Jlo555

Yeah, if your using norton, mcaffee, or aol 9.0se (or, I suppose, any other bloated, crappy security software), then expect your computer to slow down A LOT. Since winMe is still technically part of the win9x series, I suggest you dump whatever antivirus program you may have, and replace it with AVG or have nothing.

Meh, I like posting about this topic. Windows 98, while it is getting pretty old, is still a good OS for old and new computers. I just rebuilt my desktop and stuck 98SE, and it for the most part runs perfectly. And I say for the most part, because I curse nVidia for making crappy nForce drivers.

The only things I can think of that Windows 2000 won't run are some of the newest highend games, and of course old software/games designed primarily for Windows 9x/DOS. But, judging from the results I've seen from games like Battlefield 2, the reason that a lot of games say they ONLY run on XP is because they simply haven't been tested on any other OS. In fact, when I went to install the game on Win2k, the installer *said* that the game had only been tested on Windows XP Service Pack 2. Don't worry, you can expect windows 2000 to be mostly compatible with most stuff for years to come, because it's still an NT OS, and its practically Windows XP with all the sh!t cut out of it. DO worry about Windows 98/98SE/ME though, Microsoft is doing their best, along with other companies to faze those operating systems out. I can't say that I'm helping though, because I'm turning my primary desktop into a windows 2000 box, but I still got a good old Dell Dimension XPS T-500 that runs win98se like a charm. EDIT: I just read the counter results for OS usage in October. I can't believe that 74% of all computer users are using XP now; that stat sends shrills down my spine!

I just trick windows 98 by scrolling through the list of drivers that windows already has for monitors and selecting some random one. And, for me, it worked. That's the easy way out, but it worked.

Use the drivers from the last build if the old ones were working fine. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Well, I guess I'll stick with Win98 and 2000 for a couple more years, then dive headfirst into Linux (again.) I just can't take all of the new restrictions and retarded policies (DRM comes to mind... along with activation.)

I suggest you google search "reformat and install windows 98." You're bound to find some pretty good instructions on reinstalling win98.

$400? Wow, that sucks. Well, I noticed the fan had been dying periodically, so decided to just go and replace the whole heatsink. Well, I could NOT figure out how to take off the old heatsink. I googled how to pull off the old heatsink, and after 20 minutes of pulling, shoving and yanking plastic pins, I got the thing off. I put the new one on perfectly and put the card back in my computer. I turned on my computer and saw green, red and purple dots floating across the screen, next to a disfigured "window 98" boot logo. The only reaction I had to this was slowly uttering "f***" and pulling the card out and shoving it into a box in my closet. Then, I went to Fry's and bought an nvidia geforce4 mx4000 for $50, and it works pretty **** well (and it has no fan to mysteriously die.)

Oh yeah, I forgot about mentioning san andreas in my post before. Yeah, the people at rockstar games are morons; if they wanted to make their game for only 2000/XP, they should've put an OS check on the installer. But the fact is, the game DOES run perfectly, DEPENDING ON YOUR CONFIGURATION. I was using an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro for san andreas, which i accidently destroyed, while trying to replace a heatsink (don't ask about it... its a touchy subject cause I broke $200 worth of computer hardware.) So, yeah, now I'm using an nVidia GeForce4 MX 4000, which, on win2000/XP san andreas runs fine, but on 98SE... LAGGY LAGGY LAGGY. Oh, and I ran into the notorious "sound problems" on all of the operating systems at least once. I love the game, but I hate rockstar now. (I know this is off the subject, but I had to get it off my chest somehow!)

@eidenk - Nice job with the OS emulating, but I can honestly say that I understood about 15 to 20% of what you said. I guess I'm in over my head with the whole operating system emulating. There's a lot I don't really know about it cause the only thing I've used is VMware, which I've gotten to run Windows 95/98 and Me successfully.

We ain't talkin about Amiga here, we're talkin about windows 98. I can feel the days of windows 98SE fading off into the distance support wise. Once Vista comes out, all of us who still want to run Windows 98SE using any new software or high end games will be totally screwed. Oh well, no one's gonna stop me from running the OS of my choice. I know in the world of technology, the developers are the ones that are continuously progressing further and further; but frankly, I don't see much progress anymore. All I see now are old ideas getting bloated and somewhat more "user friendly." Examples: Windows, AOL, AOL Instant Messenger (actually anything made by AOL these days), Norton AntiVirus, *Any* store bought pre-loaded computer.

Thanks for the quick reply! Oh well, in that case I guess I'll just have to upgrade then. At least it's not that way with operating systems, sort of.

Does anyone know how to make MSN Messenger 4.5 work. (I know there are newer versions, but for some reason I've become obsessed with trying to make v4.5 work.) I downloaded the installer from oldversion.com and installed it perfectly, but when it tries to connect to MSN's servers, it complains that the "service is not compatible with this version of the program." That IMO is a load of crap. I was able to take a hex editor to the executable file and replace all of the text strings that say "4.5.0121" with "7.5.0311," with no luck. Anyone know how to make v4.5 work?

Why 98SE? Well, for starters, the only real problem I've ever had with 98se is stability. XP was perfectly stable, but it had other issues that bothered the hell out of me; (there's so many of em, I don't feel like listing them, but I think I did write em all out a couple weeks ago in the XP forum.) 2000... meh, I would use it but last time I ran the OS it crashed beyond repair after installing SP4. All of the XP-ers ask why we still use Win98, saying that it's old, so we should upgrade. Just because something is old, doesn't mean it's bad or obsolete.

I wasn't really referring to onboard graphics, but I've noticed for any laptop video driver, it can be true. The nVidia driver I was talking about was not integrated. I had a 32mb nVidia GeForce 2Go, which according to nVidia's stie, was not supported by them, but by the manufacturer, Dell, which only had drivers for win2k/XP (bastards.) I don't really know what separated nVidia's driver from Dell's driver, but something must have been different, because nVidia's driver simply didn't work. I'd say the same is the case with your laptop.

Googled the exe, found absolutely nothing. I highly doubt that's a windows program, in fact, im 100% sure its not, and I'm about 30% sure it's something you should worry about. Go to trendmicro.com and do a virus scan, or scan your computer with adaware. I wasn't gonna say anthing, but mjcakshp.... I've interpretted that for some reason as mj cak shp or marijuana cake shop.lol maybe it's just me...

I think the problem is that you have to use the drivers from your computer manufacturer. I know for laptops, when you use a video driver that is from the chip producer (in this case, ATI) it usually won't work. I found this out the hard way with Dell and an nVidia chip.

Your system probably hasn't crashed with the extra ram because the unofficial service pack puts the maxfilecache string in system.ini. That's kind of odd that your system crashes with all the USP's above 1.5. It is true that Windows 98 can support up to 1GB of RAM; at least for me that's true. I've heard of other people using up to 1.5gigs, and I've never seen how that's possible because whenever I tried that, I got the "out of memory" message upon bootup.

Hey hey, I don't want another XP vs. 98 war; I've already seen pleanty of em...sometimes they amuse me, other times (like now) they're just inconvenient. Thanks for your suggestions on VMware equivalents; I think I'll be doing some OS emulating this weekend...

F-disk and reformat (WARNING: everything gets erased on the hdd.) Frankly, I try to avoid the windows partitioning utilities, because imho, they all suck. I use Maxblast 4 or Partition Magic to reformat.

Well, I'm not a programmer, so I just read your second paragraph, nodding in agreement. As for what you said in the first paragraph, I totally agree with what your saying. I've especially noticed this when I installed XP Pro SP2. Right after the clean install (non-nlited), I noticed nearly 4 gigs of my hard drive filled already. What the hell could possibly be taking up that much space? Perhaps that mediocre security center that I attempt to disable everytime I use XP... who knows? Windows 98SE installs for me, usually between 250-310 megs (and I know a lot of people like to make it under 20 megs, though I have no idea how they do that.) 98SE does everything the way I want it to, along with Win2k (most of the time.) XP is so full of sh!t that I gotta go through with XP Lite and clear out all the crap that I can, and I still see the windows folder is over 2 gigs. I plan on getting Beta 2 of WinVista, and I can honestly say that I'm afraid to stick that on my computer right now, after seeing all the bloat and s***ware (aww, I made up a new word) of XP.

I guess I can't stop progress... this may sound weird (coming from someone who's only 16) but technology wise, I hate the 21st Century. Frankly, I don't think software in particular is advancing for the better. Decreasing compatibility (DirectX and apparently networking now), implementing multimedia restrictions (DRM) and producing software full of bloat (any software title made by a multi-billion dollar corporation after 2002) are all steps in the WRONG direction, and I'd say Microsoft is now the epidimy of all of this. Just look at thecounter.com and notice that in January 2000, usage stats for Linux didn't even show up. But in September 2005, Linux is #7. Obvioulsy, we're not the only ones getting fed up! Better watch out, Bill Gates...

man, just seeing the screenshots for Vista makes me run as fast as I can back to my windows 2000 box. I'm with -I- on this one, win2k until I DIE! Oh and by the way, I went to windows update on my laptop the other day (which has WinXP Home.) I was irritated when I found that MS created a nice update for implementing even more DRM into XP. By the time Vista comes out, XP will already have all of the "features" of digital rights management that Vista is going to have.

Hehe, that's a start I suppose.

There are some pretty good reasons winMe never got past 18%. It was released in the very end of 2000, right after windows 2000 was released and right before XP was released. It also got a bad reputation from the very beginning of its release. I do find it pretty sad that XP's popularity has grown that high, but has been 4 years since MS released a home-user OS. OEM's for XP are being dished out faster and faster. Also, Microsoft has pretty much cut off the sales of all other OS's it has produced, including win2k. Stores are just beginning to take windows 2000 off the shelf, leaving XP Pro, XP Home, and WinServer 2003. Yes, of course there's eBay, but what average computer user would search an auction site for an OS. Point being: XP's growing popularity is mostly due to the fact that the average computer user doesn't realize they don't have to use XP and are hypnotized into the OS with its "awesome" multimedia features and "colorful" Luna interface.