un4given1 Posted March 12, 2005 Author Share Posted March 12, 2005 un4given1 does not have any 98 SE installation discs currentlyI have countless Windows 98se licenses. I have the COA labels and all. I just don't have a use for them anymore.BTW, you said earlier that you wouldn't install XP on a PC with a slow CPU. Why is that? If XP improves performance, wouldn't you want to install it?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...Windows 98 certainly is better than XP, for me anyway. But if you need Resultant Set of Policy that XP gives you, then more power to youTo 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. Also I am opposed to buying software I don't have the right to use.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.I dont' agree with buying every single OS upgrade just to support their monopolyThat'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... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randiroo76073 Posted March 12, 2005 Share Posted March 12, 2005 I guess your too thick headed to get it, we choose to run 98 because it suits us, each for our respective reasons, and yes we do think it's better than XP, again for our own respective reasons. We stay in our forum and don't run around to XP forums trying to tell everyone what idiots they are for running XP! Yes, I have read this post all the way thru 2-3 times! People tell you why they run 98 and your response is XP is so much better[your opinion] you are the one who has degraded this topic trying to shove XP down our throats, not a good way to win friends and influence enemies for sure.Oh yea, as was mentioned before, we're not as impressed with your creditials as you are, but we know for a fact your attitude sucks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
un4given1 Posted March 13, 2005 Author Share Posted March 13, 2005 we're not as impressed with your creditials as you are, but we know for a fact your attitude sucks!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?we choose to run 98 because it suits us, each for our respective reasons, and yes we do think it's better than XPMy 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_horton Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 lol u two crack me up round 3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_horton Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 lol u two crack me up round 3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaclaz Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 Just two notes:1) @ALL it is NOT necessary, NOR useful to call someone else either thick, stupid, arrogant, presumptuous or whatever, and by the way it is against the Rules of the board, you might want to re-read them here:http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=184082) @un4given1That'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...You forget everything about Windows 2000, that is the one that mixes the stability and efficiency of NT with some of the "multimedia" features of 98.I think, (my personal opinion, though backed up by several years in the field) that Windows XP is an "upgrade" to windows 2000 with much bloat (together with some NICE new features) added.To this effect, nlite is a GREAT project as it allows for removing the bloat keeping the "good" new features, or at least gives one the "freedom" to configure his system as he wishes, but I still prefer Win2k over XP.jaclaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_horton Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 wake up microsoft is on fire.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madars Posted March 19, 2005 Share Posted March 19, 2005 Why I still use Windows 98/98SE over Windows XPIt's fast, based on MS-DOS (it is important when developing DOS applications), installs in minutes. Not mentioning that 98SE is most transparent and secure of all Micosoft OS'es ever. Windows 98 is oriented to single-user environments so it's perfect for home usage. You can "un-bloat" it (for example remove MSIE & MSHTML). Windows 98 tends to be stable.My system specsAthlon 1700+ ; 128 MB RAM ; 40 GB HDD ; CD-RW ; FDDHave you ever tried Windows XP or do you just hate it so much you won't?Yes, I have, but as I need great compatibility with MS-DOS, security, speed, robustness I switched back to Windows 98. NT based OSes aren't the best ones for desktops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
un4given1 Posted March 20, 2005 Author Share Posted March 20, 2005 Madars: I'm not even going to say anything about your post except, with your systems specs it may be the best for you. (128MB RAM) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSNwar Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 7 years! Die ... Die ... Die!Win Who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azagahl Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 7 years! Die ... Die ... Die!You're wrong, 98 SE is only 5 years old.Madars: I'm not even going to say anything about your post except, with your systems specs it may be the best for you. (128MB RAM)*Shrug* I have 1 GB RAM and 98 SE is still the best for me. Regardless of your RAM amount, why waste it on unneeded OS features?Not mentioning that 98SE is most transparent and secure of all Micosoft OS'es ever.True, I've run 98 SE for years without a firewall and only had a problem with one browser hijacker a couple of years ago when I visited a bad page, and that was easy enough to remove. I don't remember anything like Blaster happening to 98 SE. The problem is that XP is bloated with tons of unneeded features and it bears a huge attack profile for hackers to target.installs in minutes.Actually 98 SE takes hours to install with all the programs, hardware and doodads I have. So I just use free disk imaging software (savepart) to save + reload partitions. It's very easy and due to the smaller image size it's quite fast and I can store multiple backups.Also, with 98 SE you don't have to worry about activation, which is nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
un4given1 Posted March 20, 2005 Author Share Posted March 20, 2005 I'm done argueing with all of you. Stay with Windows 98. At the end of the day Windows XP Pro makes my life so much easier. Anything I have to say has already been said, so just reread the whole post and that's what I have to say. Oh yeah... send the right packet to port 139 on any Windows 98 (including SE) PC and BSOD. Did you know that? It has always been a problem and it has YET to be fixed. The only way to fix it... block port 139. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
un4given1 Posted March 20, 2005 Author Share Posted March 20, 2005 7 years! Die ... Die ... Die!You're wrong, 98 SE is only 5 years old.Windows Service Pack SE is only 5 years old... Like I said before... SE is just a service pack to Gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSNwar Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 I did know 98 would support 1 G of RAM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madars Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 Oh yeah... send the right packet to port 139 on any Windows 98 (including SE) PC and BSOD. Did you know that? It has always been a problem and it has YET to be fixed. The only way to fix it... block port 139.Emm. Who is not blocking NetBIOS and SMB ports from INTERNET anyway? IMHO, it's obvious that with any Microsoft OS you should block access to these ports from PC's you don't control. Better solution - uninstall Windows Networking if you don't need it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts