarFTP seemed to be the easiest one to use. That's how I transfer files between old computers and very old computers, where using an USB stick is a slower option (as with USB V1, everything takes its time). New Linux systems communicate well with the WarFTP Server, but I haven't used Windows 7 or newer with this yet.
  12. Dear Dave! I found an old post of yours, where you mentioned Eudora 7.1.0.9 as your mail program. Was that the case on Windows 98? What are your experiences with mail programs on Windows 98?

    1. Dave-H

      Dave-H

      Hi, I still use Eudora 7.1.0.9 every day as my default e-mail program, and I use it on all three operating systems on my machine, Windows 98SE, Windows XP, and Windows 10!
      I first started using it on Windows 98 in fact, and later also Windows 2000.
      Best e-mail program ever, the only one I've ever used at home (I started with a copy of "Eudora Lite" that came with my first machine) and it's sad that modern e-mail formats are starting to give it problems.
      The main issue now is that its internal message viewer no no longer displays many messages correctly at all, and if you use the "Microsoft Viewer" option it uses the system's Internet Explorer engine to display the messages.
      Unfortunately even this has now become a problem with some messages, especially in Windows 98 and XP, where it has to use IE6 and IE8 respectively.
      Having said that, it's still OK 90% of the time, and until e-mail servers actually start rejecting its login, I hope it will be for the foreseeable future.
      Cheers,
      Dave.
      :)

    2. Gansangriff

      Gansangriff

      Eudora 7.1 really is beautiful and well thought. Looking at the traffic it causes on startup, there is adserver.eudora.com, which now redirects to the computer history museum! Obviously the code is now in their hands.

      Unfortuneatly one has to have an e-mail provider that supports the older encryption formats. At least you can check your mail with the Windows XP part of your tripleboot computer.

    3. Dave-H

      Dave-H

      Interesting about the adserver!
      One of the main reasons I love Eudora is that it has the facility, which I believe is unique, of being able to edit received messages.
      Very useful now as some come in mis-formatted, and I can correct it!
      My main worry is that my ISP will stop supporting POP e-mail, and become IMAP only.
      Eudora does support IMAP, but I have no experience of using it.
      :)

  13. We have trouble here with sending .EXE files in the mail, too. Even putting them in a .ZIP, .7Z or .TAR.GZ archive did get caught by the mail provider, because it recognised an .EXE file inside the archive. In that case, the archive wasn't the problem, it was the .EXE inside. Renaming the files to obscure the attachments filter didn't help either. What helped however was to use a password on the archive and to encrypt the file names (which was an option in 7-zip, I think). Now the problem is, that the other computer, that recieves the attachment, has to unpack it again, and there are some incompatibilities between different zip- or 7z-versions. That might be annoying, especially when travelling through the decades with Windows 95 and modern Linux machines for example. You have to try a little bit to find some compatible options.
  14. So as the New Moon rises, all different computers rise to connect to the world's data net. An 18-year-old Pentium 3 can participate, too, thanks to New Moon. Thank you for this browser, a fantastic ally on Windows XP! Does anyone remember "Opensearch" plugins? In Netscape 9.0.0.6 of 2008 for example, there are some websites, that can be directly included in the search engine toolbar. However that seem to have gotten lost in newer browsers. The Palemoon search plugins feel like a step back in that perspective, because there is only a limited selection available.
  15. The NoSSE version worked by simply unpacking the files from the 7z archive file. I must admit however, that New Moon is a little bit too much for the 400 Mhz Celeron (which can be confirmed to not have SSE). The Retrozilla-Firefox uses less than half of the RAM that New Moon needs and is therfore better on the pre-millenial machines. Still, New Moon is far from useless on the Celeron, it depends on the target website. The 533 Mhz Celeron test might break the border of proper web browsing with New Moon. Fortuneatly nearly all Windows XP computers have more power than that.
×
×
  • Create New...