Questions...

[NeptuneNavigator2001]

Hello, I was just wondering something. How fast of a processor can Windows 98 Second Edtion handle? I heard somewhere that it can't run properly with anything over a 1 GHz processor; however, it seems that Microsoft has released a patch that will allow it to at least boot with a processor over 2.2GHz. So, how fast of a CPU can be run using Win98SE?

Also, if the processor I use is too fast for Win98SE, is there a way to underclock the CPU using some kind of software? (I was also planning to upgrade to Win2K and partition my drive into 2 drives, half for each OS. Mostly for Doom 3 purposes...) I say software, because I'd only want it active when I'd boot to Win89SE, not Win2K.

I would greatly appreciate any help that anyone could give me in regards to this.

Thank you.

 

[Nothinman]

Why waste your time dualbooting with Win9X?

 

[NeptuneNavigator2001]

Because there are security flaws that few people know about with the newer OSes. Furthermore, I'm one of those guys who likes to play the oldest of the old games, alongside the newest of the new. Please, someone out there, must understand how I feel (besides my father... God bless him.); I'm a security freak.

EDIT: I've been trying to find out this information for a long time now, to both of my questions. Anyone?

 

[Nothinman]

A security freak would never run Win9X, '"Win9X security" is an oxymoron.

You might be able to get your games to run with these: http://www.dosgames.com/essential.php

 

[mikecel79]

Like Nothinman said Win9X and security just don't mix. Another option for running older games would be Virtual PC or VMWare. Most older games run rather well in a virtual machine. Check out this blog from the VPC program manager, he talks about running games inside virtual machines all the time.

Windows 98 is past it's time. You'll be much happier with Win2k or XP.

 

[NeptuneNavigator2001]

Bah. Nonsense. Although I will check into what you guys have said. But, I've already answered one of my questions. (Thanks for not helping there... >:| ) There are other problems with the newer operating systems. But this is obviously not worth my time.

EDIT: Besides, I've found several programs to beef up security with Win98SE. With one of them, you can accidentally lock yourself out of the system, if you're dumb enough.

 

[Harvey]

Hi. Welcome to AT.

I'm currently runnin Win 98 SE on my T'bred 1800+ (B stepping) c/c'd to 2400+ (2 GHz) with no problems.

Despite all the griping from others, I need it because I have a legacy app that requires real DOS to display the graphics at any resolution greater than 640 x480 using the old VESA video standards.

If you're really interested in keeping it running tight, PM me, and I'll give you a lot of tricks to keep it running clean and reasonably secure.

 

[NeptuneNavigator2001]

Finally, a friend!
Harvey, perhaps only YOU understand how I feel on this board! Everyone else could care less. All they give a d*mn about is how new their software is. And your sig... Exactly.........

Exactly.

Okay, I will think about it. Anything you could think of, would greatly help me out.

 

[Harvey]

I have to run out pretty soon, but here's how I keep Win 98 SE tight:

1. I wrote the AUTOEXEC.BAT from hell. It nukes every temp file and all cookies on every reboot. There are things you can't see or touch once you're in Windows, but at bootup, you're in DOS, and you can see and delete lots of stuff.

2. I use certain parts of old Norton Utilities for DOS, ver. 6 and some batch files that are really handy for navigating from the DOS prompt and finding stuff much quicker than Windows "Searh" or "Find" can.

3. I use a number of other old DOS utilities, as well.

4. I use Netscape 7.2 (Mozilla 1.8) as much as possible, except on sites where IE is the only thing that works. Probably switching to FireFox sometime this month. More tricks available for these than for IE and more secure, too.

I can e-mail you the whole shebang with full descriptions of what they do and how to customize it for your preferences, but not until I get back, later.

 

[Nothinman]

All they give a d*mn about is how new their software is. And your sig... Exactly.........

Not all, version numbers mean little to me and I don't even run Windows any more. But Win9X was an ugly hack of an OS that needs to die, the more people that leave it behind the quicker companies will stop supporting it and things will get better, atleast for Windows.

There are things you can't see or touch once you're in Windows, but at bootup, you're in DOS, and you can see and delete lots of stuff.

Not true, you can see all of the same things in Windows.

2. I use certain parts of old Norton Utilities for DOS, ver. 6 and some batch files that are really handy for navigating from the DOS prompt and finding stuff much quicker than Windows "Searh" or "Find" can.

3. I use a number of other old DOS utilities, as well.

Both of which could be replaced by cygwin and not have any reliance on Win9X or real DOS.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

There are things you can't see or touch once you're in Windows, but at bootup, you're in DOS, and you can see and delete lots of stuff.

Not true, you can see all of the same things in Windows.

Very true. For example, once you've booted to Windows, try deleting the swapfile, WIN386.SWP. I don't recommend doing this, but you can if you boot to a raw DOS prompt. There are a number of other files and directories (or "folders" if you prefer) in Win 98 that are hidden or locked, even if you set Explorer to show all files.

2. I use certain parts of old Norton Utilities for DOS, ver. 6 and some batch files that are really handy for navigating from the DOS prompt and finding stuff much quicker than Windows "Search" or "Find" can.

3. I use a number of other old DOS utilities, as well.

Both of which could be replaced by cygwin and not have any reliance on Win9X or real DOS.

Unless you know how I use the DOS prompt when I need it, you know not of what you speak.

 

[Nothinman]

Very true. For example, once you've booted to Windows, try deleting the swapfile, WIN386.SWP. I don't recommend doing this, but you can if you boot to a raw DOS prompt. There are a number of other files and directories (or "folders" if you prefer) in Win 98 that are hidden or locked, even if you set Explorer to show all files.

Umm, the swapfile is in use and that's why you can't delete it. But why in the hell would you want to anyway?

Unless you know how I use the DOS prompt when I need it, you know not of what you speak.

Well you do prefer Win9X, so you're probably right, I have absolutely no idea what would be going through your mind.

 

[NeptuneNavigator2001]

We all have our own ways of doing things, including running our computers. I know Win98 like the back of my hand (pretty much) and I know certain, ahem, other factors too. Besides, I have a few games that WILL NOT work in Windows, period.

Furthermore, since we all have our own ways of running our computers, (the ways we prefer and know) we should therefore, theoretically, all support one another, help each other out, and (some of us) should still support things that would not pertain to some of us, regardless of opinions or knowledge. Now, I could see where the opposite would apply, but this is an all-around forum, where people and machines can co-exist. Diversity drives this world; yet the world is killing itself. Soon, though, we may all end up hating each other. Were it not for a Creator, (I'm a Christian) we would have all been dead 300+ years ago!

Oh, and Harvey, when you have the time, please e-mail/pm me every tip/trick you know, including your "Autoexec.bat file from hell". Ha ha...

 

[imported_Kiwi]

Actually, if W9x OS's had a problem with relatively fast processors, it must've been cured ages ago. I too keep W98se available to boot into on my PC's. On those I use most often for business-type applications, the other OS is W2K. And I do "own" both XP-Home as well as XP-Pro. Wasted my money on those. Junk.

In my own direct experience, W98se runs fine with an XP 3000 cpu at its rated speeds.


:thumbsup: