Discussion:
98se vs XP
(too old to reply)
Lil' Dave
2003-07-16 21:08:47 UTC
Permalink
98 works with FAT32/16.
XP has its own version of the NT file system. Its not identical to
NT/2000's. XP will work with FAT32 or its version of NTFS.
Suggest you do an XP upgrade, all should work as is if the hardware is
compatible/sufficient.
MS has a website to answer your questions regarding hardware compatibility.
XP can be networked to any PC running an MS windows 9X/NT/2K operating
system.
NT/2K/XP are all more stable than 9X due to their stricter standards with
hardware drivers. XP is more forgiving than NT/2K in operation. XP, in my
opinion, is too helpful as there is a help or suggestion everywhere. More
of nuisance for the more experienced, but that facility can be disabled.
Dave
I've seen the discussions about 98 vs. 2000, but who knows anything about
XP?
Reading the long post about how "Bill" is just at the mercy of all the big
bad wolves who are nipping at his heals, I'm wondering if I should give up
my 98se (which I have become very accustomed to) and wipe my drive,
install
XP, and learn a new way of doing things.
My concerns.......
98 is FAT32, 2000 is NTFS. What is XP?
If I copy all my favorites, desktop, icons, email folders, saved files
within programs to my D drive, will they be usable once XP is installed?
I know this puter can handle XP, but I have 2 others in the house I don't
know about yet. If I cant get XP on all my systems, can you network XP to
98se?
Is XP a more stable OS than 98se? (I am having some crashing problems
every
once in a while).
tks
Jim
--
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
1 cross
+ 3 nails
-------------
4 given
jazz
2003-07-17 02:33:14 UTC
Permalink
good explanation, i would jujst like to add that most of the anoying helper
wizard can be turned off or bypassed. unfortunatly i'm not aware of a way to
do it to all of them. it would be nice if someone did know and posted a link
or something.
Post by Lil' Dave
98 works with FAT32/16.
XP has its own version of the NT file system. Its not identical to
NT/2000's. XP will work with FAT32 or its version of NTFS.
Suggest you do an XP upgrade, all should work as is if the hardware is
compatible/sufficient.
MS has a website to answer your questions regarding hardware
compatibility.
Post by Lil' Dave
XP can be networked to any PC running an MS windows 9X/NT/2K operating
system.
NT/2K/XP are all more stable than 9X due to their stricter standards with
hardware drivers. XP is more forgiving than NT/2K in operation. XP, in my
opinion, is too helpful as there is a help or suggestion everywhere. More
of nuisance for the more experienced, but that facility can be disabled.
Dave
I've seen the discussions about 98 vs. 2000, but who knows anything about
XP?
Reading the long post about how "Bill" is just at the mercy of all the big
bad wolves who are nipping at his heals, I'm wondering if I should give up
my 98se (which I have become very accustomed to) and wipe my drive,
install
XP, and learn a new way of doing things.
My concerns.......
98 is FAT32, 2000 is NTFS. What is XP?
If I copy all my favorites, desktop, icons, email folders, saved files
within programs to my D drive, will they be usable once XP is installed?
I know this puter can handle XP, but I have 2 others in the house I don't
know about yet. If I cant get XP on all my systems, can you network XP to
98se?
Is XP a more stable OS than 98se? (I am having some crashing problems
every
once in a while).
tks
Jim
--
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
1 cross
+ 3 nails
-------------
4 given
meden1321
2003-09-05 01:55:32 UTC
Permalink
I have a Pentium III 450 system and XP runs fine....I don't agree on the
'mandatory' 1ghz requirement, I've been using XP on this machine with only
450 mhz and 192 mb's of 133 SDRAM, and it works fine, sometimes even faster
than 98.
Just my opinion.
Post by jazz
good explanation, i would jujst like to add that most of the anoying helper
wizard can be turned off or bypassed. unfortunatly i'm not aware of a way to
do it to all of them. it would be nice if someone did know and posted a link
or something.
Post by Lil' Dave
98 works with FAT32/16.
XP has its own version of the NT file system. Its not identical to
NT/2000's. XP will work with FAT32 or its version of NTFS.
Suggest you do an XP upgrade, all should work as is if the hardware is
compatible/sufficient.
MS has a website to answer your questions regarding hardware
compatibility.
Post by Lil' Dave
XP can be networked to any PC running an MS windows 9X/NT/2K operating
system.
NT/2K/XP are all more stable than 9X due to their stricter standards with
hardware drivers. XP is more forgiving than NT/2K in operation. XP, in
my
Post by Lil' Dave
opinion, is too helpful as there is a help or suggestion everywhere.
More
Post by jazz
Post by Lil' Dave
of nuisance for the more experienced, but that facility can be disabled.
Dave
I've seen the discussions about 98 vs. 2000, but who knows anything
about
Post by Lil' Dave
XP?
Reading the long post about how "Bill" is just at the mercy of all the
big
Post by Lil' Dave
bad wolves who are nipping at his heals, I'm wondering if I should
give
Post by jazz
up
Post by Lil' Dave
my 98se (which I have become very accustomed to) and wipe my drive,
install
XP, and learn a new way of doing things.
My concerns.......
98 is FAT32, 2000 is NTFS. What is XP?
If I copy all my favorites, desktop, icons, email folders, saved files
within programs to my D drive, will they be usable once XP is installed?
I know this puter can handle XP, but I have 2 others in the house I
don't
Post by Lil' Dave
know about yet. If I cant get XP on all my systems, can you network XP
to
Post by Lil' Dave
98se?
Is XP a more stable OS than 98se? (I am having some crashing problems
every
once in a while).
tks
Jim
--
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
1 cross
+ 3 nails
-------------
4 given
Jim Eshelman
2003-09-05 02:02:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by meden1321
I have a Pentium III 450 system and XP runs fine....I don't agree on
the 'mandatory' 1ghz requirement,
Oh *hell* no. My 667 MHz is a really fast machine with it, and it works fine
on significantly slower than that.
--
Jim Eshelman
MS-MVP, Windows Shell/User
http://aumha.org/
http://WinSupportCenter.com/
F***@rogers.com
2004-04-09 11:33:09 UTC
Permalink
This is good to know.
I just upgraded my system from PII 400 to PIII 600
I'm lagging by a couple of years, but still keeping up.
Win XP here I come.

FM
Post by meden1321
I have a Pentium III 450 system and XP runs fine....I don't agree on
the 'mandatory' 1ghz requirement, I've been using XP on this machine
with only 450 mhz and 192 mb's of 133 SDRAM, and it works fine,
sometimes even faster than 98.
Just my opinion.
Post by jazz
good explanation, i would jujst like to add that most of the anoying
helper
Post by jazz
wizard can be turned off or bypassed. unfortunatly i'm not aware of a
way
to
Post by jazz
do it to all of them. it would be nice if someone did know and posted
a
link
Post by jazz
or something.
Post by Lil' Dave
98 works with FAT32/16.
XP has its own version of the NT file system. Its not identical to
NT/2000's. XP will work with FAT32 or its version of NTFS.
Suggest you do an XP upgrade, all should work as is if the hardware
is compatible/sufficient.
MS has a website to answer your questions regarding hardware
compatibility.
Post by Lil' Dave
XP can be networked to any PC running an MS windows 9X/NT/2K
operating system.
NT/2K/XP are all more stable than 9X due to their stricter
standards
with
Post by jazz
Post by Lil' Dave
hardware drivers. XP is more forgiving than NT/2K in operation.
XP, in
my
Post by Lil' Dave
opinion, is too helpful as there is a help or suggestion
everywhere.
More
Post by jazz
Post by Lil' Dave
of nuisance for the more experienced, but that facility can be
disabled. Dave
I've seen the discussions about 98 vs. 2000, but who knows anything
about
Post by Lil' Dave
XP?
Reading the long post about how "Bill" is just at the mercy of all the
big
Post by Lil' Dave
bad wolves who are nipping at his heals, I'm wondering if I should
give
Post by jazz
up
Post by Lil' Dave
my 98se (which I have become very accustomed to) and wipe my drive,
install
XP, and learn a new way of doing things.
My concerns.......
98 is FAT32, 2000 is NTFS. What is XP?
If I copy all my favorites, desktop, icons, email folders, saved
files within programs to my D drive, will they be usable once XP
is
installed?
Post by jazz
Post by Lil' Dave
I know this puter can handle XP, but I have 2 others in the house I
don't
Post by Lil' Dave
know about yet. If I cant get XP on all my systems, can you network XP
to
Post by Lil' Dave
98se?
Is XP a more stable OS than 98se? (I am having some crashing problems
every
once in a while).
tks
Jim
--
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
1 cross
+ 3 nails
-------------
4 given
Artwilder
2004-04-09 16:24:06 UTC
Permalink
Enjoy the XP product. Hope you don't have too many security issues with
the NT source code and say goodbye to some backwards compatibility with DOS
games and programs. Long live 9x and 98SE. :>
Post by F***@rogers.com
This is good to know.
I just upgraded my system from PII 400 to PIII 600
I'm lagging by a couple of years, but still keeping up.
Win XP here I come.
FM
Post by meden1321
I have a Pentium III 450 system and XP runs fine....I don't agree on
the 'mandatory' 1ghz requirement, I've been using XP on this machine
with only 450 mhz and 192 mb's of 133 SDRAM, and it works fine,
sometimes even faster than 98.
Just my opinion.
Post by jazz
good explanation, i would jujst like to add that most of the anoying
helper
Post by jazz
wizard can be turned off or bypassed. unfortunatly i'm not aware of a
way
to
Post by jazz
do it to all of them. it would be nice if someone did know and posted
a
link
Post by jazz
or something.
Post by Lil' Dave
98 works with FAT32/16.
XP has its own version of the NT file system. Its not identical to
NT/2000's. XP will work with FAT32 or its version of NTFS.
Suggest you do an XP upgrade, all should work as is if the hardware
is compatible/sufficient.
MS has a website to answer your questions regarding hardware
compatibility.
Post by Lil' Dave
XP can be networked to any PC running an MS windows 9X/NT/2K
operating system.
NT/2K/XP are all more stable than 9X due to their stricter
standards
with
Post by jazz
Post by Lil' Dave
hardware drivers. XP is more forgiving than NT/2K in operation.
XP, in
my
Post by Lil' Dave
opinion, is too helpful as there is a help or suggestion
everywhere.
More
Post by jazz
Post by Lil' Dave
of nuisance for the more experienced, but that facility can be
disabled. Dave
I've seen the discussions about 98 vs. 2000, but who knows anything
about
Post by Lil' Dave
XP?
Reading the long post about how "Bill" is just at the mercy of all the
big
Post by Lil' Dave
bad wolves who are nipping at his heals, I'm wondering if I should
give
Post by jazz
up
Post by Lil' Dave
my 98se (which I have become very accustomed to) and wipe my drive,
install
XP, and learn a new way of doing things.
My concerns.......
98 is FAT32, 2000 is NTFS. What is XP?
If I copy all my favorites, desktop, icons, email folders, saved
files within programs to my D drive, will they be usable once XP
is
installed?
Post by jazz
Post by Lil' Dave
I know this puter can handle XP, but I have 2 others in the house I
don't
Post by Lil' Dave
know about yet. If I cant get XP on all my systems, can you network XP
to
Post by Lil' Dave
98se?
Is XP a more stable OS than 98se? (I am having some crashing problems
every
once in a while).
tks
Jim
--
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
1 cross
+ 3 nails
-------------
4 given
PCR
2004-04-10 05:20:26 UTC
Permalink
Long live 9x & 98SE!
--
(Just so long as it doesn't outlive me),
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
***@netzero.net
"Artwilder" <***@unknownspam.net> wrote in message news:***@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| Enjoy the XP product. Hope you don't have too many security issues
with
| the NT source code and say goodbye to some backwards compatibility
with DOS
| games and programs. Long live 9x and 98SE. :>
|
| <***@rogers.com> wrote in message
| news:***@216.196.97.131...
| > This is good to know.
| > I just upgraded my system from PII 400 to PIII 600
| > I'm lagging by a couple of years, but still keeping up.
| > Win XP here I come.
| >
| > FM
| >
| >
| > "meden1321" <***@rogers.com> wrote in
| > news:o2S5b.69529$***@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com:
| >
| > > I have a Pentium III 450 system and XP runs fine....I don't agree
on
| > > the 'mandatory' 1ghz requirement, I've been using XP on this
machine
| > > with only 450 mhz and 192 mb's of 133 SDRAM, and it works fine,
| > > sometimes even faster than 98.
| > > Just my opinion.
| > >
| > > "jazz" <***@hotmail.com.nospam> wrote in message
| > > news:***@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| > >> good explanation, i would jujst like to add that most of the
anoying
| > > helper
| > >> wizard can be turned off or bypassed. unfortunatly i'm not aware
of a
| > >> way
| > > to
| > >> do it to all of them. it would be nice if someone did know and
posted
| > >> a
| > > link
| > >> or something.
| > >>
| > >> "Lil' Dave" <***@nomail.net> wrote in message
| > >> news:7bjRa.3242$***@lakeread07...
| > >> > 98 works with FAT32/16.
| > >> > XP has its own version of the NT file system. Its not
identical to
| > >> > NT/2000's. XP will work with FAT32 or its version of NTFS.
| > >> > Suggest you do an XP upgrade, all should work as is if the
hardware
| > >> > is compatible/sufficient.
| > >> > MS has a website to answer your questions regarding hardware
| > >> compatibility.
| > >> > XP can be networked to any PC running an MS windows 9X/NT/2K
| > >> > operating system.
| > >> > NT/2K/XP are all more stable than 9X due to their stricter
| > >> > standards
| > > with
| > >> > hardware drivers. XP is more forgiving than NT/2K in
operation.
| > >> > XP, in
| > >> my
| > >> > opinion, is too helpful as there is a help or suggestion
| > >> > everywhere.
| > > More
| > >> > of nuisance for the more experienced, but that facility can be
| > >> > disabled. Dave
| > >> > "JimsPuter98" <***@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
| > >> > news:75oEa.2629$***@fe07.atl2.webusenet.com...
| > >> > > I've seen the discussions about 98 vs. 2000, but who knows
| > >> > > anything
| > >> about
| > >> > > XP?
| > >> > > Reading the long post about how "Bill" is just at the mercy
of
| > >> > > all the
| > >> big
| > >> > > bad wolves who are nipping at his heals, I'm wondering if I
| > >> > > should
| > > give
| > >> up
| > >> > > my 98se (which I have become very accustomed to) and wipe my
| > >> > > drive,
| > >> > install
| > >> > > XP, and learn a new way of doing things.
| > >> > > My concerns.......
| > >> > > 98 is FAT32, 2000 is NTFS. What is XP?
| > >> > > If I copy all my favorites, desktop, icons, email folders,
saved
| > >> > > files within programs to my D drive, will they be usable once
XP
| > >> > > is
| > > installed?
| > >> > > I know this puter can handle XP, but I have 2 others in the
house
| > >> > > I
| > >> don't
| > >> > > know about yet. If I cant get XP on all my systems, can you
| > >> > > network XP
| > >> to
| > >> > > 98se?
| > >> > > Is XP a more stable OS than 98se? (I am having some crashing
| > >> > > problems
| > >> > every
| > >> > > once in a while).
| > >> > >
| > >> > > tks
| > >> > > Jim
| > >> > >
| > >> > > --
| > >> > >
| > >> > > <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
| > >> > > 1 cross
| > >> > > + 3 nails
| > >> > > -------------
| > >> > > 4 given
| > >> > >
| > >> > >
| > >> > >
| > >> >
| > >> >
| > >>
| > >>
| > >
| > >
| >
|
|
Artwilder
2004-04-10 17:15:10 UTC
Permalink
Any other supporters or is it just PCR and myself who will support the 9x
efforts and how the 9x kernel is more secure at its core and the ease and
flexibility of being able to go into lite DOS for the advanced user --- I may
even install DOS 6.22 on a separate and hidden partition -- just to learn
more about its roots and get the flexibility to operate in a true, full and
uncompromised DOS environment --- much to Microsoft's annoyance, in my
opinion, DOS lives on --- Have a great day :>
Post by PCR
Long live 9x & 98SE!
--
(Just so long as it doesn't outlive me),
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
| Enjoy the XP product. Hope you don't have too many security issues
with
| the NT source code and say goodbye to some backwards compatibility
with DOS
| games and programs. Long live 9x and 98SE. :>
|
| > This is good to know.
| > I just upgraded my system from PII 400 to PIII 600
| > I'm lagging by a couple of years, but still keeping up.
| > Win XP here I come.
| >
| > FM
| >
| >
| >
| > > I have a Pentium III 450 system and XP runs fine....I don't agree
on
| > > the 'mandatory' 1ghz requirement, I've been using XP on this
machine
| > > with only 450 mhz and 192 mb's of 133 SDRAM, and it works fine,
| > > sometimes even faster than 98.
| > > Just my opinion.
| > >
| > >> good explanation, i would jujst like to add that most of the
anoying
| > > helper
| > >> wizard can be turned off or bypassed. unfortunatly i'm not aware
of a
| > >> way
| > > to
| > >> do it to all of them. it would be nice if someone did know and
posted
| > >> a
| > > link
| > >> or something.
| > >>
| > >> > 98 works with FAT32/16.
| > >> > XP has its own version of the NT file system. Its not
identical to
| > >> > NT/2000's. XP will work with FAT32 or its version of NTFS.
| > >> > Suggest you do an XP upgrade, all should work as is if the
hardware
| > >> > is compatible/sufficient.
| > >> > MS has a website to answer your questions regarding hardware
| > >> compatibility.
| > >> > XP can be networked to any PC running an MS windows 9X/NT/2K
| > >> > operating system.
| > >> > NT/2K/XP are all more stable than 9X due to their stricter
| > >> > standards
| > > with
| > >> > hardware drivers. XP is more forgiving than NT/2K in
operation.
| > >> > XP, in
| > >> my
| > >> > opinion, is too helpful as there is a help or suggestion
| > >> > everywhere.
| > > More
| > >> > of nuisance for the more experienced, but that facility can be
| > >> > disabled. Dave
| > >> > > I've seen the discussions about 98 vs. 2000, but who knows
| > >> > > anything
| > >> about
| > >> > > XP?
| > >> > > Reading the long post about how "Bill" is just at the mercy
of
| > >> > > all the
| > >> big
| > >> > > bad wolves who are nipping at his heals, I'm wondering if I
| > >> > > should
| > > give
| > >> up
| > >> > > my 98se (which I have become very accustomed to) and wipe my
| > >> > > drive,
| > >> > install
| > >> > > XP, and learn a new way of doing things.
| > >> > > My concerns.......
| > >> > > 98 is FAT32, 2000 is NTFS. What is XP?
| > >> > > If I copy all my favorites, desktop, icons, email folders,
saved
| > >> > > files within programs to my D drive, will they be usable once
XP
| > >> > > is
| > > installed?
| > >> > > I know this puter can handle XP, but I have 2 others in the
house
| > >> > > I
| > >> don't
| > >> > > know about yet. If I cant get XP on all my systems, can you
| > >> > > network XP
| > >> to
| > >> > > 98se?
| > >> > > Is XP a more stable OS than 98se? (I am having some crashing
| > >> > > problems
| > >> > every
| > >> > > once in a while).
| > >> > >
| > >> > > tks
| > >> > > Jim
| > >> > >
| > >> > > --
| > >> > >
| > >> > > <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
| > >> > > 1 cross
| > >> > > + 3 nails
| > >> > > -------------
| > >> > > 4 given
| > >> > >
| > >> > >
| > >> > >
| > >> >
| > >> >
| > >>
| > >>
| > >
| > >
| >
|
|
PCR
2004-04-10 20:01:15 UTC
Permalink
Absolutely! But, careful with DOS 6.22 (I think you already know), as it
does not know LFNs & large partitions, I think I've read. You'd have to
find something to fix it up with.
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
***@netzero.net
"Artwilder" <***@unknownspam.net> wrote in message news:***@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
| Any other supporters or is it just PCR and myself who will support
the 9x
| efforts and how the 9x kernel is more secure at its core and the ease
and
| flexibility of being able to go into lite DOS for the advanced
user --- I may
| even install DOS 6.22 on a separate and hidden partition -- just to
learn
| more about its roots and get the flexibility to operate in a true,
full and
| uncompromised DOS environment --- much to Microsoft's annoyance, in my
| opinion, DOS lives on --- Have a great day :>
|
| "PCR" <***@netzero.net> wrote in message
| news:#***@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| > Long live 9x & 98SE!
| >
| > --
| > (Just so long as it doesn't outlive me),
| > Thanks or Good Luck,
| > There may be humor in this post, and,
| > Naturally, you will not sue,
| > should things get worse after this,
| > PCR
| > ***@netzero.net
| > "Artwilder" <***@unknownspam.net> wrote in message
| > news:***@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| > | Enjoy the XP product. Hope you don't have too many security
issues
| > with
| > | the NT source code and say goodbye to some backwards compatibility
| > with DOS
| > | games and programs. Long live 9x and 98SE. :>
| > |
| > | <***@rogers.com> wrote in message
| > | news:***@216.196.97.131...
| > | > This is good to know.
| > | > I just upgraded my system from PII 400 to PIII 600
| > | > I'm lagging by a couple of years, but still keeping up.
| > | > Win XP here I come.
| > | >
| > | > FM
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "meden1321" <***@rogers.com> wrote in
| > | > news:o2S5b.69529$***@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com:
| > | >
| > | > > I have a Pentium III 450 system and XP runs fine....I don't
agree
| > on
| > | > > the 'mandatory' 1ghz requirement, I've been using XP on this
| > machine
| > | > > with only 450 mhz and 192 mb's of 133 SDRAM, and it works
fine,
| > | > > sometimes even faster than 98.
| > | > > Just my opinion.
| > | > >
| > | > > "jazz" <***@hotmail.com.nospam> wrote in message
| > | > > news:***@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| > | > >> good explanation, i would jujst like to add that most of the
| > anoying
| > | > > helper
| > | > >> wizard can be turned off or bypassed. unfortunatly i'm not
aware
| > of a
| > | > >> way
| > | > > to
| > | > >> do it to all of them. it would be nice if someone did know
and
| > posted
| > | > >> a
| > | > > link
| > | > >> or something.
| > | > >>
| > | > >> "Lil' Dave" <***@nomail.net> wrote in message
| > | > >> news:7bjRa.3242$***@lakeread07...
| > | > >> > 98 works with FAT32/16.
| > | > >> > XP has its own version of the NT file system. Its not
| > identical to
| > | > >> > NT/2000's. XP will work with FAT32 or its version of NTFS.
| > | > >> > Suggest you do an XP upgrade, all should work as is if the
| > hardware
| > | > >> > is compatible/sufficient.
| > | > >> > MS has a website to answer your questions regarding
hardware
| > | > >> compatibility.
| > | > >> > XP can be networked to any PC running an MS windows
9X/NT/2K
| > | > >> > operating system.
| > | > >> > NT/2K/XP are all more stable than 9X due to their stricter
| > | > >> > standards
| > | > > with
| > | > >> > hardware drivers. XP is more forgiving than NT/2K in
| > operation.
| > | > >> > XP, in
| > | > >> my
| > | > >> > opinion, is too helpful as there is a help or suggestion
| > | > >> > everywhere.
| > | > > More
| > | > >> > of nuisance for the more experienced, but that facility can
be
| > | > >> > disabled. Dave
| > | > >> > "JimsPuter98" <***@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
| > | > >> > news:75oEa.2629$***@fe07.atl2.webusenet.com...
| > | > >> > > I've seen the discussions about 98 vs. 2000, but who
knows
| > | > >> > > anything
| > | > >> about
| > | > >> > > XP?
| > | > >> > > Reading the long post about how "Bill" is just at the
mercy
| > of
| > | > >> > > all the
| > | > >> big
| > | > >> > > bad wolves who are nipping at his heals, I'm wondering if
I
| > | > >> > > should
| > | > > give
| > | > >> up
| > | > >> > > my 98se (which I have become very accustomed to) and wipe
my
| > | > >> > > drive,
| > | > >> > install
| > | > >> > > XP, and learn a new way of doing things.
| > | > >> > > My concerns.......
| > | > >> > > 98 is FAT32, 2000 is NTFS. What is XP?
| > | > >> > > If I copy all my favorites, desktop, icons, email
folders,
| > saved
| > | > >> > > files within programs to my D drive, will they be usable
once
| > XP
| > | > >> > > is
| > | > > installed?
| > | > >> > > I know this puter can handle XP, but I have 2 others in
the
| > house
| > | > >> > > I
| > | > >> don't
| > | > >> > > know about yet. If I cant get XP on all my systems, can
you
| > | > >> > > network XP
| > | > >> to
| > | > >> > > 98se?
| > | > >> > > Is XP a more stable OS than 98se? (I am having some
crashing
| > | > >> > > problems
| > | > >> > every
| > | > >> > > once in a while).
| > | > >> > >
| > | > >> > > tks
| > | > >> > > Jim
| > | > >> > >
| > | > >> > > --
| > | > >> > >
| > | > >> > > <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
| > | > >> > > 1 cross
| > | > >> > > + 3 nails
| > | > >> > > -------------
| > | > >> > > 4 given
| > | > >> > >
| > | > >> > >
| > | > >> > >
| > | > >> >
| > | > >> >
| > | > >>
| > | > >>
| > | > >
| > | > >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|
PCR
2004-04-10 22:45:58 UTC
Permalink
Excellent. I only hope, by the time you've learned it, Win98SE has not
crumbled to dust, &/or that DOS will still be useful in Longhorn.
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
***@netzero.net
"Artwilder" <***@unknownspam.net> wrote in message news:***@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| Yeah, installing DOS will happen on my 98SE test PC for
compatibility and safety reasons.
|
| "PCR" <***@netzero.net> wrote in message news:***@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
| > Absolutely! But, careful with DOS 6.22 (I think you already know),
as it
| > does not know LFNs & large partitions, I think I've read. You'd have
to
| > find something to fix it up with.
| >
| >
| > --
| > Thanks or Good Luck,
| > There may be humor in this post, and,
| > Naturally, you will not sue,
| > should things get worse after this,
| > PCR
| > ***@netzero.net
| > "Artwilder" <***@unknownspam.net> wrote in message
| > news:***@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
| > | Any other supporters or is it just PCR and myself who will
support
| > the 9x
| > | efforts and how the 9x kernel is more secure at its core and the
ease
| > and
| > | flexibility of being able to go into lite DOS for the advanced
| > user --- I may
| > | even install DOS 6.22 on a separate and hidden partition -- just
to
| > learn
| > | more about its roots and get the flexibility to operate in a true,
| > full and
| > | uncompromised DOS environment --- much to Microsoft's annoyance,
in my
| > | opinion, DOS lives on --- Have a great day :>
| > |
| > | "PCR" <***@netzero.net> wrote in message
| > | news:#***@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| > | > Long live 9x & 98SE!
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > (Just so long as it doesn't outlive me),
| > | > Thanks or Good Luck,
| > | > There may be humor in this post, and,
| > | > Naturally, you will not sue,
| > | > should things get worse after this,
| > | > PCR
| > | > ***@netzero.net
...snip
jazz
2004-04-11 07:01:40 UTC
Permalink
I'm a avid supporter of windows 9x too.. But i'm kinda insane.
I'm not sure if the winodows 9x base code is any more secure then the
winnt/xp base. Most of the newer exploits are with services running outside
the core os with default open ports. This latest one security warning with
the mst-its portion of the interaction of help files (*.chm) efect all
versions of windows. Also the win9x code doesn't even understand the concept
of limited access users or even multi user enviroments. That in itself
should make winnt/xp more secure. Not to mention windows 9x base is
sufficiently cripled compared to the capabilities of the 2000/xp core. but
when using it for purposes that don't require those extra features then it
is great (fast too)

If you want to install the dos without the hasle of making a hidden
partition and such you might want to look into somethign like bochs
( hit a google for it) wich is a free pc emulator. Also there are some
other virtual machines out that might work for you too (vitual pc, vmware).
It will allow different operating systems to run inside an other without
needing to dual boot or anythign... just a thought if it makes it easier for
ya.
Post by Artwilder
Any other supporters or is it just PCR and myself who will support the 9x
efforts and how the 9x kernel is more secure at its core and the ease and
flexibility of being able to go into lite DOS for the advanced user --- I may
even install DOS 6.22 on a separate and hidden partition -- just to learn
more about its roots and get the flexibility to operate in a true, full and
uncompromised DOS environment --- much to Microsoft's annoyance, in my
opinion, DOS lives on --- Have a great day :>
Post by PCR
Long live 9x & 98SE!
--
(Just so long as it doesn't outlive me),
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
| Enjoy the XP product. Hope you don't have too many security issues
with
| the NT source code and say goodbye to some backwards compatibility
with DOS
| games and programs. Long live 9x and 98SE. :>
|
| > This is good to know.
| > I just upgraded my system from PII 400 to PIII 600
| > I'm lagging by a couple of years, but still keeping up.
| > Win XP here I come.
| >
| > FM
| >
| >
| >
| > > I have a Pentium III 450 system and XP runs fine....I don't agree
on
| > > the 'mandatory' 1ghz requirement, I've been using XP on this
machine
| > > with only 450 mhz and 192 mb's of 133 SDRAM, and it works fine,
| > > sometimes even faster than 98.
| > > Just my opinion.
| > >
| > >> good explanation, i would jujst like to add that most of the
anoying
| > > helper
| > >> wizard can be turned off or bypassed. unfortunatly i'm not aware
of a
| > >> way
| > > to
| > >> do it to all of them. it would be nice if someone did know and
posted
| > >> a
| > > link
| > >> or something.
| > >>
| > >> > 98 works with FAT32/16.
| > >> > XP has its own version of the NT file system. Its not
identical to
| > >> > NT/2000's. XP will work with FAT32 or its version of NTFS.
| > >> > Suggest you do an XP upgrade, all should work as is if the
hardware
| > >> > is compatible/sufficient.
| > >> > MS has a website to answer your questions regarding hardware
| > >> compatibility.
| > >> > XP can be networked to any PC running an MS windows 9X/NT/2K
| > >> > operating system.
| > >> > NT/2K/XP are all more stable than 9X due to their stricter
| > >> > standards
| > > with
| > >> > hardware drivers. XP is more forgiving than NT/2K in
operation.
| > >> > XP, in
| > >> my
| > >> > opinion, is too helpful as there is a help or suggestion
| > >> > everywhere.
| > > More
| > >> > of nuisance for the more experienced, but that facility can be
| > >> > disabled. Dave
| > >> > > I've seen the discussions about 98 vs. 2000, but who knows
| > >> > > anything
| > >> about
| > >> > > XP?
| > >> > > Reading the long post about how "Bill" is just at the mercy
of
| > >> > > all the
| > >> big
| > >> > > bad wolves who are nipping at his heals, I'm wondering if I
| > >> > > should
| > > give
| > >> up
| > >> > > my 98se (which I have become very accustomed to) and wipe my
| > >> > > drive,
| > >> > install
| > >> > > XP, and learn a new way of doing things.
| > >> > > My concerns.......
| > >> > > 98 is FAT32, 2000 is NTFS. What is XP?
| > >> > > If I copy all my favorites, desktop, icons, email folders,
saved
| > >> > > files within programs to my D drive, will they be usable once
XP
| > >> > > is
| > > installed?
| > >> > > I know this puter can handle XP, but I have 2 others in the
house
| > >> > > I
| > >> don't
| > >> > > know about yet. If I cant get XP on all my systems, can you
| > >> > > network XP
| > >> to
| > >> > > 98se?
| > >> > > Is XP a more stable OS than 98se? (I am having some crashing
| > >> > > problems
| > >> > every
| > >> > > once in a while).
| > >> > >
| > >> > > tks
| > >> > > Jim
| > >> > >
| > >> > > --
| > >> > >
| > >> > > <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
| > >> > > 1 cross
| > >> > > + 3 nails
| > >> > > -------------
| > >> > > 4 given
| > >> > >
| > >> > >
| > >> > >
| > >> >
| > >> >
| > >>
| > >>
| > >
| > >
| >
|
|
Richard G. Harper
2004-04-11 13:17:11 UTC
Permalink
No, Win9x isn't any more secure than the NT-based operating systems are. In
fact, since all users have administrator rights on a Windows 9x box by
default, it's considerably easier for anyone who wants to exploit one.

Fortunately for us most crackers don't care that over 65% of all homes are
running a 9x-based operating system, they are going for large business
networks and that means targeting Windows 2000 or XP. In those few
instances where the cracker does want the home market (zombie PCs,
backdoors, etc) you'll note that the code runs on both 9x and NT based
operating systems.

For example, contrast Sobig and Blaster. Sobig is apparently used to create
zombie networks where the cracker wants to stay below the radar and use an
infected PC to spread spam or phishing mails, so it infects any Windows PC
it can find since any PC will provide services it can use. Blaster, on the
other hand, was made to spread through multiple network conduits quickly, so
it targeted only NT based PCs since those are the most likely to be
aggregated in large groups.
--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Win9x] ***@email.com
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
Post by jazz
I'm a avid supporter of windows 9x too.. But i'm kinda insane.
I'm not sure if the winodows 9x base code is any more secure then the
winnt/xp base. Most of the newer exploits are with services running outside
the core os with default open ports. This latest one security warning with
the mst-its portion of the interaction of help files (*.chm) efect all
versions of windows. Also the win9x code doesn't even understand the concept
of limited access users or even multi user enviroments. That in itself
should make winnt/xp more secure. Not to mention windows 9x base is
sufficiently cripled compared to the capabilities of the 2000/xp core. but
when using it for purposes that don't require those extra features then it
is great (fast too)
If you want to install the dos without the hasle of making a hidden
partition and such you might want to look into somethign like bochs
( hit a google for it) wich is a free pc emulator. Also there are some
other virtual machines out that might work for you too (vitual pc, vmware).
It will allow different operating systems to run inside an other without
needing to dual boot or anythign... just a thought if it makes it easier for
ya.
R***@carrollhealthcare.com
2004-04-18 14:41:00 UTC
Permalink
Well, those are some surprising responses.

A very interesting point about the focus of attackers being more inclined
to disregard 98 systems, that's a plus alright. Generally I am a cautious
web surfer and try to keep current with security (antivirus and firewall
etc..). I have had neglegible issues with virusus and hijacking. (knock on
wood)

As to the DOS references, I have limited need to maintain a DOS platform.
Although from a nostalgic perspective I do have a coupld of apps I might
fire up on a dedicated DOS machine.
I do, however, have a need to keep up that is driven by the CAD apps which
I use regularly.

I currently have a 486 running 98 as a secondary system, while my main
system is PIII now. Upon my next purchase the 486 will become a dedicated
DOS machine. I have a few DOS apps I'd like to tinker with and I know my
kids will enjoy some of those old games. Wouldn't it be nice to expose
them to DOS.


Excelent food for thought fellows.

Thanks


FM
Post by F***@rogers.com
This is good to know.
I just upgraded my system from PII 400 to PIII 600
I'm lagging by a couple of years, but still keeping up.
Win XP here I come.
FM
Post by meden1321
I have a Pentium III 450 system and XP runs fine....I don't agree on
the 'mandatory' 1ghz requirement, I've been using XP on this machine
with only 450 mhz and 192 mb's of 133 SDRAM, and it works fine,
sometimes even faster than 98.
Just my opinion.
Post by jazz
good explanation, i would jujst like to add that most of the anoying
helper
Post by jazz
wizard can be turned off or bypassed. unfortunatly i'm not aware of a
way
to
Post by jazz
do it to all of them. it would be nice if someone did know and posted
a
link
Post by jazz
or something.
Post by Lil' Dave
98 works with FAT32/16.
XP has its own version of the NT file system. Its not identical to
NT/2000's. XP will work with FAT32 or its version of NTFS.
Suggest you do an XP upgrade, all should work as is if the hardware
is compatible/sufficient.
MS has a website to answer your questions regarding hardware
compatibility.
Post by Lil' Dave
XP can be networked to any PC running an MS windows 9X/NT/2K
operating system.
NT/2K/XP are all more stable than 9X due to their stricter
standards
with
Post by jazz
Post by Lil' Dave
hardware drivers. XP is more forgiving than NT/2K in operation.
XP, in
my
Post by Lil' Dave
opinion, is too helpful as there is a help or suggestion
everywhere.
More
Post by jazz
Post by Lil' Dave
of nuisance for the more experienced, but that facility can be
disabled. Dave
I've seen the discussions about 98 vs. 2000, but who knows anything
about
Post by Lil' Dave
XP?
Reading the long post about how "Bill" is just at the mercy of all the
big
Post by Lil' Dave
bad wolves who are nipping at his heals, I'm wondering if I should
give
Post by jazz
up
Post by Lil' Dave
my 98se (which I have become very accustomed to) and wipe my drive,
install
XP, and learn a new way of doing things.
My concerns.......
98 is FAT32, 2000 is NTFS. What is XP?
If I copy all my favorites, desktop, icons, email folders, saved
files within programs to my D drive, will they be usable once XP
is
installed?
Post by jazz
Post by Lil' Dave
I know this puter can handle XP, but I have 2 others in the house I
don't
Post by Lil' Dave
know about yet. If I cant get XP on all my systems, can you network XP
to
Post by Lil' Dave
98se?
Is XP a more stable OS than 98se? (I am having some crashing problems
every
once in a while).
tks
Jim
--
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
1 cross
+ 3 nails
-------------
4 given
Loading...