• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Installing 98 on Sony Vaio with XP...help

C

ctf20

Member
Hi. I am about to try to install Win98 on a Sony Vaio PCV-RS 314P that has XP on it....need help! first i don't know much so if there is anything specific i should know (like if this is not possible 🙂.....i have been trying to find the 98 drivers for that model, will they even exist? and if so where?? or do i use the xp drivers?

please help!

thanks!!!
 
first we have 98, not ME already.....and not sure all the details, but xp can only have 10 computers networked? something like that. we are putting a database on it that all the computers in the building use, and its' more than ten.
 
Ouch. You're going the wrong direction!

When most companies exceed XP Pro's 10-connection limit, they install a Windows Server. Putting anything important on an unsupported operating system with near-zero security isn't usually recommended.

It's unlikely that XP drivers will work in Windows 98. Sony isn't going to provide Windows 98 drivers for that PC.

Since it's an Intel Chipset, you can probably get the "important" chipset drivers from Intel. Actually, if you are only going to load files on it, the generic drivers that Windows 98 provides will probably "work". You, presumably, don't need things like sound or fast video.

Be sure to get some updated Realtek RTL8139 drivers for the built-in network port. Windows 98 drivers for the RTL8139 are borked and can cause the PC to behave erratically.
 
Originally posted by: jlbenedict
uh oh..

I predict Link19 will post in this thread before I wake up tomorrow morning 🙂
Click to expand...
LOL. Did anybody PM him? Somebody PM Link19, and I'll PM Stash. 😛

I'm making the popcorn now. You want butter on it?
 
yeah, 98 is the wrong direction...and why would you put a database on a laptop?

If the 10 user thing is biting you, then get a server, with a server OS...or at least a real OS. I would look at an easy to use Linux distro to host the database, as it's going to have better support for modern hardware, have up to date security, and have added functionality that you just won't get with 98.

Also remember, if you hammer 98 much, you will end up with at least daily reboots.
 
Originally posted by: nweaver
yeah, 98 is the wrong direction...and why would you put a database on a laptop?
Click to expand...
Actually, this Vaio model isn't a laptop. It's a desktop with an Intel 865 chipset.
The perfect recipient for Windows 98, as I'm sure Link19 will agree. 🙂

ctf20, please consider bringing in a local IT/Security consultant to review your IT systems and advise you on how to organize, manage, and secure your data and avoid potential future pain. Many consultants will do a survey for free and you can decide what you want to do from there.

If you use Microsoft technologies, there's a tool on this page to find Certified Microsoft Partners in your area.
 
Yikes.....

Normally for such a small shop like you have I wouldn't suggest the services of a consultant. But in this case... yeah I'd say get someone in there who knows what they are doing.
 
XP pro cannot take more than 10 concurrent connections (i.e. at the same time). If more than 10 of your users need to read or write to the database simultaneously or need to map to that pc, you have a problem. If all you need is a pc that is accessible to every one, but only a few would accessing it at the same time, XP pro would be just fine.

Microsoft is ending almost all support for W98 this July. Most corporate AVs need a newer OS, so you cannot seriously put valuable data on a lightly supported and protected pc. IMHO you need at least w2000 (it has the same limitations as XP pro), preferably Windows server 2003. It can be set up for simple file sharing very easily, and would be far more secure.
 
Originally posted by: RebateMonger
Originally posted by: jlbenedict
uh oh..

I predict Link19 will post in this thread before I wake up tomorrow morning 🙂
Click to expand...
LOL. Did anybody PM him? Somebody PM Link19, and I'll PM Stash. 😛

I'm making the popcorn now. You want butter on it?
Click to expand...

:laugh:

Damn.. no signs of Link19 here yet...
 
Originally posted by: jlbenedict
Originally posted by: RebateMonger
Originally posted by: jlbenedict
uh oh..

I predict Link19 will post in this thread before I wake up tomorrow morning 🙂
Click to expand...
LOL. Did anybody PM him? Somebody PM Link19, and I'll PM Stash. 😛

I'm making the popcorn now. You want butter on it?
Click to expand...

:laugh:

Damn.. no signs of Link19 here yet...
Click to expand...

he'll be here....

To the op - I would look at going a Server route rather than installing 98. As the other posters have said it will create a much more efficient, secure environment.
 
Why would anyone in their right mind want to run such a POS OS like Windows 98/ME for hosting a database for more than 10 concurrent users? Windows 98/ME WOULD IN NO WAY be able to handle more than 10 concurrrent users. It would probably sh!t on itself with just more than even one user. WIndows 98/ME don't even belong in the server camp. Windows XP Home Edition would make a much better server OS than POS Windows 98/ME. The only problem with Widnows XP Pro and even worse with Windows XP Home is the licesning that restricts it to 10 concurrent connections, even though it is most likely technically capable of more than 10 concurrent connections.

Use Windows Server 2003 or Windows 2000 Server to host your database. Don't even consider using such a POS OS like Windows 98/ME to host a database. SUch a POS OS isn't even technically capable of being a server OS to host a simple webpage, let alone something that can be as detailerd and resource intensive as a database.
 
i know very little about this kinda stuff....our customer database is what we have on this machine - we have it on another 98 machine right now......all i care about is am i going to be able to install 98 adn the 98 drivers on that computer?
 
Originally posted by: ctf20
i know very little about this kinda stuff....our customer database is what we have on this machine - we have it on another 98 machine right now......all i care about is am i going to be able to install 98 adn the 98 drivers on that computer?
Click to expand...
Do you notice a pattern here? You "know very little about this kinda stuff". And several people who DO know about this stuff are telling you that you're making a mistake.

As I stated earlier, Sony won't give you Windows 98 drivers for that PC. You'll have to download the Windows 98 drivers for the Intel 865 chipset from Intel (if they exist). And, it's indeed possible you can get Windows 98 "running" on that PC without any updated drivers at all. It won't be optimum, but it should work. Just be sure to get Realtek's latest network drivers, or the PC will likely randomly freeze up.

And, as always, be sure to keep ongoing offsite backups of your data.
 
Originally posted by: ctf20
i know very little about this kinda stuff....our customer database is what we have on this machine - we have it on another 98 machine right now......all i care about is am i going to be able to install 98 adn the 98 drivers on that computer?
Click to expand...

The main concerns with 98 (besides potential driver and stability issues) are security and support. AFAIK Microsoft no longer supports 98. Also, it's difficult to enforce security (who has access to the database file, for instance) because of 98's out-dated FAT32 file system.

For data as critical as a customer database, I would seriously consider investing in a small server solution.
 
Do you notice a pattern here? You "know very little about this kinda stuff". And several people who DO know about this stuff are telling you that you're making a mistake.
Click to expand...

[/quote]

yeah well i don't run this show, and the guy that does knows 300 times more than i do....he's been doing it for a long time, sure he knows all that ya'll have said. don't know why its on a 98, maybe cost?

 
Originally posted by: Link19
Why would anyone in their right mind want to run such a POS OS like Windows 98/ME for hosting a database for more than 10 concurrent users? Windows 98/ME WOULD IN NO WAY be able to handle more than 10 concurrrent users. It would probably sh!t on itself with just more than even one user. WIndows 98/ME don't even belong in the server camp. Windows XP Home Edition would make a much better server OS than POS Windows 98/ME. The only problem with Widnows XP Pro and even worse with Windows XP Home is the licesning that restricts it to 10 concurrent connections, even though it is most likely technically capable of more than 10 concurrent connections.

Use Windows Server 2003 or Windows 2000 Server to host your database. Don't even consider using such a POS OS like Windows 98/ME to host a database. SUch a POS OS isn't even technically capable of being a server OS to host a simple webpage, let alone something that can be as detailerd and resource intensive as a database.
Click to expand...

and the turd that wont flush strikes again

While Win98 isn't really suitible for database servers anymore(it's outdated) it can handle more than 10 machines with out any problems (once agoin link19 proves he knows nothing on what he is talking about...do you have you're head up you're ass for the warmth or does it serve a real purpose?)

Win2k is probably a better way to go...much better network capabilities...and you should be able to use the WinXP drivers
 
Originally posted by: Stumps
Originally posted by: Link19
Why would anyone in their right mind want to run such a POS OS like Windows 98/ME for hosting a database for more than 10 concurrent users? Windows 98/ME WOULD IN NO WAY be able to handle more than 10 concurrrent users. It would probably sh!t on itself with just more than even one user. WIndows 98/ME don't even belong in the server camp. Windows XP Home Edition would make a much better server OS than POS Windows 98/ME. The only problem with Widnows XP Pro and even worse with Windows XP Home is the licesning that restricts it to 10 concurrent connections, even though it is most likely technically capable of more than 10 concurrent connections.

Use Windows Server 2003 or Windows 2000 Server to host your database. Don't even consider using such a POS OS like Windows 98/ME to host a database. SUch a POS OS isn't even technically capable of being a server OS to host a simple webpage, let alone something that can be as detailerd and resource intensive as a database.
Click to expand...

and the turd that wont flush strikes again

While Win98 isn't really suitible for database servers anymore(it's outdated) it can handle more than 10 machines with out any problems (once agoin link19 proves he knows nothing on what he is talking about...do you have you're head up you're ass for the warmth or does it serve a real purpose?)

Win2k is probably a better way to go...much better network capabilities...and you should be able to use the WinXP drivers
Click to expand...



Windows 98 has never been suitable for servers of any kind, let alone something as high end as a database server. It is not a server OS. It is only suitable as a low end desktop OS.

Even Windows 2000 Profesisonal and Windows XP Professional, while they are both high end desktop opertaing systems, they are not for high end servers either. You need Windows NT 4 Server, Windows 2000 Server, or Windows Server 2003 for running a server on an OS made by MS.
 
Originally posted by: pkme2
Flush that Win 98 thought.
Click to expand...


I will never flush my thought that is based on the downright truth with regards to that piece of crap called Win98.

It is even more discouraging that anyone would considering using that piece of crap in Win95/98/ME to run a server. That's just insanity.

Win98 is an even bigger piece of sh*t for trying to use as a server.
 
Originally posted by: Link19
Originally posted by: Stumps
Originally posted by: Link19
Why would anyone in their right mind want to run such a POS OS like Windows 98/ME for hosting a database for more than 10 concurrent users? Windows 98/ME WOULD IN NO WAY be able to handle more than 10 concurrrent users. It would probably sh!t on itself with just more than even one user. WIndows 98/ME don't even belong in the server camp. Windows XP Home Edition would make a much better server OS than POS Windows 98/ME. The only problem with Widnows XP Pro and even worse with Windows XP Home is the licesning that restricts it to 10 concurrent connections, even though it is most likely technically capable of more than 10 concurrent connections.

Use Windows Server 2003 or Windows 2000 Server to host your database. Don't even consider using such a POS OS like Windows 98/ME to host a database. SUch a POS OS isn't even technically capable of being a server OS to host a simple webpage, let alone something that can be as detailerd and resource intensive as a database.
Click to expand...

and the turd that wont flush strikes again

While Win98 isn't really suitible for database servers anymore(it's outdated) it can handle more than 10 machines with out any problems (once agoin link19 proves he knows nothing on what he is talking about...do you have you're head up you're ass for the warmth or does it serve a real purpose?)

Win2k is probably a better way to go...much better network capabilities...and you should be able to use the WinXP drivers
Click to expand...



Windows 98 has never been suitable for servers of any kind, let alone something as high end as a database server. It is not a server OS. It is only suitable as a low end desktop OS.

Even Windows 2000 Profesisonal and Windows XP Professional, while they are both high end desktop opertaing systems, they are not for high end servers either. You need Windows NT 4 Server, Windows 2000 Server, or Windows Server 2003 for running a server on an OS made by MS.
Click to expand...

So link19..you have used Win98se for Networks and servers before have you? I doubt it.
Sure the Win9x based OS'es aren't really suitible for a server environement...they were never designed for that...but it doesn't mean that they don't work...because guess what....Win98SE can do the job quite well if it is setup correctly.

You should really consider removing you're head from you're arse....then maybe you would stop talking sh!t like you seem to do quite often, you're arguements are biased and with out any proof to back them up...so really you're opinion really counts for nothing...which makes you nothing more than a pathetic troll.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top