This would be my dream come true.

As for the need to constantly upgrade to a faster computer; according to this site in 10 to 15 years this could be over.

http://blog.wired.com/business/2007/09/idf-gordon-mo-1.html

This post has been edited by Sysdll: Jul 12 2008, 06:41 PM

What do you mean by "recent hardware" ? As i said my laptop with PIII @ 933 is fine with most flash video sites.

As for yahfoo, everybody i know with an internet connection has it. I experienced the lockup many, many, many times on my laptop when i used to run XP on it. While the dual-PIII has no trouble with it.

This post has been edited by Th3_uN1Qu3: Jul 12 2008, 07:10 PM

Win98SE "Preferred O.S."= A ...Lean and Mean Revitalized-Updated-Superior 98SE O.S. Machine. .......1.5gb full install with all updates ,mail,messenger,t.v.,cd-player/re-corder,camera,photo-shop,no bloatware ,simple ,everyday use ,...trade-off on 3 different MoBo's on a rotation user/testing basis.... 1 major crash and 2 re-installs due to testing new updates in 3 month's time....not bad for a 10 year old O.S. system on 10 year old MoBo's..huh? <*It reads to me when i sleep,too-yet will not do dishes though? > Who needs a new 1,000,000,000mb/hdd-with "Warpspeed/ghz; if they could just put it in a "nutshell" and carry their Operating System in their pocket on a 4gb/usb-flashdrive when they travel as i do:)

This post has been edited by thydreamwalker: Jul 12 2008, 10:45 PM

Wow that's impressive! i hope you are doing that via USB2 though... How does that even work though? lol

However, that is called Puppy Linux...

My fault. My comments about SMP...

So you only mean Flash video, then? I guess that could work. But Flash in itself is still a hog, and can still bring a recent CPU to its knees. Fact is that if Flash was designed better and more efficient, it would also run well on about 366 Mhz.

Welcome to Europe, I say. "Yahoo!"? What's that? It's all MSN here.

Win98 can fit on a floppy.

That's true. Adobe has done nothing but bloat lately. But we can't change it ourselves as everybody uses it...



If you didn't know, let me inform you that Romania is in the south-east of Europe.



DOS 7.10 can, the GUI itself never.

I very seldom watch flash videos. Normally, I block flash content. Most of the time, it displays ads or something equally useless. There's very little content that's worth watching, but I went to YouTube just to see what this box will do. In full screen, the video isn't as smooth as I'd like but was very watchable. Yes, a 366 Celeron will play a full screen flash video running 98FE, with 18 processes running. FYI, this box was last rebooted on Friday afternoon, 44 hours ago. Still has 62% free resources. 98SE may be regarded are the more stable OS, but FE can be just as stable and reliable, and on my hardware, a bit faster. If I'd get around to giving it that cleanup it needs, it would probably do even better. It's getting a bit bloated, 2.86GB at the moment. The desktop alone is a 350MB+ mess.

Regarding Yahoo, if Yahoo gives you trouble on a 9X box, maybe you should give Miranda a try. They have a 9X version that works quite well. I use it for Yahoo and MSN. Much better than running 2 separate IM programs.

On the original subject, "why use 9X", for me the primary reasons are security and privacy. These are best achieved by having control over the OS and the software you use. Control requires total access that you don't have with an NT system. The more I look at the NTFS file system, the more convinced I get that it was designed to hide things from the user, processes, files, usage records, etc. Microsofts attempt to lock the kernel on Vista has only reinforced that belief. On 98 units, DOS lets you access everything. A 98 box doesn't complain if the OS components don't have internet access. It can be secured very well with a couple of freeware apps and a little tweaking. A simple batch file can keep your registry exactly the way you want it, fully optimized, emptied of usage records. What combination of apps are needed to accomplish that on XP? I can let someone else use this PC and not worry about what they might open, where they go, or what exploit they might run into. To me, a computer is a tool. For a tool to do what you want, you need to have control over it. If you don't have the final say over what it's doing, it may do more than you expect. For me, that's more than enough reason to not "upgrade." Little to gain and a lot to lose.
Rick

makes me with it supported SMP etc so i could throw it at any of my new PCs. Hey since it doesn't support SMP, does is not support a second core on a dual core graphics card?

I have used Miranda in the past. There are so many things wrong with it that i don't know where to start. Sure, it is small and fast, and the yahfoo chat client is a slow piece of junk, but at least it does what i need it to do.




What, you want a dual-chip ATi Rage? It should work with that.

How long has it been since you've tried it? I'm using Miranda version 0.7.4, Yahoo Protocol support via libyahoo2 library. [Built: Apr 6 2008 18:31:48]. It usually logs in and connects in 2-3 seconds. Miranda updates quite often. I installed it in late February and I'm already 3 versions behind.

Eh, a country that has only recently joined.

Yes it can. Take a look at Mindows.

By the way, I've discovered a couple days ago that youconvertit.com exists for converting Flash videos into something I can watch. I knew of vixy.com, but that only converted to formats that demand a lot of your CPU.

It has nothing to do with the login time, Miranda logins faster than the yahoo messy. However, photo sharing doesn't work, file transfers only work with certain users, HyperIM (powerful status manager for a lot of IM clients) started supporting Miranda only recently, and while i can see other users' display images, they can't see mine.

It's been more than an year since i last used it but i doubt much has changed. I may try it again but don't count on it.

@ BenoitRen: It's not like MSN is the official chat client of the European Union. Cut it out please.

This post has been edited by Th3_uN1Qu3: Jul 14 2008, 10:32 AM

Really true. I have Win2000 and XP installed on dual boot, but only use them occasionally. IMO XP and Vista dedicate most of its resources not to do what you would like it to do but to avoid the system doing most things without external permits, be it from the Administrator, Microsoft, DRM, or the software providers. Backdoors, controls, and controls and more controls, most of them unwanted.

I can't stress enough how MSN is widely used in Europe, that's all.

When I reinstalled my windows98 afresh, before it even touched the internet, I made a copy of all the files (program files, and windows basicaly) on a CD-R. Uncompressed it took less than half the CD-D, program files included. Ok now, that I have installed MS Office and any other stuffs, I'm near a Giga, but the point is that my basic installation and basic softwares can be backed on a CD-R. Uncompressed.

Then if something happen I can reboot in dos mode and with a one-line comand, using xcopy I can restore my whole system. It would take less than 20 minutes to do so.

I can also insert anything I want in autoexec.bat.

I stopped using antiviruses two years ago because they couldn't find anything ever. I run spybot once in a blue moon, and at worse, he finds three cookies.