Link21 was being negative again by saying that Windows 9x is just a DOS extender!
Like it's Windows 3.1 or something.

Windows 98 SE probably was one of the best operating systems based on Windows 95!

nope, win9x/me line is based on DOS (DOS Based Kernel) and it lack most feature like true security and a big cluster they have in Fat16/32 but for some reason i disagree if it only was DOS extender, if it was win98 will be the best DOS extender at all (remember we have good old days with win98 before win2k and xp arrive)

and windows ME is the worst at the line, its want to mimic win2k but it only hide the "dos" deep (no realtime dos support on winme)

I agree somewhat. Just got p***** when someone said that's it's a DOS extender or even worse, a shell!

Some people show their ignorance every time they open their mouths.

If MS had just fixed the little problems in 98SE, it could still be a very viable OS today and we sure wouldn't need XP on our home computers.
It's a dang'd business system and should never have been installed on home computers in the first place.

As it is, 98SE still has some serious glitches that were somewhat addressed in the Unofficial Service pack 2.
But, for any of the older pre-XP computers, 98SE is still the best OS that ever came down the pike.

I can still take an 8 yr old PC with 98 on it and improve its performance by at least 50% and usually more.
Heck, put a SATA controller card in it, max out the ram and put in a 100gig+ SATA drive and I can make that old PC scream like a Banchee.

To say that 98 was a DOS extension is, as far as I'm concerned, a Complement.
I still use DOS today.....in fact Every DAY. And, I'm running XP-Pro+SP2. And I'm a professional tech.
DOS aint dead,,,,,by NO means. If you're good at DOS, you can be good at just about anything.

For three years I taught DOS here in the Community Education Dept. I LOVE IT!

cheers
Andromeda

In my opinion win98se is the best. I use xp but my heart belongs 2 Win98
And another thing a lot of companies will lose out on money discontinue'n support for 98
If thats the strategy 2 force people 2 upgrade thats there lost not ours
becuz there r people that just won't upgrade 2 anything above 98se
just my 2 cents

I agree, because Windows 98 SE launched games fast. Windows XP is somewhat bloated and even Windows 2000 likes to go virtual memory happy when loading some of my games.

These battles have already been lost with the old losing out to the new. PROBLEMCHYLD, they have already updated or bought their systems with XP preinstalled.

It's done. Like the old Dos vs. Windows.

That being said, I still enjoy using Windows 98SE and keeping up to date with it so things go smoothly. I use XP too though. I'm a Libra, so I like balance!

I'm no fun in this Flame War. I support both sides. But I definately don't enjoy 98 being disrespected. It's been running computer's for a long time now and although user's are dwindling, those that still do use it can get plenty of functionality out of it.

Win9x... is a shell... that's why you can start it just by running WIN.COM from the prompt. Although it definitely isn't a DOS extender.

I run 98se on all my PCs - from a 66MHz 486DX2 with 16Mb of RAM up to the machine I'm using now, a 4.17GHz Pentium 4 with 256Mb of RAM. I've used XP in a dualboot with 98se, but it needed such frequent updating and extra bloatware to keep it secure that I've since formatted the drive where XP used to reside and now use that for storage.

98SE is simple, fast and compatible with most of the software out there. That's why I still use it.

Are you sure windows is a shell ? I always thought explorer was the shell.

Microsoft need 2 take 98SE back into the lab
and add

1.Unofficial SP1

2.98SE2ME

3.Maximum-Decim Native USB Drivers

4.Tihiy RP Pack

5.All hacks/tweaks etc

then re release it and this world will b at peace

I still like Windows 98SE, but I prefer XP, because its stable and reliable. But thanks to the patches, it made W98SE more stable, but I use XP because it supports the latest drivers and programs.

Windows 98 was good because it was fast. If you don't like XP and you want a faster OS, use Windows 2000.

Jeez, guys it's just an operating system. Don't like, fall in love or anything.

XP is just the latest version. Some of the bloatware is pretty usefull. 9x needs keeping up with security patch's too. But it still is quite functional. Plenty of bloatware still works on it. Just more bloatware now runs on XP. And some old bloatware (programs) that used to work on previous versions of XP now malfunction because of some of the latest SP2 security updates.

Just use what will make the box do what you need and stop crying about people preferring one or the other. A computer operating system doesn't need religious zealots defending it. It either makes stuff work how you like it or not. It has no feelings to get hurt by those who may diss it.

So let's all move to threads that help solve problems running our boxes and quit posting love letters to our computer programs.

Ummmm 2003 is the newest m8.

you mean 2003 R2? or maybe Vista CTP Builds are the newest?

just kidding...

oh yeah

why wait Micros*** Oops i mean Microsoft do this? if you want it you can do it yourself , remember the canceled SP5 for win2k? or maybe delay for winxp SP3? dont lend it on M$ and that's why this community made

and some sad news for me, i had to switch into win2k cause i use my pc for software development (i need the stability but i want a faster than xp) and goodbye for nostalgic games like c&c,sims,etc (since win2k have issue on virtual memory lack on games)

oh yeah win98 is the 1st operating system i'm own (even the manual book is in my bookshelf)

Good point. Maybe you can see it as a shell running inside a shell?

DOS kern -> COMMAND.COM -> VMM32 -> EXPLORER.EXE
realmode ----- realmode --------- 32bit -------- 32bit -------
kernel ----------- shell ------------ kernel ------ shell --------

yeah explorer.exe is only shell, and you can change the shell with other alternate shell like litestep,aston,talisman,geoshell,sharp-e,serenade,etc.
but for windows it self, it's not a shell or advance dos wrapper or dos extender, it's a solid operating system (some people might be said 1/2 descent, but this true win9x is a solid os). and if it isn't, what should os must have to be a "real os"? just for example, take a look linux, bash is only shell and what does KDE or GNOME? it's shell too.
and if i had mistaken, please tell me what the first "real" os available on earth?

Nevermind

You're both right, techinally Win95/98 is just a really fancy program that runs on top of DOS. But it is a great OS if you install the USB support and uSP1. The XP vs 98SE chatter is mindless, it's been posted a hundred times on here.

I prefer a well tuned XP box but if my hardware was weaker, I'd be satisfied with 98SE /w uSP2.

Of course keep in mind guys that eventually as new hardware comes out, you won't have compatible drivers that will work in 98.