W98 gets a lifeline - will now only die June 2003

[LvR]

Read about it here.

[Gurm]

That's really too bad. They should stop encouraging the use of degenerate OS'es.

- Gurm

[Jon P. Inghram]

Like Windows NT based OS's?

[TdB]

or unix based OS´s

seriously, whats wrong with win9x?
I just upgraded from win98 to winxp, and the only differences is an ugly gui, that(thank god!) can be disabled, and a little more effiency in multitasking, I honestly can´t see why win98 is so bad.

[Dr Mordrid]

Lousy memory management and disk caching for starters.

Dr. Mordrid

[GT98]

Originally posted by Dr Mordrid
Lousy memory management and disk caching for starters.

Dr. Mordrid

I second that I had Win98 on my work machine and bylunch time I was getting out of memory errors. I upgraded the RAM..did the same thing and said screw it and put Win2K on...no more problems

[TdB]

It is correct that winxp seems to use my 512 mb ram better than win98, but on the other hand, my disk feels ALOT slower in winxp than win98.
I never really experienced any instabillities in win98, so i wouldn´t really know if it was more or less stable, I have heard from others that winxp doesn´t crash as often as win98 on their computers though.

[Jon P. Inghram]

The biggest problem with Win98 I've had is the annoying explorer lockup when deleting lots of files at once. Never had memory problems even when using 768 megs of RAM, although I did use CacheMan to tweak the file cache settings. Too bad my current mobo, an Asus TUSL2-C, can only handle 512 megs because of it's 815EP chipset.

[TnT]

Eh I still use Win98 and I don't care if they quit supporting it. Most of the support was crap, I never needed tech support (figure it out on my own or from online peeps, like you guys ) and it's only really useful to me anymore so that I can still run HL and a few other games.

The only thing is that I think that something considered obsolete should be considered abandoned and therefore should be considered "freeware". Really the only reason you buy a product is 1) newest features and 2) support from the company. The funniest argument against that I've heard is that it can make the company look bad -- well you shouldn't have made a crappy product in the first place! Kinda like those ads MS put out for Win98 saying no more General Protection Faults and for Win2K saying no more BSODs.

[mungu]

my biggest problem with win98 is the fact it is way insecure. Win2k/WinXP is a lot easier to control as far as policies and access goes. Win98 is very easy to hack. (i also find win2k/xp a lot more stable)

[Gurm]

Err... win2k doesn't bluescreen unless you have badly written drivers. NOT MS's fault.

- Gurm

[Technoid]

He he....

Like the WDM drivers provided to my USB -->RJ45/NIC adapter

[Gurm]

Technoid,

Provided by the manufacturer? Yeah, NICs can bluescreen out the OS, it's VERY network-driven. In fact, 3COM's new drivers (on Windows Update, no less!) bluescreen XP during heavy multimedia playback, and causes sound cards to crackle. Why? NOBODY KNOWS. But it's not MS's fault. It's 3COM's fault.

- Gurm

[TnT]

Originally posted by Gurm
Err... win2k doesn't bluescreen unless you have badly written drivers. NOT MS's fault.

- Gurm

I meant they ran two page ads in the magazine with a giant BSOD for Win2K. On the bottom it would say something about upgrading to Win2K will solve all those problems you had in Win98. Basically beating on their own product even though back then they were crowning Win98 for less General Protection Faults than 95.

[mungu]

Originally posted by TnT


I meant they ran two page ads in the magazine with a giant BSOD for Win2K. On the bottom it would say something about upgrading to Win2K will solve all those problems you had in Win98. Basically beating on their own product even though back then they were crowning Win98 for less General Protection Faults than 95.

Well obviously nothing is perfect, right? Doesn't it make sense that each successive operating system would be closer to the "perfect" one?