• 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.

why do people hate win98 so much? win2k and linux suck so much more

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
And no one is allowed to think that Linux isn't the greatest thing in the world, and that Microsoft is evil, according to you.
 
Your comment that there is no corporate money behind Linux shows just how gullible you really are. There is HUGE corporate money that is vested in the success of Linux. Redhat, Corel, IBM and many many other companies have huge amounts of capital at stake.

The fact that Torvalds owns the rights to the kernel is meaningless. There is still big money behind Linux.

My own company is about to release a major communications product that is Linux based, and of course we want it to succeed. I know quite a bit about UNIX, having worked on stuff as old as AT&T System V and old versions of Novell Unixware. I also have some Linux experience.

UNIX is an excellent operating system, so is Linux. Linux is excellent for certain applications, however, as an all around OS that can play with all my hardware, run the latest games and give me a smooth internet experience, Linux ain't it.
 


<< And no one is allowed to think that Linux isn't the greatest thing in the world, and that Microsoft is evil, according to you. >>



You can think all you want, whatever you want. But in light of the fact that Microsoft caused hundreds of thousands of people the loss of their credit card numbers due to buggy web server software, and countless billions of dollars loss of data and productivity due to desktop software that is a virus breeding ground, I fail to see how one could possibly have a favorable opinion of Microsoft.

Unless one happens to be a Microsoft shill and gets regular paychecks from them. No names mentioned.
 
you fail to realize that if linux or any other operating system was as popular as windows and was under the kind of hacking attacks and scrutiny that windows is there would be virus propogation and security holes found in those OS's too.
 
Flaws in open source software would be fixed before anyone took advantage of them. Because the source is open, and it undergoes peer review all the time. It is in the best interest of Linux, and of companies depending on it, to discover and fix these flaws as soon as possible.

On the other hand, Microsoft cares most about profits. It is in their best interest to ignore or hush-hush these flaws in their products in order to save face. They only make a big deal out of it when the fiasco is too great to hide. (Such as the stealing of hundreds of thousands of credit card numbers, or the loss of billions of dollars worth of productivity) They do their best to try and minimize PR damage or try to spin it in a positive way when sh!t hits the fan, but this is often difficult. Their LAST priority is fixing the bug. Microsoft's reputation and public image matters more to them than the quality of their software.

Linux is first and foremost responsible to its users. Microsoft is first and foremost responsible to its shareholders, therefore to its profits, screw the customers. Therein lies the difference.
 


<< highly successful company, imagine that? >>



Very good at making money, not so good at making nor maintaining software.

Of course, as a software user, I don't care how good Microsoft is at making money. I care about how good it is at making software. If I were a Microsoft stockholder or a Microsoft shill (no names mentioned) I guess my priorities would be different in this respect.
 


<< Yeah, I didn't mean I haven't shutt off my system for 7 months! Just that it has never hung while I was using it - which is something that can't be said for when the same machine was running Win 98 OR linux! Talk about riddled with bugs - unless you are running a bare command line, the software out there for linux is so full of bugs (if it is even developed to the point of being able to run at all) it is virtuallly unusable in the real world where people have to make money from the work they do, and interact with other businesses.

The original poster here obviously is taliking about a desktop OS - and you are very far out of touch with reality if you think linux is a viable desktop OS at this point! And BSD?? on the desktop?? You must be on drugs! >>



It really depends on what you use your desktop to do. If you want to use email and need easy little gui's or browse the net with IE, or use a word processor other than emacs (or was that an operating system?) windows is fine. If you want to network, use an easy email client (pine, mutt), learn to program, prefer power over looks, unix-like systems are perfect. I run OpenBSD as my desktop. People want to send me an office doc (since I havent loaded staroffice) I tell them I cannot read the file. If they CANNOT send it to me in another format (text is wonderfule for me) they are not worth it.
 
its funny to see people give such creadit for MicroSh*t windows.

what does everage joe do on the pc. hit the net, download mp3, some
online action game. does people really have to run win2k in order to gain acceptable stability??? no.

its believed and proven that win98 is better in gaming or average daily computer usage. why isnt there a affort in MS's part to fix win98???
or at least make win98 somewhat stable???? ( yea, good try on winME. lol)

they put all they energy in making win2k when all users are suffering from known bugs in win98. ( general protection fault, ielgel operation, bsod )

right now we have somewhat stable win2k. lets say in 6 month
a nasty bug was discover hidden within win2k. this bug will only effect
5% of win2k user. whats the possiblity of MS actually trying to solve the problem?? none. they will be busy with launch of winXP.

win2k is ok, and workable OS. i am using it right now without any crashed(pro and AD). however, i will notsay this is the best OS i have play with.
i still format my system every 2 month just out of old habit. 🙂 lol
if i have time to learn linux, bye-bye windows.

dr0p0ut
 
Windows 2000 and Windows 98 are aimed at two completely different markets. One at Business, the other at the home user. The updates at Windows 98 you wanted are going to be called Windows XP. That launches sometime in Q3 (I forget if they set a date at the moment).

In my experience, yes you do need to run a windows NT based os (if you go with windows) in order to gain stability.

FINE. I know some of you out there haven't had ANY problems with windows 98. Good. I am happy for you. For the rest of us, Windows 2000 is the first Operating System put out by Microsoft that is actually stable. It even gives the memory back to the OS when a program is closed. IMAGINE THAT!!!
 
its believed and proven that win98 is better in gaming or average daily computer usage. why isnt there a affort in MS's part to fix win98???

i have no problems w/ 98

99% of the problems (which there arent many) are caused by the user, or poorly written third party programs
 
Relax konichiwa, josphstalinator has just never run his system 24/7 for a month or more and had it be as responsive as when he first pressed the power button. That's what W2K gives you, a system that never needs to be rebooted! The word for that is stability.

 


<< That's what W2K gives you, a system that never needs to be rebooted! The word for that is stability. >>



I beg to differ. Windows 2000 still needs to be rebooted once every month and a half. I run a web server on Win2k Advanced Server (both Apache, main site and IIS, needed for a specitality app that is being implemented at my school) and it needs to be rebooted at least every 45 days.

I must say that Win2k is the &quot;most stable and nicest&quot; MS OS that I have ever seen, it sure beats NT 4. But it will NEVER beat a linux server.

The problem with most other MS probucts (i.e. OE, IE, IIS, Office) is that they were ment to be RUN not USED. What I mean is that if you use the program you &quot;will&quot; and &quot;can&quot; find bugs and security problems, OE and viruses for an example.

About 95% of the the time I use third party programs on Windows and of that time only 10% of the time do I have problems with them, and that is usually because of user error, a confilct in codind on the parts of MS and the third party.

I have tried to use Win2k pro on my home system but is always seems to have some type of error on boot up, but I think that is because of the RAID 0 I am running on that system.
 


<< I run OpenBSD as my desktop. People want to send me an office doc (since I havent loaded staroffice) I tell them I cannot read the file. If they CANNOT send it to me in another format (text is wonderfule for me) they are not worth it. >>



The problem with this is that business cannont afford to tell someone who sends them a document 'dont send it in word format' That would never ever fly, and such a business would be screwed whenever it had to deal with an outside company. You can get away with it but most people need that ability to read word formats.
 
MJT2k

that's funny, we have an NT 4.0 server in our development lab that is running our custom communications application and it's got uptime now of over 300 days.

the majority of windows stability problems are poorly written applications.
 
The power conditions at that school also cause problems with the servers (not just windows but novell and linux/unix). Most likely if we had a steady smooth flow of current the up times would be greater. But then again it could be the apps like you say. I didn't pick the apps that run on it, I am just a student there that got the lucky job of setting it up to work on the server. The apps that we are implementing on the Win2k server is HEATWeb and HEAT Self-Service, from GoldMine software or what ever there name is now. These apps go along with the HEAT Call logging apps we are using at the Help Desk at the college. I just installed them on the Win2k box but haven't gotten them fully functional yet.
 
josphstalinator,

I realize that you can keep your computer running 24/7 with Win98, but the truth is that this OS just cannot maintain control over memory as well as NT and W2K. Just look here for another example. This is especially true with memory above 256megs. Win 98 just doesn't have the tools to keep itself together as well as NT based kernels. Just because it can keep running, doesn't mean it stays running well. Memory managers help to clear physical memory that has been lost to the system, but it only prolongs the situation...it doesn't correct it.





 


<< Flaws in open source software would be fixed before anyone took advantage of them >>



LOL at you Lucidguy........Way to only point out the positive!😉 Hmm.....&quot;Linux Shill&quot; yourself huh?😉

Don't you also realize as even most in the Linux community already do, that there are also two sides to this quote of yours???? Yes, breaches or flaws can be &quot;fixed&quot; quickly.......but, as soon as Linux is worth the time to the hacking community by sheer numbers, it will also be an easy source to reak havoc upon!!😉🙂 If you don't see this, as MANY others already do.......you are no more than a Linux Mouthpiece, a &quot;shill&quot; if you will, because it's apparent you do not grasp an understanding as to exactly how &quot;Open&quot; and vunerable linux is and could become!😉🙂
 
josphstalinator:

Stay with 98 if you can't get a handle on 2K!😉 98 is fine.....it's nowhere near as capable as 2K in any way, shape, or form, but hey, if you like it, Kudos to you!

It is a fact though that 2K is a much better overall OS than any 9X. Seems to me your problems are exactly that.......problems you're causing and can not resolve so you've decided to take the &quot;easy path&quot; and stick to what you know!😉
 
Ok, I'm going to come in . . . .

Lucidguy: Ok, give it up. Yes there are lots of bugs in Win2k but to be honest most users are not affected by them. I'm just more angered at the quality of most drivers than of the OS. And Linux, as much as I love it, is riddled with bugs as well (read the released notes for every kernel release. It's mostly bugfixes in the stable tree). However just like Win2k most people are not affected by it. And all webservers have problems (Apache's server was hacked just recently). Just let it rest at the fact that both Linux and Win2k have their uses (I use Win2k for gaming and video editing. I use Linux for programming. either or for web browsing, I just use whatever the computer is running in).

murdock2525: Well, at least you kept to mindlessly promoting Windows instead of mindlessly bashing Linux.

 
starcutter -

from the post you linked to;
I have 384 MB of RAM and after 45 mins to an hour of using Windows (98), my system ressource monitor always shows that i have something like 10 MB

hahaha this is an example of an imcompetent user. i have 320 mb of memory and dotn ahve this problem. this guy is obviously an idiot or running some pretty lame third party applications




tobeme -

Stay with 98 if you can't get a handle on 2K! 98 is fine.....it's nowhere near as capable as 2K in any way, shape, or form

nowhere near as capable???? well with the lack of dos support and w/ less hardware support i think you have things backwards buddy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top