waywyrd
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by 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
-
Myself - I've got my gripes about xp and I've got even my own about 98 once in a while (few and far between) but they don't belong here. However, whatever happens happens.
We've had our run with suppprt and it's over. If they [microsoft] are somehow encouraged to extend support further then kudos to them. However, it doesn't matter how long ago supoprt has ended or when doomsday begins. There is still a wonderful user base that supports it and that is all that matters. Think of windows98 as the new linux in a way. It may not be open source but it still has very heavy backing by much of it's user community and will be developed and expanded as such.
Fanatical? Maybe a lil
Zealot? Absolutely not
Crazy? Perhaps but they never admitted me yet
I will use 98se because I don't see the real point in upgrading. I've always been a minimalist whereas if I have something that handles all of my needs without having to dual-boot I'm all for it. If I can get that option in as small of a size and memory footprint as possible, even better. I just truely don't believe in newer always being better when the newer and better just doesn't handle what I need and want. Convinience and performance is key in my eyes.
Can I play all of my legacy games at a whim? YES
Can I play all of my legacy games without emulation (and on kali)? YES
Can I still use older versions of software that still do the same job as the newer? YES
Can I still play even the most recent of games and software? YES
Can I network over a lan and wireless flawlessly? YES
Can I host it as a full time personal webserver\fileserver? YES
At least half of those quests would end up with a no if i used anything newer such as windows xp. I would also be forced to dual boot which is something I didn't want to bother with in the firts place. Why end your session to change O/S just to do one thing when windows 98 can handle it all and then some?
I will still use windows 98se untill the last day I can use it no longer. 'Upgrading' to a supposedly newer but lesser OS is not my idea of an upgrade. Why shoudl I sacrifice additional disk space and ram for something 'just because its newer' and doesn't do what I need? I use multitudes of unsupported software and never complained about it. Sure, we can use a virtual pc but - why go through an extra 5+ steps to set it up virtually when you can just boot into it directly with no problems? Unless you really need to for other reasons I fully understand and Will not debate that as poeple will use what they want to use as they need to use it.
Again, i just do not see the need to shell out for an O/S that is a virtual downgrade in my eyes. More space use, more ram use, does less for me, runs slower, and provides more never-to-be-used features. Don't give me the dismissive 'use xp and nlite it' comments as I will just disregard it. Just because I can make it smaller won't hide the fact that it still doesn't do what I want when I want.
Sure, windows 98 may not be as 'secure' according to many people but have I been 'hacked' or whatever? Absolutely not. I run in my DMZ, I leave it running 24\7, I leave ports open for services I have running such as my webserver and ftp, I also have no firewall. By most if not all standards I'm wide open and just waiting to be 'hijacked'. However, it's yet to happen for the last 5 years...
Yes, I'm fully aware of the 'w9x is still alive compain' and support everybodies efforts.
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
-
You completely missed my argument! I wasn't talking about 32-bit crap or a long uptime, I was talking about the amount of updates that each OS has had over the years. If you're trying to defend your precious NT-series OS's then you could at least do it intelligently.
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
-
Geez, I actually always look for more "junk" to install rather than less!
How do wallpapers, screensavers, tiny wave files, etc slow down or take up too much space on today's massive hard drives? I even copy all that stuff, including all the Plus! stuff, to my XP installs.
I love old junk that makes me nostalgic.
Unless you're using 32MB of memory on 3.2 GB hard drives with 300MHz processors I wouldn't worry about some nice pictures and sounds.
And that cool cd sampler reminds me to break out Return of Arcade once in a while.
It reminds me of lot's of folks who use stuff like IE Eradicator then install IE anyway. Old programs need stuff left over from IE 4 and 5, and that is properly left behind when updating IE. No need to fully remove the older version, and in some cases problematic.
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.
-
My tip, but forget it if you aren't using NTFS:
There is a group called Administrators, and Users. Remove your account from Administrators, and add it to Users. Start -> Run -> lusrmgr.msc
There ain't nothing like "I have an anti-virus and anti-spyware and am unable to clean my computer [because the virus is deeply embedded into every nook and cranny], guess I will have to format!"
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.when I am done they'll be nothing left to patchSomething 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!
-
@Link21 - You have to be the most ignorant person I have ever seen! It's all the same thing over and over; first you bash 9x and say its junk and should not be supported, then your argument is refuted by one of the many 9x supporters (hell, this is a win9x SUPPORT forum, not an ANT-SUPPORT for 9x forum, right?) over and over again.
I really don't care if win9x is not supported anymore. It seems to be that for every mainstream application that is unsupported from the 9x series, us 9x users gain an open source app.
IE -> Mozilla FireFox
Outlook -> Mozilla Thunderbird
AIM/MSN/IRC -> GAIM
MS Offfice -> Open Office.org (yeah, I know ms office is better, but all versions after office 2000 just aren't worth the upgrade)
WMP -> Media Player Classic, older WMP (yeah, there not open source, but it proves that their are alternatives)
My favorite game (gta: san andreas) theoretically had no win98se support, but it ran fine after a few modifications.
Basically, I just don't care... the only time I have ever used MS tech support was to validate windows xp... guess what? I don't gotta validate win98se!! YIPEE!! now i don't need ms anymore... and as for all the apps that have no 98se support, i'll just find an alternative, i don't really care about the mainstream product. And Link 21, you're GETTING your wish, if you were the least bit observant you would notice an increasing trend in the lack of support for any os other than 2000/XP over the past 2-3 years. The OS's are getting phased out... have some god **** patience.
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)
-
i didn't say it was superior, that was Link21
however, what OS is better is a personal choice. to flatly say one is better than the other is just plain wrong. it depends on what your needs are.
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!
-
With regards to XP being 'superior', how come it's got so many 'holes' for hackers and virus writers to exploit.
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.
-
i should stay out of this but i resent the way you continually quote the weaker posts and sections of posts (my apologies to those concerned) yet totally ignore the stronger points when they are made and continue, endlessly continue, as if they were not made at all.the holes in your knowledge have been poked through many times before by people far more knowledgeable people that you or i, and the bottom line is this, you don't have that much of a clue. you never say (in essence) 'gee, that's interesting' or 'i didn't know that' and you never take anything on board. you just wait till a few posts have past (hoping, i assume, that the other readers can't remember) then turn into the wind again.you have wrote thousands of words by now on your chosen diatribe in a 9X support forum, to express your chosen view for what ? do you really expect us all to agree ? do you expect us to down tools and all go out and buy Win 2000 tommorow (which by the way costs way more than XP) do you expect to log in after you've finally (oh please God) finished and see nothing but tumbleweed blowing through these forums and then lean back in you chair safe in the knowledge of a job well done ?the answer 'use 2000/XP' is an anathema (go look that up) and is not appreciated in anyway, shape, or form.
your not even addressing the original topic of the thread.
the question was why use it, not why not to use it.
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.
-
These are some interesting comments about Windows 98SE. No viruses aimed at it? Really? I kind of find that hard to believe considering the Internet is such a huge place!
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
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. 
AC'97 sound cards
in Windows 9x Member Projects
Posted
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.