It has been 7 years since Win98 was released

[un4given1]

of course you are talking about XP

[un4given1]

I want to add one more point. If you own a laptop the power management that bullet speaks of is amazing. Your battery power with Windows XP will be significantly longer than with any other OS.

@bullet: none of the Windows 98 users care about the business application of an OS because they don't use it that way. Any business that isn't running Windows XP should seriously concider the added features of Windows XP in a corporate environment. Windows XP along side Windows Server 2003 is an amazing combonation. They don't know what they are missing. I'm right there behind you on Windows XP. If you haven't reviewed the whole thread take a second to do so and see what I have been dealing with...

Later

[brian873]

Just came across this topic and read the 1st couple of pages. So Ii thought I would throw my tupence worth in.

As any person that works with computers knows you find solution that bridge’s a problem. Win 98 as far as my experience goes is still used by many companies. Remember that there are a lot of places with 20 or fewer staff. Win98 is a good option for these places as all they want to do is use word and excel. Email maybe, internet probably not. These technologies still do not have much benefit from my experience as most work is done by phone and catalogue for these small countries. Internet searching and email communications still has to be more wide spread although the introduction of affordable SDSL In my country should help speed things up. Most small companies also outsource things like accounts and the pay system so there is no need for a secure in house personnel system. My company, while a mixed environment of OSX, win98 and winxp, ohh and 1 laptop with 2000 still has a use for 98. Cost is everything for the small guy. And while I am a fan and use XP myself, cannot justify it for all machines that are only used for editing, creating and printing word documents.

Personally for non power users I would stick with 98 in a business environment. Although I would seriously consider moving to a Linux system in the future with open office. And for friends and family this should be an option to be considered. Remember not everyone wants to be able to play half life 2 with Dolby surround sound while downloading the latest Kings of Leon album over there 2mb net connection to there ipod…

But for me there is no way but xp.

• Why I still use Windows 98/98SE over Windows XP

o Business reasons, not my chooice

• My system specs

o Various from 6 years old to one I bought about a month ago

• Have you ever tried Windows XP or do you just hate it so much you won't?

o Yes I like to try as many systems as I can and still use BEOS for some things

Maybe this would suit everyone.

And now, the end is near;

And so I face the final curtain.

My friend, I’ll say it clear,

I’ll state my case, of which I’m certain.

I’ve lived a life that’s full.

I’ve traveled each and ev’ry highway;

And more, much more than this,

I did it my way.

[bullet]

As far as companies using Win98. The reason they are still using 98 is because of the cost associated with the upgrade it is not because they prefer to use 98. Also, if there is a company that completely outsources all of there accounting and payroll then please tell me I will never do business with them. If the company does not even keep ther own records just to make sure they are not getting ripped off then the company is run by MORONS. What you describe Brian is a pipe dream.

[eidenk]

1. At least 10 times more reliable (fully protected memory model)

In case of "problems" XP shuts down and restart automatically. That's what you mean maybe by more reliable ? That instead of recovering your session like you can usually do in 98, the OS chooses for you and restarts the machine, not leaving an opportunity to probe what goes wrong ?

2. Ability to verify device drivers and roll back if necessary

I hope you are not speaking of the frankly useless System Restore feature that can be found in Win ME as well ?

4. System File Protection (useful if you have stupid users)

You've got that on ME as well. Quite usefull I agree but at the end quite useless for lack of customization options and flexibility as always. Is there any progress in XP ? Can you now add other files to be monitored by SFP for example ? Such as the OLE automation runtimes or quartz.dll ? Though I have SFP on ME. I now use System File Checker from the Win 98 resource kit as I can do those things with it I can't do anymore with SFP on ME. The only trick here is that you must recompress your cab archives from ME with a standard archiver otherwise SFC won't manage to extract files from them. Then you create a cab in which you put all the runtimes you have added to your system when you are satisfied by it. SFC + SFP and you are almost totally foolproof. Why is SFC gone to be replaced by an automated and far less functional system in ME and XP ? Can you do anything like that on XP ?

8. Ability to actually have more than one user

Tell me again you can't have several users on a 98 box. You have got even poledit from the resource kit at your disposal.

10. Built in Firewall

Better this than nothing at all I have read almost everywhere. I hope you don't too much count on this for your local security.

11. Better application compatability

Of course you can't run some apps that contain XP or 2000 only API calls. I have several thousands apps for performing almost all tasks you can imagine in my ME box. So compatibilty is not really an issue for me. By the way many unique software exist only for linux. They won't run on XP. Same goes for the Mac.

12. Better hardware support

Never experienced any problem of that sort so far. Hardware drivers for 98 are very well written. I doubt this will become an issue in the foreseeable future.

13. Unattended installs

Infinstall and Batch Setup from the resource kit utilities do the trick well in 98 I think.

16. Better power management

Hibernation feature for example ? You've got this on ME as well. When it doesn't work it is down to the hardware not to the OS.

15. File syncronization

I suppose your are speaking about something similar to the Win ME briefcase. Not frankly superior. Many freeware utilities do probably a better job. In XP as well I have little doubt about it.

18. Offline webpage viewing

I am not using that feature but I have seen it in my IE 5.5. Or does it work only on XP ?

19. Better file association handling

In which way is it less crappy than in 98 or ME ? I doubt anyway that Microsoft came up with anything better than the freeware utilities WAssociate or Types Popup Free in this respect.

I'll keep my ME and the day I'll really need to upgrade the OS I'll probably go for the latest Mandrake which I find is outdoing XP in many respects regardless of the price tag question. Anyway 32 bits 9x systems are said to perform extremely well under Athlon 64 so that my little customized OS has got a ten years future, easy. And I bet that within 2 or 3 years, 98 systems running on processors 20 times faster as those we have today will pulverize the performance of the latest .net 64 bits Microsoft OSes.

I have noticed something weird as well but it might be subjective. I find that 98 is more stable on a fast CPU than on a slower one.

And what if America gets nuked some day because of what they do here and there, what am I doing with my XP if no one answers me in Redmond to give me a new serial number when I change some hardware ? That's another trend that I do not like. When I buy a car I don't want to have to ask permission to Ford and General Motors when I change tyres or the exhaust ? I find it infriges on my freedom too much. I have heard there are OEM copies of XP with which you can't upgrade any hardware at all. When you want to upgrade those systems you must upgrade everything which means buying a new computer with a new OEM copy of XP.

To sum it up I find 98/ME to be much more fun for the years to come despite its many shortcomings. I just speak for myself of course. You understand I am just an average end user and not a wisely advised corporate user investing in the functionality, security and stability nothing else but the latest Microsoft OSes can offer of course.

What I find funny or even strange is that many people feel to come here in a corner devoted to 9x to fiercely battle for XP. Why don't they leave such retarded cavemans with their illusions and go their way to explore the new wonders of Longhorn/ Avalon.

Is it generosity or is Bill Gates afraid of something such as not selling enough ?

[brian873]

Bullet

Keeping records and outsourcing business processes is two completely different things. Do you think a guy that has a staff of three plumbers for example should hire a personnel manager? I worked for a couple of large American companies (EDS and AON) both of whom out source services like these. It’s done everyday. I get my bank to manage my money for me and I check my statement ever month. It’s the same principal.

Also as for a pipe dream. That’s the way my company works. Whats the point of buying a new dell with xp and office for £800 when it is used only for word processing and excel editing? It’s the way it works for many.

Hail hail

[azagahl]

Office 2003 still won't install here. Please instruct me how I can get it to install on this.....

Parathapml, it has been mentioned at least twice in this thread that you need to have an earlier version of Office installed first, such as Office 2000. You may then install Office 2003. IF you have time to try this, then thank you and I look forward to hearing if you can duplicate horsecharles' results.

No support for transparency.

Support for transparency (I assume you mean transparent icons and menus and such) is easily added by installing the Revolutions software that has being developed by one MSFN user (Tihiy).

After doing this the only problem that remains is freezing the display when deleting moving or copying large number of files or emptyimg the recycle bin

This annoying bug results from IE 6 SP 1. You will not have this bug on a fresh 98 SE install. IF you've installed IE 6 SP 1, you can avoid this bug by going back to BROWSEUI.DLL and BROWSELC.DLL from IE 5.5. (There is also a particular patch for ME that has the latest versions of these IE 5.5 DLL's, if you are interested).

[eidenk]

support for transparency

I mean like in 2000. Does this pack do this ? I have win ME.

After doing this the only problem that remains is freezing the display when deleting moving or copying large number of files or emptyimg the recycle bin

I haven't IE 6. What for ? Anyway I had this prob with 95, 98, and ME. Solved as seen above by the cache settings.

Really the only serious limitation is the limitations in resources. I really would like to be able to open more apps or windows simultaneously sometimes. 64KB is a bit scarce.

[bullet]

@eidenk

1. You can disable the restart option, but even with it like it or not xp is still more reliable.

2. I am not talking about system restore. I mean exactly what I said the first time. XP has the ability to know if you are installing the correct device driver for the correct hardware.

4. I sure hope you are not trying to suggest ME is better than XP now. If SFP is enable on ME then you are really asking for problems with that OS.

8. When you can log on as one user, then customize the desktop and then log on as another user and not have the same desktop then let me know.

10.

11. You may not have to worry about compatibility but millions of other people do. I asure you that there is an equiliviant app on XP for anything you can do in Linux or MAC.

12. You said it right "so far". Just wait

13. You obviously have not tried an unattend on 98SE. Semi-unattend is as good as it gets.

16. Get two identical laptops, put 98 on one and XP on the other. Then tell me which battery lasted the longest.

15. If you choose to have a thousand freeware programs to try to duplicate what XP has built-in then be my guest

18. I am not sure what your point was there

19. Back to the thousand freeware/shareware apps.

After your best shot you still could only respond to 12 items out of the 20 I posted.

Does that mean that XP is better on the other 8 with no contest?

I think I have responded adequately to the other 12. Try again B)

[bullet]

@Brian

So if your company keeps records then I would hope that they would want them secure. Hence the need for XP.

That way plumber Bob doesn't sit down at the computer and find out all of plumber Joe's personal information.

[azagahl]

Hi, I won't respond to all your 20 items, simply because 20 is a lot. Most of the things you mentioned are features I simply don't need. I did not buy a 3400+ processor and 1 GB of memory just to squander it on unneeded bloat.

1. At least 10 times more reliable (fully protected memory model)

In practice I find 98 SE with USP2.0RC3 to be more reliable. I've seen XP suffer from inexplicable slow downs, processes that refuse to be killed, and locked files. I've even had it reboot randomly, once resulting in a irreparably corrupted partition. It even warns you in XP when you try to shut down a process that it might cause system instability.

2. Ability to verify device drivers and roll back if necessary

You might have a point here, for newbies. But I am a competent user and I often install up-to-date, or even Beta drivers, and I rarely have problems.

3. Support for up to 4GB RAM

I do not think a lot of current motherboards even support that much. So it's kind of a moot point.

Furthermore, I don't actually know anyone who has more than 1 GB on a single PC.

I am not sure what 98 SE supports. It was claimed for years (and recently e.g. by un4given1) that 512 MB was the max and that proved to be baloney. I use 1 GB PC 3200 without problems. Due to 98 SE's tiny memory usage (~40 MB even with a full OS and dozens of programs running, and 16 MB of that is my RAM disk!), I never run out of memory. By disabling features the memory footprint becomes even smaller!

If I need to I guess can try installing more RAM. Supposedly Win 98 SE works fine up through 1.5 GB, and beyond that one can probably create a RAM disk on which an immense swap partition can be placed. So even 3 GB might be possible?

I guess I might be forced to upgrade in a few years when I need > 1 GB. So far I'm doing just fine with 1 GB RAM and 1 GB page file though.

10. Built in Firewall

With 98 SE you do not need a firewall. I ran 98 SE for years without a firewall and did not have any problems. I visisted a bad website once and due to IE 6 security holes I came down with "CoolWeb" spyware or something. It was easy enough to remove. I believe 98 SE simply does not have equivalent to the XP Blaster nightmare. I use a firewall now, of which there are many free ones available, but I probably would do just fine without it.

11. Better application compatability

It sounds like XP SP 2 actually has worse application compatability.

12. Better hardware support

Unfortunately, I believe I have hardware that XP SP 2 doesn't even support, for example certain Gravis Gamepads. All my hardware - USB hard drive, MP3 player, photo printer, digital camera, LCD monitor, joysticks, etc.. work fine on 98 SE.

17. Bluetooth

Bluetooth is not exclusive to XP. There are bluetooth devices for 98 SE as well.

18. Offline webpage viewing

This is a web browser function, what does it have to do with the OS??

Back to the thousand freeware/shareware apps.

I don't see any thing wrong with looking at all the many freeware solutions available and choosing the best one. Sometimes they are much better than the monopoly-approved version, e.g. XP's integrated CD burning is one example. Assuming I liked XP, I would be happy with getting XP N and downloading my media player of choice for example.

[prathapml]

Office 2003 still won't install here. Please instruct me how I can get it to install on this.....

Parathapml, it has been mentioned at least twice in this thread that you need to have an earlier version of Office installed first, such as Office 2000. You may then install Office 2003. IF you have time to try this, then thank you and I look forward to hearing if you can duplicate horsecharles' results.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"mentions" in the thread are of no point. Precise instructions please. Or have you ever done this yourself at all?

8.  When you can log on as one user, then customize the desktop and then log on as another user and not have the same desktop then let me know.

10.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry, But I have to let you know that it is possible. And the "Microsoft Family Logon" does allow you a choosable interface to click the user-account you want to login to.

That way plumber Bob doesn't sit down at the computer and find out all of plumber Joe's personal information.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Plumber Bob and Joe won't be allowed to use the computer, in the first place.

10. Built in Firewall

Better this than nothing at all I have read almost everywhere. I hope you don't too much count on this for your local security.

12. Better hardware support

Never experienced any problem of that sort so far. Hardware drivers for 98 are very well written. I doubt this will become an issue in the foreseeable future.

13. Unattended installs

Infinstall and Batch Setup from the resource kit utilities do the trick well in 98 I think.

I'll keep my ME and the day I'll really need to upgrade the OS I'll probably go for the latest Mandrake which I find is outdoing XP in many respects regardless of the price tag question. Anyway 32 bits 9x systems are said to perform extremely well under Athlon 64 so that my little customized OS has got a ten years future, easy. And I bet that within 2 or 3 years, 98 systems running on processors 20 times faster as those we have today will pulverize the performance of the latest .net 64 bits Microsoft OSes.

I have noticed something weird as well but it might be subjective. I find that 98 is more stable on a fast CPU than on a slower one.

And what  if America gets nuked some day because of what they do here and there, what am I doing with my XP if no one answers me in Redmond to give me a new serial number when I change some hardware ? That's another trend that I do not like. When I buy a car I don't want to have to ask permission to Ford and General Motors when I change tyres or the exhaust ? I find it infriges on my freedom too much. I have heard there are OEM copies of XP with which you can't upgrade any hardware at all. When you want to upgrade those systems you must upgrade everything which means buying a new computer with a new OEM copy of XP.

Is it generosity or is Bill Gates afraid of something such as not selling enough ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For this last point - the XP sales speak for themselves. I need say no more.

10.

And I hope you have something better than the Windows Firewall which is good enough. Bought your software firewall? or a router? Or is your OS exposed to the net's evil underground?

12.

Hardware support?

My 2 year old MoBo already came with only 2k, XP drivers, and linux sources for the same. Since then, I have progressively seen drivers that work with win98/ME on the downward spiral - so too, with application compatibility.

13.

uA installs.

They do the "trick" and "you think" ? That almost shows up how you aren't familiar with this. Firstly, its not a trick, its a science. Next, don't "think" - just look around this forum (uA for XP) - that's more than I need to say.

You will go to mandrake? Yeah right - seeing is believing. And yes, I'm saying this because I know it well - mandrake is not the best linux distro, nor as easy to use as win98, nor as bug-free as it. First time one ever heard of a threat of retarding instead of advancing.

32-bit is dead, and its hardware support and usability is only going to go down.

98 is more stable on a fast CPU? yeah right - why am I not surprised.

But all that power is doing you no good with win98.

As for your phobia about America getting nuked and XP not working for you.... VLK editions abound, and then you forget that cracks exist.

Hi, I won't respond to all your 20 items, simply because 20 is a lot. Most of the things you mentioned are features I simply don't need. I did not buy a 3400+ processor and 1 GB of memory just to squander it on unneeded bloat.

1. At least 10 times more reliable (fully protected memory model)

In practice I find 98 SE with USP2.0RC3 to be more reliable. I've seen XP suffer from inexplicable slow downs, processes that refuse to be killed, and locked files. I've even had it reboot randomly, once resulting in a irreparably corrupted partition. It even warns you in XP when you try to shut down a process that it might cause system instability.

3. Support for up to 4GB RAM

I do not think a lot of current motherboards even support that much. So it's kind of a moot point.

Furthermore, I don't actually know anyone who has more than 1 GB on a single PC.

I am not sure what 98 SE supports. It was claimed for years (and recently e.g. by un4given1) that 512 MB was the max and that proved to be baloney. I use 1 GB PC 3200 without problems. Due to 98 SE's tiny memory usage (~40 MB even with a full OS and dozens of programs running, and 16 MB of that is my RAM disk!), I never run out of memory. By disabling features the memory footprint becomes even smaller!

If I need to I guess can try installing more RAM. Supposedly Win 98 SE works fine up through 1.5 GB, and beyond that one can probably create a RAM disk on which an immense swap partition can be placed. So even 3 GB might be possible?

I guess I might be forced to upgrade in a few years when I need > 1 GB. So far I'm doing just fine with 1 GB RAM and 1 GB page file though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Uhh.... Real world is different.

The machine on which I'm typing this right now..... is a 2 gig DDR400 monster.

As you illustrate above.... memory management and running of win98se is pathetic - disable this and that, do a lot of things..... and still never get near perf. levels that newer OSes can offer.

For your 3400+ processor, yes you ARE squandering it on an OS like win98.

Win98se with the SP rivals XP's reliability? First, "reliability" consists of more than stability alone. Next, on stability, XP is second to none - those services might warn you but you never crash. Seems like you are posting on the basis of hear-say.....

And finally, all those problems that you mention with XP - just tell if that was on a pirated (and virus-infected) version of XP?

[randiroo76073]

Pramthapml[Do you have a shorter nickname], the reason sales are so high for XP, have you tried to buy a puter lately that doesn't come w/XP installed? You can slant statisics to show just about anything you want them to, they very seldom show the real story, if at all. you need to do some research into how reliable these studies[on any subject] actually are! Thats the real world.

[randiroo76073]

Sorry that I misspelled your name Prathapml

[eidenk]

@bullet

1. You can disable the restart option, but even with it like it or not xp is still more reliable.

Do you mean it just automatically shuts down ? Or can you disable the feature altogether ?

If SFP is enable on ME then you are really asking for problems with that OS.

I haven't really understood what you mean. What I was saying was that SFC is superior to SFP but doesn't exist anymore in the latest OSes.

8. When you can log on as one user, then customize the desktop and then log on as another user and not have the same desktop then let me know.

I am not sure I understand what you mean here. With ME or 98 I can change users in one click without even loging off : Shell folder locations (including desktop and document folders), taskbars, color scheme, policies, everything.

10.

You are laughing yourself about the built in XP firewal I understand.

12. You said it right "so far". Just wait

Your only argument here is that Microsoft will be succesfull in bullying hardware manufacturers into stopping writing drivers supporting the 9x familly. I do not see this happening in the foreseeable future frankly.

13. You obviously have not tried an unattend on 98SE. Semi-unattend is as good as it gets.

I used that when I begun experimenting with 98 and got fed up with reinstalling the OS. So far as I can remember it did work pretty well. Now I barely ever reinstall so I don't need it anymore. You can do deployment with it.

16. Get two identical laptops, put 98 on one and XP on the other. Then tell me which battery lasted the longest.

I think there is a fix for that. I haven't got a laptop so I am not sure.

Back to the thousand freeware/shareware apps.

It is true that almost no Windows built-in tools are matching, and by far the best freeware alternatives. You can't contest that if you are serious about computing really. The only built-in tool I know for which there is no better free equivalent is scandisk.

I think I have responded adequately to the other 12.

Not really and azagahl adressed those I forgot I feel. You did not answer anything about the new points I brought in. So here it goes again : What am I doing with my XP CD if no one answers me in Redmond to give me a new serial number when I upgrade some hardware or does not want to give me one for whatever reason tomorrow ? Just because of that, I would not touch XP. Even if I would feel XP is superior.