Upgrading Windows 98
in [Home Built PC]
|
From: John Doe on 4 Jan 2010 12:41 Toolpackinmama <philnblanc(a)comcast.net> wrote: > 98 Guy wrote: > >> Win-98 was not vulnerable to any exploit that could result in >> remote code execution resulting in control over the machine. >> There were never any network worms that could do that to >> win-98. >> >> Many of the IE exploits that were used against XP never worked >> correctly on win-98. > > Interesting. I learned something new today. Still, it is OLD > NEWS. > > Old news... is that an oxymoron? :) > > You know, newspapers and books aren't vulnerable to code > execution exploits, either. You also can't run any modern > programs on them. > >> Every few years we rebuilt all PC's with new hardware >> (motherboards, hard drives, video cards, etc). Currently our >> win-98 systems are running with 512 mb ram, 80 gb hard drives, >> 256 mb Nvidia AGP-8x video cards, Socket 478 P4 Celerons or >> Pentiums (2.6 ghz), i845 chipset motherboards. >> > > Your Win 98 systems don't run Dragon Age: Origins. Besides big games, Windows 98 does not run half of the stuff I use, like speech recognition activated systemwide scripting. That stuff requires a modern mainstream operating system (i.e. Windows XP or higher).
From: Toolpackinmama on 4 Jan 2010 12:44 Mike Easter wrote: > > So next, in order to have a lean and mean OS plus only the apps of your > personal choice, you have to go thru' the installation picking out all > of the little parts which are imbedded into the registry. I don't mind fussing with a new computer. It's fussing over old ones that irritates me. :)
From: John Doe on 4 Jan 2010 12:54 "Mike Easter" <MikeE(a)ster.invalid> wrote: > Toolpackinmama wrote: >> the cheapest 250.00 netbook you can buy now is ten times better >> than any system that was built for Windows 98. Come on you >> cheapskates, buy a new computer. .... > That is, you have to 'de-construct' the OS plus junk and try to > create a good OS + apps yourself. Then after that you have to > make some kind of image or clone of your debloated system -- > because you have no OS installation disk, only an image of what > you bought with the bloatware. As has been pointed out recently, there is a free application for that purpose and more. > Alternatives are to steal the OS off a bit torrent Why you are short on hard drive space for backing up the OS... Optimization is just another reason to keep a clone of the Windows partition.
From: edfair on 3 Jan 2010 22:23 Quote John Doe: If you are so limited, you should consider a device that is much smaller and less expensive than a modern PC and does more than your Neanderthal hardware running an ancient operating system. I have the XPs, not just the SE. But you probably will sneer at the 386 laptop with 30mb hard drive running dual boot DOS/Xenix, too, although it is being replaced by a 486 divided the same way. Not everybody needs a sledgehammer to drive nails, although they are great if you need to break up concrete.
From: 98 Guy on 4 Jan 2010 23:19
John Doe wrote: > >> Win-98 was not vulnerable to any exploit > > And then there is the (need for stability) Ah, the stability myth. The truth is that most people experienced win-98 on very pathetic hardware. Machines with maybe 32 or 64 mb of memory. With buggy motherboard, AGP and video card drivers. By 2000 or 2001, most techie people had abandoned win-9x and started running win-2K (as long as there were enough video-card and SOUND CARD drivers so they could play their infantile games on win-2k). But by 2002 the drivers were getting better for win-98. I run win-98 all day on my office and home PC's. PC's with 2.5 ghz P-4's with 512 mb ram and Nvidia 6600 cards with 128 or 256 mb ram and 80, 250 and even 500 gb hard drives and giga-bit ethernet cards and even dual-screen 1600 x 1200. That's a long way from the hardware available back in 1999. And they're stable as a rock. |