Hi,

To quote Tamiga:



Has anybody got any valid ideas to an alternative to Win98, ready for when it's no longer practical to run this O/S anymore?

I've personally had a brief 'play' with Ubuntu. While I was very impressed with the speed with which it installed and updated it's self (without frequent reboots), I couldn't get my Canon printer to work and had several problems with various media file formats. I would basically like an O/S that is straight forward to install and use and has good hardware driver support, plus media files support.

For the reasons Tamiga gave above, plus all the 'bloat', I've no desire or intention to use Vista and I don't have the funds for a MAC!

I have no desire or intention to start a 'flame' war as to the best alternative to Win98, I'm hoping for constructive discussion to alternatives that work as well, as far as possible, as Win98 did. If that's possible?

Waywrd

Windows 2000 is a very good OS

Windows 2000 is a good OS, but only with Service Pack 4, and preferably with IE ripped out.

I don't know about Linux as an alternative. They always seem to want to throw as much crap on you as possible, and the main window managers, KDE and Gnome, are designed for high-end PCs, so they are kind of a hog.

A small Linux distribution like DamnSmallLinux with the FVWM95 window manager would be a good alternative, I think.

Yeah, Windows 98 will become pretty impractical in the near future, in which case, I'd recommend windows 2000, fully updated, properly installed and SP4'd. Here's my theory on the whole Windows>Linux migration thing. Windows is like cigarettes...its bad for your computer experience, it controls your computer, and the worst part, you get used to it. I've tried the Linux migration several times, and I've gotten thrown back to Windows every time. Linux, I guess is like Nicorette--it looks like a good plan, but it just doesn't work out. BTW, I've tried to quit smoking many times to.

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=87883

I think we've had enough of these threads...

IMO: There are no alternatives to Windows if you like Gaming. Windows98SE is compatible with Hardware till 2005 and Games till 2005.

Windows 2000 is very good option, but it requires 256 MB to start going. All operating systems following Windows98SE are slower but they have new features.

I will stick to Windows98SE for few more years.

Hi,



My apologies if this post is 'off target' or considered as repetition.

But, with all due respect I wasn't looking for reasons to continue to run Win98 now. My question was intended as to what the options would be now or in the next couple of years. When there's a likelihood of buying a new PC, even a low spec one, where the manafacturer doesn't provide Win98 drivers. Or am I wrong, will you still be able to buy a 'blank' PC (with no O/S) with Win98 drivers?

Regards,

Waywyrd

waywyrd,

Have you heard of reactos?

http://www.reactos.org

It seeks to build an NT compatible system, but under GPL, or a variant of that.

However, it is still in beta 0.3.0.

They say that when it reaches 0.5, it may be usable on a day-to-day basis.

I am sure you know about Gape's unofficial windows 98 SE Service Pack - works a treat!

By the time you "need" to give up win98, linux will be even better than it is now & there are so many distros -
one will fit the bill, I'm sure.

Wild Weasel

That's Linux' biggest problem. There are so many distributions that you don't know what to choose. There are so many window managers you don't know what to choose. Standardisation is a big problem.

Hi,

Thanks very much to 'wild weasel' and 'BenoitRen'. You guys have "hit-the-nail-on-the-head". This was the sort of answer I was looking for when I posted my original question.

The 'reactos' system sounds like a very good idea. Particularly for those of us who would to use a pc O/S without having to go through hoops finding the right hardware drivers and software to run it. I was lucky when I tried Ubuntu, it found all my hardware and installed the relevant drivers. Even so I still had problems in other areas with different file types and applications.






Regards,

Waywyrd

I've used all kinds of different OS's, ranging from Linux (DSL, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Frugal ware, Dream Linux, and others) over to Windows 95 and up (all versions, 95, 98, NT, ME, 2000, XP) and I have never really be comfortable with any version other than Windows XP.

Its purely a matter of personal preference though, you may like Windows 98, you may like Windows XP. It's all based on who you are. I have been using a lot of laptops lately, not necessarily super fast machines, (ie, less than 500MHz) and I have run XP on all of them. They all have run well.

If you want to use Windows 2000/XP, I highly recommend nLite to remove some of the things you don't like. Using nLite, I have gotten machines that are 6 years and older running a very up to date machine with full wireless capabilities, and all kinds of new software working on them.

It's true, Windows 98 is much better for older systems, but because of advancing hardware and software, your going to need to update soon. Web browsers are already beginning to not support the 9X core. So, if you wish to use a lightweight system into the near future, your going to have to use at least Windows 2000 or higher. Or a Linux distribution of equal capabilities.

Now, these different topics about "Which OS is better" and stuff, aren't the same as this topic. This topic was a question simply asking what the alternatives were to this older OS. Its a very simple question, which I hope I answered helpfully. Other people who look at a thread like this and figure "This is a hit at me" or something like that, shouldn't bother answering just to avoid further conflict. If you don't like what you see, just simply look the other way.

I'll be the first to admit not to like Windows 98 because of the experiences I have had in the past. But others may have had great luck in getting it to work properly and running well. But I still to this day don't see it as being a viable OS for purposes that need to be quite reliable. However, I'm not saying its a terrible OS that should be banished from the Earth, I'm simply saying that from my own experience I'm not crazy about it. It's the same thing that happened with Windows ME. Everyone seems to hate it, but I myself have never had any problems with it.

It's all a matter of your own opinion, and don't hate other people over it. Simple as that.

But if you use nLite, you're not really using 2000/XP anymore, but your custom-built Windows 2000/XP. When you recommend an OS to someone else, keep in mind that they may not want to bother with or not know of removing things they don't like. Defaults and setup options are important, and part of the OS.

True, but the same applies to 98/ME/Vista from what I have seen.

Here's a hint: Debian. Install the base system and then install X-Windows and a light window manager like IceWM, fluxbox, or Xfce. There's no need to install a bloated OS (like the newer Windows versions and many Linux distros) and then have to rip out what you don't want. You can have a very lean and fast Linux system from the start.

Phil

Choice is not a problem. Choice is good!


Phil

What specific flavors of Linux would be suggested? Why those flavors? How is the hardware support for laptops? For desktops? For USB devices?

I would love to have a lightweight Linux install... but I got an E1705 Dell laptop... and I don't know Linux... but I like the Knoppix DVD... I boot it in VMWare often enough to claim I use a Linux OS weekly... BUT... I boot the Knoppix for the software it comes with... not for anything else.

I like the shell a *lot* more. I like the 'feel' of it. Something says power and simplicity...

The file system is almost too scary to bother fiddling with... if not for my Amiga experience, I would *never* try anything on Linux/Knoppix...

I use it in work for diagnosing truly dead hardware... ya know, sometimes Windows is just being a bastard... the hardware is actually fine...


Windows 2000 sounds like the next in line for older hardware, and I can easily understand this stance... it answers correctly to my criteria in the beginning of my post...

BUT.

I never really considered 2000 as 'user friendly'. I can't put into words why I feel this way, even with standard 98 themes applied and icons and fonts and everything.... it just feels alien to me somehow...

How's about ideas about shell replacements on 2000? I tried a few on XP and 98 back in the day, and all of 'em had issues... anyone know of one that is finally working properly as a replacement shell??

I like this thread, and I often wondered the same thing but never figured to ask... thanks for having the gusto to post it.

Hi,

Thanks DeadDude, for your kind comments.

I'm glad that other members are realising that the aim/point of my original post was to ask if anybody had found or was using a viable alternative to Win98. Perhaps I should have made it plainer from the start, that I wasn't neccessarily thinking of other Microsoft O/S. Neither was I looking for 'the best' O/S, if there is such a thing? There's been enough posts about which is the best O/S, usually ending up in a 'slanging match' as to why such-and-such O/S was rubbish etc.

The aim of this post was/is to see if there was a viable alternative to Win98, other than just upgrading to Vista. While, with regard to Linux, the choice is good, what isn't so good is 'going through hoops' to get it to handle all the various hardware and file formats, that Win98 handles almost 'out-of-the-box'!

Waywyrd

I read the installation manual on Debian's site, and I'm not sure if Debian is for me. The (minimum!) system requirements are a bit disturbing for someone who just wants the equivalent of Windows 95 OSR 2.x:

Install Type: With Desktop
RAM: 64 megabytes
Hard Drive: 1 gigabyte

Compare this with what I would recommend for my Windows 95 install:

RAM: 32 MB
HD: 300 MB

I'm wondering if the requirement is for the regular Debian install. I haven't seen something specifically labelled as "base" (except in the documentation), only a network install, which I'd rather avoid in favor of having a CD.

I've just seen that you the kernel by default has a lot of drivers, but that you can recompile it with only what you need, which is good.

I would also like to know if it's possible to have the floppy boot Linux so my hard drive's MBR remains unaffected.

First and foremost, I think that your specs for Win95 are only going to be good for W95... sorry dude... but, you also mentioned a possible fix for those issues- recompiling the kernel. Not a bad idea, if you are a developer. Someone like me, a tinkerer in software, no programming skills really... I can't do that... so it is a no-go for my side of this issue...

Someone said somewhere the problems of Linux for people like us here is that there are too many choices. and I agree.

Do they **all** run ****ALL**** the same software? Recompiling the KERNEL?!?! How often do you have to do that?! What is the software support like in Linux? IF YER NOT A PROGRAMMER?

Do you see the issues with Linux clearer? It may honestly fit the 'requirements' for a PC, but not necessarily the people requirements of their PC... I'm quite smart, and I can do anything I've tried eventually... but I still have yet to give Linux an honest go- I have the entire world to enteract with, not just Linux users...

The online software for my college (for instance) only supports IE5.5+ and FF 2+

and the Linux build in my live CD doesn't work with it... hmmm.... neither does Launch.com (music site with video), or any other multimedia website... and there's no Windows Media support at all on Linux... we hate the M$ beast, but we are still dependant since we don't want to be shut ins....

Wanna get that geat game of yesteryear to play on your dinosaur? Too bad, Linux can't do it. Linux on NEW hardware and with emus can **try** to do it... but hell no.

If it was *easy* to create a minimal but *fully functional* Linux distro with all the compatible programs to replace Windows entirely, then it may be an option... just like how the Knoppix LIVE DVD works...

You see, the issue is how the hell do you install hardware or software on Linux? Everything I've read is waaaay too intense just to play pacman...

A good lightweight linux distro is xubuntu, which is based on the popular ubuntu distro.
It is said to install on PCs with as little as 128MB RAM.

It is easy to install & use & you can add software easily.

WW

If GNU/Linux really is better than Windows, it should require less, not more, in my opinion.

It's not as hard as it sounds. And once you've learned how to compile something, it's easy to recompile that same project. Also, there are message boards and IRC channels out there to help you if something goes wrong that you can't figure out.
Pretty good, since many distributions now also have a package manager with a GUI. You select the software you want to install (you have to have root priviledges, though), and there it is. The downside is that the package has to be available.

That's a problem for everyone using alternative OSs or browsers thanks to silly company/college policies.

Keep in consideration Haiku (aka OpenBeOS) and Syllable. Check out the "strange E/OS LX beast" too...

regardless of the OS, you cannot possibly recommend such a HDD for any use today. Unless you admit you need a 2nd HDD or partition for your data.

I think he may have been recommending the minimum amount of memory you should have to install Windows 95, not the actual HDD size.

I ran Windows 95 on a 486 DX/75MHz with 8MB of ram and a 512MB hdd. It ran fairly well, but by any means, the thing was just a glorified calculator. It was a Daewoo DN7400 (I think), either way, it was a tiny little computer.

Indeed, I was referring to the needed space on the HDD, not the size of the HDD. Just like any other system requirements table...
Neat! I've read about BeOS, it seems quite good. Its main goal was to have an uncrashable system, which it achieved.

I'm sure it could have been a nice little game computer as well. Not to mention that every computer also is a good typing machine. You could probably browse the web with it too using Lynx, Dillo, or some other light-weight browser, and send e-mail.

Hi,



I find myself pretty much in the same position. I'm not above tinkering with the O/S etc, to customise to the way I'd like it to be. But, I feel 'stuck with' MS until someone can create a minimal, fully functional O/S, where you can add the programs you want and still have the compatability with the file formats that Windows users take for granted.

Waywyrd

Linux is not an alternative to w98, but Ubuntu is certainly a good alternative to RedHat .

2000 is not an alternative to w98 neither because if you do this, then why not install XP alltogheter? Old computer? If we need alternatives, I understand it's for new computers and softwares. On old coputers, we talk about "updates", not "alternatives".

The big question is shall I need to use XP/Vista the next time I buy a new computer?

One thing I don't understand is if w98 has so many issues with new drivers and softwares, why this question is never risen for Linux? How does Linux perform in term of hard/software compatibility versus w98?

Then there is the immorality, almost blasphematory, of requesting a new hardware "compatible with w98". Every vendor will tell you to go to the church, confess all your sins, and then, install XP.
They don't want to hear of w98 at all.

So the new concept, the new request (when you enquire for hardware you want to buy), is not "w98 compatible", but "compatible with all kinds of Oses".
This is a fairly new concept, not yet shared in the industry. But the commercial logic would want that hardware be
OS independant. That's less obvious with software, but hardware are just pieces of electronics with streams of bits in and streams of bits out. Why does this need a OS?
IMO if you ask "a computer on which I can install any OS I want" (carefuly avoiding the w98 word!), they might have something to offer. However, if you ask for a "w98 compatible" machine, they will shake their head telling you it's impossible because nobody use that anymore.

And that's not only twisting words. One day ReactOs might be a workable solution.
ReactOs and the likes are the only true alternatives... in the making.

And with that all out there in the open now....

Methinks ROS may just be where I'll put my eggs in the future...

Then again, this Windows: Jackhammer project looks like it may also be viable.... it is a core 98SE install with some **major** overhauling.

I don't know what else to say about it, because frankly, it is in early Beta...

oh yeah, it claims certain driver issues are resolved.... don't know the specifics, as I just got around to installing it in VMWare... and video drivers are a "VMWare" thing in this setup...

I like ReactOS for forwards compatibility... and it looks like Jackhammer is the beast to maintain the Win9x core in the future...

Why *did* M$ fuse NT and 9x?? (I know their reasons... and the 'typical' reasons... but seriously, why *not* keep business seperate from pleasure?)

Because WinXP is even more bloated can do almost everything that WinXP can.

Linux has better compatibility because people write drivers for them. You don't see people doing that for Win9x. Of course, it's not all perfect, because if the manufacturer refuses to make their driver open source, it's an uphill battle.
I don't agree. It's a WinNT clone, not a Win9x clone.

What? They didn't. They just took Windows 2000 and twisted the thing into a consumer version.

The problem is that there is not enough developer working freely for w98.
Only Xeno has brought an attempt to modify the core of the w98 system to a point it's not w98 anymore and can become a real alternative.
Unfortunately Xeno seems to have put his kernal project on"hold" if not abandonned yet. Others made lots of cool stuffs but only in the cosmetic branch. The rest and the most useful so far has been picking up dll's from other systems and bundling upgrade packs into unofficial ones.

The Linux comunity is indeed much more vibrant.

ReactOS cannot be a NT clone because that would make it illegal. But they are inspired by the NT principles.

Now I wonder if it could be possible to take reactOS elements and put them on w98... Sort of w98ToReOS.

That would be great!

I've had lots of thoughts about this issue also. Actually it first came up with the release and description of win xp, but I decided at that time I could wait a few more years since xp only had the "call-home" functions, and not shutting the user out for real as with vista.

But we have to face it, even though I'm writing on a 9x computer now, it's time is coming to an end. Gradually we will be shut out, first new programs, and eventually the web itself. But so will xp and 2000 pretty soon, and then there won't be any other option than vista's DRM hell! If you look at it with a view long into the future, vista and the os'es following it, will severly limit your and my digital freedom, in any way they can. Expect the grip to be tightened little by little, not so much that regular people will protest, but inch by inch they will take your computer freedom away from us all.

This issue is coming, if you like it or not, and you WILL need to make a choice at one time or another. Is 98 fairly compatible with almost everything today? Yes. Will it stay that way forever? Hell no. Soon Xp and 2000 will face the same problems.

I agree with all of you saying linux is not for you. It's a hassle. Jackhammer is almost unusable. win98's unofficial updates are hampered by almost no developers, and no real knowhow by the users to do anything themselves to further the work Xeno did.

The bottomine is; As win98 gradually becomes more and more unusable/uncompatible with the rest of the world, and a little later xp/2000, the other alternatives will become gradually more interesting.

I feel that tinkerers, and power users like us, with no real programming skills, will in the long run benefit the most migrating AWAY from the microsoft platform, whatever OS. Remember that almost every unix program ever written, still runs on almost any linux/unix distro. Microsoft on the other hand will continue to obsolete their older systems as they see fit, as needed for their profit growth. That in addition to the DRM thing, which essentially takes away your control over the computer and your files, says to me that migrating is unavoidable, it's just a matter of when!

As many of you have experienced, swapping all you ms knowhow, files and programs over to linux/unix isn't just that easy, I feel that the smartest way to go about things is to rather plan on a long term migration. Say starting in 2007 with a full migration sometime in 2 years time. Which is about the time xp and 2000 will become obsolete. I'm sure some security fixes will be availiable, but not new programs and such. As have been the case with 98.

THe benefit that will gradually become more clear, is that the more users of different linux distros, the better they will become. We as power users and tinkerers, who often perform the quasi or "home" computer helper/technichian, have the ability to convince people they should also migrate to another platform. The more users it gets, the more resources will be availiable for development of open source software, and the more options we as users will get to use that software. The situation now, with 98 becoming obsolete and incompatible for instance, that would never happen on that platform.

I'm not sure about reactOS.. the main thing in my mind is that whatever OS platform you choose, it should be open source, so no one company or person can obsolete it, andmake it impossible to develop further, for further use.As more users use open source, hardware manuftacturers will have to also comply with their need and wants. Look and Firefox for instance, it hasso many users developers cant simply dismiss them longer, and if the growth continues, it will get even better, with web applications also optimized for it. So will also be the case with games and apps, if there's sufficiently amount of users on linux, messengers and popular games will also be developed to that platform.

The migration is going to hurt, as in all cases where there are rewards at the end, there will be initial expenses and chores to be done first. But the longterm benenefit is quite clear, and if we don't do it, we will be sucket into microsofts wet dream of controlling erevry single human being on this planet, and whatever they do with a computer. I for one is not going to let that happen to me.

We all need to at one point or another find the guts to say Goodbye windows, and Hello freedom!

To the initial poster I would say that I don't have a readily availiable do-it-all solution after w98. But if you'll accept that it won't be a "quick and easy fix", (as with the sigarette comparison) You can have the slower but permanent fix. All the tinkering we guys typically do, usually don't benefit others than ourselves, and maybe a few friends on the microsoft platform. However, the same amount of testing, tinkering on the linux platform, can lead to a free and new release for everyone to enjoy. And we don't even need to be programmers to contribute; Just testing things and reporting issues is of great help!

If someone could establish a mass migrate movement that would be of such value for all of us in every way. Lets hope someone pics up the idea, and let us hope we one day can say so long windows, and good riddance!

Hi,

To Tilstad, being the original poster of this thread, I've got to say I found your comments very interesting and informative.

When I originally posted the thread, one of my thoughts was that it wouldn't be too long before WinXP was 'obselete' in Microsoft terms, and there was no way (if I could avoid it) I was going to 'migrate' to Vista. I'm currently dual-booting Win98 and WinXP. Mainly because some programs do work better under XP and I also wanted a little bit of knowledge as to how XP 'runs'.

With regard to a mass migration movement, maybe this Win98 forum would be a good platform to start from. Personally, I've already started to tell the people I know that I'm not 'migrating' to Vista, and perhaps more importantly why I'm not. The issue of having to inform Microsoft and hold your hand up every time your PC wants 'a tea-break'!

Waywyrd

Xenos kernel project added extra functionality but it did not alter the monolithic kernel to that of a different system, it is still 9x through and through. The Linux community is certainly more vibrant, they have people in their that have gone to the trouble and picked up a c# programming book. I am certain their are people in this forum that are quite capable of moving the kernel project onwards and the same applies to device drivers and ntkern.vxd. Learning kernel mode programming takes time, and needs to be balanced with full time work etc. WinXP will be around for many more years to come, do not go surrender monkey just yet. Nix may start hitting brick walls also, due to Win hollywood forcing device manufacturers to release even less information regarding device drivers or fear a law suit. I sincerely hope they are allowed open access all be it without the inbuilt protection information or it smells to much like restrictive practice to me.
If you want to help any of these os`s pick up and learn c#, study imports/exports, make your own apps

Not all of us dislike Windows. I love my Windows 95. But that doesn't mean I don't want to try other things. That's all.
What, just because official support stopped? Support for Windows 95 stopped years ago, and I'm still trucking along nicely. There's so much software out there, and open source projects, that official support doesn't really matter.

If you're talking about hardware support, that's a totally different topic. I don't think that should be much of an issue, though, if we're already comfortable with our older hardware setup.

The web? Why would that be? I can't express how silly that thought is. The web is not dominated by Microsoft, and despite years of an IE monopoly, Linux and other systems were not shut out. Why not? Because the web is built on open standards. They can't be shoved under the rug like that, or we'd need a whole new web, and no one is going to have the will or the cash to do something like that.

In fact, open source browsers and the rise in correct implementation of W3C standards make us less shut out from content. That being said, due to the nature of the web, if your browser doesn't support a certain feature, the page will degrade nicely. It will not deny you access, unlike an application does when an important dependency isn't met.
You're saying that as if Windows is the only OS in the world that's viable.

I don't think so. The open source community and the groups of hackers are strong. DRM gets cracked.
A good, simple distribution with clear documentation can solve this. I've been tinkering with the Debian base install and FVWM95. It's looking pretty good, though I haven't completely set it up yet. At the moment I'm hesitating between starting over with the testing version of Debian Etch, or waiting for Debian Etch's official release (Sarge is two years old, a long time in the Linux world).

ReactOS IS open-source.

I feel quite free on Windows 95, thank you.

Well just to comment on a few of your comments... By being shut out of the web, I mean unintentionally.. like if there's not new development of browsers for the 9x platform ( because of too few users), and new and more advanced viruses and worms etc surfaces, then you WILL be shut out, because it's going to be impossible to use!

I'm not saying w95 is TOTALLY obsolete yet... I'm saying it's starting as with the rest of the 9x platform, gradually... Like you can't get this and that program to install anymore... And don't come with "oh, but I don't have any interest in using that" Because in the end then, you'll be the only one left.


With your reasoning I could say that my commodore 64 is still trucking along.... yeah sure with it's 115 baud modem and geos desktop... but can I use it for ANYTHING productive anymore? Hell no.

Yes, DRM wil get cracked, no doubt. But that's not the problem at stake here, it's TCPA! (Trusted Computing Platform)
A few links for those that haven't read up on it;

http://lafkon.net/tc/

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Compu...atform_Alliance

Vista is the final piece in the puzzle to shut YOU out.

Yes, ok reactOS is open source, but I just questioned if thats the way to go forward... emulating or to be similar to windows... I'm not sure if thats a good long term solution... could be though. Or not.

Yes, I can imagine you feel very free on win 95.... as I also do on commodore 64... to do NOTHING! Which I guess will be your case in 10 years also, if you don't ever migrate to anything other than w95.

Old hardware die out... and those that don't become gradually more incapable of running ever more power hungry applications. New hardware already refuse to install 9x OS's... some do, alot don't. Gradually, none will at all. In the end you'll be forced to either use your old hardware with the old software that exists, and gradually be shut out from the rest of the world in terms of not being able to open documents, no internat capability etc etc. If you can't see that coming, you really need a head examination!

But of course, I'm not saying it's happening all of a sudden... I guess 9x could still be used even 5 years from now, but by then you will have alot less functionality than the rest of the world has, albeit more freedom.

My point is, open source have as today less funcionality, but more freedom. That will gradually change until the point it will have more functionality, and still the same freedom!
Viste on the other hand, will give you perhaps even more functionality, but less and less freedom, til the point where the lack of freedom is percieved as less functionality. By then, it will be even tougher to migrate than it is today.

When would the best time to migrate away from the windows platform exactly be? I can't say for sure... but would it have been easier when we were at the dos level if it was around at that time? I guess so... Will it be harder when pc's have become super complicated dumbed down "content delivery" machines, not educating you to do anything or learning anything about how things work? For sure...

THats also my basic point.. I believe it will become harder to migrate, the longer we wait.

And by the way, I also like ( not love though) my windows... it's their policies and politics I can't stand.

A short summary of TCP;
It's a small chip in your hardware, (Fritz chip) as of now on the mainboard itself (since about 2003-2004), vga card, etc. Will gradually become implemented into the cpu itself.

It will;
Make microsoft and others able to delete whatever they find illegal on your computer.
Cut out any third party program they don't allow.
Make them able to revoke any document, file, program whatever made on a tcp computer and to every computer those have been distributed to.
Make those that control the fritz chip able to censor ANYTHING they see fit.
If the government demands control over TCP, they will in fact control everything on any pc.

Basicly the ones that controls the fritz chip ( as every pc sold today have), will have ALL control over the pc, and it won't be YOU!

Read the whole FAQ on the second link, after you have done that, come back and THEN argument against this. I bet you'll be stunned.

Exactly why I'm pressing the issue. If enough users migrate to other open source OS's now, they won't be able to deny information about device drivers as needed to write linux drivers if the customer base is large enough. It will just be a too great profit loss for the content suppliers, if alot of the users are shut out.

But if there's no big migration pretty soon, that may very well become the case, that Linux and *NIX development stalls, and those OS's become obsolete and unusable. And then what...? Well then we will ONLY have microsoft left! And if that happens, it's bye bye to digital freedom to everyone. Screw dos games and win98 apps. This is about something way more important.

You're talking through a closed-source mindset. Closed-source browsers will have the problem you mention, not open-source ones. As long as there are people that want to continue Win9x support (like me), it won't happen.

How is this a problem? I haven't had a virus in years, because I'm not a luser that clicks "Yes" on every download/warning prompt. Also, viruses target newer Windows systems, and services that only exist on those. The only door in Win9x is the browser, and if that door is secured, you're safe. A hardware firewall gives even better protection.
1) When you use an older OS, you use older software. Except for the browser, as the outside does change.
2) Again, open-source.

I doubt it ever really was productive on the web. Aside from that, I don't know what the Commodore 64 could do aside from text processing and Basic, but I'm sure it didn't just lose those abilities.
Seriously, what are you smoking? The applications I use now won't suddenly vanish in 10 years.

True, but that's not an OS problem.
I think the one needing examination is you. Again, the web is built on open standards, and there are open-source browsers. As for documents, that's why open formats exist.

Again, my programs won't disappear.
We are but a small hardcore group of users, just like the current Linux community already is. It won't make a difference.

You obviously don't know how much is out there.

Well, I have to say it's hard talking to people who absolutely refuse to see things in a bigger picture than their own small playground.

First off, you totally miss my point! Of course your old w9x apps will still work, as they still do on my commodore 64. THe whole point is; Computer usage CHANGE! If you can't see that fact, oh well, than it's impossible to reach out to you. No, your right, with commodores people usually didn't use the web. Why? Well mostly because no one new about it at the time, and back in 1983 I don't really believe there was much there anyway. You could still have browsers though, it has even been run as a webserver.

THe point is, what we use our computers for change, we and the world around us both demand, and get used to using ever more advanced programs and applications. Old hardware /software can't keep up, and then if you want those new futures, you have to upgrade, one time or another.

But your reasoning is like "Oh no, I like what I have with 9x platform now, and since I do , I never want or need anything else". RIght. As Bill gates said; " No one cumputer user should EVER need any more than 640 kb ram". Right.

And no, I won't rely on you, a single person guaranteeing the usage of future safe web browsing for the 9x platform. Are you insane? Do you think Anyone just would take your word for it just like that? I'm not saying you couldn't, but When you compare all the programming going on in open source compared to what's being done to 9x, that seems more like a joke than anything else.

Ok, to adress some of your comments,
You don't necessarily need to klick "yes" to get a virus, spyware worms etc

"when you use older OS you use older software" Well thats real dandy... when my boss send me an autocad file made in autocad 2007 which wont install on 9x. Ok, I just pop up my autocad 2002 then... but oh no, that can't open that new autocad files anyway... bummer.

Well commodore could at one time edit and run MS documents... today it can't run s***.

No, in 10 years you'll still have w95 and office 97 fully working. But do you really think office 2017 opens up that old documents anymore? It won't, so whats the point of using it then? It is no point!

In a few years your online bank account acces will require you to run a tcpa enabled platform. Oh your hardware don't support it? Too bad, no bank account acces for you anymore then.

Regular dvd's will most certainly ble replaced by hd dvd's. Just like vhs tapes dissapeared. No tcpa? Ok, no movie for you then.

Microsoft office docuements aren't open formats. If it was, I would still be able to use my moms old word perfect, wouldn't I?
No, your programs won't dissapear, or stop work, but they will become useless and pointless having, exept for games and playing that is. I'm not talking about computers as toys here, but as a real tool for productive and educational work. You on the other hand seem content with you pogo or pacman working in 10 years. I'm sure it will. As it still does on most commodores.

By less functionality I mean less programs, popular programs like quake arena, GTA, autocad etc won't install, exept in emulators. If more people used the platform, those programs would be ported there from the beginning by the producer, thats not hard to grasp, is it.

But anyway, I'm tired of trying to convince you there's any point in newer computer systems, because you obviously have decided for yourself what you have now will be good enough for you forever. Exept for the new browser you'll program everytime it needs an update.

To the others following the thread I'd like to urge you to read up on tcpa and try to understand what's coming, and why the microsoft platform is something we should try migrating away from eventually.

Tilstad,

What you say is true and chilling. I admit.
Personaly my PC usage didn't change in 4 years since I built my w98 machine. But you autocat example is true as is my whife's corel draw.
No corel draw on w98. Most professional software will ever install on w98 and if they still do they won't in a foreseable future.

On the other hand, w98 evoluated fast enough until now. Had w98 stayed the same since 1999, it would be a pretty usuless OS by now indeed.
And what was thought to be impossible on w98 5 years ago is merely a basic update now.
But as you said, big software will probably never install on w98.

But software developers and manufacturers will also have to rethink the notion of OS dependancy and think of making their product non-OS dependant because of the increasing number of poeple using an increasingly various range of alternative OSes as M$ reached a plateau in its Windows developement but others just start to kick off.

I find very pittyful that we must install such and such OSes to run a program. That shouldn't be.

I totally agree. Most of the software I use is OpenSource or sort of, hence I can use it under Knoppix/... as well.
Try Portaple Apps.

I just wanted to mention that if people change to Win2k they'll definitively experience a lot of trouble. Since it has the same core as WinNT and WinXP all malware written for those systems will kill them. There is big advantage in using WinME because only the neglected Win98 malware works on it.

I use Win98SE (ripped out IE, SESP 2.1, ...) and I experience neither crashes nor hardware incompatibility nor malware, although I don't have a software firewall. This is because I got the nifty brain.exe.

NOOO, my reply of yesterday didn't get posted! f***ing stupid quote limit!

Amen to that!

Alternatives to Windows 98. If you are still running windows 98, and you have all the drivers for your current hardware, and you do not play the latest games that require XP, why search for an alternative. Especially when there is a forum like msfn with some of the best talents on the net?

If you really want to feel safe in the idea that your machine is being protected by updates then Windows 2000 is a good choice, but you might as well run XP and just turn all the stuff you don't want off, or even consider getting to grips with nlite.

There have been a few posts saying that people have tried to run linux and just cant get video to play and its too slow, or windows games/apps don't run. Well to be totally honest most people have a look at the official ubuntu releases, find that lots of things don't work and give up. For those people who like the idea of running linux but really can't be arsed to add codecs, find linux programs, install and configure this and that, there is a version of ubuntu a bit like some of the "FAT" custom windows XP DVDs that are around.

What i'm talking is ubuntu ultimate (xmas edition as it was previously called), made by a guy that wanted to include just about everything possible on one DVD images (1.6gb) The version runs as a live cd that you can install to hard disk if you want. If has almost everything working straight away, DVD's play, AVI's (DIVX or whatnot) play fine, etc etc.

If you are interested take a look here http://ubuntusoftware.info/xmas.html

This edition is based on GNOME, as another user here said its not ideal for a slow machine. If you have a slower machine and want something that performs well, looks nice, has codecs and most programs and fits on a cd-rom give dream linux a try, another VERY good setup http://www.dreamlinux.com.br/english/index.html.

But i hear you say, what about my windows apps/games etc? Well for those of you who dont know about it Crossover office http://www.codeweavers.com/ is a commercial application for linux which allows you to run office 2003, half life 2 and a huge selection of windows programs under linux. Its not perfect but is a lot easier to use and get things working than wine. For those mac people out there, there is a mac version of crossover for x86 versions of mac os, which allows you to run windows apps/games too, office 2003, half life 2 just like the linux version (finally able to use outlook instead of entourage, YAY!)

Sorry about the long post i was bored.

Tom

Hi,



This is beginning to seriously look like George Orwell's "1984". I've only read two of the threads (one wanted Quick Time) and it's a very scary thought!




Agreed and seconded.


waywyrd

I think Linux Kurumin is good, why not!?

I think Linux kurumin is great. Especially for brazilians, but I dunno if there's a english version. But i repeat: Linux Kurumin is great!

Wayward; there was option for other formats than quicktime there aswell, and if you choose the "high bandwith", you could just whach it on youtube.

Here; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1H7omJW4TI...;search=trusted

Computer usage has hardly changed in 9 years. Most people use their computer as Internet terminals these days, and the web is here to stay, as it was built on open standards. Back in the days of the Commodore, it was chaos.

You're calling me insane because you assume that I think you would take my word for it? The right term is naive.

You don't know me, so you can't judge my abilities.
Have you been sleeping under a rock for the past 5 years? Viruses that use exploits aren't that common. These days it's all about social engineering. Viruses that do use exploits are geared at WinNT systems, with their high amount of network services, just begging to be owned.

As I explained earlier, the only door in Win9x is the browser. If you have a secure web browser, you're pretty much safe. With a hardware firewall, even more so.

Closed formats are a problem on all OSs.
Knowing M$, and their new OpenXML format, I think it will still be compatible with older documents.

I've read about it, and sure, it's a real danger, but you can't assume that they will succeed. You're trying to look in a crystal ball. So much can still happen.

By the way, there's only a Fritz chip on IBM Thinkpad computers since May 2002. I saw no mention of those being on other motherboards.
Really?
-My browser won't, as the Internet is based on open standards
-My picture viewer won't, as the specification of PNG, GIF, etc. doesn't change
-My FTP won't, as FTP is an open standard
-My CD burner won't, it will keep working with CD-ROM drives
-My IM clients won't, as they are based on protocols
-My plain text editor won't stop being able to edit plain text
etc.

Then you caught me on the wrong channel, as I'm talking from the point of view of a home user, not some salary man or corporation.
I don't play games a lot on this computer. I use it mostly as an Internet terminal. I surf the web(web browser), maintain a couple websites (plain text editor + FTP client), hack Firefox/Thunderbird extensions to make them compatible with SeaMonkey (plain text editor, ZIP tool), view the odd picture, sometimes play a game...

I would say I'm quite productive.

Hold it! Those are video games, not traditional programs, which PCs were not designed for. Game consoles were. Now, I know there are games that you can only play on a PC, but I feel it shouldn't be a point in this kind of discussion.

Dream on. Firefox has had a 10+% browser user share for at least a year, and there are still tons of companies that refuse to fix their sites to work in it. The current Linux user share isn't even close to 10%.

There is a point in newer computer systems, but only for developers who need developer class systems, and businesses who need to run heavy duty applications to do things like maintain their databases.

Ok, I see you have some valid arguments, and some not. I'm not going to discuss those any further. Anyway, I respect your stand that this can work for you, but I'll dare to claim that for most users on this old platform, sticking with it forever isn't a viable option in the long run.

Given that was the original posters view, and the question being "what after w98?", I think we can safely bury this argument and get back to the question at hand.