Tip: Run a free scan for common Windows errors ad

re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 3:46 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) |Unfortunately I cannot upgrade my system to XP | Samantha | As I've said here before, these infections are WINDOZE-SPECIFIC and if you stop using Windoze[1], the threat from them disappears. (No more anti-virus app / anti-spyware app / yada,yada,yada to install/update/yada,yada,yada.) |because of limited resources | That can still be an issue with a non-Windoze solution. The (cutting-edge) variant I linked to above is also pretty resources-hungry, but there are SEVERAL other variants that will run on your *current* hardware[2] while still offering the immunity from infections. |and not worth the trouble. | The way I figure it, if you're going to have to learn a new OS anyway, why give money to Micro$oft on top of that (when Linux is FREE). |Could anybody recommend another free version of antivirus |that will still support our Windows 98 OS ? | After AVG recently included a clueless/evil "feature", AVG is on most folk's $#!+ List these days. From the Usenet Archive     More of that The 1st of those Usenet links gives 2 alternates in the first post and others are mentioned in the thread. [1] Mac OS X is also Unix-based and is also immune from Windoze infections. [2] You can boot to the "Live CD" of a Linux "distro" and test-drive / practice with that Linux variant WITHOUT HAVING TO INSTALL IT. If you have the drive space (or a spare drive bay and $10 for an old HDD), you can set up Windoze/Linux as dual-boot --with the goal of dumping MSFT completely(??). [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 6:53 pm Posted by jack hall (308 messages posted) Samantha, Superantispyware would be one item you might want. Google it. I've used it on my 98SE for an extended period, and it did a fine job. Works on 98 and up. There's a free version which I used. Nice tool. Jack... On Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 1:14 pm, samantha wrote: >Could anybody recommend another free version of antivirus that will still support >our Windows 98 OS ? >Unfortunately I cannot upgrade my system to XP because of limited resources and not >worth the trouble. I'm only using the computer for mail, reading stuff and banking; >and since it still runs very well I don't intend to scramble it till necessary. >Any help in solving the upcoming protection drop from AVG will be greatly appreciated. >Love to all >Samantha [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 7:52 pm Posted by bob wells (1636 messages posted) samantha, Try Avast AV from link below. http://www.filehippo.com/download_avast_antivirus/ It' Free, daily AV updates. BW __________________________________________________________ There's nothing to learn from someone who already agrees with you. On Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 1:14 pm, samantha wrote: >Could anybody recommend another free version of antivirus that will still support >our Windows 98 OS ? >Unfortunately I cannot upgrade my system to XP because of limited resources and not >worth the trouble. I'm only using the computer for mail, reading stuff and banking; >and since it still runs very well I don't intend to scramble it till necessary. >Any help in solving the upcoming protection drop from AVG will be greatly appreciated. >Love to all >Samantha [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 5:24 am Posted by samantha (103 messages posted) BW: thanks for your suggestion. Avast was also suggested by somebody else and should be good enough for my need. Thanks again. samantha xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx On Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 7:52 pm, bob wells wrote: >samantha, > >Try Avast AV from link below. > >http://www.filehippo.com/download_avast_antivirus/ > >It' Free, daily AV updates. > >BW > > > > __________________________________________________________ > >There's nothing to learn from someone who already agrees with you. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 6:54 am Posted by Alan Masterman (462 messages posted) The only comment I would add, Samantha, is that I agree with Bob that Avast is probably the most effective protection which is still compatible with Win98; but in my experience it does affect system performance quite noticeably. I don't know anything about Superantispyware, but if you are still running a Win98 era computer, I would certainly give it a run, because it may affect your system performance less severely. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 7:19 am Posted by Alan Masterman (462 messages posted) I have checked a number of programming language references, including Dbase 7.5 and GW-Basic, and I am unable to locate an entry for "yada yada yada". Please try to use correct, informative, and professional terminology when replying to posts. Are you sure you have the right forum? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 8:53 am Posted by bob wells (1636 messages posted) Maybe I'm missing something, but I fail to see how any of this Windows bashing serves to help the OP with finding a new AV program for her Win98 System. I know you know this is not a Linux/Firefox Forum; so how about providing some Win98 advice to the Posters? __________________________________________________________ There's nothing to learn from someone who already agrees with you. On Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 3:46 pm, gewg_ wrote: >|Unfortunately I cannot upgrade my system to XP >| Samantha >| >As I've said here before, these infections are WINDOZE-SPECIFIC >and if >you stop using Windoze[1], the threat from them disappears. >(No more anti-virus app / anti-spyware app / yada,yada,yada >to install/update/yada,yada,yada.) > >|because of limited resources >| >That can still be an issue with a non-Windoze solution. >The (cutting-edge) variant I linked to above is also pretty resources-hungry, >but there are SEVERAL >other variants that will run on your *current* hardware[2] >while >still offering the immunity from infections. > >|and not worth the trouble. >| >The way I figure it, if you're going to have to learn a new OS anyway, >why give money to Micro$oft on top of that (when Linux is FREE). > > >|Could anybody recommend another free version of antivirus >|that will still support our Windows 98 OS ? >| >After AVG recently included a clueless/evil "feature", >AVG is on most folk's $#!+ List these days. >From the Usenet Archive     More of that > >The 1st of those Usenet links gives 2 alternates in the first post >and others are mentioned in the thread. > > >[1] Mac OS X is also Unix-based and is also immune from Windoze infections. > >[2] You can boot to the "Live CD" of a Linux "distro" >and test-drive / practice with that Linux variant WITHOUT HAVING TO INSTALL IT. > >If you have the drive space (or a spare drive bay and $10 for an old HDD), >you can set up Windoze/Linux as dual-boot >--with the goal of dumping MSFT completely(??). [Reply or follow-up to this message] Alternatives to easily-infected OSes Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 10:35 am Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) was: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 |I have checked a number of programming language references, |including Dbase 7.5 and GW-Basic, |and I am unable to locate an entry for "yada yada yada". | Alan Masterman | Though it has been in use for a LONG time, it became even more popular when used as a theme for a 1990s American sitcom: http://www.google.com/search?q=yada-yada-yada+Seinfeld |Please try to use correct, informative, and professional terminology |when replying to posts. | Do you complain when people here use the phrase "and so on" even though it's not in a tech glossary? ...and I'm pretty sure the OP knows the term. |Are you sure you have the right forum? | Let's see: A forum for a payware operating system that is past the end of its support cycle by its vendor and reaching the end of its support cycle by 3rd-party app vendors.[1] To replace it, people mentioning yet another easily-infected payware product[3] --a product that is NOT the subject of *this* forum. People mentioning that their hardware won't support that latest payware product. Yeah. I'd say I'm as on-topic as the OP. Those who read my ENTIRE post will see I also provided an answer to the AV query. [1] I'll go on to mention that the Free Software OS offerings INCLUDE the ancillary utilities need to do routine tasks and those utils that don't come on the distro CD are available from repositories (searchable using the OS's tools--making these kinds of questions unnecessary) and those ancillary programs (like the OS) are FREE. If you can't find a Free Software app to do your task or you don't like the way the current crop handle, you have other options: Since the "source code"[2] for those apps is available, you (or a programmer you hire) can MODIFY the app to do what you would like. (Try THAT with the vast majority of Windoze-compatible apps.) ...or you can seek out a payware app, much the same way Windoze users do. [2] Think of "source code" as the recipe or blueprints for the product. Imagine every product you buy coming with full instructions about how it is made. THAT is what "Free Software" (e.g. Linux) is about. ("Free" means more than just "Gratis".) [3] In addition, white box vendors are no longer *officially* able to offer XP. That is, to get XP pre-installed these days you must pay for TWO M$ operating systems (XP AND Vista) --an abuse of a monopoly to the extreme. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 10:36 am Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) |Maybe I'm missing something, but I fail to see how any of this Windows bashing |serves to help the OP with finding a new AV program for her Win98 System. | bob wells | The subject of the thread is *security*, specifically Windoze-specific infections. The OP then goes on to mention XP --which suffers from many of the same easily-infected structures. It reminds me of the old joke: Q: Why are you hitting yourself in the head with a hammer? A: Because it feels so good when I stop. |I know you know this is not a Linux/Firefox Forum; | The OP mentioned dumping W98. I'm as on-topic as she was. |so how about providing some Win98 advice to the Posters? | Read my ENTIRE post. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 11:15 am Posted by bob wells (1636 messages posted) The problem is, I actually DID read your entire Post. That is exactly what prompted my reply. And I believe another on the same line. If I were the OP I would be shaking my head asking; "What the ******** is this fool saying? Your opinion of the Windows OS's is not the subject of the OP message. Unless I've lost perspective, after reading your messages, I believe Samantha asked for help with a new AV program that supports Win98. Replacing Win98 with Linux is not to the point, Was not asked for, nor implied in Samantha's Post. NUFF SAID! __________________________________________________________ There's nothing to learn from someone who already agrees with you. On Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 10:36 am, gewg_ wrote: >|Maybe I'm missing something, but I fail to see how any of this Windows bashing >|serves to help the OP with finding a new AV program for her Win98 System. >| bob wells >| >The subject of the thread is *security*, specifically Windoze-specific infections. >The OP then goes on to mention XP >--which suffers from many of the same easily-infected structures. >It reminds me of the old joke: >Q: Why are you hitting yourself in the head with a hammer? >A: Because it feels so good when I stop. > >|I know you know this is not a Linux/Firefox Forum; >| >The OP mentioned dumping W98. I'm as on-topic as she was. > >|so how about providing some Win98 advice to the Posters? >| >Read my ENTIRE post. [Reply or follow-up to this message] Working around Microsoft's insecurities Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 11:49 am Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) was: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 |Your opinion of the Windows OS's is not the subject of the OP message. |Unless I've lost perspective, after reading your messages, |I believe Samantha asked for help with a new AV program that supports Win98. | |Replacing Win98 with Linux is not to the point, Was not asked for, |nor implied in Samantha's Post. | bob wells You seem to have missed it AGAIN so I'll put it in big letters for you: The OP mentioned **replacing** Windows 98. |||||Unfortunately I cannot upgrade my system to XP ||||| Samantha When people mention giving yet MORE money to Micro$oft to work around problems WHICH ARE CAUSED BY MICROSOFT, I mention FREE alternatives--which DON'T HAVE those problems. This is particularly true when the new M$ "solution" HAS THE SAME PROBLEM as what the poster currently has (e.g. Microsoft-only insecurities). The big 3 there are Internet Exploder (the LEAST-SECURE browser), Outbreaks In Excess (the LEAST-SECURE mail client), and Windoze (the family of LEAST-SECURE operating systems). Any other facts you'd like to bring up? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Working around Microsoft's insecurities Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 1:51 pm Posted by bob wells (1636 messages posted) Yes! I saw the part about "Cannot upgrade to WINDOWS XP" STILL not an indication of any interest in "LINUX". Does not help the OP with either Win98 or WinXP or finding a new AV Program that supports WIN98. WHICH, BTW, is what Samantha, the "OP", lest you forget, expressly asked for. Linux cannot Fix WinXP any more than Fire Fox CAN repair Internet Explorer. IMHO, you ARE on the Wrong Forum, as was previously suggested. STOP PUSHING your Personal AGENDA. __________________________________________________________ There's nothing to learn from someone who already agrees with you. On Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 11:49 am, gewg_ wrote: >was: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 > >|Your opinion of the Windows OS's is not the subject of the OP message. >|Unless I've lost perspective, after reading your messages, >|I believe Samantha asked for help with a new AV program that supports Win98. >| >|Replacing Win98 with Linux is not to the point, Was not asked for, >|nor implied in Samantha's Post. >| bob wells > >You seem to have missed it AGAIN so I'll put it in big letters for you: >The OP mentioned **replacing** Windows 98. >|||||Unfortunately I cannot upgrade my system to XP >||||| Samantha > >When people mention giving yet MORE >money to Micro$oft >to work around problems WHICH ARE CAUSED BY MICROSOFT, >I mention FREE >alternatives--which DON'T HAVE those problems. > >This is particularly true when the new M$ "solution" >HAS THE SAME PROBLEM as what the poster currently has >(e.g. Microsoft-only insecurities). > >The big 3 there are Internet Exploder (the LEAST-SECURE browser), >Outbreaks In Excess (the LEAST-SECURE mail client), >and Windoze (the family of LEAST-SECURE operating systems). > >Any other facts you'd like to bring up? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Working around Microsoft's insecurities Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 2:13 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) |STOP PUSHING your Personal AGENDA. | bob wells As soon as you stop pushing yours. I offer *solutions*. If the best solution isn't "Microsoft", I say so. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Working around Microsoft's insecurities Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 2:38 pm Posted by bob wells (1636 messages posted) Don't want to help with MS Windows OS's, don't reply. Your answers are not helpful to the person who sets the Agenda. The OP. Read the Forum Headings. I don't see Linux listed as a Site Supported OS. Maybe Creative Element will create one Just for gewg_, NOT. __________________________________________________________ There's nothing to learn from someone who already agrees with you. On Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 2:13 pm, gewg_ wrote: >|STOP PUSHING your Personal AGENDA. >| bob wells > >As soon as you stop pushing yours. > >I offer *solutions*. If the best solution isn't "Microsoft", I say so. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 3:04 pm Posted by Kiwi (2228 messages posted) Hmmm? What level of hardware was it that was affected adversely? I have a couple of oldies I can run Win98 on, and still do so, occasionally (XP 2600 in an Abit NF7 MB, and an XP 3000 in an Asus A7N8X Deluxe), and I'm quite sure I've run those using Avast, and W98, and hadn't seen any great degradation. On the other hand, I've had no reason to run the PC with a Duron 900 in it for a long time. I'm not sure I've swapped out AVG on that one yet. Maybe I'll have an unpleasant experience when I do? . Kiwi ** On Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 6:54 am, Alan Masterman wrote: >The only comment I would add, Samantha, is that I agree with Bob that Avast is probably >the most effective protection which is still compatible with Win98; but in my experience >it does affect system performance quite noticeably. I don't know anything about >Superantispyware, but if you are still running a Win98 era computer, I would certainly >give it a run, because it may affect your system performance less severely. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 5:05 pm Posted by George Cowley (172 messages posted) Try NOD 32 although I don't think it's free. Regarding suggestions about Linux, unless you have a broadband connection, that's a non-starter as dial-up is a nightmare for novice users. Linux is great if you know a ton about computers. I know a ton about computers and Linux just irritates me because it just doesn't do what I need it to do. The old argument about low overhead, in my experience is false too. I find Linux is a memory hog without fine tuning and I'm not prepared to fiddle. On Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 3:04 pm, Kiwi wrote: >Hmmm? What level of hardware was it that was affected adversely? I have a couple >of oldies I can run Win98 on, and still do so, occasionally (XP 2600 in an Abit NF7 >MB, and an XP 3000 in an Asus A7N8X Deluxe), and I'm quite sure I've run those using >Avast, and W98, and hadn't seen any great degradation. > [Reply or follow-up to this message] XP (and M$ warez) vs alternatives Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 6:05 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) was: Working around Microsoft's insecurities |Don't want to help with MS Windows OS's, don't reply. | bob wells | You are free to ignore my posts. I am free to ignore your posts. The OP is free to ignore either--or both. As I suggested, you should give up on the assumption that a Microsoft-only solution is always the correct answer. It makes you look uninformed and foolish --especially when talking about an OS that has reached its EoL and which, in 2008, has considerable competition quality-wise and price-wise. As an interesting aside, a bootable Linux CD has pulled many a Windoze user's fat out of the fire. That may be a small indication of relative quality for some; many will say it is especially noteworthy (since you can't easily put a GUI-capable M$ product on a bootable CD). |Your answers are not helpful to the person who sets the Agenda. The OP. | Unlike you, apparently, I'm willing to let the OP decide what is helpful. Unlike you, I am able to operate on a plane other than M$ fanboi. Many people like Free Software. (It's even better than freeware.) Most find that having choices is also a Good Thing(tm). Replacing a 10 year old DOS-based payware OS with a modern Free Software OS *may* also be a Good Thing(tm). When I see folks saying they are thinking about another payware OS or it's clear that a poster is dabbling in warez, I'll lay out the facts about Free Software and let them decide for themselves. When you can boot to a CD and get a full OS desktop--GUI and all and do documents, browsing, and email from it WITHOUT INSTALLING ANYTHING, it's easy to decide if you like it or not. You're right: I'm not stuck on "Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft" --especially when many app companies consider this OS obsolete ...and when there are alternatives that don't need pasted-on "security". [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: XP (and M$ warez) vs alternatives Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 7:46 pm Posted by bob wells (1636 messages posted) Are you finished ? I'm sure Samantha is happily Computing with her new Avast AV installed, and AVG in the Recyle bin, while you keep flapping your lips about an OS that is NOT supported by this Forum. Get thee to a LINUX Forum. __________________________________________________________ There's nothing to learn from someone who already agrees with you. On Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 6:05 pm, gewg_ wrote: >was: Working around Microsoft's insecurities > >|Don't want to help with MS Windows OS's, don't reply. >| bob wells >| >You are free to ignore my posts. I am free to ignore your posts. >The OP is free to ignore either--or both. > >As I suggested, you should give up on the assumption >that a Microsoft-only solution is always the correct answer. >It makes you look uninformed and foolish >--especially when talking about an OS that has reached its EoL >and which, in 2008, has considerable competition quality-wise and price-wise. > >As an interesting aside, >a bootable Linux CD has pulled many a Windoze user's fat out of the fire. >That may be a small indication of relative quality for some; >many will say it is especially noteworthy >(since you can't easily put a GUI-capable M$ product on a bootable CD). > >|Your answers are not helpful to the person who sets the Agenda. The OP. >| >Unlike you, apparently, I'm willing to let the OP decide what is helpful. >Unlike you, I am able to operate on a plane other than M$ fanboi. > >Many people like Free Software. (It's even better than freeware.) >Most find that having choices is also a Good Thing(tm). > >Replacing a 10 year old DOS-based payware OS with a modern Free Software OS >*may* also be a Good Thing(tm). >When I see folks saying they are thinking about another payware OS >or it's clear that a poster is dabbling in warez, >I'll lay out the facts about Free Software and let them decide for themselves. >When you can boot to a CD and get a full OS desktop--GUI and all >and do documents, browsing, and email from it WITHOUT INSTALLING ANYTHING, >it's easy to decide if you like it or not. > >You're right: I'm not stuck on "Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft" >--especially when many app companies consider this OS obsolete >...and when there are alternatives that don't need pasted-on "security". [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: XP (and whatever MS OS) vs various non-MS Friday, August 22, 2008 at 11:48 am Posted by Kiwi (2228 messages posted) Personally, I've DONE my time in the *Nix Zone, back when PCs were still "Microcomputers", and I've run my tests of several *Nuxes. Windows98 was a nice little OS that happened to need a reinstall a couple of times a year; I still like it better than Linux, on a "scale of being nicer to use" than most OSes. It just doesn't happen to be as useful to me, personally, any longer, as any of the WinNT variants are. I do miss using it. . Kiwi ** On Wednesday, August 20, 2008 at 7:46 pm, bob wells wrote: >Are you finished ? > >I'm sure Samantha is happily Computing with her new Avast AV installed, and AVG in >the Recyle bin, while you keep flapping your lips about an OS that is NOT supported >by this Forum. > >Get thee to a LINUX Forum. > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > >There's nothing to learn from someone who already agrees with you. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: XP (and whatever MS OS) vs various non-MS Friday, August 22, 2008 at 2:24 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) |Personally, I've DONE my time in the *Nix Zone, back when PCs were still "Microcomputers", | Kiwi | It should be obvious that the individual posting this is a VERY experienced user and knows how to use Windoze AND HOW *NOT* TO USE WINDOZE. His knowledge will not necessarily extrapolate across the broad spectrum of users. |and I've run my tests of several *Nuxes. | ...and it's so easy to try one when you can **run** the distro from a CD. |Windows98 was a nice little OS |that happened to need a reinstall a couple of times a year; | Which 99.999% of its users won't do prophilacticly. ...and you're laying on the hyperbole just a bit thick. 8-) |I still like it better than Linux, |on a "scale of being nicer to use" than most OSes. | Linux improves daily. With its many *variants*, there is likely one that suits any need one might have. Now, _finding_ that one among all the possibilities could be an issue. 8-) There are a lot of converts to Linux (e.g. Kubuntu) who don't notice a dime's worth of difference from Windoze for the tasks they do. (It's easier to convert if you've used Firefox, OpenOffice, Inkscape, VLC, GAIM, Audacity, etc. under Windoze before taking The Big Plunge.) For the majority of folks, the various flavors of Ubuntu are easier to install than Windoze[1][2] (and don't suffer from Windows Rot, so they don't need constant re-installing --and a big reason is that they don't use the stupid *Windows Registry* notion). ...and there's the *Linux security patches being issued as needed* thing --unlike EoL'd M$ stuff. (The *You almost never need to reboot unless you replace the kernel* thing is really cool too.) |It just doesn't happen to be as useful to me, personally, any longer, | Like I said: Having choices is a Good Thing(tm). If the EoL thing that happens with payware doesn't affect what someone does, more power to him. Ironically, many of the folks still using 9x are exactly the folks who SHOULDN'T be --and for many of those, *gratis* would be a boon--if they KNEW about it. |as any of the WinNT variants are. I do miss using it. | Since MSFT decided EVERYTHING would be GUI-based, having few command line utilities for batch operations is a big sore point for Micros~1. ...and with Win9x, you have to work around 8.3 paths for CLI stuff. Again, Free Software augments what Micro$oft offers--e.g. http://www.google.com/search?q=Bash.For.Windows Being able to install a distro on 8 dozen boxes without having to pay for a single license is something the warez guys envy. "Rockin' on without Microsoft" -- A story of Ernie Ball, Inc. and Linux cache of http://www.getopenoffice.org/ernieball.html [1] Can you say "Reboot. Reboot. Reboot."? (Again: the stupid Windows Registry.) [2] Can you say "Windows Product Key"? Can you say "Windows Product Activation"? Can you say "Windows Genuine Advantage"? Note: 2 of those refer to the *current* generations of Windoze. The biggest PITA for users of older versions of Windoze is having to chase down device drivers. (Linux does hardware support better than Windoze --especially in its out-of-the-box config.) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Working around Microsoft's insecurities Friday, August 22, 2008 at 6:50 pm Posted by appleoddity (2369 messages posted) LOL.. If you can find a forum on annoyances.org that says it is for Linux, then you would be in the right place. But, this is a pure Microsoft support forum, called "Windows Annoyances." Welcome to the club.. And seems how it is clear that you have no valuable knowledge whatsoever of the Windows operating system, you are not of much use to anybody here. But, you know what the funny thing is, after all your ranting, I gurantee that you have a windows installation to boot to whenever you just have to run that piece of software that falls in the same class that 99% of other software falls into. You know, the class of software that says, "Designed for Windows" on the box and all you have to do is put a CD in and click a couple times to install it successfully. LOL. Man, I could go on and on about how silly bashing Windows sounds from a Linux user seems how I am also an experienced Linux user. And you know what? I continually find myself whispering under my breath, "what a joke to think this operating system is ready for the mainstream newbie." Or, at other times, expletives I don't want to repeat here. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Working around Microsoft's insecurities Friday, August 22, 2008 at 7:16 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) |I gurantee that you have a windows installation to boot to |whenever you just have to run that piece of software... | appleoddity The days until the end of that paradigm are rapidly approaching too. http://www.google.com/search?q=winehq |...that falls in the same class that 99% of other software falls into. | You are ill-informed or are very bad at math. The phrase for the 21st Century is "Gratis and Libre". cache of http://www.libervis.com/wiki/index.php?title?Table_of_Equivalent_Software [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Sunday, August 24, 2008 at 11:51 am Posted by heh heh (11 messages posted) Linux makes great live cd roms, and since linux is always in a state of constant upgrade curve, (2-6 months) It can't be counted on. Use live Cd's only for now only, windows 95/98,98SE,& XP are still old versions that get the job done. Linux is a great Temporary solution. On Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 1:14 pm, samantha wrote: >Could anybody recommend another free version of antivirus that will still support >our Windows 98 OS ? >Unfortunately I cannot upgrade my system to XP because of limited resources and not >worth the trouble. I'm only using the computer for mail, reading stuff and banking; >and since it still runs very well I don't intend to scramble it till necessary. >Any help in solving the upcoming protection drop from AVG will be greatly appreciated. >Love to all >Samantha [Reply or follow-up to this message] Bootable CD vs Dual-boot or new OS (was: ...AVG free...) Sunday, August 24, 2008 at 3:45 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) heh heh wrote: |Linux makes great live cd roms, | Yup. I've mentioned that in this thread. |and since linux is always in a state of constant upgrade curve, | That's NOT a bad thing. One of the BEST things about Free Software is the rate at which those projects release patches & updates.[1] Just think how long IE6 stagnated until Mozilla (a Free Software app) and Opera (a freeware app) spurred Micro$oft to work on IE. Think how long M$ futzed with Vista (5 years) before stripping out most of the promised features then shoved it out the door in a state that has many people just shaking their heads. "The Vista Death Watch" by John C. Dvorak cache of http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2209837,00.asp |(2-6 months) | Because Debian supports *so many* processor/architecture types (not just x86) --and since they want to release all of them at the same time, it takes them *longer than most distros* to put out a new release. Ubuntu (which is based on Debian)[2] was started to give a firm 6-month release cycle of the Debian codebase. Firefox typically issues patches ~weekly. They also offer nightly builds for the adventurous. |It can't be counted on. | Can you give an example? ...or do you think M$'s Security Through Obscurity model and its frequent *we're never going to patch that* stance is somehow superior? ...and the "Patch Tuesday" model of once-monthly SECURITY patches that M$ uses is just confounding to me. If you've never actually INSTALLED an upgrade to a Linux distro then **reverted** to the previous configuration (read: put back the previous kernel--which is possible with Linux)[3], you don't really have a valid data point to add to the graph. |Use live Cd's only for now only, | Well, they are excellent for test drives and for practicing but I don't see the logic behind "only". If you wanted to, you could install Linux to a completely seperate HDD. You could then remove Linux by removing that drive; all of Linux that would be left behind would be the (benign) Multi-Boot Manager. |windows 95/98,98SE,& XP are still old versions that get the job done. | That's what counts most: A tool that does what you need to do. For people posting questions to *this* forum, XP typically *isn't* an "old version"; they would have to purchase it and learn it. If you are going to have to learn something new, having to *pay* for it as well seems like twisting the knife--especially when there are FREE options. |Linux is a great Temporary solution. | When people mention spending yet more money for yet another M$ OS with yet another version of MSFT's poor security model, I have to ask what those folks are thinking. In most cases, I think it's just no one telling them there are options. Most apps that folks are currently using have Free Software equivalents. (Many of those apps are cross-platform so they can be used under Windoze long before the Big Switch to another OS.) ...and under Windoze, those Free Software apps are more secure than the M$ apps. WINE (a recursive acronym for Wine IS Not an Emulator) is a reverse-engineered re-implemention of the Windoze APIs. It currently allows many Windoze-compatible apps to run under Linux (and it is improving weekly). Smart software developers make sure that their Windoze apps will run under WINE. The brilliant ones did it 5 years ago. From the Usenet Archive -- Mike Engelhardt There are also folks who have never used a computer and haven't formed a bias. When they buy new computers with pre-installed Linux[4] (Wal-Mart does a profitable business in this), those folks find that can do all the usual stuff--sans Microsoft. I posted a link to the story of a sizeable corporation that for years now has conducted its business completely Microsoft-free. The city of Largo Florida has done the same since 2002. [1] ...and no one is holding a gun to your head to upgrade anything --though if you do, the process under Linux is **easier** than with MSFT. [2] as is Knoppix and MEPIS and Freespire and ... [3] This just boggles the mind of Windoze users. [4] ...which, of course, are cheaper without the Microsoft Tax(tm). [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Bootable CD vs Dual-boot or new OS (was: ...AVG free...) Monday, August 25, 2008 at 12:51 am Posted by appleoddity (2369 messages posted) If Linux was so great, everyone WOULD be using it. But, anybody who HAS used it knows its pitfalls, unless they are just blind. Just a few words: Integration, compatibility, ease-of-use, availability. The fact is the vast majority of software DOES NOT run on Linux, and the FREE versions often leave much to be desired. You can show me a list of 100 apps that run on Linux, and I can show you 10000 that run on Windows. Big deal. Think of all the huge hit games, and multi million dollar productivity, media, and design packages. And to top it all off, most people wouldn't be able to install, configure or even use Linux if their life depended on it, where as Windows gives you that power with a few intuitive clicks. Linux has benefits, and it is a remarkable operating system, for free. But, Linux developers should take a look at Mac, and get a clue. Mac is a perfect (Unix based) example of a USEABLE operating system by the clueless. Linux is NOT and is not recommended for the faint of heart. Its single biggest downfall that will keep it from every being a mainstream operating system is this: Linux is like a patchwork quilt with dozens of different versions, with different commands, different looks and feel, and never ending different ways of doing things based on which one of dozens of different versions you have. And when you have a question about something, the internet has about 1/10th the amount of information about it than a similar winodws search - if you can find the answer at all. To anyone who isn't capable of utilizing the power of the Linux operating system it all adds up to one thing - MESS! Not to mention that Linux was never meant to be a desktop operating system, that was an after thought, and is barely out of its infancy stages IMO. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Bootable CD vs Dual-boot or new OS (was: ...AVG free...) Monday, August 25, 2008 at 3:57 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) |If Linux was so great, everyone WOULD be using it. | appleoddity | That ignores human nature to adapt to what exists. How many people do you know that buy the same brands their parents did for no apparent reason? It also ignores a few items at the core of the US vs MSFT case brought by the DoJ, not the least of which is the fact that for 25 years, someone buying an x86 system was FORCED to pay for a M$ OS --whether he wanted it or not; the concept is STILL common. http://www.google.com/search?q=Microsoft.Tax The inertia of decades of the old (monopoly) paradigm are difficult to overcome. If all systems came with BLANK hard drives, there would be greater parity. The European Union is trying to address this through laws forbidding bundling (instead, moving to an a la carte listing of all items and their actual costs). |But, anybody who HAS used it knows its pitfalls, unless they are just blind. | ...as well its strengths (e.g. shell scripting[1]). Not having to BUY every app you use (Ghost, Partition Magic, M$Office,...) but getting equivalents of those for FREE, tips the balance for many (e.g. the cities of Largo, Florida and Munich, Germany). I also mentioned in this thread how Ernie Ball, Inc. butted heads over licensing with the Business Software Alliance (an honorary member of MAFIAA)--then chose Linux. |Just a few words: Integration, compatibility, ease-of-use, availability. | Yup. The inertia and persistent influence of a monopoly are in evidence here. I was just in an (ostensibly OS-agnostic) engineering newsgroup and Linux's inconsistency of look & feel across desktop environments as well as apps-to-app *was* mentioned--by a Linux user. OTOH, there are enough exemplars of cross-platform apps & hardware out there to clearly demonstrate that cross-platform availability is quite do-able. Again, outlawing bundling and going to an a la carte spec sheet will show folks what is *actually* available and what those items cost. Again: Choice is a Good Thing(tm). Computer users have a choice to make, weighing the relative advantages of the lock-in and lockout of proprietary offerings. I think planned obsolescence and deliberate lack of interoperability is NOT good. |The fact is the vast majority of software DOES NOT run on Linux, | How many of those apps actually have versions that will run on THIS version of Windoze? How many of them have UPDATES that will allow them to be run under LATER versions of M$ OSes? How many of those updates are at a low "upgrade" cost? How many generate files that cannot be used by a colleague who doesn't have the app? Proprietary lock-in and closed source are weapons used against computer users to the advantage of unscrupulous for-profit corporations. The concepts for the 21st Century are "Open Standards", "Gratis and Libre", and "SERVICE-based Businesses". --things MSFT doesn't do (or they do them with the intention or BREAKING them; mentioned as "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" elsewhere in this thread). |and the FREE versions often leave much to be desired. | How many of these whiz-bang features in the payware actually get used? ...and anyone actually doing a feature-by-feature comparison of Free Software vs proprietary apps will also find features in the Free column that are not in the payware column. I will acknowledge that M$ Excel is a shining example of a good proprietary app; if it was ported to ALL platforms, it would move up to excellent. Again: Choice is a Good Thing(tm). I can't remember the 19th Century politician's name or what exactly the metaphor related to, but he mentioned the concept of *What good is an infant?*. If monopoly influence was/is allowed to dominate all choices, then--just like Herod's victims--we would/will never know what WAS/IS possible. |You can show me a list of 100 apps that run on Linux, |and I can show you 10000 that run on Windows. | Not if you count all the things done with Linux shell scripts. The fact that M$ has the *everything GUI* mentality borked that for Windoze. An entirely new scripting language every few years didn't help M$ users either. Ever see the vast number of extensions for the Mozilla browsers? A clear demonstration of the power of Open Source software. ...and most of the Open Source stuff runs on ANY platform. You can get familiar with it using it under Windoze and it's the SAME app when you start using Linux full-time. |Big deal. Think of all the huge hit games, | If you are a Windoze gamer, buy a Windoze box. Anyone with half a brain knows that. Serious gamers are moving to consoles. |and multi million dollar productivity, media, and design packages. | There is no reason those can't be ported to *n?x. Adobe has several items available already. As I am fond of saying here: Give your money to vendors WHO SUPPORT YOU. These days, SMART developers are choosing cross-platform-compatible widgets. |And to top it all off, most people wouldn't be able to |install, configure or even use Linux if their life depended on it, |[whereas] Windows gives you that power with a few intuitive clicks. | Empirically false. Neophytes will do equally poorly on poorly-supported software --no matter what the platform. ...and Linux has better out-of-the-box hardware support than Windoze ever dreamed of. If it wasn't so, the Linux Live CDs wouldn't work; they would ask for device driver disks--AS MOST WINDOWS INSTALLS DO. (This is the reason Bart PE and the other bootable Windoze CDs are such a PITA.) The out-of-the-box config for most of Linux is sufficient for most users --just like with most of Windoze and its users (if you don't count all the 3rd-party band-aids that have to be applied to achieve the pseudo-safe state that passses for "security" with M$ OSes). WRT the *usable* issue--that's Windoze fanboi FUD. There are millions of Linux users who have a bone to pick with you. The ones that didn't use Windoze first would rate Windoze equally bad. An academic installed a Linux computer with a touchscreen in a brick wall in a slum in India. The neighborhood kids had it jumping thru hoops immediately. Damn. I can't find a link to the story now. People who are used to using certain key combinations to do certain tasks and who are used to having things in a specific place on the screen and who are incapable of adapting to new conditions will, of course, choose to stick with what they have--even past the point where it is not supported. Adaptable people, OTOH, will find that payware is largely foolish. When that payware uses dirty tricks to try to get you to continue to use it or to "upgrade" to later versions for no useful reason, it is unacceptable. |Linux has benefits, and it is a remarkable operating system, for free. | Careful. I see your resolve slipping. 8-) |But, Linux developers should take a look at Mac, and get a clue. | I won't argue with stealing good ideas. It's at the core of M$'s business model--Apple's too. |Mac is a perfect (Unix based) example of a [USABLE] operating system by the clueless. | Even the Mac fanbois don't go as far as _perfect_. ..and I think you meant *for*--not *by*. Again, there is a yet another legion of folks who will disagree. ...and there are folks who don't WANT to futz with their (Mac or other) boxes; they have people whose job it is to do that. Folks shouldn't have to know how an engine works to get a driver's license. |Linux is NOT and is not recommended for the faint of heart. | The existence of this forum and the number of posts to it is evidence that few mortals are able to maintain their own boxes--whatever the OS. Finding a good Support guy (or forum) is critical. |Its single biggest downfall |that will keep it from [ever] being a mainstream operating system is this: |Linux is like a patchwork quilt with dozens of different versions, | The number of Windows(NT) apps that require admin privileges to run (breaking any hope of having a secure operating environment) is clear evidence that the *patchwork* thing is not restricted to one OS. One would think that the *easily-infected* thing would have kept Windoze from gaining the market share it enjoys--but nope. ...and the marketplace is full of many *worse* ideas that gained traction: QWERTY, x86's segmented model, Iomega Zip disks, VHS, NTSC,... |with different commands, | False. The CLI of the Unix (POSIX) environment across versions and distros is uniform. ...and the wide range of utilities *comes* with the OS. |different looks and feel, and never ending different ways of doing things |based on which one of dozens of different versions you have. | If you want to mention the range of package managers or desktop environments, that's another matter; it's also a STRENGTH of Free Software. Again: Choice is a Good thing(tm). (I'm reminded of Apple's "1984" commercial.) ...and even the WORST Linux package manager is orders of magnitude BETTER than what exists under Windoze for getting/updating apps and the OS. |And when you have a question about something, |the internet has about 1/10th the amount of information about it |than a similar [Windows] search - if you can find the answer at all. | Ah, the flaw of 21st Century existence: A *wealth* of Windoze answers--many of them WRONG. Obviously you haven't seen the phenomenal Ubuntu forums. |To anyone who isn't capable of utilizing the power of the Linux operating system |it all adds up to one thing - MESS! | More typical Windoze fanboi FUD. |Not to mention that Linux was never meant to be a desktop operating system, |that was an after thought, | Patently false. Linus developed it for his own general-purpose use. ...and if you think the security model of ANY version of Windoze is appropriate for a workstation, you are simply delusional. |and is barely out of its infancy stages IMO. | I previously mentioned the *infant* thing and contrasted it with the *monopoly* thing. As stated, test drives of Linux are dirt simple. Most people will find that if they boot to a Linux CD, without stumbling badly, they can do the stuff they normally do with a computer: documents, surfing, email. Power users are likely to find that WINE is a replacement for Windoze and their old Windoze-compatible apps will still run under Linux. YMMV. Trying to use a *WinModem* to do dial-up (as mentioned elsewhere in this thread) is a likely exception. While SOME "LinModems" 8-) have been gotten to work,[2] if you buy hardware that is SPECIFICALLY for Windoze, you get what you get. Those kinds of folks would likely go to a Ford dealer for parts for their Toyota. Using Linux is not significantly different that trying to use some random piece of hardware on a more recent M$ OS: The hardware has to be on the *Supported* list. Fortunately, the chances are BETTER with Linux. (Just boot to a Knoppix CD and see if it balks at anything.) [1] BASH scripting has remained consistent since 1978, while M$ comes up with a completely different scripting notion every few years. [2] Again, depending on how eager the vendor is to sell more of his products. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Bootable CD vs Dual-boot or new OS (was: ...AVG free...) Monday, September 1, 2008 at 3:28 am Posted by GG (1 messages posted) I agree with trying linux. At least with linux you can try a live cd to see if you like the operating system and 99.99% of the linux os's are free. Microsoft can't say that. With vista you don't even have a choice. You can try damn small linux, ubuntu, xubuntu or puppy linux for your win98 desktop. On Monday, August 25, 2008 at 3:57 pm, gewg_ wrote: >|If Linux was so great, everyone WOULD be using it. >| appleoddity >| >That ignores human nature to adapt to what exists. >How many people do you know >that buy the same brands their parents did for no apparent reason? > >It also ignores a few items at the core of the US vs MSFT case brought by the DoJ, >not the least of which is the fact that >for 25 years, someone buying an x86 system was FORCED to pay for a M$ OS >--whether he wanted it or not; the concept is STILL common. >http://www.google.com/search?q=Microsoft.Tax > >The inertia of decades of the old (monopoly) paradigm are difficult to overcome. >If all systems came with BLANK hard drives, there would be greater parity. > >The European Union is trying to address this through laws forbidding bundling >(instead, moving to an a la carte listing of all items and their actual costs). > >|But, anybody who HAS used it knows its pitfalls, unless they are just blind. >| >...as well its strengths (e.g. shell scripting[1]). > >Not having to BUY every app you use (Ghost, Partition Magic, M$Office,...) >but getting equivalents of those for FREE, tips the balance for many >(e.g. the cities of Largo, Florida and Munich, Germany). >I also mentioned in this thread how Ernie Ball, Inc. >butted heads over licensing with the Business Software Alliance >(an honorary member of MAFIAA)--then >chose Linux. > >|Just a few words: Integration, compatibility, ease-of-use, availability. >| >Yup. The inertia and persistent influence of a monopoly are in evidence here. >I was just in an (ostensibly OS-agnostic) engineering newsgroup >and Linux's inconsistency of look & feel across desktop environments >as well as apps-to-app *was* mentioned--by a Linux user. > >OTOH, there are enough exemplars of cross-platform apps & hardware out there >to clearly demonstrate that cross-platform availability is quite do-able. >Again, outlawing bundling and going to an a la carte spec sheet >will show folks what is *actually* available and what those items cost. >Again: Choice is a Good Thing(tm). > >Computer users have a choice to make, >weighing the relative advantages of the lock-in and lockout of proprietary offerings. >I think planned obsolescence and deliberate lack of interoperability is NOT good. > >|The fact is the vast majority of software DOES NOT run on Linux, >| >How many of those apps >actually have versions that will run on THIS version of Windoze? >How many of them have UPDATES >that will allow them to be run under LATER versions of M$ OSes? >How many of those updates are at a low "upgrade" cost? >How many generate files that cannot be used by a colleague who doesn't have the app? > >Proprietary lock-in and closed source are weapons used against computer users >to the advantage of unscrupulous for-profit corporations. >The concepts for the 21st Century are >"Open Standards", "Gratis and Libre", and "SERVICE-based Businesses". >--things MSFT doesn't do (or they do them with the intention or BREAKING them; >mentioned as "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" elsewhere in this thread). > >|and the FREE versions often leave much to be desired. >| >How many of these whiz-bang features in the payware actually get used? >...and anyone actually doing a feature-by-feature comparison >of Free Software vs proprietary apps >will also find features in the Free column that are not in the payware column. > >I will acknowledge that M$ Excel is a shining example of a good proprietary app; >if it was ported to ALL platforms, it would move up to excellent. >Again: Choice is a Good Thing(tm). > >I can't remember the 19th Century politician's name >or what exactly the metaphor related to, >but he mentioned the concept of *What good is an infant?*. >If monopoly influence was/is allowed to dominate all choices, >then--just like Herod's victims--we would/will never know what WAS/IS possible. > >|You can show me a list of 100 apps that run on Linux, >|and I can show you 10000 that run on Windows. >| >Not if you count all the things done with Linux shell scripts. >The fact that M$ has the *everything GUI* mentality borked that for Windoze. >An entirely new scripting language every few years didn't help M$ users either. > >Ever see the vast number of extensions for the Mozilla browsers? >A clear demonstration of the power of Open Source software. > >...and most of the Open Source stuff runs on ANY platform. >You can get familiar with it using it under Windoze >and it's the SAME app when you start using Linux full-time. > >|Big deal. Think of all the huge hit games, >| >If you are a Windoze gamer, buy a Windoze box. Anyone with half a brain knows that. >Serious gamers are moving to consoles. > >|and multi million dollar productivity, media, and design packages. >| >There is no reason those can't be ported to *n?x. >Adobe has several items available already. >As I am fond of saying here: Give your money to vendors WHO SUPPORT YOU. >These days, SMART developers are choosing cross-platform-compatible widgets. > >|And to top it all off, most people wouldn't be able to >|install, configure or even use Linux if their life depended on it, >|[whereas] Windows gives you that power with a few intuitive clicks. >| >Empirically false. Neophytes will do equally poorly on poorly-supported software >--no matter what the platform. > >...and Linux has better out-of-the-box hardware support >than Windoze ever dreamed of. >If it wasn't so, the Linux Live CDs wouldn't work; >they would ask for device driver disks--AS MOST WINDOWS INSTALLS DO. >(This is the reason Bart PE and the other bootable Windoze CDs are such a PITA.) > >The out-of-the-box config for most of Linux is sufficient for most users >--just like with most of Windoze and its users >(if you don't count all the 3rd-party band-aids that have to be applied >to achieve the pseudo-safe state that passses for "security" with M$ OSes). > >WRT the *usable* issue--that's Windoze fanboi FUD. >There are millions of Linux users who have a bone to pick with you. >The ones that didn't use Windoze first would rate Windoze equally bad. > >An academic installed a Linux computer with a touchscreen in a brick wall >in a slum in India. The neighborhood kids had it jumping thru hoops immediately. >Damn. I can't find a link to the story now. > >People who are used to using certain key combinations to do certain tasks >and who are used to having things in a specific place on the screen >and who are incapable of adapting to new conditions will, of course, >choose to stick with what they have--even past the point where it is not supported. > >Adaptable people, OTOH, will find that payware is largely foolish. >When that payware uses dirty tricks to try to get you to continue to use it >or to "upgrade" to later versions for no useful reason, it is unacceptable. > >|Linux has benefits, and it is a remarkable operating system, for free. >| >Careful. I see your resolve slipping. 8-) > >|But, Linux developers should take a look at Mac, and get a clue. >| >I won't argue with stealing good ideas. >It's at the core of M$'s business model--Apple's too. > >|Mac is a perfect (Unix based) example of a [USABLE] operating system by the clueless. >| >Even the Mac fanbois don't go as far as _perfect_. >..and I think you meant *for*--not *by*. >Again, there is a yet another legion of folks who will disagree. >...and there are folks who don't WANT to futz with their (Mac or other) boxes; >they have people whose job it is to do that. >Folks shouldn't have to know how an engine works to get a driver's license. > >|Linux is NOT and is not recommended for the faint of heart. >| >The existence of this forum and the number of posts to it is evidence >that few mortals are able to maintain their own boxes--whatever the OS. >Finding a good Support guy (or forum) is critical. > >|Its single biggest downfall >|that will keep it from [ever] being a mainstream operating system is this: >|Linux is like a patchwork quilt with dozens of different versions, >| >The number of Windows(NT) apps that require admin privileges to run >(breaking any hope of having a secure operating environment) >is clear evidence that the *patchwork* thing is not restricted to one OS. > >One would think that the *easily-infected* thing >would have kept Windoze from gaining the market share it enjoys--but nope. > >...and the marketplace is full of many *worse* ideas that gained traction: >QWERTY, x86's segmented model, Iomega Zip disks, VHS, NTSC,... > >|with different commands, >| >False. >The CLI of the Unix (POSIX) environment across versions and distros is uniform. >...and the wide range of utilities *comes* with the OS. > >|different looks and feel, and never ending different ways of doing things >|based on which one of dozens of different versions you have. >| >If you want to mention the range of package managers or desktop environments, >that's another matter; it's also a STRENGTH of Free Software. >Again: Choice is a Good thing(tm). (I'm reminded of Apple's "1984" commercial.) > >...and even the WORST Linux package manager is orders of magnitude BETTER >than what exists under Windoze for getting/updating apps and the OS. > >|And when you have a question about something, >|the internet has about 1/10th the amount of information about it >|than a similar [Windows] search - if you can find the answer at all. >| >Ah, the flaw of 21st Century existence: >A *wealth* of Windoze answers--many of them WRONG. >Obviously you haven't seen the phenomenal Ubuntu forums. > >|To anyone who isn't capable of utilizing the power of the Linux operating system >|it all adds up to one thing - MESS! >| >More typical Windoze fanboi FUD. > >|Not to mention that Linux was never meant to be a desktop operating system, >|that was an after thought, >| >Patently false. Linus developed it for his own general-purpose use. >...and if you think the security model of ANY version of Windoze >is appropriate for a workstation, you are simply delusional. > >|and is barely out of its infancy stages IMO. >| >I previously mentioned the *infant* thing and contrasted it with the *monopoly* thing. >As stated, test drives of Linux are dirt simple. >Most people will find that if they boot to a Linux CD, >without stumbling badly, they can do the stuff they normally do with a computer: >documents, surfing, email. > >Power users are likely to find that WINE is a replacement for Windoze >and their old Windoze-compatible apps will still run under Linux. YMMV. > >Trying to use a *WinModem* to do dial-up >(as mentioned elsewhere in this thread) is a likely exception. >While SOME "LinModems" 8-) have been gotten to work,[2] >if you buy hardware that is SPECIFICALLY for Windoze, you get what you get. >Those kinds of folks would likely go to a Ford dealer for parts for their Toyota. > >Using Linux is not significantly different >that trying to use some random piece of hardware on a more recent M$ OS: >The hardware has to be on the *Supported* list. >Fortunately, the chances are BETTER with Linux. >(Just boot to a Knoppix CD and see if it balks at anything.) > > >[1] BASH scripting has remained consistent since 1978, >while M$ comes up with a completely different scripting notion every few years. > >[2] Again, depending on how eager the vendor is to sell more of his products. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Bootable CD vs Dual-boot or new OS (was: ...AVG free...) Monday, September 1, 2008 at 7:18 pm Posted by heh heh (11 messages posted) Hello, OK, one thing i think that can be answered is the charge of the existence of this forum proves that a lot of people can't run their own computers. When a person runs distro's like Slackware, are they not encouraged to READ the linux forums such as Linuxquestions.org or the many Ubuntu forums. And how about distrowatch, so that you can find more new distro's to play with. I'm sorry but I came back to windows because I am done with going from here to there, giving up my free time just because something is free. Linux is coming, and we need the competition. But I don't need to defend linux on a windows forum. And I don't go to the linux forums to spead FUD as said. On Monday, September 1, 2008 at 3:28 am, GG wrote: >I agree with trying linux. At least with linux you can try a live cd to see if you >like the operating system and 99.99% of the linux os's are free. Microsoft can't >say that. With vista you don't even have a choice. You can try damn small linux, >ubuntu, xubuntu or puppy linux for your win98 desktop. > > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Bootable CD vs Dual-boot or new OS (was: ...AVG free...) Monday, September 1, 2008 at 10:01 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) heh heh wrote: |one thing i think that can be answered is the charge of |the existence of this forum proves that a lot of people can't run their own computers. | In that same thought, I said that getting a good Support guy or Support forum is essential--regardless of OS. |When a person runs distro's like Slackware, | Whoever picks Slack as a *first* distro--especially in 2008-- has gotten horrible advice. Maybe that someone heard about Debian Sid too. 8-( The Ubuntu variants are MUCH more user-friendly. Almost anything is. |are they not encouraged to READ the linux forums |such as Linuxquestions.org or the many Ubuntu forums. | Folks who get a *new* version of Microsoft stuff are often just as befuddled by the new look & feel of that. Mostly, it's about shedding old habits. Again, having a good Support system in place makes life easier. |And how about distrowatch, so that you can find more new distro's to play with. | Yup--and you don't even have to install one to try it. With a "Live CD" which will boot to a Linux desktop, you can decide pretty easily if *that* Desktop Environment / app collection has the look & feel and the functionality you desire. Windoze, OTOH, has to be installed to give it a try. Ever try to return a Windoze CD? ...and those heavy-duty payware Windoze-compatible apps: Ever try to return one of those? |I'm sorry but I came back to windows | Horses for courses (aka Different strokes for different folks). |because I am done with going from here to there, |giving up my free time just because something is free. | I don't think folks switching to XP spend that much less time getting acclimated to it, though a Click and Drool interface seems pretty intuitive for what Joe Average does --no matter what the OS. |Linux is coming, | Millions of people can demonstrate for you that it's already here. I already mentioned Largo, FL; Munich; and Ernie Ball, Inc. |and we need the competition. | Amen. |But I don't need to defend linux on a windows forum. | Again: It's about Choice. Paying M$ for another OS with the same old flaws seems foolish to me. When those flaws are SECURITY flaws, that crosses WAY over the line. |And I don't go to the linux forums to spead FUD as said. | It's only FUD if you don't have the facts to back it up. ...and if you check the (xxxx messages posted) beside my name, you'll see I'm not a newbie here. I know the strengths and weaknesses of W98. When I mention Free Software, it's because someone is struggling unnecessarily. When that is because of one of the M$ apps that got installed with Win98 (and usually the pitiful "security" associated with that app), I mention that (Free Software) Mozilla products are available. I often mention (freeware) Opera as well, though I prefer non-proprietary software. As those options actually have versions available from this century, their up-to-dateness is superior to M$'s ancient offerings. Ever try to install the (still-poorly-secured) 21st Century versions of IE or OE on Win98? M$ purposely broke those to thwart that. That is EVIL. My recommendations are not FUD or trolls; these are (mostly cross-platform) options, available at zero cost, which don't suffer from the *let's ASSIST in the infection process* thing that IE and OE suffer from. When someone is struggling with the pasted-on 3rd-party "security" that they have to endure with Windoze, I often mention that a properly-designed OS doesn't need those. When someone here mentions XP as a "solution" to Windoze 98 deficiencies, I point out that MSFT hasn't solved the security problems yet and that there are *actual solutions* to M$'s poor security model --but they require that you you stop giving money to MSFT for Defective-By-Design software. I'm not forcing anything on anybody. Each solution has its strong and weak points. I'll give the facts; you can pick your poison. [Reply or follow-up to this message] Windoze "security" apps vs a more secure OS Saturday, May 2, 2009 at 3:44 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) (was: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98) George Cowley wrote: |Regarding suggestions about Linux, |unless you have a broadband connection, that's a non-starter |as dial-up is a nightmare for novice users. | Not entirely true--not by a long shot. First, you can get a friend to download Linux and burn it to CD for you or you can buy a Linux CD for MUCH less that a Windoze CD (typically $2 - $5) or you can get Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Edubuntu to mail you a CD (free) --and they even pay the postage. There are also folks who schedule large downloads for the wee hours using dial-up and a download manager (which can resume a broken download). ...and (WRT the subject of this thread) think of the bandwidth you save with Linux not having to get/update band-aid "security" apps. Second, the need for updates with a Unix-like OS is less critical than with Windoze because an exploit's ability to "get root" is mainly a factor of obviously foolish choices by the user. This is very unlike Win9x where **everyone and everything** is a superuser. Those traits are especially significant with the *default* installs of each of these. It is also noteworthy just how little USEFUL software COMES with a Windoze install. e.g. Win98 doesn't even come with a fundamental app for a net-connected OS (a software firewall). To get a spreadsheet, database manager, presentation app (PowerPoint), and a real word processor for Windoze, M$ wants you to buy their office suite[1] separately; most Linux distributions COME with OpenOffice or similar apps on the CD. ...and, of course, the FIRST thing you should do with a Win9x install is replace M$'s horrendously insecure online apps: Internet Exploder and Outbreaks In Excess. (So even what *does* come with that OS is crap.) Here's a BIG point with Linux: There are over 22,000 Free Software apps in the Debian software repositories.[2] These are all no-infection, no-crapware, gratis-and-libre applications. Here's **the** BIG point with Linux: If you want to get ALL of those *without* a broadband connection, there are folks who have made this available on optical media. In fact, all of that will *still* cost you LESS than getting just a Windoze CD. cache of http://distrowatch.com |Linux is great if you know a ton about computers. | You are mired in 1999. Modern Linux distributions ("distros") are SMOKIN'. (Ubuntu 9.04 was just released and folks who had poo-pooed Linux before are just agog at how good it is in its out-of-the-box state.) People who have only used Macs and use Windoze for the first time take a while to get acclimated. People who have only used Win9x and use XP for the first time take a while to get acclimated. People who have to be trained like a monkey to follow a particular sequence of keystrokes/clicks to get a task done will have trouble with *any* OS that is different from what they currently run. Most people need a support guy with their computers. Few people walk up to a computer for the first time and figure it out right off and few Windoze users have ever done their own Windoze install. ...and most real techies these days install Linux for their moms so no one has to deal with all the (Windoze-specific) infections. The vast majority of users will find that a default Linux install will do what they typically do with a computer: documents, surfing, email. No real melodrama there. ...and you DON'T have to **install** Linux to try it; you can run Linux FROM THE CD and see if it will work on your box (the amount of RAM is typically what will limit things) and you can see whether you like the look and feel of that distro. Don't like *that* Linux distro? Try another. (There's a whole bunch.) |I know a ton about computers | It sounds like you equate "Windoze" and "computers". |and Linux just irritates me because it just doesn't do what I need it to do. | It sounds like you are a resident of the USA. Don't blame Linux for the stupid laws your government has enacted. If you want full out-of-the-box multimedia support, you simply have to ignore those stupid laws and get Linux Mint. There also Python scripts that will get/install the proprietary codecs/drivers/crap that aren't permitted to be shipped with free Linux distros. This is an old thread, but those tweaks have been known much longer than that. There are also payware Linux distros which include the ransomware. (I don't advise using those payware distros; the security config on them sucks.) |The old argument about low overhead, in my experience is false too. | Yeah, right. There are also people who try to install XP on their Win9x boxes--and FAIL. Heavyweight Linux distros are made to compete with XP/Vista and require similar resources for similar tasks. TANSTAAFL. You aren't impressing me with your "computer expertise". |I find Linux is a memory hog without fine tuning and I'm not prepared to fiddle. | Compared to the amount of useless stuff Vista loads into RAM by default then has to dump / page out when something useful wants that RAM, Linux is much smarter/sleeker. ...and if you have a lightweight system, get a lighter distro--dump the eye candy. This is actually a great advantage of Linux. Say you don't like the look and feel of a particular Window Manager? Try another. Don't like a distro because it comes with a default WM you don't like? Try another. Again, (unlike Windoze) you DON'T have to *install* a Linux distro to try it. cache of http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Minimal_Linux_distros cache of http://www.linux.com/feature/52134?theme=print ...and when you go to buy a peripheral for your Win9x box, good luck finding something with a Win9x device driver. OTOH, Linux has the BEST hardware support of *any* OS. This is because of the dedication of the Linux Driver Project. ...and of course, you may not have to _buy_ it at all (or at least not *new* stuff); Linux LOVES older hardware. So, not only is Linux zero-cost, you can use old stuff you already have or old stuff you can pick up dirt cheap. [1] OpenOffice doesn't include an email app; Mozilla Thunderbird (or an equivalent), however, comes with Linux. OTOH, M$Office doesn't include a vector drawing app; M$ wants you to buy Visio separately. OpenOffice Draw uses an open, non-proprietary vector graphics file format. [2] Debian Linux has a free-software-only policy. If a software developer pulls any kind of proprietary nonsense with his software, Debian will completely ignore that app. When you hear "Free Software", think "FREEDOM"--not necessarily "freebie". Those memes almost always overlap--but that is just a happy coincidence. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Thursday, May 14, 2009 at 6:56 am Posted by dolly (1 messages posted) Anyone know of a free antivirus for Wndows 98? I was using Grisoft AVG but they have stopped sending out antivirus updates. On Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 3:46 pm, gewg_ wrote: >|Unfortunately I cannot upgrade my system to XP >| Samantha >| >As I've said here before, these infections are WINDOZE-SPECIFIC >and if >you stop using Windoze[1], the threat from them disappears. >(No more anti-virus app / anti-spyware app / yada,yada,yada >to install/update/yada,yada,yada.) > >|because of limited resources >| >That can still be an issue with a non-Windoze solution. >The (cutting-edge) variant I linked to above is also pretty resources-hungry, >but there are SEVERAL >other variants that will run on your *current* hardware[2] >while >still offering the immunity from infections. > >|and not worth the trouble. >| >The way I figure it, if you're going to have to learn a new OS anyway, >why give money to Micro$oft on top of that (when Linux is FREE). > > >|Could anybody recommend another free version of antivirus >|that will still support our Windows 98 OS ? >| >After AVG recently included a clueless/evil "feature", >AVG is on most folk's $#!+ List these days. >From the Usenet Archive     More of that > >The 1st of those Usenet links gives 2 alternates in the first post >and others are mentioned in the thread. > > >[1] Mac OS X is also Unix-based and is also immune from Windoze infections. > >[2] You can boot to the "Live CD" of a Linux "distro" >and test-drive / practice with that Linux variant WITHOUT HAVING TO INSTALL IT. > >If you have the drive space (or a spare drive bay and $10 for an old HDD), >you can set up Windoze/Linux as dual-boot >--with the goal of dumping MSFT completely(??). [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: antivirus AVG free version ending support for Win98 Thursday, May 14, 2009 at 10:31 am Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) dolly wrote: |Anyone know of a free antivirus for Wndows 98? |I was using Grisoft AVG but they have stopped sending out antivirus updates. It would be good if you read the ENTIRE thread before posting to it. That is done by clicking the show all link. http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/t1219176855 [Reply or follow-up to this message] Tip: Use one of the [Reply or follow-up to this message] links above to add a message to this thread Search this forum Start a new thread on a different subject Report abuse of the forum Return to the Windows 98 Discussion Forum