[Drugwash]

BenoitRen, on Dec 7 2006, 10:50 PM, said:

Quote

Online content started not to support Win9x anymore

What kind of s*** is this? The Internet is platform-agnostic!
If you're talking about things like Flash, well, they're proprietary, and not in the spirit of the web.

Tell that to the guys at VH1.com. I had a subscription to their site but have been visiting it very rarely. Recently when I tried to follow a link in one of their e-mails, I got a nice message saying "sorry but your operating system is no longer supported by our site" or something like that. I have no idea if it was about Media Player version or anything else, they just said my OS was bad. So I said "f*ck them" and sent an unsubscribe reply (as instructed). At least twice. They still send me those stupid news e-mails and I keep marking them as junk.

As for Flash... that's funny, but I currently have installed v9.0.28 and it works fine. But I disabled it in my browser using Nir Sofer's TurnFlash, and enable it only when needed. And no, that was not the reason for the VH1.com rejection.

[glocK_94]

Drugwash, on Dec 8 2006, 11:03 PM, said:

Tell that to the guys at VH1.com. I had a subscription to their site but have been visiting it very rarely. Recently when I tried to follow a link in one of their e-mails, I got a nice message saying "sorry but your operating system is no longer supported by our site" or something like that. I have no idea if it was about Media Player version or anything else, they just said my OS was bad. So I said "f*ck them" and sent an unsubscribe reply (as instructed).

You did the right thing! But can somebody explain me how the f*** a web site can be OS dependant? Does M$ give them dollars to ban people who use OSes they don't wanna see around anymore? Because I don't see any other reason.

I guess we can still spoof our user-agent... But really, why do they even waste their time creating an OS check just to virtually exclude people using Win9x?

[Drugwash]

Beats me... MS can do about whatever they want. We can only keep barking at the moon.

[LLXX]

Drugwash, on Dec 8 2006, 04:03 PM, said:

BenoitRen, on Dec 7 2006, 10:50 PM, said:

Quote

Online content started not to support Win9x anymore

What kind of s*** is this? The Internet is platform-agnostic!
If you're talking about things like Flash, well, they're proprietary, and not in the spirit of the web.

Tell that to the guys at VH1.com. I had a subscription to their site but have been visiting it very rarely. Recently when I tried to follow a link in one of their e-mails, I got a nice message saying "sorry but your operating system is no longer supported by our site" or something like that. I have no idea if it was about Media Player version or anything else, they just said my OS was bad. So I said "f*ck them" and sent an unsubscribe reply (as instructed). At least twice. They still send me those stupid news e-mails and I keep marking them as junk.

As for Flash... that's funny, but I currently have installed v9.0.28 and it works fine. But I disabled it in my browser using Nir Sofer's TurnFlash, and enable it only when needed. And no, that was not the reason for the VH1.com rejection.

Use Proxomitron. It can make other websites think you're running whatever OS or browser you want. In fact, I'm sure more than one server admin is a bit puzzled that someone is still using DOS 3.2 and Lynx as a browser

[Fredledingue]

Drugwash, on Dec 8 2006, 03:03 PM, said:

Tell that to the guys at VH1.com. I had a subscription to their site but have been visiting it very rarely. Recently when I tried to follow a link in one of their e-mails, I got a nice message saying "sorry but your operating system is no longer supported by our site" or something like that. I have no idea if it was about Media Player version or anything else, they just said my OS was bad. So I said "f*ck them" and sent an unsubscribe reply (as instructed). At least twice. They still send me those stupid news e-mails and I keep marking them as junk.

As for Flash... that's funny, but I currently have installed v9.0.28 and it works fine. But I disabled it in my browser using Nir Sofer's TurnFlash, and enable it only when needed. And no, that was not the reason for the VH1.com rejection.

The web is not dependant to OSes. However there are some script capable of detecting your OS and telling you that based upon this information, your system is not up to date to browse their website.
Of course that's BS but they just don't want to read complains from poeple who made no update in the last 6 years.
So if you have w2000, they are sure that at least, your IE is from that year and not earlier.
The wrose thing is that websites are increasingly dependant on scripts and on useless scripts which only makes thing slower and buggier. So to avoid system crashes, they don't correct or simplify the scripts, they just tell w98 users to keep away.
The main difference with softwares, is that online scripts and even online applications are perfectly compatible with any computer able to handle javascript and less importantly vbscript. Normaly no website is supposed to include applets which are calling to XP specific ActiveX components...except to hack your system.

Yet I'm still waiting for the website that won't open on my fully updated w98 machine.
Y!MailBeta wasn't supposed to run on my w98 but I use it it on a daily basis.

[Drugwash]

LLXX said:

Use Proxomitron. It can make other websites think you're running whatever OS or browser you want.

Thanks, but that would be cheating. There's lots of software saying they don't support Win9x and when you mess with winver and make it report you're running 2k or later, they install and run flawlessly. It's like admitting myself as guilty to escape capital punishment in favor of life sentence, while in fact I'm completely innocent. Does that seem right?!

Fredlelingue said:

Yet I'm still waiting for the website that won't open on my fully updated w98 machine.
Y!MailBeta wasn't supposed to run on my w98 but I use it it on a daily basis.

I havent' messed much with my system (yet) except for a few system files that I had to upgrade. I'm testing an application in its alpha stage and I need the OS to be as basic as possible. Will upgrade it after I build a test machine. Meanwhile try subscribing to vh1.com and see if you can access their videos or whatever other online content linked to in their newsletters. I'm curious if you'll get rejected too.

As for Y!MailBeta... Yahoo is vital for me to get replies from forums posts, friends, etc. I always rejected their upgrade offers, but I know there will come a time when it'll be forced upon us. I wonder which would be the needed system upgrades that'll allow running it safely on a 9x system. And how long will it take until Win9x will permanently be banned by everybody, heavily upgraded or not...

[LLXX]

Drugwash, on Dec 9 2006, 03:35 AM, said:

LLXX said:

Use Proxomitron. It can make other websites think you're running whatever OS or browser you want.

Thanks, but that would be cheating. There's lots of software saying they don't support Win9x and when you mess with winver and make it report you're running 2k or later, they install and run flawlessly. It's like admitting myself as guilty to escape capital punishment in favor of life sentence, while in fact I'm completely innocent. Does that seem right?!

You're not making any sense

[Steven W]

You guys talking about VH1 just need to change your user agent in the browser that your using.

see my post:

http://www.msfn.org/...showtopic=82947

Just look at the bit about the user agent (there's a screen capture there too).

For Firefox get this extension:

https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/59/

Under User agent add the following line:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; nl; rv:1.8) Gecko/20051107 Firefox/1.5.0.7

Leave the rest of the lines blank. Remember you can change the Agent for the current session only.

[BenoitRen]

Quote

As for Flash... that's funny, but I currently have installed v9.0.28 and it works fine. But I disabled it in my browser using Nir Sofer's TurnFlash, and enable it only when needed. And no, that was not the reason for the VH1.com rejection.

I'm assuming that the latest Flash doesn't work under Windows 95, just like Sun's latest Java Virtual Machine doesn't (at least it doesn't want to install).

Quote

I wonder which would be the needed system upgrades that'll allow running it safely on a 9x system.

None. Your browser interacts with the website's code, not the OS.

[Drugwash]

LLXX said:

You're not making any sense

Am I too deep? Let me try again: here's a quote from X2 - X-men united, a talk between Kurt Wagner and Mystique:

- Excuse me... They say you can imitate anybody, even their voice.
- [imitating his voice] "Even their voice"
- Then why not stay in disguise all the time? You know... look like everyone else.
- Because we shouldn't have to.

Steven W: so this is all about DRM, isn't it? MS wants to stick a tag to my ear, hang a cowbell onto my neck and watch each and every step I take. Well, I'll refrain from expressing all the nice words that come to my mind related to this and I'll just say: "no, thanks".

[patchworks]

Hey guyz, the discussion stage is gone 2 pages ago... Please enter the "pre-alpha working" phase !

I mean: don't talk about IF we can do this, but HOW.

[LLXX]

patchworks, on Dec 10 2006, 05:28 AM, said:

I mean: don't talk about IF we can do this, but HOW.

A Brain, a Disassembler, and a lot of Time...

[Drugwash]

Don't forget the essential ingredient: a Bullet-time button on the keyboard.

Because by the time the assumingly handful of part-time disassemblers/reversers/coders would finish open-sourcing Win98SE, the army of MS programmers would have released a couple of other OS versions that would even be incompatible with Vista and any 32-bit CPU. Given that most software producers already forgot about Win9x (probably intentionally or forced) and the old hardware is dying (you wouldn't expect nowadays' HW to last 50 years as the old one did, would you?), you'll only end up with grey hair, wasted time and an obsolete Win98 perfect clone.

You see, I have no issues with IF and HOW - when there's a will, there's a way; my only question is WHY?

But don't mind me, I'm just... nobody.

[awergh]

well im sure you have a brain and a disassembler or you could write a disassembler and convined with other people you could have a lot of time

[patchworks]

...or you can gradually substitute every windows component with an open source one (a sort of "extension" of the Kernel Update project philosophy to the whole OS)

This post has been edited by patchworks: 11 December 2006 - 10:38 AM

[BenoitRen]

Quote

You see, I have no issues with IF and HOW - when there's a will, there's a way; my only question is WHY?

Funny you'd ask that, since you gave a couple reasons above yourself.

[patchworks]

Drugwash, on Dec 11 2006, 10:10 AM, said:

You see, I have no issues with IF and HOW - when there's a will, there's a way; my only question is WHY?

Sorry, i haven't see your question, and here's the reason: 'cause i see *many* peoples that are working as volunteers for free to build AutoPatchers, 98SE2ME, uSP, etc. and many other interesting projects that could become a "waste" of energies. I wanna remember all that MS has the right to sue them if should find something that sounds like a "lost profit". With an open source license (GPL is better) so mutch work should be preserved from any kind of attack. In other hand, all the knowledge could be shared with 3rd party projects (i have ReactOS in my mind, but there are many other interesting communities...) to help their grow.

That's my point of view; anyway, like you, i'm just a user.

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

patchworks, on Dec 11 2006, 04:09 PM, said:

peoples that are working as volunteers for free to build AutoPatchers, 98SE2ME, uSP, etc. and many other interesting projects that could become a "waste" of energies. I wanna remember all that MS has the right to sue them if should find something that sounds like a "lost profit". With an open source license (GPL is better) so mutch work should be preserved from any kind of attack. In other hand, all the knowledge could be shared with 3rd party projects (i have ReactOS in my mind, but there are many other interesting communities...) to help their grow.

This stuff has been going on for years if M$ hasn't sued them all this time
i don't think they will.

M$ might see it as a threat if these ladies & gentlemen profit from it, but they don't and neither do M$
So that means if the people recieve millions in donation M$ probably would sue.

I myself will donate in the future once these projects are @ they final release because people tend
to leave things unfinished and i don't pay for half stepping.But i do appreciate these people with the utmost respect
and they hard work.

This post has been edited by PROBLEMCHYLD: 11 December 2006 - 03:26 PM

[patchworks]

PROBLEMCHYLD, on Dec 11 2006, 10:15 PM, said:

This stuff has been going on for years if M$ hasn't sued them all this time i don't think they will.

Would you bet on it ?

Even antiwpa/wga "lived" without problems since last week...

If you "live in the fog" you must hope the sun never shine.

Personally i don't like this approach; I don't think that any MS employee works for free, so: why these guys do not deserve a wage ? MS would say: "We never asked them to do this ! On contrary, they're violating our copyrights !".

1+1=2

Volunteer work should be for the whole community, but original authors have to tutelate their rights = choose an open source license for your works !

This post has been edited by patchworks: 12 December 2006 - 02:03 AM

[Drugwash]

So many thoughts running through my mind...

My opinion is that MS will not take a step towards prosecuting any alleged copyright breakers here unless they feel seriously threatened. And I believe this will never be the case. Why?

First reason is because of (almost) natural selection: old hardware that allows running any of the 9x versions of Windows is slowly dying. No matter how great the efforts to maintain those systems - be them unofficial service packs, patched libraries/kernels, etc. - soon the day will come when the current functional hardware will simply refuse to install those OS versions.

Second reason is because the software released currently and in the future will be bound to NT-specific libraries that would make them unusable under 9x systems, no matter how upgraded and patched. Obviously, most fields of activity will require the newest software versions - you may run Win98SE 10-20 years from now (assuming you'll still have compatible hardware for it), but when you won't be able to open documents created with Office 2007+, watch media created with WMP 11+, burn CD/DVDs with Nero 7.5+ or browse websites optimized for IE7+, you'll face the choice of giving up computers forever or find a suitable alternative.

It's that 'suitable alternative' that we should think about, right now. As long as current and future hardware and software are intentionally created to only support NT-based OSes, and keeping in mind that Win2000 and XP will soon 'kick the bucket' just like their not-that-older 9x brothers, logic and common-sense tell me that efforts should be channeled towards developing a Vista+ compatible open-source OS.

It's only then that MS will blow steam off their ears and send out their army of jackals in a furious attempt to stop the freedom movement, because that would be the only real challenge for them.

Until then, creating and maintaining all kinds of unofficial patches, service packs, updates and whatnot is like injecting morphine to terminal-phase cancer patients.

All that said, I have to mention that I have the deepest respect and admiration for all the people out here that voluntarily offer their time, knowledge and efforts, day by day, to keep our beloved dying 9x systems still alive for as long as possible. As mentioned in a previous post, I myself am a Win98SE user and in no way am I trying to mock these people's work; on the contrary - I'm trying to help them with my little knowledge and testing, whenever possible. But time has come for us to broaden our horizons and look forward to the future.