Why do you still use 9X

[CoffeeFiend]

Once the malware has entered your system, you have already lost. It's the same on NT.

Nice black and white view. Although very true in Win9x' case.

As for NT, different story. In the real world, people will run into malware now and then, and when it happens, the layered security truly helps. From techs to make the exploits not work at all (e.g. DEP), to making them run trapped in a sandbox (no system access whatsoever), and ACLs greatly limiting exposure. It's not the same at all.

A firewall running on your computer is not the same as running it on your router, which is a specialised computer that is much more capable.

Which only shows you know nothing about the subject. Routers aren't magical, or all powerful. They're really just crappy little embedded processors (read: cheap, and very often with exceptionally poor and truly appalling build quality), running a very basic kernel and something like iptables on top of that. Like most Linksys, which use Linux (or VxWorks) and iptables indeed (with a crappy broadcom that overheats, almost no flash, and not much RAM). In fact, some routers don't even have firewalls but are rather just dumb NAT boxes (very limited protection). If you want a great firewall (with actual rules, not just a dumb NAT box), then pretty much all the best options are software, like ISA Server, pfSense, m0n0wall, ipcop, smoothwall, etc (although there are some decent "hardware" firewalls like sonicwall makes).

Except computer security is not like the real world.

Says you.

Again, you're confusing local security with remote security.

It only seems that way because you missed my point entirely.

refuses to acknowledge certain unbelievable NT platforms vulns

Which I'd like you to list and explain for us to thoroughly debunk. FUD.

Other example is cuberti who escapes completely the point about the run as utility which is to say that code downloaded and executed through one or another exploit will have zero difficulty to get admins rights and take control of the whole machine because code to bypass those limited rights is just trivial to write.

Which only shows, like JustinStacey said, that you have no idea what you're saying. There are standard features to elevate permissions, which require the password or the hash, neither of which the exploit would have. It's exactly like the sudo mechanism on Linux or Mac OS X. You're essentially saying those are vulnerabilities too, and trivial to bypass.

If anything, the NT file system made NT systems vulnerable to a class of malware (rootkits) that is difficult to detect and can be very hard to remove.

Except, rootkits are totally not a NT-only thing, and it doesn't come from there either. They also exist on Linux, OS X, BSD, Solaris and others. Win9x is not safe either. Even in the MS-DOS era, viruses were using similar techniques to hide themselves (e.g. hooking int 21 and filtering the results of functions like 4E/find first file and 4F/find next file, plus hooking int 13 and always returing "clean" bootsectors and so on). In fact, most OS'es on this list offer a decent level of security against those (like ACLs preventing installing one, without having to enter admin pwd or getting "access denied" errors), save for Win9x.

A file system that makes it easy to hide executables and processes is not a security asset.

Except, it has nothing to do at all with the filesystem.

[cluberti]

eidenk, you are free to your opinions of me and what I say, but calling myself and/or Coffeefiend out as liars or idiots regardless of what we have said, fact or otherwise in your opinion, most certainly falls afoul of the MSFN forum rules - specifically rule section 7, to which you agreed to when you joined the forum. I made no personal attacks on you or anyone else here, and simply quoted facts as I see them in response to other posts. For what it is worth, I can even have a decent conversation here with folks on whom I tend to disagree with almost on everything - but everyone is free to their opinion, whether or not I agree with it, and is afforded respect from me on the forums regardless of how I may feel about their opinions or their view on the facts.

Also, to everyone else I didn't mention, keep it above board. As those who know me understand I will leave a thread open for debate long after it has devolved from it's original point (this is heading that way), but I will not tolerate violations of the rules. Please treat others on these forums with respect iin your replies (including the forum administrator). Continued violation of forum rules will find yourself promptly banned.

Pass me your emails guys and I'll send you a few innocent executables as attachements like Microsoft recommended to people not so long ago... (Look for Microsoft Picture It Print Studio 2001 if you don't believe that )

And getting back to the point, pass them along. I'll load them up on XP, Vista, and Win7 running as a regular user and see what happens with the debugger. My email address was sent to you in PM.

[Chozo4]

Off-Topic: Why must topics like these always devolve into a full out debate that gets it locked in the end? Everytime I see a topic along this line I always dread the worse (basing on past history of the such).

On Topic: My opinion is just that but, personally, I use it for a few reasons.

1) Granted, it has its' limitations but to me, it's a feeling of an achievement to continue using it and enjoying it where things still work regardless of [most] requirements. That and it's like being the person running Win3.1 or even DOS in an internet cafe, it's something out of the ordinary. ^_~

2) It does what I need without having to follow the 'upgrade now' trend every few years down the road. If the need arises that I have to use a certain application in WinXP, *nix, etc; I'll just run it in a VM and that's about it. Why invest in an up to date OS when they don't bring me any real benefits that I'd care about?

3) Easier to trim down and maintain (my opinion, others will understandably disagree).

4) Can install and run off a thumbdrive with the assistance of a bootcd on a laptop that does not natively support booting from USB. Had to resort to such a solution due to poor cooling with my laptop and extensive use causing the hard drives to fail on a yearly basis. I believe the same can be achieved with NT-based systems with using grub4dos(?) via bootcd to load from thumbrive but I haven't tested that theory for myself yet. So far a $7 4gb thumdrive has lasted twice as long as that of a physical hard disk in it and still going strong.

5) Had to think of a 5th reason so... I like to be different from the rest? ^_^

[herbalist]

Nothing to do with the file system??

Try hiding malicious code in an ADS on FAT32. No Rootkits aren't just Windows, but you don't see true rootkits for 9X systems. I've got some malware that comes close to rootkit behavior on 9X, but unlike an NT system, it's visible when it first starts, and in safe mode.

I use both 9X and NT systems. For me during casual usage, either one will do. When I'm trying to capture some new malicious code or going to sites that can't be trusted, my 98 box is the one I trust to come out unharmed, not just because it targeted less, but because it has less surface to attack. The smaller 9X attack surface is easier to protect. Except for user mistakes, the amount of vulnerable attack surface ultimately determines which PCs get infected. Excluding user actions, effective attacks against 9X systems have to target applications. If IE6 is removed , a 9X systems biggest vulnerability is gone. Unlike NT systems, the 9X operating system doesn't need to be exposed to web based attacks. Except for DNS, the OS needs no internet access at all. NT systems are exposed by default. Yes, this exposure can be reduced and in some cases eliminated, but that's not something most users can do. On a 9X system, all that needs to be done is to make certain the NETBIOS ports are closed.

[CoffeeFiend]

Nothing to do with the file system?

Indeed, NOTHING to do with them.

The filesystem itself hides NOTHING. It could be hiding in plain sight right in the root on a FAT12, FAT16, FAT32, NTFS, EXT2, EXT3 partition or anything else just fine. It's the code (the rootkit) that hides the files by hijacking your OS functions, NOT the filesystem, which is irrelevant here. That's how rootkits work. And like I said before, DOS isn't protected from any of this in any way. Of course you haven't seen code that does this nowadays, as nobody writes viruses for DOS anymore.

[dencorso]

4) Can install and run off a thumbdrive with the assistance of a bootcd on a laptop that does not natively support booting from USB. Had to resort to such a solution due to poor cooling with my laptop and extensive use causing the hard drives to fail on a yearly basis. I believe the same can be achieved with NT-based systems with using grub4dos(?) via bootcd to load from thumbrive but I haven't tested that theory for myself yet. So far a $7 4gb thumdrive has lasted twice as long as that of a physical hard disk in it and still going strong.

Properly tweaked XP will boot on a laptop that does not natively support booting from USB via a "XP Kansas City Shuffle" (BTW, the name first appears on post #61), either with the loader image sitting on a bootable CD or a on a smalish old internal HDD quite fine and do marvels while installed to either a pendrive, a SDHC card or an external HDD. THE use I think 9x/ME excells at above all others is for maintenace, when things get really messed up. Now, the only real reason I stick to my 98SE is that I'm fond of it! I do like it! And I dual-boot it with XP when necessary. But, above all things I do backup, I do backup, I do backup, I do backup and then I do backup. Good old Ghost 2003 stand alone is easy to find used and costs very little on eBay and similar places, and nowadays there are free alternatives galore for one not wishing to spend any money, and DVD-Rs are quite cheap. If you have recent enough backups, you can trash your machine seven-ways-to-sunday many times every day and be back to working status quite fast.

[rloew]

I already have an 8GB system with 3GB of System RAM and 5GB of RAMDisks.

Seriously? 5 GB of ramdisks? why? in case you decide you want to read an entire uncompressed DVD onto a ram drive? how useful could that really be? I usually avoid car analogies but i cant help but picture a Geo Metro(the 3 cylinder one) with Windows 98 logo spraypainted on the side attempting to pull 5 Railroad cars.

1 GB is for Swap so I can use 4 GB of managed RAM without going to disk.

I did not have another use for the 64-Bit RAM at the time so I gave all of it to the RAMDISKs. Of course there is nothing wrong with copying or writing whole DVDs entirely from RAM.

My new Memory management software provides another use for the 64-Bit RAM so I intend to take some of the space back.

The OS has little to do with how much RAM can be utilized with these tools and has no effect on speed, as that is determined mainly by the Application software.

A better car analogy would be a Windows 98 logo spraypainted on a Geo Metro spraypainted on a Railroad Engine pulling 8 Railroad cars.

[M()zart]

Anyone who believes that Windows 98 offers better security then the Windows NT based platform obviously doesn't understand the metrics behind the equations to determine so.

Well, I don't believe that Win98 provides more security. But as for me, I prefer user control over OS rather than security. I agree to be at risk, but I want to have possibility to install any apps, control services, etc.

WinXP with third party utils provides enough control for me and nice security. But Vista does not (I mean that I cannot install unsigned drivers, for example). Recently I've deleted my antivirus because it REALLY slowed down my internet connections when downloading torrents. I mean when I downloaded torrents with my torrent client speed of ALL connections, including torrent slowed triple and more times because AV needed to verify all the traffic. And my AV did not provide enough control to disable this. So I decided that my comfort is more important, I encountered viruses may be twice a year if not more seldom and I got infected only once in all my life.

[JustinStacey.x]

I tried to install Windows 98 on one of my computers last night but I ended up not being able to find a display driver (I've done it before, and I knew I should have saved the driver, oh well...) I ended up giving up. It's just become so much of a hassle to run 9x these days that I'd rather run a newer OS, skin it like 9x, and use DOSbox whenever I need the age old functionality... I mean, when the hassle of running an older OS like 9x wastes so much more time than just chucking on XP, having to port a few games over (like Duke Nukem and DooM) and spending a few moments skinning it, and still saving hours, I'd much rather do that. Although I love my computers, there are (believe it or not) things I'd much rather be doing than arsing about trying to get 9x to work.

In a way though I'm just as stubborn with XP as all these 9x users are with 98/95. Although there are some things that really make my blood boil about XP (the extra overhead compared to Windows 2000 for almost no extra functionality except a few new wizards and services) there are so many things about it that are really quite great even if it pains me to admit it. The fact that since I started using it in around 2004/5 (when I had to get rid of my old 486 running 95...) I've ALWAYS ended up coming back to it no matter what, kinda proves that it's a good solid product. I've been to Linux, Windows 2000, 98, Vista, and all came back to XP. The only place where I use Vista is work and that's because it's rockin' on my PC there. I think in a few years time XP is going to become the NT4 of today and will probably be seen in cash machines, embedded systems and godknows what else for years and years to come. The fact is though, it is being replaced fast by better technology. People are already considering XP 'oldschool' and in a way I feel that too.

I guess what I am trying to say here is use what you prefer, and be happy. In many ways I prefer Windows 2000 and 95 over XP but for me its just not viable to use them so I stick with XP, and, in all fairness, i DO seem to have less issues with XP. I don't have to arse around with it just to get software to work and it is relatively stable. (Hell Windows 2000 can't even do dual monitors natively, how sucky is that!) There is a fine difference though between having a personal preference and then just blatantly believing that it's better than everything else citing biased preferences as 'advantages'. I know fine well, that Vista wipes the floor with XP in terms of some things - and although I don't like it much, I am aware Windows 7 is probably much of the same. I know fine well that modern games like Crysis wipe the floor with DooM, Duke Nukem etc even though I prefer them. And I know that older cars are not as safe and economical as newer ones... I could go on and on.

[jaclaz]

Properly tweaked XP will boot on a laptop that does not natively support booting from USB via a "XP Kansas City Shuffle" (BTW, the name first appears on post #61), either with the loader image sitting on a bootable CD or a on a smalish old internal HDD quite fine and do marvels while installed to either a pendrive, a SDHC card or an external HDD. THE use I think 9x/ME excells at above all others is for maintenace, when things get really messed up. Now, the only real reason I stick to my 98SE is that I'm fond of it! I do like it! And I dual-boot it with XP when necessary.

Just for the record, there is also a dual-stage approach making use of PLoP.

Main "kicker" is just grub4dos and the PLoP loader, which loads the "XP Kansas City Shuffle" kicker image from the USB device, and this latter "fake signature" image loads the real XP, as well residing on the USB device.

But, above all things I do backup, I do backup, I do backup, I do backup and then I do backup.

Please note that that is a very irregular verb, conjugation is :

• I backup
  
• I backup
  
• I backup
  
• I backup
  
• I backup
  
• Ooops, I have no more media
  

Now, the only real reason I stick to my 98SE is that I'm fond of it! I do like it!

Very good .

IMHO a very valid reason , and a breath of fresh air after this thread, like ANY other thread on similar subjects, has degenerated to the usual Godzilla vs. King Kong or Dracula vs. Mickey Mouse kind of debate.

And in case you are asking yourself , there is no story: Godzilla can easilly reduce King Kong to a bunch of minced meat and Mickey Mouse can get rid of Dracula in no more than 15 pages (thanks to Eega Beeva that has available any number of crosses, garlics crucifixes and what not).

jaclaz

[jaclaz]

I tried to install Windows 98 on one of my computers last night but I ended up not being able to find a display driver (I've done it before, and I knew I should have saved the driver, oh well...)

UNIVBE:

http://www.bearwindows.boot-land.net/vbe9x.htm

SCITECHSOFT:

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showto...22401&st=20

http://web.archive.org/web/20080120054601/...ft.com/ftp/sdd/

jaclaz

[PC_LOAD_LETTER]

--snip--

1 GB is for Swap so I can use 4 GB of managed RAM without going to disk.

I did not have another use for the 64-Bit RAM at the time so I gave all of it to the RAMDISKs. Of course there is nothing wrong with copying or writing whole DVDs entirely from RAM.

My new Memory management software provides another use for the 64-Bit RAM so I intend to take some of the space back.

The OS has little to do with how much RAM can be utilized with these tools and has no effect on speed, as that is determined mainly by the Application software.

A better car analogy would be a Windows 98 logo spraypainted on a Geo Metro spraypainted on a Railroad Engine pulling 8 Railroad cars.

lol. to each his own but i cant see that much volatile storage being usefull especially on an OS as reboot prone as win9x.

[JustinStacey.x]

I tried to install Windows 98 on one of my computers last night but I ended up not being able to find a display driver (I've done it before, and I knew I should have saved the driver, oh well...)

UNIVBE:

http://www.bearwindows.boot-land.net/vbe9x.htm

SCITECHSOFT:

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showto...22401&st=20

http://web.archive.org/web/20080120054601/...ft.com/ftp/sdd/

jaclaz

Kickass links jaclaz but would the generic drivers ever be able to do as good a performance as the real ones? I run a railway simulator on that machine and so I need smooth video.

[bTW: I've already decided I am **not** going to continue trying to run Windows 98 on this one nor am I going to generally put any more effort into running pre-XP OSes on my machines. It's becoming too much effort to maintain and anything pre-XP is dead as far as I am concerned... I will be purchasing a RAM upgrade instead and sticking with XP.]

[Ludwig Von Cookie Koopa]

Well lets look at reality. We live in a capitalist society. A society that is dependent on products being sold and replace by

uneeded newer products. Without this continues chain of buying and selling we cannot have the toys we like to play with.

Thanks to this capitalism, we have to buy these new products to suite the needs of our work lives. Buyers, sellers, fixers, users, presentors, of the sorts needs to upgrade to suite the needs of there dou-do brained employers or employees who no matter what will ask for the newer version.

However knowledge is universal. Meaning if somebody is taught something THEY MUST BE GIVEN A MEANS TO MAKE A LIVING OF IT. However since they live in capitalist society they are given the choice of

Retirement

Going to free classes not to get fired

Going to classes not to get fired THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY OUT OF THERE OWN POCKETS.

So not to go off the bat and how culture is destroyed by this so called lust for technolgy ( lust for means of living, MONEY ) I will explain why I still use 9X.

My Windows 98 can do all the editing work I need it to do. It runs most of the programs that is on 20XP and it is more then powerfull enough to

Download files

use High-end paint programs

view high-end images ( like TIF, RAW, AI )

Play 3d games ( GTA via accelerator )

internet ( via K-melon )

In the future I hope to use it for

building flashes and power point files ( not playing flashes )

use matrix programs ( not the movie )

running Amiga animation files

About FLV. Since adobe flash 8 they changed it up completely. It is not the same. This is why Youtube

at some point the flashes would not go threw. Youtube upgraded to this 8 type.

You see folks people ( USERS, real users who have no necks, slumped back in there lazy chairs, who maybe

have a gut ) don't care. Not the fact they might be daddies on the third leg but the fact they are "Old" and don't

care and THEY ARE NOT THAT DESPERATE TO KEEP DOWNGRADING" to avoid upgrading.

If they did then we all would still be using DOS to watch DVD and playing high-tech ( AKA high end ) games on the

Amiga or Win1.0.

If you wanted to see Windows 3.1 being advertised on television ( along with the NES ) you will need to convince the real people ( business that is not about computers ) that uses computers everyday that your software plan is

universal

faster

better

longer lasting

When I worked in a officie they

replaced the computers that was being used for three years with brand new ones that has not yet been released to the public price ( cheap 1000 price ).

replaced the programs with newer versions and told people to take an ( non-college, non-grade school ) adult course at

a nearby highschool.

The problem with this is that people want things newer, better, faster, and the only reason for this is to.

Feel younger, feel like if they are worth something, for the sake of imbarresment, avoid taxes??, and to

keep the economy going.

That is why I don't upgrade and why I am not going to. Cause I am a commie , and I am running a not even close 600Mhz Celeron with 256RAM. Down with Captialism and up with Road Warrior, the end days of Oil is near.

[specialbao1]

I have used windows 98se without bsod for a week

bsod usually comes after using IE4