Last Patchday --> persuade M$ to extend support for Windows 9

**winxpi** · July 11, 2006

Hi guys!

Today is the last Patchday (11th July 2006)

and since there are still 70 000 000 Windows 9x users on the world ~20% of the users

it could be a good idea to write M$ that they shouldn't stop support for Windows 9x.

Maybe everybody who wants to could write an e-mail to support@microsoft.com and billg@microsoft.com(is this Bills adress? ) with the subject "extend support for Windows 98 " or similiar

and then maybe it works like in 2003 .

Otherwise billy boy & m$ gets spammed *ggg* what I think they deserve for there bugs and none support .

What do you think?

Edited July 11, 2006 by winxpi

**X-Mas** · July 11, 2006

I find it good when we don't have to know about new bugs in Windows 98/98SE/ME.

**randiroo76073** · July 11, 2006

HE double 2 sticks, if they won't listen to the French government? Besides, we've got better support here in this Forum than MS ever provided It's best to be shut of them!

**Jeremy** · July 11, 2006

Win95/98/ME is dead as far as I'm concerned. After 8 years, it's time the rest of the world got up-to-date. Don't like XP, use nLite, simple as that. or go to Linux.

**anfo1369** · July 11, 2006

Win95/98/ME is dead as far as I'm concerned. After 8 years, it's time the rest of the world got up-to-date. Don't like XP, use nLite, simple as that. or go to Linux.

Agreed. IF you're running an 8yr old operating system, you need to "get with the times". People were saying the same thing to those Windows for Workgroup 3.11 people when Windows 98 (SE) was the current version.

XP is what, 5 years old now? MS is really slipping on the routinely released (almost annual) operating systems. Windows 95 (A,B,C in '95-97), Windows 98 in '98, Windows 98 SE in '99, Windows ME/Windows 2000 in 2000, and XP in 2001. Personally, I got tired of that routine. Glad to see them bring out XP and Server 2003, and then "support" them. About time to support only them. Well...then we'll have Vista

I've got a friend who still runs 98SE on a P4, purely for games, and Windows 2000 on a P3 for his programming/workstation; but then again, he took my Slot1 mobo/cpu for his MS-DOS box which houses games older than Windows 98.

I should also tell you he's

--just my 2 cents.

**noguru** · July 11, 2006

Personally I don't think it's needed to go up at all, you can still run Win98 fine if you like. I really don't believe that XP is saver to use because it's still supported. But you have to stop wining now. Win98se has been supported for more than 7 years now and that's long enough. I think that Micrcosoft has been very responsible in this matter.

**PROBLEMCHYLD** · July 11, 2006

Classics are always the best.

Win98SE 4 ever

**TravisO** · July 11, 2006

Win98 finally hitting it's end of life is pretty fair at this point, it's been 8 years, and there's been 3 OSs released since then (4 if you count Win 2003) and Vista is right around the corner.

To be honest, MS was being very forgiving with their Win98 support already, generally speaking their rule of thumb is "support the current and the previous OS" and Win98 support reached 2 extra levels back. Demanding any more support is absurd at this point.

No I don't want to make "why I want/need to run 98" war. Heck, Win98SE + uSP2 is a great and efficient OS and I always run it when I come across a low end box. Despite, MS has done a great job embracing 98.

If you want to complain, then fight about the one last flaw in 98 relating to file shares or whatever, that was known in June but MS said they weren't going to release a patch for it in 98. I forget the details.

Edited July 13, 2006 by travisowens

**eidenk** · July 11, 2006

You've got it a bit wrong guys when you say that MS has been fair with it's 98SE/ME customers.

Just compare WinME and Win2000, both published the same year.

Is support ending for Win2000 ?

No it is not.

Has the 128 GB LBA adressing bug been fixed for Win 2000 ?

Yes with SP3.

Has the 128 GB LBA adressing bug ever been fixed for Win ME ?

Never.

Is there a limitation inherent to the 9x architecture that did prevent MS to fix it ?

No there isn't any.

**redxii** · July 11, 2006

Dear Bill Gate$, plea$e extend $upport for Micro$oft Window$ 98.. ?

No point in fixing execution flaws in an OS where the only type of accounts are those with absolute power and allows programs like CIH access to your hardware.

**Jeremy** · July 11, 2006

@ProblemChild - For videogames, sure... but not for operating systems.

@eidenk, Win2k is probably still worth patchng. WinME was an unfinished pile of crap that isn't worth the dirt under your carpet.

@redxii, WinXP has been out for 5 years. Win98 has had it's run. Time to move on.

**eidenk** · July 11, 2006

@eidenk, Win2k is probably still worth patchng. WinME was an unfinished pile of crap that isn't worth the dirt under your carpet.

**LLXX** · July 12, 2006

Has the 128 GB LBA adressing bug ever been fixed for Win ME ?
Never.
Is there a limitation inherent to the 9x architecture that did prevent MS to fix it ?
No there isn't any.

...and I'm working on a fix right now. Partially rewriting a disk driver is a lot more interesting than I expected

Is it still illegal to download copies of an unsupported OS now? Or does Micro$oft just not care about 98 anymore?

Edited July 12, 2006 by LLXX

**Link21** · July 12, 2006

You've got it a bit wrong guys when you say that MS has been fair with it's 98SE/ME customers.
Just compare WinME and Win2000, both published the same year.
Is support ending for Win2000 ?
No it is not.
Has the 128 GB LBA adressing bug been fixed for Win 2000 ?
Yes with SP3.
Has the 128 GB LBA adressing bug ever been fixed for Win ME ?
Never.
Is there a limitation inherent to the 9x architecture that did prevent MS to fix it ?
No there isn't any.

Good quality operating systems such as Windows NT based deserve to get a much longer support period than low end lousy quality operating systems in Win9X based operating systems.

It doesn't have to do with when the OS was released to the general public. It has to do with how old the technology of the OS is. Even though Windows 98 was released 8 years ago, it is based on ancient, inferior legacy echnology. Windows XP which was released nearly 5 years ago is based on modern technology. Windows 2000 which was released over 6 years ago, and it is still based on modern technology. Despite Windows 98 being only 8 years old, it is based on technology that is over 30 years old. Windows 2000 and Windows XP are based on technology that is only 10 years old.

Microsoft had every right to stop supporting that pile of crap Windows 98/ME early. Better quality operating systems get longer support life cycles. That is how it works.

As much as I don't like Microsoft, I applaud them on this move to get rid of piece of crap operating systems which comprise of the worst operating systems ever released since 1994. I think Microsoft should have stopped supporting piece of sh*t Win98SE/ME in January 2004 like they orriginally planned.

Edited July 12, 2006 by Link21

**winxpi** · July 12, 2006

Ohh no Link21 is here we are all going to get stupid ,just kidding!

When you say that Windows 9x operating systems don't deserve to get longer support time in comparision to NT based systems

because they are worse.

Why did then Microsoft stop support for Windows NT 4 and 3.5 if you say they are better than 9x?

Windows 98 rulez =) and I'm sorry to say it but Windows NT 4 sucks even Windows 95 had USB support *g* .

Edited July 12, 2006 by winxpi

Sign In

Last Patchday --> persuade M$ to extend support for Windows 9

Recommended Posts

winxpi

X-Mas

randiroo76073

Jeremy

anfo1369

noguru

PROBLEMCHYLD

TravisO

eidenk

redxii

Jeremy

eidenk

LLXX

Link21

winxpi

Please sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0 members

Activity

Browse