Jump to content

Why run 98?


colemancb

Recommended Posts

:yes: excellent movie 5 stars.i see link21 is also a regular at pogo bingo.gotta love 98se nothing going out to microsoft except complaints for patches lol.

Stop with trying to tell me that BS. I make sure that I strip all of that stuff out. Windows 2000 doesn't have any snoop features, so use that if you don't like Windows XP and feel like having to strip out bloat. At least Windows 2000 is a good quality OS, unlike junker Windows 9X. It is Windows 9X that stinks, not anything besides Windows 2000/XP!! Use Windows 2000 if you don't like Windows XP. I take my privacy very seirously, ut I will also make sure I use a good quality OS. You can have both. I use Windows XP and make sure I strip out any snoop features so Bill Gates can't see what I do when using Windows XP.

Edited by Link21
Link to comment
Share on other sites


stay tuned folks!!!

the next episode of "The Way The CPU Burns" is coming your way!

will Link21 succeed in converting all of us to NT?

or will his CPU overload from typing "windows 98 is junk" too many times?

if you plug your PC into a 220v outlet, does it really run twice as fast?

stay tuned for the answerers to these and many more exciting questions in our next episode!!!

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good and funny comment, atomizer. :thumbup Thanks to Link21 this thread becomes more and more amusing.

Although I'm rather quiet and peaceful I feel sometimes like saying:

Link21, have you ever thought about replacing your brain with a good quality one instead of using the piece of junk which you have? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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)

It is the differences in the kernel and core OS technology. Windows 9X depends on ancient DOS just to function. Windows XP uses the NT kernel which is so much more advanced and wasn't natively limited. I wish Microsoft didn't integrate IE into Windows XP the way they did, so then there wouldn't be near the amount of malware probelsm there are.

Windows 98/ME use a POS core and are based on inferior technology. That is why Windows XP is superior to WIndows 98.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:thumbup but link the dink we love dos that why were here.all the wonderfull thing you can do with it.

That is no reason to keep DOS on life support. Windows 98/ME shouldn't be supported by any new games, software, nor hardware!!! The Windows 98SE obsessers and lovers should be left on their own when it comes to support!

All software written for Microsoft made operating systems only should be written only for the Windows NT based platform. This is inclduing Freeware and Open Source software as well. Did you ever think you would here someone who thinks freeware and open source stuff is great from an MS supporter?? HECK NO!! I think that because Windows 9X is a junk operating system and I want software written for good quality operating systems like Windows 2000/XP/2003 and Linux.

Edited by Link21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:thumbup but link the dink we love dos that why were here.all the wonderfull thing you can do with it.

That is no reason to keep DOS on life support. Windows 98/ME shouldn't be supported by any new games, software, nor hardware!!! The Windows 98SE obsessers and lovers should be left on their own when it comes to support!

All software written for Microsoft made operating systems only should be written only for the Windows NT based platform. This is inclduing Freeware and Open Source software as well. Did you ever think you would here someone who thinks freeware and open source stuff is great from an MS supporter?? HECK NO!! I think that because Windows 9X is a junk operating system and I want software written for good quality operating systems like Windows 2000/XP/2003 and Linux.

* Looks around *

Did someone say someting ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@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.

Edited by Jlo555
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@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 :thumbup

Edited by waywyrd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a big mistake by the OpenOffice developers to make it compatible with junker Windows 98/ME. OpenOffice should have been for Linux, MAC OS X, Solaris, and Windows 2000/XP only!! In no way should it have supported Windows 98/ME.

I will be honest with you. I prefer many OpenSource softwares over commercial ones as well. However, I want OpenSource software to be written for the native Windows 2000/XP only when it comes to OpenSource software written for MS made operating systems. Of course Linux support is desired as well. I wish Thunderbird and Firefox didn't run on junker Windows 98/ME. They would probbably be fatser and less buggy if they were designed for good quality opertaing systems only like Windows 2000/XP when it comes to the MS OS world. Of course Linux support is great as well. But in NO way should they have supported junker Windows 98/ME!!

Not all games written for only Windows 2000/XP will run on 98. You were lucky with GTA: San Andreas, but try Battlefield 2. Bet it won't work. Actually Battlefield 2 is for Windows XP only, but it does run on Windows 2000. It was just not tested on Windows 2000. But I bet it won't run on junker Windows 98/ME!! :D:D

You see, there is reasons for developing software for Windows 2000/XP only. It is called being optimized for the native Windows NT based OS. Otherwise, every single program that was written for only Windows 2000/XP would always run on Windows 98 as well. But not all programs do. So that has to tell you something about writing programs for Windows 2000/XP only.

Edited by Link21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

hey banging the ignorance drum is fun wheeeeee . . .

OpenOffice (originally StarOffice) was written to run on Java by Sun (not Linux, MAC OS X, Solaris, Windows 2000/XP, or 98/ME).

the whole point of it is it's a crossplatform app.

and your views about abandoning an OS and producing software for those who are only at the forefront flies in the face of a fair few OpenSource ideals.

let me tell you (and anyone else reading) how much you actually know about programming (given i've read most of what you've posted in these threads.)

nothing.

absolutely nothing at all.

i bet you've never even compiled a program from source.

(PS. i also bet you're a ball at partys . . . not )

Edited by miko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

hey banging the ignorance drum is fun wheeeeee . . .

OpenOffice (originally StarOffice) was written to run on run on Java by Sun (not Linux, MAC OS X, Solaris, Windows 2000/XP, or 98/ME).

the whole point of it is it's a crossplatform app.

and your views about abandoning an OS and producing software for those who are only at the forefront flies in the face of a fair few OpenSource ideals.

let me tell you (and anyone else reading) how much you actually know about programming (given i've read most of what you've posted in these threads.)

nothing.

absolutely nothing at all.

i bet you've never even compiled a program from source.

(PS. i also bet you're a ball at partys . . . not )

Ok, forget about that application. It was written in Java which is meant to be cross platform compatible. How about other applications that aren't written in Java and are supposed to be more OS specific?

They should be for only Windows 2000/XP when it comes to the Microsoft OS world. I hate DRM just as much as all you Windows 98SE lovers. Look at the QuickTime ALternative Codec v. 1.68. It is for Windows 2000/XP only. http://www.free-codecs.com/QuickTime_Alter...ve_download.htm And all the codecs at that site are made by contributing memebers of the free codecs community. So supporting Windows 2000/XP only doesn't mean it must utilize some DRM, or otherwise, there is no reason it can't run on Windows 98/ME as well. The fact that only Windows 2000/XP are supported is because they are so much better quality operating systems from a technical standpoint.

My praising of Windows 2000/XP and bahsing of Windows 98/ME has all to do with the technical perspective of both opertaing systems. It has nothing to do with supporting DRM. Take my word for that. DRM is EVIL!! Windows 98/ME are just 16-bit DOS with a 32-bit GUI shell around it. Windows 2000/XP are actually real operating systems. I wish they went openSOurce so it would be easy for the community to make them even better. But the heck with junker Windows 98/ME which is only ancient technologically limited DOS with a DOS extender that it depends on to make it 32-bit compatible. Let DOS die already!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Support for modern hardware is nonexistent. Examples:

ACPI (controls fans, cpu throttling, battery, screen controls, sound controls, multiprocessor tables, IRQ routing, and many other things in modern machines.)

PCI-Express (not sure how well 98(SE)/ME functions on PCI express machines. curious. any reports?)

Bluetooth (there are third party stacks available, I'm sure, though.)

Wrong. Except that it don't support APIC. That just means that there won't be more than 15 or 16 IRQs.

With APIC, you can have at least 20 IRQs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...