On Dec 4, 12:23*pm, Home Guy wrote:
wrote:
Yes, and we both still run windows 98. *Because I'm that
type of "Guy".

That sure puts a perspective on things. * Windows 98 was
notoriously crash prone,

Ok, I don't want this thread to seriously derail at this point, so I
will simply say that there are reasons why people perceived win-98 to be
seriously flawed that had more to do with the quality of computers and
hardware available in 1999-2000, like faulty video drivers and
pathetically small amounts of installed ram.

Last time I checked, video drivers are considered part of and ship
with the OS,
at least today. The video drivers
I'm using on the PC I'm writing this on were shipped as part of
Windows XP. Upon
installation, the OS installer detects the hardware and installs the
appropriate driver. That's
one of the benefits of XP and more modern OS's. The drivers for
everything the typical
user needs are tested, certified and sold with the OS


As for the quality of computers in 2000, it's rather strange that if
hardware were the problem,
those same computers did not crash when running NT.



*There is a very healthy
and active community of people that run win-98 on moderm motherboards
with 512mb of ram (and up to several gb). *As I type this, I'm running a
P4 2.5 ghz PC with 512 mb ram and 2 hard drives (80 gb and 400 gb SATA)
with KernelEx API enhancements (which lets me run quite a bit of XP-only
software). *


Yeah, I'm sure it's a real stable gem and a marvel that should be in
the Smithsonian
for all to admire.



Very reliable and stable, hardly touchable by any of the hundreds of
exploits for NT-based windows systems. *XP was the emperor with no
clothes. *It was a disaster for the first 4 years of it's life. *

Strange because I used it on several PCs from the time of it's first
release and
I experienced no such disasters. It was an immediate improvement.




We live
with spam today because of all the home systems that used XP from 2002
through 2006 that got infected with backdoor trojans that turned them
into botnets. *It was a crime for Microsoft to force XP into home
computers back in 2002, and it really wasn't fit enough for home use
until SP2. *But everyone conveinently forgets XP's history in that
regard. *

Nonsense. The only reason more spam originates from XP, Vista, or
Win 7
systems is because there are so many more of them out there and
consequently
they are the systems targeted. Why would any hacker or virus
developer waste
their time screwing around writing for Win98 in 2006, when it was
basicly extinct?





difficult to protect from a security standpoint

Complete myth.

Tell us what marvel of security software you're using that offers
realtime protection
from viruses and malware on Win98. None of the major security
software vendors even offer
a product that runs on Win98 anymore. Not Norton, not McAfee,
Kaspersky, TrendMicro, none
of them. The best you can find is some shareware that may find the
virus when you manually
run it after the virus is already on your system. None of those
that I'm aware of provide removal either.





There never were any network worms that could work on win-98 systems.
Meanwhile there were about 6 different worms over the past 7 years that
can infect NT/XP systems just by them having an internet connection - no
user intervention required. *

You think MAYBE that's because of factors like it just took time for
the worms
and the sophistication of hackers to develop? Any reasonable person
knows
perfectly well that if Win98 was sitting all over the worlds networks
today, it would be MORE
prone to attack by viruses today. That argument is like saying there
were never
any terrorists that used a DC3, so it was a superior airplane to a
767.



NT/XP was designed to be used by corporations and enterprises on closed
networks, behind firewalls, managed by IT departments. *It's only since
mid 2006 (XP-SP2) did it become somewhat secure for the average
home-owner/user to use XP without help and protection from an on-site IT
staff.

LOL. As I said, I used XP for a decade, from the start, with no such
problems.
What you're suggesting, that Win98 is or was more secure than XP, is
laughable.




Go to secunia.org and look at the security issues for different versions
of windows. *Win-98 has a pathetically small number of issues (33?) -
many of them of low importance. *Meanwhile, XP has hundreds.

You think just maybe that could be because those that develop viruses
and
those that try to hack systems evolved over time, became more
prevalent over
time? Consequently they are spending their time to hack into the
systems
that are most widespread and useful to hack with. In other words,
for the last
decade, just like other software developers they haven't given a rat's
behind about Win98.
Yet, you mistake that as a feature of Win98.




Then we have the fact that with just about any new PC you buy
today

I don't buy PC's - I build mine from scratch. *I don't own any laptops
or netbooks - don't need em.

Figures you'd follow that strategy. Kind of like the guys I see
bidding up
systems on Ebay. The seller has a two year old PC and states in the
listing over and over that they don't know if it works, sold as is, it
turns
on, but there is no video, no cables, no software, etc. Yet I see
guys
bidding it up to over $200. Over at HP, you can get a brand new
midrange PC with
Win 7 and Microsoft Office, warranty, support, etc for $425. Does that
$200
box sound like a good deal to you?

You couldn't buy the indivdual components on that HP system for
anywhere
near $425. You think you're going to get an AMD Phenom II X4 for
anything
close to what HP buys it for? How about that 1GB drive? Even just
the hardware
components would be more than that. And then, after you do the
integration,
using parts from God knows where, when it doesn't work, you can argue
with
the seller about whether the parts were deffective before or after you
screwed
around with them. I suppose you'd prefer to build your own TV too.




I have access to binders full of Microsoft software. *MSDN, technet,
etc. *I have set up hundreds of XP machines at my $DayJob$. *I've even
set up something called Multipoint Server 2010 (based on Server 2008
R2). *

I run office 2000 Premium SR1. *It's nice, because no validation is need
to install (just like no validation needed for win-98). *Office 2003?
2007? *2010? *I have them all at work. *What do most of our work
computers run? *Windows 98 with Office 2000. *Why? *Because if it ain't
broke, you don't f*ck with it. *

That sounds like the corporate strategy used by GM, Chrysler, and
Lucent Technologies.



I know my ****, and what I know is that Microsoft's life blood is to
keep selling you a new OS every 3 years, and they'll do what-ever they
can to beat their old OS's into the ground. *

Really? Wow, you mean just like every 3 years or so I can get a new
cell
phone that has way more features, better call quality, better
bandwith, internet
access, longer battery life, etc? My what blood suckers, all of them!


If Win-98 was really as bad
as everyone thinks it is, I would leave it in a second, and I have any
number of options at my disposal at no cost to me. *I have the CD's and
product keys for ALL versions of windows since windows 95 up to Windows
7. *

Almost everyone knows how inferior it was to the OS's we run today.




But I keep using windows 98 for my home computers and my desktop
computer at work. *What does that tell you? *Does it tell you that I
like to have FULL ACCESS to my own computer? *Does it tell you that NTFS
is really a crock of **** compared to FAT32? *Does it tell you that I
don't particularly like the idea of WGA? *Or that I don't like DRM built
right into the kernel of my OS (as with Vista and 7)? *Or a dozen new
system vulnderabilities discovered every month?

I'd say it, together with your constant vulgarity and the fact that
you claim you
would take any new furnace apart to tear out the modern technology
parts before
installing it tells me that you aren't as smart as you think you are
and you have
some serious issues.



Keep drinking the coolaid. *Microsoft and it's ecosystem of software and
hardware partners are loving you for it.

Yeah, they get a whole lot of money out of me. Let's see, last $
they got was when I
bought a PC back in 2001 with XP installed on it. That might have
amounted to $50
at most. Then, this year I bought a new HP computer with Win 7 and
Office. Maybe
they got $75 out of that. Big deal. Compare that to your cell
phone bill. Or your cable
bill. Oh wait, let me guess, you don't have those either, right?