QUOTE (soldier1st @ Jan 16 2005, 07:26 PM)
hey 98 is very popular even now,some ppl can't afford to goto 2000 or xp but 98 will do just fine
I can't afford to use XP, and I'm not talking monetarily. I don't let any machine with XP on it get out of my hands without at least 98SE for a maintainence system where you can run antispyware/antivirus stuff apart from the security-buggy XP.
This is an ever-burgeoning problem I am seeing at an alarming rate:
The system this happens on is always the same general configuration: I can run WinXP on say drive C: and also dual-boot to drive F: to run 98SE [lite perhaps]. Both systems are prepared to run the same set of anti-spy/vir tools. I have a floppy backup of BOOTSECT.DOS to get 98SE up along with the other few files 98SE needs to have unvirused on drive C: if necessary [the basic DOS stuff that gets 98SE proper up on drive F:].
Run all tools on XP including Ad-Aware, CWShredder, SpyBot S&D, and Trend Micro Housecall free virus scan [I recommend this one; finds stuff Norton and McAfee NEVER find!]. After all of the gauntlet of tests, XP tells me it is TOTALLY FREE of unwanted guests, etc. which have either been deleted/quarantined/removed or were never there, etc.
However, this is in fact NOT THE CASE!
Now boot to the F:-based 98SE system and do the same collection of tools. Trend Micro Housecall finds that there is a resident trojan in the XP system! One particularly bad case was that SVCHOST.EXE was infected and XP said it was not!
Thus, all of the attempts by well-meaning people to get the public to at least run available [and mostly free!] anti-spy/vir tools isn't good enough, since smarter viruses are around that give the intended false sense of security afforded by inadequate testing for problems present but not known to the user, etc.
As I said, I can't afford to run [only] XP.
cjl (Woody Lenhard referring to Gates' quote: Trustworthy computing, indeed!)