Wondows 98 ceases

[william northcote]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5164450.stm

Microsoft are now going to end the upgrades and patches for Windows 98, 98 second edition, SE and the Millenium edition. All online updates will cease and Microsoft is urging users of these OS packages to upgrade to XP.

Is it me, or is Microsoft asking Windows users to fork out more money?

[Shitoryu Dude]

This makes good business sense on several levels. First off, the products are outdated and no longer sold, and the hardware that these operating systems run on are not only obsolete, but well past their typical date of death. The number of systems running any of those programs is quite small compared to the volume of XP systems. Hell, I'm usually a late adopter of new operating systems and keep my computers running much longer than average, and even I switched over to XP Pro 5 years ago and am now on my second version.

This means that supporting them isn't really helping as many people in comparision to supporting XP, and with Vista coming out in a few months, they will need all available bodies working on that. The economics of supporting previous generations of software isn't cost effective after a certain point. We don't complain that they don't update DOS, Windows 3.1 or Windows 95 do we?

It also makes very good business sense to encourage people to use the latest products - it gets everyone on the same page (literally in some cases) and we all benefit.

Finally, I'm just sitting her imagining what it would be like to spend my time putting together computers out of recycled components and loading them up with Win98. Sure, you can do it, but what are you going to run on it? Nothing but obsolete software and a few games you just can't live without? Good luck getting HALO 2 running on that.

[william northcote]

Well the difference between XP and 98 is major, but between XP and Vista.... Not by much.

I have managed to make XP run nearly as good as Vista with a few registry tweaks from a magazine that came out a few months ago in the UK. Basically, the value in the registry is all that needs changing to make it run like Vista. But 98 runs well. Even 2003 looks like 98, so there has to be something in 98 that people like on the face of it.

[Shitoryu Dude]

By the time all the XP boxes are dead and dying, the majority of working computers will be on Vista. Does a new OS have to be dramatic to be worth shifting to? I don't think so, as long as there are advantages to be gained in hardware, stability, ease of use, and functionality.

98 wasn't that much of a change from 95, but most peope were glad to have it. ME was a total debacle and 2000 was on the market just too short a time until XP came out. I wouldn't dream of using an older OS on my new machine - they wouldn't be able to handle the hardware.

Unless I'm mistaken, Vista will actually take better advantage of my 3.8 gigahertz, dual core, 64-bit processor and 2 gigs of RAM a lot better than XP does. At least they aren't issueing a new OS every other year like they used to.

[tddeangelo]

And what no one wants to address here is that 98 was not only more inherently unstable than the 2000/XP family (all built off of NT), but 98 ONLY supported FAT, where 2000/XP supports FAT and/or NTFS, which is exponentially more solid a file allocation system than FAT.

98 simply is old technology. Things are SOOOOOO much better in XP from a user standpoint in that the "blue screen of death" is all but history in XP, where it can be a daily occurance in 98/ME (also known as "Mistake Edition"...all it did was give Win2k window dressing to the horrid functionality of 98SE).

In fact, I'm having this debate with my brother, who stubbornly refuses to move on past WinME. I'm continually helping him with computer issues, and I've tried to explain that simply calculating the TIME he has in dealing with this makes it worthwhile to upgrade to XP. He won't. I don't know why. I can see sticking with some that works, but it's not even something that works in this case.

There is no good reason to stay with 98 other than the hardware in hand won't run anything more current. And in that very limited situation, they are SOL. BUT...most updates are to either stabilize the OS or to add security. NO ONE is looking to attack Win98 systems now. There are so incredibly few that hackers/virus creators are exponentially better off looking to find vulnerable Macs, and that's not happening because there are just SO many XP users to work with. As for stability, the users by definition have to be satisfied with the stability or they wouldn't still be using that technology.

Either way, the fact that they have supported this OS for close to 10 years is kind of like keeping parts for a Ford Pinto in stock at a Ford dealership's service department. And how often does THAT happen? ;)

[william northcote]

Basically, it is forcing people who can not afford brand new PC's to upgrade. There are still in the second hand shops 128Mb processors with Pentium III chips for £100+ Now you need a PC for your kid. Do you go for the most up to date PC and find out when you leave the shop that it turns into a large paperweight, or buy a fully working 128Mb PC that will work with 98 SE, ME and 2000.

If these PC's are stil lthere being sold, then they will be a large backlog of loads of hardware that will have to be reused. Even now it is hard to find a 1.4Ghz processor chip as companies are now upgraded to 3.5Ghz. the technology still works, but the OS upgrades are stopping. CCL computers online www.cclonline.co.uk now only stock 3.5Ghz, so an upgrade from 98 to XP is a lot of money for low wage earners. The cost of XP is around £60 -£80 and then you have to have the internals to build it with.

So the choice is to go out and buy a PC with 98 on it. The low wage earners will save money, the shops sell on the junk and everyone is happy.

[tddeangelo]

And you CAN STILL USE Win98. No one is removing it's functionality. There is simply no access to updates for 98, nor will Microsoft provide technical assistance. Has anyone here EVER called Microsoft for technical assistance?

I didn't think so.

Their knowledge-base still contains all kinds of archaine topics if you search for them. Win98 tips and problem-solving solutions are still available online from a myriad of sources that only require Google to find.

The only change is that Microsoft doesn't want to support the 9x/ME family along with XP. Hell, even Win2000 lost support BEFORE 98, and that's because the users of 2000 were ok with moving along to XP.

No one has removed the ability to run 98, and if you like it, use it. But to think that Microsoft is going to continue to provide top-end support for an 8-year-old product is asking a heck of a lot. Kind of like being mad that the repair shop doesn't have parts for your TV that was built in 1975.