Did Microsoft cut support for Windows 98? How about Win 98 SE?

They cut support for 95, NT(all versions) and 98. Actualy I am not sure about 98, I remember hearing that they have or are going to soon, not sure.

why would they keep supporting it? They want everyone on XP. This is just a subtle hint to tell you to switch to it all-ready.

because it�s the only OS from MS that is pretty much at a secure level like any *nix type.

I know they wised up and killed support for that bastard child ME, but I think they still support 98SE. Many businesses/schools still use it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SpaceFalcon2001:
why would they keep supporting it? They want everyone on XP. This is just a subtle hint to tell you to switch to it all-ready.

---

Many people's computers cannot support XP. XP is a resource hog, by far. win95 uses about 1/20th the ammount of resources as XP, similar to most linux distros. If you ask me its a bad idea to stop supporting it.

bsk i dont get what you mean by its on the same security level as nix. I mean you are comparing a safe with a lock that cant be picked(nix) and a metal box with no way of opening(98, its never designed to be remotely accesed). but in a way, you got a really good point.

[This message has been edited by CDG (edited 11-06-2002).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zok:
XP is a resource hog, by far. win95 uses about 1/20th the ammount of resources as XP.

---

Ya but 95 is total crap, you should know that Z.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CDG:
a safe with a lock that cant be picked

---

There ain't no such thing.

[This message has been edited by bunghole (edited 11-06-2002).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by SpaceFalcon2001:
Ya but 95 is total crap, you should know that Z.

---

It's only crap if you can't use it. If I may quote myself "A fucking ferrari isn't fast enough if you can't switch gears!" Not to mention that 95 is the only version (aside from 3.x) that comes with the "real" dos, not an emulator.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zok:
Not to mention that 95 is the only version (aside from 3.x) that comes with the "real" dos, not an emulator.

---

*cough*windows 98 *cough*
ME was also dos based but you needed a boot disk to get into dos, meaning that either the boot sequence or DOS itself was alterd. But 98 was the last Real dos.

oh and by the way

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zok:
I eat cheese and love the word Chee.

---

no, I think Zok�s right.

I agree. DOS is just a unix rip-off, it annoys me.

Microsofts golden rule is that they cut support for an OS 5 years after its release

Slightly off topic but does anyone know where to buy a brand new upgrade version of win 98se? I have an old box with windows 98 on it, it has no where near enough power to support a new os (like xp) but i want a little more stability on it, linux is out of the question as it will soon be going to my mother (isn't chunky such a good son!). I can't find anywhere that will sell it.

Chunkmiester
?

I hate cheese! Cheese and I have our differences, and those differences will never be settled.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skalez:
I agree. DOS is just a unix rip-off, it annoys me.

---

DOS doesnt have much to do with UNIX, thats why its so unstable as a base for windows.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chunkmiester:
does anyone know where to buy a brand new upgrade version of win 98se?

---

you dont seem to be looking very hard, i can run down to microcenter and still get Win 98, i think they have NT (Z, do you know?), I also have been to a few places that still have one or two unopened copies of win 95...

Um so anyway.. did they cut support for 98 se?

lets count together: 98, thats 1, 99, 2, 00, 3, 01, 4, 02, 5. Yup 5 Years, following the 5 yr rule. So yes yes they did.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SpaceFalcon2001:
DOS doesnt have much to do with UNIX, thats why its so unstable as a base for windows.

---

Win98 operates independently from dos...and from what im seeing, i guess thats the windows you are talking about. And by the way, dos is not a rip off unix, you take a look at any os back in the day, and guess what...they are all text based and unix/dos looking. You take a look at most of the os of today, they are all graphical, so can you say that linux ripped off of ms(who actually did rip off mac)? The working behind unix and MSdos is very different.

If you want a new version of win98se, run down to best buy/compusa/any computer store.

The booting from a floppy to dos has nothing to do with if your windows comes with dos or not. Dos stands for...Disk Operating System, if you boot from a disk, in this case the floppy, you are running DOS, not windows, and it has nothing to do with windows.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CDG:
The booting from a floppy to dos has nothing to do with if your windows comes with dos or not. Dos stands for...Disk Operating System, if you boot from a disk, in this case the floppy, you are running DOS, not windows, and it has nothing to do with windows.

---

I know, but I suspect that it is not true MS-DOS. I think it has been mutilated beyond use in ME. 98 runs on DOS, just like 95, 3.11, 3.1, 3.0, etc.

the DOS and linux kernels are very different and DOS is very inferior. the only area it excels in is ease of use which was never a strong point or intention for unix.

if you want to get some bad ass power on your windows box just get cygwin and welcome to the world of stable and easy to use linux transition.

Can't argue with that. (Ill look for the program to try it).

quote:

---

Originally posted by CDG:
Win98 operates independently from dos...

---

wrong again ...

BSK's proof = 0, you can easily exit windows 98 to MS-DOS.
SpaceFalcon2001's proof=1

[This message has been edited by SpaceFalcon2001 (edited 11-09-2002).]