Jump to content
MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. ×

Why run 98?


colemancb
 Share

Recommended Posts


I only see two valid reasons.

One reason is if you want and/or have a need to run leagcy games and applications that flat out won't work and/or run very poorly in Windows 2000/XP regardless of what you do to try and make them run well in Windows 2000/XP. But Windows 98SE should only be used strictly for those purposes on modern hardware and be dual booted with Windows 2000/XP/2003 for running more modern applications on modern hardware.

Another reason is if you have really old hardware that you will use just for running really old applications or simple modern applications designed to run on just about anything produced the last 10 years.

So to sum it up, the only logical reason I see to run it is for legacy hardware and software produced in the year 2000 and prior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:whistle: you run 98se simply because your cant afford xp or you run a P2 or less or you might be in emerging countries that still rely on 98se like korea for one ,at least 10% of bussiness do and thats just the tip of the icebergand lets not forget older laptops etc.you should normally run the os that best perforances on your pc/motherboard/ram etc.those that run it on new mobo are probablydiehard fans and i dont blame them abit if u dont play dvd based major ram comsupting pig games then u could use 98se to surf chat etc.i realize its 2006 soon but i know so many new pc users that are given second hand pcs from friends or family usually with 98se on it.so i guess if your ok with what u got ride it out .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why w98?

Because it's faster than 2000 and XP.

'nuf said.

For even more reasons see LLMX replies.

Only true on computers with very little physical RAM. On computers with lots of RAM, Windows 2000 and XP are faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My test (if you remember) was on 512 Mb of ram... is it what you consider "little"? Sure for XP is not "a lot" and for Vista it may be "not enough". ;)

How about 1GB of RAM and above. Windows 98 will be slower than Windows 2000/XP with 1Gb or more RAM! :D:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems ok at 768MB on 98SE

You can't look at that alone to determine whic is really faster. Sure, 98SE may take up less total system RAM, but it also doesn't use large amounts of RAM efficeintly. Windows 2000/XP does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've dualbooted Win98se and XP on a 4.17GHz P4 with 2Gb of (borrowed) DDR533.

The 98se runs very smoothly with the 2Gb but XP (already considerably slimmed down) still feels sluggish.

My machine now has 256M of DDR400, I've returned the other 1.75Gb.

If I can I might borrow 3Gb of RAM and try that out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have mine at 524288 vcache

Notice my pagefile ? 0.00...

Ram is way faster than the Harddrive, I'm not sure if you can do the min swap file for XP/2000

Everyone I know does a set swap "drive" with temp folders and crap that go to it also, usually a fast but small drive.

Thank god on 98se you can do away with it and focus the unused cache to the ram :w00t:

I have a Epox EP-8K9A7I with 1G of PC3200 on the way I want to see how 98se reacts to ddr, 8xagp and usb 2.0 !!

Aparantly At 266FSB the ram will run 400mhz It may be faster than pc133 :yes:

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...