Tip: Run a free scan for common Windows errors ad

re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 2:50 pm Posted by Steve (23810 messages posted) XP is still so popular, that my bet the activation will remain intact for many years to come. The activation system of XP, Vista, Windows 7 is probably all woven together in the same infrastructure. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:06 pm Posted by Steve (23810 messages posted) My ISP says they don't support Windows 98, or Linux, but both work fine with the Broadband, so not sure why just having Windows 98 would stop you from getting High Speed connection. If you got old Windows 98 Hardware, then XP won't work that well on it anyway. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:13 pm Posted by Alan (11 messages posted) Thanks Steve ..... I figured the Microsoft monster would think of something. On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 2:50 pm, Steve wrote: >XP is still so popular, that my bet the activation will remain intact for many years >to come. The activation system of XP, Vista, Windows 7 is probably all woven together >in the same infrastructure. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:18 pm Posted by Alan (11 messages posted) That's good ! I don't know if a USB port broadband modem would just take off like that in 98 without some kind of driver. I suspect linux would. Just to be on the safe side .... are there any sites that have special drivers ? Murphy hides under my bed. On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:06 pm, Steve wrote: >My ISP says they don't support Windows 98, or Linux, but both work fine with the >Broadband, so not sure why just having Windows 98 would stop you from getting High >Speed connection. If you got old Windows 98 Hardware, then XP won't work that well >on it anyway. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:30 pm Posted by Steve (23810 messages posted) You don't want a usb modem if you can avoid it. They suck. A modem using Network cable is the most reliable. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:36 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) Here's how your post looks: http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1253134574 The length of your post is approaching what I call "a blob". The first 2 paragraphs here are worth reading: http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1217046552 Alan wrote: |I have a terribly slow rural dial up connection of 26K | If you are hovering over the icon in your system tray and that's what it says, you aren't even getting that in a *sustained* way. |and am using win98se with unofficial updates. |I'd like to know if the end of support for XP (this year ??), |means that I would be able to buy an XP disc | First, questions about XP belong in the XP forum. |and use that same code for my computer as well as my wifes. | Absolutely not. I suggest you THOROUGHLY investigate http://google.com/search?q="Windows.Product.Activation" This nonsense goes FAR beyond what you have experienced with Win9x's Windows Product Keys. (I'm assuming you have installed Win9x yourself.) Particularly investigate what happens if you replace a hardware component. Hint: Your M$ OS won't work any more. WRT your wishfulness: THE OPPOSITE IS MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN. Stop and think what happens if (when) M$ shuts down its XP activation servers. What good is XP if, in the future, you can't get an activation code for it? Hint: None at all. |Seems like a pain in the rear to need different codes / keys (whatever) |for two different home computers. | So, you want to use M$ products and not give M$ its full due? Shame on you. What are you? Some kind of Commie? ...and as indicated above, Product Keys are only the tip of the iceberg. You don't need to go through ANY of that nonsense to use a computer. In order to avoid that, however, you have to stop giving money to Microsoft. If you boot to a Linux CD, I'll bet you find that a device driver for that device[1] is on the disk[2] (aka "out-of-the-box support"). You could then go on to install Linux to a hard drive and dump the 10 year old junk you're running --and not give away any more money to M$. Did I mention that Linux is FREE? |If this problem disappears, |I can switch to XP and get a broadband modem for high speed. 26K is a real drag. | There are broadband modems that come with a Win9x device driver. Whoever is stringing you along with this bad information is likely going to charge you a premium for all of this as well. ...and that would be after paying The Microsoft Tax(tm) again--twice. [1] ...provided the modem doesn't use chips from that HORRIBLE company called Broadcom. [2] The device drivers are in the Linux kernel, actually. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:41 pm Posted by Alan (11 messages posted) I'm in Colorado. There are huge areas of land that don't even have electric or phone. The nearest tower is 10 miles away......BUT, I have several parabolic grill antennas out back that were used for a now defunct TV system set up years ago. They have a 20db gain. Get a usb extension cord and put the modem at the focus of the parabola an aim it at the tower. On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:30 pm, Steve wrote: >You don't want a usb modem if you can avoid it. They suck. A modem using Network >cable is the most reliable. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:55 pm Posted by Alan (11 messages posted) I'm not a commie, but I like a feeling of privacy. If you want a bar code on your arm, go for it, but I don't. Who wants to keep getting profiled by greedy people trying SELL SELL SELL all their plastic junk. Back to computers: Linux is interesting, but it was very confusing to me after using Win98 for so long ..... and yes I know how to set up everthing after I wipe a drive down. Have to do it about 3 times a year. Running Vcom Fix It is a really good program to have on an old OS. Ubuntu didn't see my hardware, except for the monitor, so I tossed it. Maybe some newer version of linux is more friendly (for me, it needs to be MUCH more friendly). It's kind of sad really ..... I'm an indigent 62 year old guy and didn't want to spend so many hours learning about computers in my later years. There are so many conflicts within computers and operating systems. I'm not a bible pounder, but "The Book" says Satan is the author of confusion. I'll try and be of good cheer and hope the Linux folks come up with something I can easily use. Thanks :-) On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:36 pm, gewg_ wrote: >Here's how your post looks: >http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1253134574 >The length of your post is approaching what I call "a blob". > >The first 2 paragraphs here are worth reading: >http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1217046552 > > >Alan wrote: >|I have a terribly slow rural dial up connection of 26K >| >If you are hovering over the icon in your system tray and that's what it says, >you aren't even getting that in a *sustained* way. > >|and am using win98se with unofficial updates. >|I'd like to know if the end of support for XP (this year ??), >|means that I would be able to buy an XP disc >| >First, questions about XP belong in the XP forum. > >|and use that same code for my computer as well as my wifes. >| >Absolutely not. I suggest you THOROUGHLY investigate >http://google.com/search?q="Windows.Product.Activation" > >This nonsense goes FAR beyond what you have experienced >with Win9x's Windows Product Keys. >(I'm assuming you have installed Win9x yourself.) > >Particularly investigate what happens if you replace a hardware component. >Hint: Your M$ OS won't work any more. > >WRT your wishfulness: THE OPPOSITE IS MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN. >Stop and think what happens if (when) M$ shuts down its XP activation servers. >What good is XP if, in the future, you can't get an activation code for it? >Hint: None at all. > >|Seems like a pain in the rear to need different codes / keys (whatever) >|for two different home computers. >| >So, you want to use M$ products and not give M$ its full due? >Shame on you. What are you? Some kind of Commie? > >...and as indicated above, Product Keys are only the tip of the iceberg. > >You don't need to go through ANY of that nonsense to use a computer. >In order to avoid that, however, you have to stop giving money to Microsoft. > >If you boot to a Linux CD, >I'll bet you find that a device driver for that device[1] is on the disk[2] >(aka "out-of-the-box support"). >You could then go on to install Linux to a hard drive >and dump the 10 year old junk you're running >--and not give away any more money to M$. > >Did I mention that Linux is FREE? > >|If this problem disappears, >|I can switch to XP and get a broadband modem for high speed. 26K is a real drag. >| >There are broadband modems that come with a Win9x device driver. >Whoever is stringing you along with this bad information >is likely going to charge you a premium for all of this as well. > >...and that would be after paying The Microsoft Tax(tm) again--twice. > > >[1] ...provided the modem doesn't use chips from that HORRIBLE company >called Broadcom. > >[2] The device drivers are in the Linux kernel, actually. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:56 pm Posted by Steve (23810 messages posted) If you live out in the sticks, your option for Broadband is probably one of the Satellite Broadband providers, unless you have Cable internet available. Your Home brew solution kind of sounds silly.:) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 4:28 pm Posted by Alan (11 messages posted) No, it works very nicely. I gave my neighbor one of the larger parabolas (3 ft. dia) I had and he gets a good signal. Before I had a phone line I used to use one of these when I had a cellphone. Put an element at the focus and got ALL the bars. Without it, maybe only 2 bars and frequent break ups. On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:56 pm, Steve wrote: >If you live out in the sticks, your option for Broadband is probably one of the Satellite >Broadband providers, unless you have Cable internet available. Your Home brew >solution kind of sounds silly.:) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 5:00 pm Posted by Alan (11 messages posted) Satellite is too expensive. On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:56 pm, Steve wrote: >If you live out in the sticks, your option for Broadband is probably one of the Satellite >Broadband providers, unless you have Cable internet available. Your Home brew >solution kind of sounds silly.:) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 5:03 pm Posted by Alan (11 messages posted) Guess I should have said: I would appreciate you suggesting one or two versions of Linux for me to try. The dummy versions :-)) On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 3:36 pm, gewg_ wrote: >Here's how your post looks: >http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1253134574 >The length of your post is approaching what I call "a blob". > >The first 2 paragraphs here are worth reading: >http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1217046552 > > >Alan wrote: >|I have a terribly slow rural dial up connection of 26K >| >If you are hovering over the icon in your system tray and that's what it says, >you aren't even getting that in a *sustained* way. > >|and am using win98se with unofficial updates. >|I'd like to know if the end of support for XP (this year ??), >|means that I would be able to buy an XP disc >| >First, questions about XP belong in the XP forum. > >|and use that same code for my computer as well as my wifes. >| >Absolutely not. I suggest you THOROUGHLY investigate >http://google.com/search?q="Windows.Product.Activation" > >This nonsense goes FAR beyond what you have experienced >with Win9x's Windows Product Keys. >(I'm assuming you have installed Win9x yourself.) > >Particularly investigate what happens if you replace a hardware component. >Hint: Your M$ OS won't work any more. > >WRT your wishfulness: THE OPPOSITE IS MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN. >Stop and think what happens if (when) M$ shuts down its XP activation servers. >What good is XP if, in the future, you can't get an activation code for it? >Hint: None at all. > >|Seems like a pain in the rear to need different codes / keys (whatever) >|for two different home computers. >| >So, you want to use M$ products and not give M$ its full due? >Shame on you. What are you? Some kind of Commie? > >...and as indicated above, Product Keys are only the tip of the iceberg. > >You don't need to go through ANY of that nonsense to use a computer. >In order to avoid that, however, you have to stop giving money to Microsoft. > >If you boot to a Linux CD, >I'll bet you find that a device driver for that device[1] is on the disk[2] >(aka "out-of-the-box support"). >You could then go on to install Linux to a hard drive >and dump the 10 year old junk you're running >--and not give away any more money to M$. > >Did I mention that Linux is FREE? > >|If this problem disappears, >|I can switch to XP and get a broadband modem for high speed. 26K is a real drag. >| >There are broadband modems that come with a Win9x device driver. >Whoever is stringing you along with this bad information >is likely going to charge you a premium for all of this as well. > >...and that would be after paying The Microsoft Tax(tm) again--twice. > > >[1] ...provided the modem doesn't use chips from that HORRIBLE company >called Broadcom. > >[2] The device drivers are in the Linux kernel, actually. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 5:14 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) Again: Tweaking your forum preferences is advised. http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1217046552 Alan wrote: |I don't know if a USB port broadband modem |would just take off like that in 98 without some kind of driver. | Not a chance--even simple mass storage devices need a separate driver with 9x. |I suspect linux would. | http://google.com/search?q="The.best.hardware.support.of.ANY.OS" |Just to be on the safe side .... are there any sites that have special drivers ? | I wouldn't hand over my cash in a store nor reveal a credit card number to an online vendor *UNTIL* I had a disk in my hot little hand containing the device driver for the device being pushed AND HAD VERIFIED THAT IT WAS FOR *MY* OS. Booting to a Linux CD in the store and seeing the device working there would be the Gold Standard for a Linux user.[1] |Murphy hides under my bed. | ...and Sturgeon is in the closet. http://google.com/search?q="Ninety.percent.of.everything.is.crap" [1] Assumes the "Buy More" store has been assimilated by The Borg and won't install Linux on anything. (Does anybody else like the show "Chuck"?) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 5:16 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) Steve wrote: ||Your Home brew solution kind of sounds silly.:) Alan wrote: |No, it works very nicely. |I gave my neighbor one of the larger parabolas (3 ft. dia) I had |and he gets a good signal. Back in 2001, Bob Cringely got the idea to "piggyback" via Wi-Fi off someone closer to the wired feed and he put that in his column. http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2001/pulpit_20010628_000421.html The number of folks who have done something similar since then should be staggering. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 5:16 pm Posted by Arminius (334 messages posted) Alan, You managed to get things done using Win98 all these years, have you considered installing Windows 2000? On the plus side: 1) Win98 users adapt to Windows 2000 very easily. 2) Runs better on older hardware than WinXP. 3) There is NO product activation. On the down side: 1) Microsoft will stop issuing patches for it next year. 2) A growing number of third party software vendors are dropping support for it. 3) Second hand CDs are not cheap. Maybe you know someone who no longer wants their copy. Overall, I'd say Windows 2000 has a few good years left in it. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 5:19 pm Posted by Arminius (334 messages posted) Hey! What is the matter with the formatting of the forum today? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 5:20 pm Posted by Alan (11 messages posted) Yes ..... definitely The Borg ! I knew this would happen ! On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 5:14 pm, gewg_ wrote: >Again: Tweaking your forum preferences is advised. >http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1217046552 > > >Alan wrote: >|I don't know if a USB port broadband modem >|would just take off like that in 98 without some kind of driver. >| >Not a chance--even simple mass storage devices need a separate driver with 9x. > >|I suspect linux would. >| >http://google.com/search?q="The.best.hardware.support.of.ANY.OS" > >|Just to be on the safe side .... are there any sites that have special drivers ? >| >I wouldn't hand over my cash in a store >nor reveal a credit card number to an online vendor >*UNTIL* I had a disk in my hot little hand >containing the device driver for the device being pushed >AND HAD VERIFIED THAT IT WAS FOR *MY* OS. > >Booting to a Linux CD in the store and seeing the device working there >would be the Gold Standard for a Linux user.[1] > >|Murphy hides under my bed. >| >...and Sturgeon is in the closet. >http://google.com/search?q="Ninety.percent.of.everything.is.crap" > > >[1] Assumes the "Buy More" store has been assimilated by The Borg >and won't install Linux on anything. >(Does anybody else like the show "Chuck"?) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 5:25 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) Arminius wrote: |Hey! What is the matter with the formatting of the forum today? It's no different today. Open up a posting page. What is the first word in the dialog box? How many linefeeds do you see preceding that? You can't start a line with that word (well, not capitalized) --unless you want to insert a bunch of linefeeds before it. (Again, the Webmaster's odd syntactical rules.) You need to put something (e.g. a period) preceding that word on the line. Another trick is to put bogus markup in the middle of the word --like {/b} (without a matching {b} ). If you haven't already, you need to read my trick book as does the OP: http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1217046552 [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 6:20 pm Posted by Arminius (334 messages posted) I don't know what's going on gewg. In my post in this thread the paragraphs (sections) appear to be separated by six blank lines even thought I only left one blank line between them, it never happened before. That is when viewed with Opera. http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1253146615 When I opened the same page with IE6 it looks better, only two blank lines between the paragraphs. Go figure. It may be due to a foible when a colon : and a ) symbol are used as I have but I have no idea why. The last line starting with the word "Overall" has only one blank line between it and the previous paragraph as it should. gewg wrote: |Open up a posting page. |What is the first word in the dialog box? |How many linefeeds do you see preceding that? If by "dialog box" you mean the place the message gets typed, mine is blank, it always is. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 6:33 pm Posted by Steve (23810 messages posted) Well at least I now understand why you are to cheap to buy a couple 80 dollar copy's of XP.:) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 6:41 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) gewg wrote: ||Open up a posting page. ||What is the first word in the dialog box? ||How many linefeeds do you see preceding that? Arminius wrote: |If by "dialog box" you mean the place the message gets typed, mine is blank, |it always is. | It appears you have "Quote previous message when replying" unticked at http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/config The magic word I refered to is "On" (capital O, small n, space). You can't start a line with that without hijinks. Treatment of that is hard-coded into the forum's posting script. [Reply or follow-up to this message] An OS that doesn't require activation (was:...XP...) Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 6:46 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) Alan wrote: |Guess I should have said: |I would appreciate you suggesting one or two versions of Linux for me to try. |The dummy versions :-)) Why does no one mention how much horsepower he has? 8-( How much RAM you have matters (especially assuming Win9x-era hardware). With at least 256MB: Linux Mint is the Cadillac. It comes with all the proprietary crap--even some that Windoze doesn't include: (That's a BIG plus--especially for those with limited bandwidth.) cache of http://sheehantu.wordpress.com/category/tips The default version of Mint uses the Gnome desktop. A lot of (former) Windoze users prefer the K Desktop Environment. Mint does also have a KDE spin for those folks. (Again: 256MB) With at least 128MB: Mint also has a spin that uses the Xfce desktop. Mint also has a more sparce, less graphical spin using the Fluxbox desktop. I want the first spin of Mint using the Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment to come out NOW, but McLovin is having post-partum health problems and there have been delays with that. This one should fit in between the Xfce spin and the Fluxbox spin. I fully expect the LXDE spin of Linux Mint to be the Win98 Killer. Others: Knoppix is legendary for its hardware support. Puppy has a well-established rep for running on anything--even old, slow boxes. SliTaz is an up-and-comer that's light but nice. moonOS is another in that category. There are a lot of ideas down a bit on this page: http://annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1253042777 The DistroWatch search engine linked there is pretty great. The individual DistroWatch page for a distro is a good place to start. Side by side, those give a level-playing-field comparison to some extent. NOTE: The lighter distros sometimes don't come with what I consider basics; several don't include a mail client, so you can't test drive that. Some don't include an offfice suite--or ANY office software.[1] The thinking often is that this far into the 21st Century, everybody has a fast 'Net connection. 8-( The "package managers" of Linux distros make it a snap to get the apps you need --but, again, it ASSuMEs a good download capacity. [1] ...then there's Debian Linux which comes with 3 office suites. That one is in the Ubuntu / Mint(Gnome) class for power. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Will the end of XP support, end the code nuisance ? Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 7:12 pm Posted by Alan (11 messages posted) You mean, Too cheap, not to cheap. ............. I'm pretty broke so I have to be frugal and inovative. I've never had a new computer. They're more like kits I put together, but they work. On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 6:33 pm, Steve wrote: >Well at least I now understand why you are to cheap to buy a couple 80 dollar copy's >of XP.:) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: An OS that doesn't require activation (was:...XP...) Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 7:27 pm Posted by Alan (11 messages posted) Thank you for all the great info ! :-) On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at 6:46 pm, gewg_ wrote: >Alan wrote: >|Guess I should have said: >|I would appreciate you suggesting one or two versions of Linux for me to try. >|The dummy versions :-)) > >Why does no one mention how much horsepower he has? 8-( >How much RAM you have matters (especially assuming Win9x-era hardware). > >With at least 256MB: > >Linux Mint is the Cadillac. >It comes with all the proprietary crap--even some that Windoze doesn't include: >(That's a BIG plus--especially for those with limited bandwidth.) >cache >of http://sheehantu.wordpress.com/category/tips > >The default version of Mint uses the Gnome desktop. >A lot of (former) Windoze users prefer the K Desktop Environment. >Mint does also have a KDE spin for those folks. (Again: 256MB) > > >With at least 128MB: > >Mint also has a spin that uses the Xfce desktop. > >Mint also has a more sparce, less graphical spin using the Fluxbox desktop. > >I want the first spin of Mint using the Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment >to come out NOW, but McLovin is having post-partum health problems >and there have been delays with that. >This one should fit in between the Xfce spin and the Fluxbox spin. >I fully expect the LXDE spin of Linux Mint to be the Win98 Killer. > > >Others: >Knoppix is legendary for its hardware support. > >Puppy has a well-established rep for running on anything--even old, slow boxes. > >SliTaz is an up-and-comer that's light but nice. >moonOS is another in that category. > > >There are a lot of ideas down a bit on this page: >http://annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1253042777 >The DistroWatch search engine linked there is pretty great. >The individual DistroWatch page for a distro is a good place to start. >Side by side, those give a level-playing-field comparison to some extent. > > >NOTE: The lighter distros sometimes don't come with what I consider basics; >several don't include a mail client, so you can't test drive that. >Some don't include an offfice suite--or ANY office software.[1] > >The thinking often is that this far into the 21st Century, >everybody has a fast 'Net connection. 8-( > >The "package managers" of Linux distros make it a snap to get the apps you need >--but, again, it ASSuMEs a good download capacity. > > >[1] ...then there's Debian Linux which comes with 3 office suites. >That one is in the Ubuntu / Mint(Gnome) class for power. [Reply or follow-up to this message] Another alternative? (was:...XP...) Thursday, September 17, 2009 at 10:02 am Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) Arminius wrote: |[...]have you considered installing Windows 2000? | |On the plus side: |2) Runs better on older hardware than WinXP. | This assumes that he looked at the XP Hardware Compatibility List and already confirmed that all his devices *are* supported under XP. I have my doubts on that--re: "supported" and re: "looked". The fact is, the device in question *may not* work under Win2000. |3) There is NO product activation. | That's the big one. It's MS's last product without that nonsense. |On the down side: |1) Microsoft will stop issuing patches for it next year. | Heh. Wishful thinking. |Overall, I'd say Windows 2000 has a few good years left in it. | I wouldn't say that at all. Here are the facts: When a security hole was revealed in Win9x weeks before M$'s stated EoS date, M$ simply dropped support for Win9x early when they knew they would actually have to expend some effort to close the hole. In a similar move which has been widely reported due to its callousness, M$ has ALREADY decided to stop patching Win2000 (most of a year before its stated EoS). from the Usenet Archive -- Terry Porter |2) A growing number of third party software vendors are dropping support for it. | Yup. When you look at the list of things that no longer run under W2k (or NEVER DID), is only slightly better than 9x--and both lists grow weekly. |3) Second hand CDs are not cheap. | Despite my playful chiding of the OP earlier in this thread (that Commie), I do not advocate giving money for software. I have already mentioned Gratis and Libre (Free Software). Anyone with a BitTorrent client can also get any of this unsupported M$ stuff without financially supporting a fundamentally corrupt business environment. (Paying for abandonware seems immoral to me--not to mention dumb.) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Another alternative? (was:...XP...) Thursday, September 17, 2009 at 9:22 pm Posted by Arminius (334 messages posted) ||On the plus side: ||2) Runs better on older hardware than WinXP. || |This assumes that he looked at the XP Hardware Compatibility List |and already confirmed that all his devices *are* supported under XP. |I have my doubts on that--re: "supported" and re: "looked". |The fact is, the device in question *may not* work under Win2000. Maybe he has a piece of hardware that won't work on Win2000, who knows? It is idle speculation at this point. I was thinking in terms of his CPU and motherboard. I assumed if his computer shipped with Win98 then it almost certainly shipped with a Pentium II or III, Celeron or Athlon. Win2000 would be more responsive than WinXP on an old system like that. Second hand SDRAM is so cheap these days it is virtually a non-issue if he needs an extra stick or two. Later on he told us he cobbled the computer together himself. http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1253153576 The complaint about Win2000 when it was first released was lack of drivers for various hardware items, but that problem eventually went away and support for Win2000 among hardware maunfacturers became standard. ||Overall, I'd say Windows 2000 has a few good years left in it. || |I wouldn't say that at all. Here are the facts: |When a security hole was revealed in Win9x weeks before M$'s stated EoS date, |M$ simply dropped support for Win9x early |when they knew they would actually have to expend some effort to close the hole. It doesn't surprise me that Microsoft would pull the plug on patches earlier than originally promised. However, as a practical matter, if the security hole had been there all those years and gone undetected it probably was not much of a problem. I read an article several years ago that stated only 4% of known security vulnerabilities were ever exploited. In any case, Win2000 is more up to date than Win98 which is what the OP is using now. |Anyone with a BitTorrent client can also get any of this unsupported M$ stuff |without financially supporting a fundamentally corrupt business environment. |(Paying for abandonware seems immoral to me--not to mention dumb.) Yeah, but this ain't a warez forum. The OP didn't indicate he knew there is a version of XP available that DOES NOT require product activation. Even so, the OP is in a catch-22 situation. Imagine trying to download an ISO using a 26k modem, even if the ISO is broken up into 100MB chunks as RAR files. In theory it can be done, but it would take a long long time. Win2000 is a sensible alternative for Win98 users who want to continue using their old hardware and continue to use an OS they are basically familiar with. The fact that Win2000 regularly sells for premium prices (for an old OS) on the second hand market suggests a lot of other people have the same idea and are creating the demand for it. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Another alternative? (was:...XP...) Thursday, September 17, 2009 at 10:40 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) gewg_ wrote: ||The fact is, the device in question *may not* work under Win2000. Arminius wrote: |[...]The complaint about Win2000 when it was first released was lack of drivers [...]but that problem eventually went away |and support for Win2000 among hardware maunfacturers became standard. | Yeah. You would _think_ an NT kernel is an NT kernel as far as drivers goes, --but there *are* incompatibilities among those ostensibly similar platforms ...and manufacturs of stuff **today** often don't bother to do regression. (It's a mark of what separates the good guys from the crap.) ||M$ simply dropped support for Win9x early ||when they knew they would actually have to expend some effort |It doesn't surprise me that Microsoft would pull the plug on patches |earlier than originally promised. | Now, contrast that with Open Source Software. Terry's Usenet post did exactly that. When the source code is available and a single programmer is still interested, the codebase never dies and the exploits get patched. |However, as a practical matter, if the security hole had been there all those years |and gone undetected it probably was not much of a problem. | Don't whistle too loudly in the dark there. 8-) ||[...]BitTorrent[...] ||(Paying for abandonware seems immoral to me--not to mention dumb.) |The OP didn't indicate he knew there is a version of XP available |that DOES NOT require product activation. | I'm not talking about XP--yet. As long as M$ does a good faith effort at patching it, they can retain the rights. I have a real problem, however, with the "intellectual property" laws that allow projects that are clearly abandoned to be protected still. |Even so, the OP is in a catch-22 situation. |Imagine trying to download an ISO using a 26k modem, | My worse experience was at ~33kb/s (measured). It takes a lot of patience. ...and as I said to the OP, the initial burst speed that you see displayed when you hover over the icon in the SysTray ISN'T a sustained throughput rate. |even if the ISO is broken up into 100MB chunks as RAR files. | Yet another beauty of BitTorrent (segmentation). |In theory it can be done, but it would take a long long time. | You young whipersnappers who have no patience... |Win2000 is a sensible alternative for Win98 users |who want to continue using their old hardware |and continue to use an OS they are basically familiar with. | "To each his own" as the old woman said when she kissed the cow. |The fact that Win2000 regularly sells for premium prices (for an old OS) |on the second hand market suggests |a lot of other people have the same idea and are creating the demand for it. | It's largely what it DOESN'T contain: WPA, WGA, DRM. The last of that breed. ...and you should use the QuickLink button when posting URLs. (I prefer it when folks remove the **target=_blank ** part.) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Another alternative? (was:...XP...) Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 8:53 pm Posted by Arminius (334 messages posted) |In a similar move which has been widely reported due to its callousness, |M$ has ALREADY decided to stop patching Win2000 |(most of a year before its stated EoS). |from the Usenet Archive -- Terry Porter I think this is the vunerability Porter was refering to: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS09-048.mspx To say that Win2000 ought to be junked because of this one vulnerability is an overreaction. They aren't fixing the problem in XP either. Terry Porter didn't even bother to provide a link or reference to the actual Microsoft security bulletin. Doesn't he want people to read what Microsoft has to say or is that what Porter calls reporting? My guess is Porter didn't read the security bulletin himself, he just quoted someone else. Microsoft recommends using a firewall, something users ought to be doing anyway. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Another alternative? (was:...XP...) Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 2:05 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) Arminius wrote: |To say that Win2000 ought to be junked because of this one vulnerability |is an overreaction. They aren't fixing the problem in XP either. |[. . .] |Microsoft recommends using a firewall, |something users ought to be doing anyway. Yeah, this is mostly a tempest in a teapot --but it *is* indicative of M$'s willingness to exclude part of its user base and to cavalierly ignore its own flaws. On the flip side of the coin is OpenBSD: an Open Source Software project that is absolutely anal about good code and especially about rapidly fixing those few things that they ever let get out in an insecure/broken state. OpenBSD is in the top tier of any list of highly-secure OSes. In light of Bob Wells' recent post http://annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1254034257 about M$IE's FUD (pot; kettle; black) regarding Google Chrome Frame, this is quite telling. See my response to Bob's post. Aside: Did you notice what I did with the word "On" in this post? Look at the page source. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Another alternative? (was:...XP...) Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 5:00 pm Posted by Arminius (334 messages posted) Yeah, you inserted "< / b >" (minus the spaces) between the "O" and the "n". It has no effect unless it is preceded by "< b >" somewhere to give instructions for the text to be displayed as bold. Your point is? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Another alternative? (was:...XP...) Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 11:38 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) Arminius wrote: |Yeah, you inserted "< / b >" (minus the spaces) between the "O" and the "n". |It has no effect | It has *exactly* the effect desired. |unless it is preceded by "< b >" somewhere | That assumes that BOLD was the desired effect. It wasn't. |[...]Your point is? | Several days back, http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1253147121 you pitched a fit about the number of carriage returns inserted into your post by the forums HTML auto-parser. I was calling attention to one of the ways to avoid that (an unmatched ending tag in the middle of the offending word). Another word that gets special treatment here (treatment of a heinous nature) is JavaScript. The trick I demonstrated is especially handy for that instance --where nothing else will work without altering the appearance of the text. [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