Still using Windows 9x? Which one?
#1
Posted 27 August 2003 - 02:24 PM
#5
Posted 28 August 2003 - 05:38 AM
Also have an old AMD Athlon 750 Slot A, with 512 MB RAM, running Windows 2000 SP4 with Windows Millennium dual boot.
#6
Posted 28 August 2003 - 05:55 AM
SB16, 420mb hard disk, 16mb RAM. Runs my favourite Flight Sim ever - Wings of Glory. Also my favourite RTS - Horde.
#7
Posted 29 August 2003 - 04:39 PM
I second you, though today I'm going to a friend's place to install that crap on her machine ;( ...., but I warned her, DON'T CALL BECAUSE OF A BSOD!
#8
Posted 14 February 2004 - 12:19 AM
#9
Posted 14 February 2004 - 03:41 AM
There was no option for this as I still do some testing even on Win 95a, yes I still own a floppy version of this one too
I have full versions of 98-SE, ME which I liked a lot :p
The fun thing to do with Win 95 however is to install it along with QEMM 8.xx, twas a sight to behold 8)
Since I still run a couple of DOS boxes too I suppose that makes me a retro phreak, but hey so be it :x
I have to get my Doom 2 audio fix on my Ensoniq Soundscape and MT32/General MIDI music now and again...
#10
Posted 14 February 2004 - 03:56 AM
#11
Posted 14 February 2004 - 04:09 AM
Well, I be 40+ myself and have been into Mainframes, Minis and Micros since the mid-70's.
My retro collection is growing cause I'm such a packrat
Have fun computing and try out OS/2 if you have a copy
#12
Posted 19 February 2004 - 08:18 PM
#13
Posted 06 July 2004 - 08:32 PM
Ya ain't seen nuttin until you run 95 on top of DR-DOS!
#14
Posted 06 July 2004 - 08:38 PM
How about running it on top of MS-DOS 5.xx instead
#15
Posted 06 July 2004 - 09:50 PM
After a hundred-or-so installs? ROFLMAO!
Yup! 8)
(Much better than MS-DOS 5.X - 6.X.)
http://www.devicelogics.com/
#16
Posted 06 July 2004 - 10:48 PM
This is impractical. Also, I think that MS has probably the longest support around in regards to software. See how far back any type of linux distro or open office is supported.
#17
Posted 07 July 2004 - 12:47 AM
Yeah. If you're going to keep the stockholders--instead of your customers--happy.
(Customers - the people who possess the money you want for yourself.)
Originally posted by zen69x:
Only recently something you could call support--we'll ignore longevity of same--and not willingly, of course.
It certainly needs it desperately, with all those security holes that still need to be filled-in with spit-balls and duct tape.
Originally posted by zen69x:
Hmmmmmm.....
Yeah. OOo, as a project, is at least as old as ms office.
Maybe you should install a mainstream Linux distro sometime, and use nothing else for a couple of years.
The rates of maturation of the respective OS platforms are not the same--Linux is evolving more rapidly--hence, you're comparing apples to oranges.
#18
Posted 07 July 2004 - 06:14 AM
#19
Posted 07 July 2004 - 08:49 AM
(Customers - the people who possess the money you want for yourself.)
Show me where I can get a 1.x release of any distro of Linux patched? Not upgraded, but patched. This is not only about $$ to finance the support, but also the time you take away from current products/projects. What I'm getting at here is that this is not an MS exclusive issue. Unfortunately for the sake of evolution of a product you have to drop off support for some of the older stuff; the resources that you need to survive as a company just aren't there to support things ad infinitum.
Originally posted by EnigmaOne
The rates of maturation of the respective OS platforms are not the same--Linux is evolving more rapidly--hence, you're comparing apples to oranges.
This is where you will find issue in a corporate environment. Clutch has already touched upon this; you will find that rollouts take considerably longer, moreso in larger companies with installed bases.
Also, just telling them that the OS is "evolving more rapidly" and hence to just upgrade to the latest pretty much quashes your argument of support for one and additionally, who knows what types of incompatiblities or problems with dependencies that may introduce, most especially with legacy and / or in-house code that was developed to meet a certain need of the company. Not to say that service packs or other critical updates may not cause same with MS's software either, but at least I know how long I can count on support and updates for problems that may arise.
For a home user being able to upgrade to the latest might well work as they don't tend to have custom code, but they may have a legacy app they need, true in Windows as well. But this discussion is not aimed there so I will leave it at that.
Bottom line is that whatever misgivings you have about MS and their support of their OS's, there isn't a single Linux distributor out there that I've seen that can even come close to touching the longevity of support that MS offers.

Help










