waywyrd

Hi, I can install the drivers under a "98Lited" Win98SE for AC'97 Motherboard sound cards, but when I install the "ME replacements" I get the error icon showing in device manager for the sound driver. Uninstalling and reinstalling the drivers makes no difference. Has anybody else had this problem? They're both AMD motherboards. Waywyrd.

Hi, Thanks guys for your help. My appologies to MDGx I thought I'd read through the "KNOWN BUGS + FIXES" section of READ1ST.TXT reasonably well. Eveidently not well enough! To erpdude8 my computer uses the ACPI standard for power management. I'll try what MDGx says. Thanks again. Waywyrd

Hi, I don't know if anyone else has come across this problem or not, but when I install "98SE2ME" 9after installing Gape's service pack) my system no longer goes into "standby" with the settings I use under the screensaver/power management properties. Under my "standard" 98 Lite system the power management properties work perfectly! My specs are: Processor Model : AMD Athlon XP 2200+ Speed : 1.80GHz Mainboard Bus(es) : ISA AGP PCI USB i2c/SMBus MP Support : 1 Processor(s) MP APIC : No System BIOS : American Megatrends Inc. P1.90 Mainboard : K7S8X. Total Memory : 512MB DDR-SDRAM Chipset 1 Model : ASRock Inc SiS746 CPU to PCI Bridge Front Side Bus Speed : 2x 133MHz (266MHz data rate) Total Memory : 512MB DDR-SDRAM Memory Bus Speed : 2x 133MHz (266MHz data rate) Video System Monitor/Panel : Dell D2128-TCO Adapter : NVIDIA GeForce2 MX/MX 400 Physical Storage Devices Removable Drive : Floppy disk drive Hard Disk : ExcelStor Technology J360 (57GB) Hard Disk 2 : ST360020A (31GB) CD-ROM/DVD : ARTEC WRR-52Z (CD 52X Rd, 52X Wr) CD-ROM/DVD : IDE DVD-ROM 16X (CD 48X Rd) (DVD 6X Rd) Peripherals Serial/Parallel Port(s) : 2 COM / 1 LPT USB Controller/Hub : SiS 7001 PCI to USB Open Host Controller USB Controller/Hub : SiS 7001 PCI to USB Open Host Controller USB Controller/Hub : SiS PCI to USB Enhanced Host Controller USB Controller/Hub : USB Root Hub USB Controller/Hub : USB Root Hub USB Controller/Hub : USB Root Hub Keyboard : Standard 101/102-Key or Microsoft Natural PS/2 Keyboard Mouse : Microsoft PS/2 Mouse MultiMedia Device(s) Device : C-Media AC97 Audio Device Anybody got any ideas? Waywyrd

Hi, Thanks guys. Iwasn't sure how much the two lists differed when I couldn't access the link. Waywyrd

Hi, Does anybody have a copy of "win95-4mb.txt", because the link on the webpage doesn't work anymore and a google search doesn't bring anything up either! Waywyrd

Hi, Well said. If past experience with Microsft's new, 'superior' operating systems is anything to go by when Vista finally surfaces, not only will it be a monstrously oversize, 'one version for all' o/s it will probably be even more 'insecure' than XP when that first came out! Waywyrd

Hi, For what it's worth here's my 'two cents' worth about 98Lite. It's an awesome program. Worth every penny and more besides. I've tried it on 3 different PC's. Yes, it did take me several attempts and a few formats to 'get the hang' of using it. One lesson I learned, a bit of knowledge of MSDOS or FREEDOS (or similar) can be a real 'life saver'. I had no trouble installing Direct Xc. I followed Shane Brook's advice on the 98Lite website, under the FAQ/Support section. 'Ieradicating' Internet explorer never gave me any problems with Windows98SE itself. A few programs 'complained' it wasn't there, so I either didn't use them or installed Internet explorer as a 'stand alone' program. As regard needing 3 versions of Windows a quick search on eBay will give some options for obtaining legit copies, for far less than a legit copy of WinXP. Gape's service pack improved an already (for me) very stable Win98SE. Waywyrd

Agreed. If WinXP was/is so superior over Win98 then there wouldn't be a continual stream of critical updates. Would there? Surely the whole point of a superior operating system is that's inherent security can not be so easily 'attacked'. I say so easily 'attacked', because since WinXP came out there's been sooo many critical updates! From what little I understand of Linux, if one part of the operating system is 'attacked' it doesn't immediately corrupt the rest of the o/s. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Waywyrd.

Hi, When I got my first PC, which came with Win98SE, I had all the usual problems... BSOD, programs crashing, constant reboots etc. Several times I came close to throwing the PC out of the nearest window. Then a salvation came in the form of a PC magazine article about Shane Brooks IE Iradicator. I downloaded the program and was so impressed with the speed gains and stability I purchased the full 98Lite program. Then later on I came across "98 SE SP 2.1a" which improved my Win98 even further. Later still "Killer Replacements 98 SE -> ME" and even more improvement. Thanks to those guys for all their work. Now I dual boot Win98 (with the addons) and WinXP. I'm hanging on to Win98 while it will still do all the things I want it to do. I find several things work better under Win98 than XP. Nero CD burning for one. Version 6 will 'coaster' CD's under XP, under Win98 works perfectly (99%). Another family member (scorns me for still using 98) has also 'coastered' several CD's... using different Cd burning programs... whilst trying to do some CD's for me. Malware, viruses etc. next to nothing with Win98. Not so with XP. With the way Microsoft is heading, with bigger 'bloat', one system setup 'fits all' I'll probably head for Linux (even with its steep learning curve). Or a Mac if I can ever afford one. Another reason... check this out! Microsoft spyware? Waywyrd

Hi Jake, Firstly I could be wrong, but I think Eck missed the point of removing "junk" from Win98. I personally removed the "junk" from several of my multi-boot 98O/S... to improve the stability and usability of Win98. Are you trying to do the same? (I run Win98 and XP on a AMD Athlon 1.8, with 512mb ram and a 60gb hard-drive. Maybe not "state-of-the-art", but not sluggish either.) Any way back to reducing Win98. Is a method which will give you a basic 9x, about 120 mb, plus the remainder as components added to the Windows Setup tab in Add/Remove programs of interest? Although you will need the full "98lite" program. This method is called "Speedos", and it's a fellow Brit's idea, which he is happy to share with anyone who wants it. As regards using "IE Eradicator then install IE anyway", Win98 runs like a dream this way compared to Microsoft standard installation of IE. I tried both ways of running IE, and using IE Eradicator is definately more stable. Regards, waywyrd

Thanks for the help and reply. Now that there is a good basis for running a Limited User Account perhaps more software vendors can create programs that will run on a LUA without having to work out file permissions etc. I have one program which is supposed to gather data via the Interent which won't run under LUA... unless I alter the file permissions. Another program Paint Shop Pro, will only run under Administrator account. I've running a "98Lited" dual boot system with XP, because I didn't fully trust XP on the Internet. Yes, I know Win98 can get hacked/attacked, but it's far easier to "clean up" the infections etc.

I've already altered my Administrators account, and that's why I was wondering how much "truth" there is in limiting virus or malware to one account/profile. Especially as it's relatively easy for "Newbies" to set up seperate accounts.

Hi, Well thought out and well written guide. Does anybody have any idea or opinions (or even evidence/proof) as to how much "damage limitation" creating a Limited User Account in WinXP would/does make in the event of virus or other malware infection? Especially for internet use. Waywyrd

If gdogg is as good as his word then you should have the choice between a lean mean Internet/online Gaming O/S. That won't get infested with malware etc. or having the standard XP setup. Something Microsoft could have done in the first place... instead of install everything whether you want it or not. Even Win98 gave you an... albeit limited... choice when it came to installation!

Well said. Not only are there alternatives, but a lot of open source programs, are just as good if not better than MS or aimed at XP. Plus they seem to fix/iron out the bugs in their programs a lot quicker than MS and others. Long live 98

I wonder why if XP is such a superior o/s to 98... there's even more "junk and bloat" to strip out of it (XP)? Just so as you can hook up to the Internet... without being infested with spyware and other "wonderful delights" to let Microsoft and everyone else know where you've been. Thanks to a certain Ausie, if IE gets infected and thereby the rest of your system you can "rip out" IE and start again. Especially as most of Micrsofts vulnerablities started from having a web browser tied into the o/s in the first place. I don't use any version of IE if I can avoid it, but unfortunately most websites seem to be designed as if it's the only worthwhile browser! Waywyrd B)

My appologies. I should have made it clearer that my comment about XP being 'superior', was directed towards members, (I won't mention names, I don't want to get into pointless arguments), who seem to be slating Win98 just because it's older. They seem to refuse to acknowledge that while Win98 may need some 'tweaking' to improve it... it can be done relatively easily. And without the need for constant updates!

eh, be careful with that one if 9x were as popular as NT, i'm sure the virus writers would be focusing on it instead. not so many years ago it was under heavy attack. Point taken. Win98 was as you rightly point out under attack from virus writers. But I dispute the point that XP is superior, when it needs as many, if not more, 'critical' updates than a supposedy inferior Win98. Surely if XP is a superior o/s than it should at less risk of attack from viruses... from day one? One example that springs to mind is the XP 'Firewall'. There were/are enough examples from smaller companies with far more secure firewalls... before XP was released!

Hi, In which case, the sooner the better. And a lot of people are going to be extremely grateful. Me for one. At the moment I use a 98Lite, with further modifications to surf the Internet in "relative" safety. Waywyrd

Hi, I think atomizer's hit the 'nail on the head', that for me being a fan of Win/Internet98 until the o/s is completely unusable there's no pressing urgency for me to spend £/$'s just because MS and the PC manafactureres are in a technological race to beat each other. I'm all for progress but, not for continually upgrading while the previous version still works. With regards to XP being 'superior', how come it's got so many 'holes' for hackers and virus writers to exploit. Win98 may not be perfect in that respect but I bet most reasonably savvy users could update Win98... without being infected by viruses and spyware in less than 10 minutes! Waywyrd

Hi, For me the ideal MicrowinX would be one that allowed me to surf the Internet on either dial-up or broadband, with as little need for critical updates as possible. I don't mind having to run a firewall, but find having to constantly update because of major "holes" in the operating system itself a "pain in the a*&!". Waywyrd.

Well said. The title of this topic is Why use Win98, and there's been some good answers as to why. And no really good reasons why not. Waywyrd.

Hi, I never meant to say that win98, or should that be "Internet98", had no viruses at all aimed at it. What I was trying to say is that most "New viruses" are aimed more at WinXP/2000. And a virus in either of those two systems is a lot harder to get rid of than Internet98. I'm no real expert, but I remember a virus that knocked out the Coastguards, along with many others, computer system here in the UK... left Win98 unaffected! No doubt some one will sooner or later say I've got my facts wrong. As I said before I'm no real computer expert but, I've found it relatively easy with 98Lite and a rudimentary knowledge of DOS, to remove no end of "clutter" and "bloat"... and still have a workable/bootable and very, very stable OS. The only real thing I have against XP is you have to install everything and then try and get rid of the "bloat" etc. afterwards! Waywyrd.

Hello, I use an "unpatched", but very modified Win98/98Lite for Internet surfing, simply because I can take advantage of the fact that viruses aren't aimed at it anymore! I also run XP for other programs, but I'm getting completely fed up with having to update "critical" patches let alone the "non-critical". I know 98 is a smaller operating system (even in its virgin state), but wonder, percantage wise, what the rate of updates for XP (a supposedly "superior?") operating system is? I've also placed my Internet 98 on a partition where, it can't "see" a second hard drive. Let alone my XP o/s. Personally I don't really give two hoots what's the "best" o/s. I'm going to use 98 as long as it does everything I want it to. Which it does and more besides. Waywyrd.

Hello, With regard to the above (why run Win98) I only wish I could have some up all the benefits of Win98 as well as that! I "went off" WinXP because of the almost constant need to update. At the last count there's at least 30+ critical updates alone... since Service Pack 2! Waywyrd