Jump to content

Why do you still use 9X


win95guy
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have used Miranda in the past. There are so many things wrong with it that i don't know where to start. Sure, it is small and fast, and the yahfoo chat client is a slow piece of junk,

How long has it been since you've tried it? I'm using Miranda version 0.7.4, Yahoo Protocol support via libyahoo2 library. [built: Apr 6 2008 18:31:48]. It usually logs in and connects in 2-3 seconds. Miranda updates quite often. I installed it in late February and I'm already 3 versions behind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


If you didn't know, let me inform you that Romania is in the south-east of Europe.

Eh, a country that has only recently joined. :)

DOS 7.10 can, the GUI itself never.

Yes it can. Take a look at Mindows.

By the way, I've discovered a couple days ago that youconvertit.com exists for converting Flash videos into something I can watch. I knew of vixy.com, but that only converted to formats that demand a lot of your CPU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have used Miranda in the past. There are so many things wrong with it that i don't know where to start. Sure, it is small and fast, and the yahfoo chat client is a slow piece of junk,

How long has it been since you've tried it? I'm using Miranda version 0.7.4, Yahoo Protocol support via libyahoo2 library. [built: Apr 6 2008 18:31:48]. It usually logs in and connects in 2-3 seconds. Miranda updates quite often. I installed it in late February and I'm already 3 versions behind.

It has nothing to do with the login time, Miranda logins faster than the yahoo messy. However, photo sharing doesn't work, file transfers only work with certain users, HyperIM (powerful status manager for a lot of IM clients) started supporting Miranda only recently, and while i can see other users' display images, they can't see mine.

It's been more than an year since i last used it but i doubt much has changed. I may try it again but don't count on it.

@ BenoitRen: It's not like MSN is the official chat client of the European Union. Cut it out please.

Edited by Th3_uN1Qu3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9X systems are immune to much of todays malware and is unaffected by many of the exploits that cause havoc on NT systems.

Really true. I have Win2000 and XP installed on dual boot, but only use them occasionally. IMO XP and Vista dedicate most of its resources not to do what you would like it to do but to avoid the system doing most things without external permits, be it from the Administrator, Microsoft, DRM, or the software providers. Backdoors, controls, and controls and more controls, most of them unwanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I reinstalled my windows98 afresh, before it even touched the internet, I made a copy of all the files (program files, and windows basicaly) on a CD-R. Uncompressed it took less than half the CD-D, program files included. Ok now, that I have installed MS Office and any other stuffs, I'm near a Giga, but the point is that my basic installation and basic softwares can be backed on a CD-R. Uncompressed.

Then if something happen I can reboot in dos mode and with a one-line comand, using xcopy I can restore my whole system. It would take less than 20 minutes to do so.

I can also insert anything I want in autoexec.bat.

I stopped using antiviruses two years ago because they couldn't find anything ever. I run spybot once in a blue moon, and at worse, he finds three cookies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To finish in a sentence, many of the common used progs are capable to run Win98 so why run XP or Vista with 256 MB RAM, you loose speed.

I loaded Win2000 and XP in dual mode. Even having both I always use Win98 because all the programs I need run perfect and I feel more comfortable: guaranteed startup stability console has no price. I use Win98 to restore both from scratch instead. Having this experience, in this moment I would not even loose my time loading any of them two. I have modified many things with the help of this forum and don't need really anything more. Maybe I'll delete both 2000 and XP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

I do happen to like win98 & winxp, however, on this computer a 1ghz P-III cpu 512meg ram rig, 98 is very fast and

suits my needs very well. Ialso have a newer p-4 2.8ghz also running win98 and for video editing and music work as well,

windows 98se does quite well, thank you. Some people have said that you can't run usb 2.0 on 98 err yes you can

some motherboards come with the drivers. And of course there is windows xp on the rest of our computers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have single core single threaded cpu - Intel Pentium III-S "Tualatin". therefore any higher OS is waste of effort.

I need Win32 based environment with DOS support, with widest HW support possible. WDM standard is the most spreaded driver standard and windows 98SE is the best for me.

This configuration gives me full compatibility from year 1980 to year 2004 (Radeon x850), and software i can run is much newer - such as Oblivion and Prey from 2006. XP needs emulator for this spectrum of applications, i need upgraded kernel (kex).

Most dos based apps (optimized for Pentium Pro and later) can run flawlessly, all Win16-bit apps from Windows 3.11 and earlier too, and also all true Win32 apps can run and Win32xp surely will run when KEX will reach version 1.0.0 :D

Also I still think that KEX is better than dos emulation which should be never perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my thinking any program which want to contact producer or anybody else without asking computer user is SPYWARE.

Using this logic Windows XP and Windows Vista are spyware.

I can block Windows XP from contacting Microsoft so I can use XP, but I can't block Vista so I will never use Vista or any other similar OS.

In this logic only Windows 98 is 100 % OK program.

Edited by Rjecina
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my thinking any program which want to contact producer or anybody else without asking computer user is SPYWARE.

Using this logic Windows XP and Windows Vista are spyware.

I can block Windows XP from contacting Microsoft so I can use XP, but I can't block Vista so I will never use Vista or any other similar OS.

In this logic only Windows 98 is 100 % OK program.

Vista can be blocked too if you're that paranoid... The x64 version runs well given enough RAM and CPU power, and loads things faster than XP. However, it has a s***load of compatibility issues, bad enough to make me do most of my work in a 32-bit XP virtual machine. 32-bit Vista is more compatible but SLOW, besides, being 32-bit it can only use half of my RAM.

If i wasn't a gamer, i'd be running Ubuntu Linux now. Besides, Vista is a lot like Linux, you can't do this, you can't do that, that doesn't work, that needs to be changed to be made compatible, that needs to be removed as it has bad drivers, and so on. <_<

There is one BIG difference though: In Linux you can do ANYTHING using the command line as root. Vista's command prompt is basically useless as it denies access to pretty much everything you'd need it for, even though you are admin.

Edited by Th3_uN1Qu3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my thinking any program which want to contact producer or anybody else without asking computer user is SPYWARE.

Using this logic Windows XP and Windows Vista are spyware.

I can block Windows XP from contacting Microsoft so I can use XP, but I can't block Vista so I will never use Vista or any other similar OS.

In this logic only Windows 98 is 100 % OK program.

Vista can be blocked too if you're that paranoid...

Why do you consider this paranoid? When user software does this, it's classified as spyware. Why should it be different for an OS? When you look at the behavior of their anti-piracy and WGA, it definitely qualifies as spyware, especially when it messes up. A user shouldn't have to compete with the vendor for control over the OS, or repeatedly prove that they didn't steal it, or fight the anti-piracy when you upgrade hardware, drivers, etc. That's one of the best things about 98. The user has control of it, not Microsoft.

Rick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A user shouldn't have to compete with the vendor for control over the OS, or repeatedly prove that they didn't steal it, or fight the anti-piracy when you upgrade hardware, drivers, etc. That's one of the best things about 98. The user has control of it, not Microsoft.

Rick

I never ever ever had to activate XP or Vista. However, this way is not very legit. :P But you are right. If you have to run illegal software to be in full control of it there's definitely something wrong.

Edited by Th3_uN1Qu3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve noticed on this subject that the general wisdom is XP doesn’t run well on PIII era machines. I have two Celeron-S 1.4 ghz machines, one with XP and one with ME and both run well. ME is noticeably faster but SP3 and the latest Catalyst drivers have closed the gap. I have some apps that won’t run on 9x and some that won’t run on XP so right now I need both. XP is very slow to start, slower than even 2000, but once it’s up and running it moves right along. I was given these two computers because they “won’t run XP” and this was from the IT department of a Fortune 500 company. :unsure: I have a 3ghz P4 laptop and from a real world user perspective the Celeron desktops are faster (benchmarks would say something different though.)

Either I’ve Forrest Gumped my way into the perfect hardware/software combination or there is a lot of misinformation in this area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either I’ve Forrest Gumped my way into the perfect hardware/software combination or there is a lot of misinformation in this area.

No Forrested Gump at all! I use a desktop with an AMD motherboard built yr 2001 and updated firmware yr 2003 , 512 Mb memory and 900 Mhz processor, and it is so fast using Win98 as XP or Win2000 (double boot).

You are right: misinformation pays!

BTW I normally run Win98.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...