With all the new processors & hardwares coming out so fast these days, is Win 98 still sufficient or compatible to use with such advance hardware?
Is Win 98 Still Sufficient?
- Thread starter holyghost
- Start date
Lots of brand new stuff doesn't have proper win98 drivers for it and may cause issues.
Win98 is dead.
Nobody is going to care if hardware or drivers break compatability with the OS.
Win98 is dead.
Nobody is going to care if hardware or drivers break compatability with the OS.
Netcraft confirms Win98 is dying!
oops, wrong site.
Really, why put yourself through the kludge that was win98? Even I can admit that Win2k/XP are a step in the right direction for Microsoft.
oops, wrong site.
Really, why put yourself through the kludge that was win98? Even I can admit that Win2k/XP are a step in the right direction for Microsoft.
I use Win98SE for my gaming partition, it's perfectly fine. For daily use, I'd have to go with Win2K/XP if I were forced to use Windows tho.
unless if you're really short of change, I don't see why anyone wouldn't upgrade to XP.
faster and with increased stability. I haven't had a crash in over a year (at least, that is, a crash that I didn't cause). some people claim hardware incompatibility, but I've only ever had a problem with one piece of hardware (net cam), which was in serious need of upgrading anyways.
will 98 do?
sure, but in the same way that taking the bus to work will still get you from point A to point B.
faster and with increased stability. I haven't had a crash in over a year (at least, that is, a crash that I didn't cause). some people claim hardware incompatibility, but I've only ever had a problem with one piece of hardware (net cam), which was in serious need of upgrading anyways.
will 98 do?
sure, but in the same way that taking the bus to work will still get you from point A to point B.
mostly these days I just use win98 to defrag and image my fat32 xp partition
I also use it to restore a registry for xp if I mess it up.
win98se should work fine as long as you have drivers for your hardware
but I always suggest dual boot
win98 is a great safety net and it beats trying to fix XP from a command prompt
I also use it to restore a registry for xp if I mess it up.
win98se should work fine as long as you have drivers for your hardware
but I always suggest dual boot
win98 is a great safety net and it beats trying to fix XP from a command prompt
While Win98 is no DEAD yet,
it is INSUFFICIENT as an OS for modern Gaming or Multimedia Photo & Video works
In Games, both ATI and nVidia focus mostly on WinXP driver set, while ignoring or delaying
their Win98 Driver development. If you like gaming, upgrade to WinXP should be a priority.
Win98 is still sufficient as a nice Word Processor and Web Browsing machine, but
that is about it. Since most of these task and be served by Linux for Free anyways.
Why bother with Win98?
it is INSUFFICIENT as an OS for modern Gaming or Multimedia Photo & Video works
In Games, both ATI and nVidia focus mostly on WinXP driver set, while ignoring or delaying
their Win98 Driver development. If you like gaming, upgrade to WinXP should be a priority.
Win98 is still sufficient as a nice Word Processor and Web Browsing machine, but
that is about it. Since most of these task and be served by Linux for Free anyways.
Why bother with Win98?
If MS says it's dead, it's dead.
Latin is a dead language, it still slightly usefull in some ways, some people still use it, but it's no longer being developed.
The guy asked if Win98 is still usefull on the newest hardware, then the answer is: "only if it works" and as time goes by the likelyhood of it working becomes less and less on newer and newer hardware.
(BTW, I am using win95 right now, but the computer is also only about 100mhz and realy realy sucks)
I understood when people hung on to 98 instead of going to ME. I could somewhat understand choosing 98 over 2000 for gamers. I have absolutely no idea why anyone would continue to choose 98 over XP, now that XP's been out for a while. Why people would put anything less than 2000/XP on a new machine is beyond me.
I never had lock-up issues with any of the 9x OS's... not even ME... so that's not where I'm coming from. XP is far from perfect, but as has been said, it is an absolute improvement over the 9x family.
I never had lock-up issues with any of the 9x OS's... not even ME... so that's not where I'm coming from. XP is far from perfect, but as has been said, it is an absolute improvement over the 9x family.
it took me a long time to convert to 2k after being a 98se user for many years. once service pack 3 hit for 2k i was hooked and have never looked back. to install anything lower than 2k on a new machine would be a waste of computing power imo.
what's one good reason I should have my xp partition formated with NTFS
besides microsoft saying it's cool
I remember the day when compressing the windows partition was cool
come to find out it just adds to the headache
I do use NTFS but not on the windows partition, I want it accessible thru win 98 and yes even dos.
besides microsoft saying it's cool
I remember the day when compressing the windows partition was cool
come to find out it just adds to the headache
I do use NTFS but not on the windows partition, I want it accessible thru win 98 and yes even dos.
NTFS is a journalling files system, it's more relaible, it's faster, it's able to use space more efficiently then fat32. Fat32 corrupts your data after a while because it's more suseptable to damage due to power outages, hard reboots and the like.
You remember the term "bitrot"? It was used to describe how the stability of a machine and programs deteriates over time.
Well people created the term because they were ignorant, a more correct term is "FAT32 SUCKS".
HAHAHA! That argument means nothing to me since I am quite anti-microsoft
What drag said. Plus security. It's a decent FS. Fat is only for SMALL drives (my 32MB memory stick comes to mind) where nothing critical will be stored. And for compatibility with hold overs from the 80's, like DOS.
faster ? I don't know about that it's got a lot of overhead
it maybe faster in some or even most situations but I wouldn't say it faster in every situation
reliable is not a big deal when you can back up you whole windows partition in one or two minute.
I've also seen plenty of network files systems get messed up real good.
And system where the whole drive is just one big NTFS partition that never gets backed up.
It's not that I'm against NTFS it's just for my windows partition I want simplicity
it maybe faster in some or even most situations but I wouldn't say it faster in every situation
reliable is not a big deal when you can back up you whole windows partition in one or two minute.
I've also seen plenty of network files systems get messed up real good.
And system where the whole drive is just one big NTFS partition that never gets backed up.
It's not that I'm against NTFS it's just for my windows partition I want simplicity
It is faster over all.
It is to some people. Downtime is downtime.
What does NFS have to do with this?
Why would it never get backed up? We can say the same thing about DOS filesystems.
Me too. NTFS provides that.
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
The only overhead would be related to checking rights when opening files, for everything else NTFS is faster than FAT.
I don't know about you but I don't enjoy restoring from backups, even if it only takes 2 minutes. And I doubt you constantly backup your partitions so going back a full day or even a half day can be a real PITA.
NTFS isn't a 'network filesystem', whatever that's supposed to mean. You can share a FAT volume just like you can a NTFS one, the difference is the FAT volume has no facility to set rights and it'll lose a lot more data in the event of a crash.
There's nothing complicated about NTFS from the user's perspective.
thanks for pointing out my lack of knowlege of knowing the difference between NTF and NTFS
also thanks for all the facts used to support you position
also thanks for all the facts used to support you position
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter