un4given1

yeah... you OBVIOUSLY are a pothead, as you stated earlier. That stuff will make you stupid... that statement only proves that. Anyways, don't want to turn this into a drug battle... SilverHaze420, you should be ashamed that you would make such a statement when there are so many underage kids who frequent this site. Don't be stupid.

Microsoft Office 2003 all the way! I like it because it integrates into our intranet website at work using SharePoint Services. I like it because it's industry standard, and knowing how to use it at a "professional" level is an accomplishment that anyone should be proud of.

[rant] I do not smoke. I do not like smoke around me. You smokers don't realize that smoking kills your senses. That's why you all use salt. That's why you can never smell the smoke on you. I had to put out a cigarette the other day at the office because someone else forgot to and my hand smelled like it for hours, even after washing it 5 times! The smell of smoke makes me sick (literally!) Now, if you smokers wish to smoke then that's your own perogative. I can even deal with it around myself when I am at a club or something... but tell me why, since none of you smokers have the respect not to smoke around kids, I should have to subject my kids to that? You think my 2 1/2 year old, who had to say "goodbye" to her kitty because she had an ashma attack that put her in the hospital because of the cat, wants to be around that? Do you think smoke is good for my 7 month old daughter with her still developing lungs? Do you all realize your walls are yellow from smoking? Or the inside of your car? Do you realize that smokers are the greatest litterers? Every time I see one of you a******s throw a "butt" out of your car window it makes me want to drive around picking up every butt I can find and fill the back of my truck... follow you home and dump it on your yard! If you want to smoke then fine... just don't be so thoughtless. Also, why is it every smoker in the world believes that because they smoke they are entitled to stand outside for 10 minutes out of every hour smoking while their non-smoker co-workers are still working? [/rant]

The only reason I have discussed my credentials is because you all questioned them. And, to be completely honest... I don't care if you are impressed... I feel appreciated every time I get a message from a user asking me to help them with their issues or projects. My attitude is because you all have misconceptions and want to believe they are right. When I post something you question my knowledge... When I post my background you knock it saying you didn't care to know it... When I post fact you come back with "Microsoft paid them to say that..." When I discount your opinions that overstep the truth you tell me that you run it because you "choose" to and then tell me that my attitude sucks... When I try to get the topic back on track you just continue to come after me. You keep sending me in circles... why not concentrate on the debate at hand? My problem has never been about your "choice" to run Windows 98. It all started when people started posting thier ideas of what Windows XP could and could not do. It's when their opinion steped over the bounds of truth. Opinions based on preference with no lies "I run it because it does everything I need it to..." "Because XP is expensive" (curtousy of azaghal) "I just don't like the way Windows XP runs on my system..." Opinions that overstep the truth... "Windows XP is slow..." "Windows XP does not offer me anything that Windows 98 does not..." "Because XP is bloated and drains system memory and performance!" (curtousy of azaghal) "Because 98 has superior backwards compatability" (also curtousy of azaghal) "On Windows XP you need to have a virus Scanner on it,with 98 you don't" (curtousy of soldier1st) @azaghal: you were the 3rd poster in this thread... You quickly stated incorrect information. You instigated this "war." As I have said before... I have no problem with opinions as long as they do not overstep truth. So, I would like to call a truce and see if we can get this thread back on track.

I have countless Windows 98se licenses. I have the COA labels and all. I just don't have a use for them anymore. As long as you meet it's minimum requirements... Besides, you can pick up a PC that well overdoes it's requirement with XP installed for under $500... With that kind of thinking, why did you ever upgrade to Windows 98 from 95? 95 too less RAM. Oh, you should have just stuck with DOS... To believe that is the only thing that XP offers you that Windows 98 doesn't is just ignorant. I'm going to assume that you know Windows XP offers you more than that... Windows 98 may be your choice... but it certainly isn't the better choice. What do you mean by this? How do you not have the right to use XP if you buy a license? Do you believe that Microsoft is the only company that you don't "own" the software that you purchase licenses for? More companies do this than you know. You buy a "license" to have the right to use their software. Windows 98's EULA doesn't even state that you own the product. The product is the property of Microsoft and you only have the permission to use it. That's your problem... you look at Windows XP as an "upgrade." It is not. It is a completely NEW operating system. It is not based on the Windows 98 kernel...

I have run both Mandrake and Redhat. I was administering a Redhat box at our office for about 4 months until we made the decision to purchase Windows Server 2003. I would concider myself an intermediate Linux user. I will not lie... Linux is not my strong point, but I never set out to make it so. Also, I'm sorry if it seems I am getting a little upset. I never set out to make this thread what it is. If you read back through the whole of the thread you will see that I have had to deal with "Windows 98 is better than XP" posts based on opinion and not fact. Now, I understand there are probably some Windows 98 users out there who have used XP extensively and just decided to stick with Windows 98 for one reason or another... but I believe the majority of the Windows 98 users who have responded here have little or no experience with Windows XP. It has been questions whether or not I have used Windows 98 myself... which certainly isn't the case since I used to be an OEM System Builder and have probably installed and repaired over 1000 Windows 98 PCs. I was even one of the users who fought about switching to Windows XP at first. I just want to get this topic back to what it was supposed to be... "Why do you still use Windows 98?"

First off... this is not the only forum site that I frequent. Ever heard of NTFS.org? They are now OSNN.net... I have been a member with them for nearly 3 years. I have been a member on BINK.nu for a little bit longer than that. It's obvious you have gone into "attack mode" because you can't back up your opinions. Don't take it out on me because you can't find that proof... Stay with Windows 98... doesn't bother me... Just don't be so ignorant next time you decide to jump in and stand up for it... Come with the facts and proof if you are going to turn a simple "why do you use it?" conversation into a "Windows 98 is better than Windows XP" conversation. I'll tell you what... if you hate Microsoft so much then why not just get off of Windows all together... I'm sure Linux would welcome you with open arms... OH, that's right! Linux won't let you run all of the programs you want with the ease you have now... Linux doesn't have the features that Windows does... Linux is to Windows 98 as Windows 98 is to Windows XP. If you are satisfied with a mediocre product then so be it. Some of us demand the best, and we get it in Windows XP. I laugh so much at you because you remind me so much of myself when I was younger. I used to believe that I was never wrong when it came to computers. I had enought knowledge to be dangerous but not enough to REALLY know what I was doing. Then I got into the industry and found out that I really knew nothing. Now, if you are simply the "home user" you speak of and you don't think you will ever get into the IT field, then that's your own thing... maybe opening your big mouth on a tech forum full of IT professionals and self-proclaimed computer gurus is just the wrong thing for you. Grow up... Educate yourself... then come back and maybe we will let you up onto the porch... Until then little puppy... STFU!

No sir, I have not. I am kinda a "do it yourselfer." I like the feeling of accomplishment writing a big script will do, or finding a regkey myself, or making possible what otherwise was thought impossible. I'm sure that anyone who has followed my posts over the years knows that I have helped others find answers when there weren't any elsewhere. You will also see that I have devised my own methods which I have shared in the past as well. I have begun working on projects before, I just never seem to have the time to complete them. Being Director of IT for a multi-million dollar company, a loving father to 2 beautiful little girls (7 month old & almost 3 year old), and managing to keep my Fiance smiling takes much of my time. Don't write me off though... When I do work on something I don't tend to always let it be known... you never know. I will tell you however I am working on a "Dummies guide to Command Scripting" (for lack of a better name) Everyone in the past has always asked me "How do you know what all of that means!?!" I love to pass on my knowledge when I can and I hope others benefit from it... Anyways, back to the "debate"

Oh, and WELCOME! Hope you stick around. Later!

You can simply edit SourcePath at the following key HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Setup Create a directory, edit this path and place your files there...

randiroo76073: Hey, why not go back and read the whole thread before you post again... This thread was to discuss why people still use Windows 98. I was curious. It turned into a debate when uninformed idiots decided to get involved and base everything on their opinion without regards to fact... So, like I said.. if you don't contribute then get out...

It sure was... it was to back up facts and show that I have an extensive knowledge of the subject. If you did not wish to question me then it would have never come up. Like I said... where's YOUR proof?

It's a good indicator when you have someone complaining about the extra 2 gig of space that an OS takes up when they have a 120GB+ drive... Besides, you brought NOTHING to this topic. Have anything to support Windows 98 being "better" or "worse" than any other OS? If not please stay out of it. The gentleman you are speaking with is a moderator so... Anyways, like I said, unless you have something to bring to the conversation, stay out. Thank you.

I could have guessed what you were going to say... Also, the article you posted was 2000 to XP. And, it compares Office 2000 to Office XP. So, here we are in a Windows 98 thread debating if Windows XP is better/worse.. I give you proof to back up what I say, and you give me proof that Office XP is slower than Office 2000... Anyways, Office XP is much more stable, reliable and does not crash nearly as often... I'll gladly wait longer for it to load... but back to the main agenda... Give me proof of all of your opinions of Windows XP being true... because so far you have stated opinions which you believe to be facts, which I have denounced by showing proof.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/eva...erformance.mspx http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/eva...eliability.mspx http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/eva.../usability.mspx There's some proof of everything I have said... Where's your proof?

Actually my main PC has Athlon 64 3400+ with 98 SE Wow... what a waste. You have a 64 bit processor running a 32 bit OS. You get no added performance from this chip. Granted Windows XP is 32 bit, but they are releasing a 64 bit version. With this processor you should not have any slowdown in Windows XP whatsoever. That would be like running a multi processor PC with Windows 98. Windows 98 is not a multi-thread OS. Windows XP is. My 98 SE system boots up on the order of 10 times faster than the equivalent XP system I absolutely guarantee that Windows XP boots faster than Windows 98... ABSOLUTELY! and use Remote Desktop all from 98 SE. only the client piece... not the server. "Why would I need server?" Well, I use it to log into my PC from other locations. It's a fantastic tool, all built into XP. You CAN NOT utilize the server piece of RDC in Windows 98. All along he has been posting into this thread which is now more than 180 posts large..... about how XP is better. Well, other than that, WinXP when fortified with SP2, is the best desktop OS out there. Reasons? un4given1 posted a lot of them. THANK YOU! I was gonna say the same thing. If you have just joined this thread spend the next week reading it before you reply again. Thank you! Bigger target (both bigger OS and more visibility) for virii and malware Prove it! Your incorrect. Signifcant performance degradation If you are noticing any degradation on your 3400 chip then you might want to reevaluate your knowledge of PCs. Good luck trying to get a job in the IT industry... becuause I assure you if you sit in front of the Director of IT of any big company and tell him that Windows XP "sucks" you aren't going to get that job. Try it. Significant memory consumption Windows XP runs each program in a seperate protected memory space which means if your program crashes your PC does not. This is not the case with Windows 98. Also, Windows XP releases memory from background processes (unless told otherwise) for use with foreground processes... OK, so where in all of those TRUTHS are you able to make your point? Waste of disk space Yeah... wouldn't want you to lose out on 2 gigs of warez or illegal MP3s or movies... becuase we all know that it's SOOOO easy to fill a 200GB HD with all legally purchased programs and songs. Backwards compatability problems Name one... Windows XP has "compatability mode" which can be set to allow a program to run in a compatable environment... But since you haven't used XP much you wouldn't know this... It's so easy to setup too... you right click on your shortcut and click Properties and Compatability. Cumbersome interfaces (e.g. Find) Win Key + F You know there's a registry key you can run to take away the search dog. There is even a check box you can click when you run it once.... Poor troubleshooting (e.g. Shift-F8) It's like a Toyota to a Ford... a Ford might be easier to fix but the Toyota probably won't break... I'm not sure if your statement means the "Help and Support" system is worse than Windows 98's help (which you are completely insane if you believe this) or if you mean it just takes a greater skillset to repair it... I thought XP was supposed to be easy to use. Does a home user really need the experience of having set up a hundred systems to avoid all of the problems us forum members are reporting? You all keep using my posts out of context. This wasn't to show it was easier or that it takes that much knowledge to use it... I was simply showing that my opinion is not based on one system that might be completely compatable with Windows 98 and not completely compatable with Windows XP. I believe that's your situation. The only time I have come across a situation where Windows 98 is better for a system is if it has less than 256MB of RAM and lower than a 700Mhz Processor. BTW, I think one big reason people like XP is because its "newer". Not actually better, just newer You will never get it... You are like a linux user or a Mac user. You don't have to be right, you just are because you said so... right? (and this was not to say those OSes are better or worse... just pointing out how hardheaded you are about this.. give me facts, not opinions.)

Yes, the original question was why... If your answer is based on truth or necessity then I understand. This conversation became an argument because too many of you 98 users decided "Windows 98 can do this BETTER... Windows 98 can do this and XP can't..." That's where the problem came in. Real issues I see.. Cost "it ain't broke so don't fix it" Activation woes I understand all of those... I have based my opinions of both 98 and XP on hundreds of systems that I have built and or administered. If you are having an issue with speed or something else maybe you should determine if it's your system and it's incompatability or of it's a true issue. If you are informed about the differences and don't make any false statements then I will respect your answer. If you retaliate and argue about what one can do that the other can't, when it can... then you lose my respect. Base your answer on fact over opinion and there wouldn't be an arguement, because fact always trumps opinion.

Oh, come on. You can't tell me with the size of drives these days that it really matters to you. I supposed you drive a geo because it's got a 3 cyl engine, afterall a V8 would take up too much room, and is a waste of space, right? Spoken like someone how claims to know about the product they hate but hasn't really used it enough to know the truth... this is just an ignorant statement. NTFS... that's all I have to say This doesn't happen with every change... As a matter of fact, you can make changes to much of your system without this happening. If you swap out a MB or processor you can guarantee it will happen though. I never worry either... because I have this nice little thing called a firewall. And I'm not talking some software I installed. I have a stand alone stateful firewall. Noone should be without one IMO. What other phobias do you have? Sounds to me like you are just afraid to upgrade to windows XP because you don't know it as well... As I said before... External firewall. Software firewalls are a joke. I would say your phobia isn't just Windows XP phobia, but upgrade phobia. I would like to recommend a drug to you for that... it's called "phukitall" That will help you get over your phobias. Once again, spoken like a user who hates XP and doesn't really know why... Got any other false ideas in your mind I can help you get the right answers to?

OR... you could just use compatability mode in Windows XP...

sounds like you are having some hardware issues. Please don't try to mask these as Windows XP problems, as they are not. If you were not having hardware issues you would fnid that Windows XP runs beautifully.

Wouldn't believe that from anyone outside of Japan. The networks everywhere else are far more inferior to the 3G networks in Japan. They are even working on 4G networks.

You could edit your OSC files to allow you to choose which SIF you would like to use. That would be the easiest way. Other than that, you really don't have to have multiple SIFs. Simply place all of your drivers and set a path and your system will use the correct driver. Copying all of the drivers over will take a little more time, but not a whole lot longer. You will find a great deal of the drivers are probably included in XP to begin with.

Although it's not completely legal, as long as you have valid licenses for all of your PCs you should be OK. The company I used to work for used VLK but had many OEM versions. As long as we had OEM Licenses for Windows XP Professional they didn't frown on us using our VLK for these PCs.

I'm gonna agree with everyone else... great program.

Oh, I said "Absolutely!"