31 Jan
2016
31 Jan
'16
11:19 a.m.
From: CuriousMarc
Needless to say, you'd only boot to this Windows
98 for retro-computing
purposes.
BTW, are you indicating that Win 98SE _in general_ should only be used for
retro-computing, or only Win 98SE _in the particular configration you
described_ should only be used that way?
Because, if the latter, I happily use Win 98SE on most of my machines, for
the vast majority of my work!
Of course, I don't need to run the latest and greatest uSloth
bloatware^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H applications, so they fact that they probably
won't run on the older Windows (What a shock! You don't think they would by
any chance want to encourage people to pay them a large pile of dineros for
the latest and 'greatest' version of their OS, do you?) is not a problem for
me.
The biggest issue, actually, for me, is that the latest Adobe Reader which
will run under Win 98SE is 6.0, and that doesn't support some of the latest
PDF's (in particular, encrypted ones).
Noel
31 Jan
31 Jan
1:55 p.m.
On 01/31/2016 08:19 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
The biggest issue, actually, for me, is that the
latest Adobe Reader which
will run under Win 98SE is 6.0, and that doesn't support some of the latest
PDF's (in particular, encrypted ones).
There are API add-ons to 98SE that improve the potential for
XP-and-above applications working. For the Adobe reader, there are also
alternatives, such as BullZip.
--Chuck
9:08 p.m.
On Sun, 31 Jan 2016, Noel Chiappa wrote:
You might try http://www.pdfunlock.com/ It will convert pdf version 1.7
files with encryption to pdf version 1.4 which should work.
From:
CuriousMarc
Needless to say, you'd only boot to this
Windows 98 for retro-computing
purposes.
BTW, are you indicating that Win 98SE _in general_ should only be used
for retro-computing, or only Win 98SE _in the particular configration
you described_ should only be used that way?
Because, if the latter, I happily use Win 98SE on most of my machines,
for the vast majority of my work!
Of course, I don't need to run the latest and greatest uSloth
bloatware^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H applications, so they fact that they
probably won't run on the older Windows (What a shock! You don't think
they would by any chance want to encourage people to pay them a large
pile of dineros for the latest and 'greatest' version of their OS, do
you?) is not a problem for me.
The biggest issue, actually, for me, is that the latest Adobe Reader
which will run under Win 98SE is 6.0, and that doesn't support some of
the latest PDF's (in particular, encrypted ones). 
4 Feb
4 Feb
8:08 a.m.
On 31 January 2016 at 17:19, Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:
BTW, are you indicating that Win 98SE _in general_
should only be used for
retro-computing, or only Win 98SE _in the particular configration you
described_ should only be used that way?
AFAICS:
At all. Ever.
It's a nearly 20y old piece of code which was notoriously unstable and
insecure when it was new.
Look, I built, installed, ran, maintained & supported MS-DOS-based PCs
for over 20y. I am not biased against DOS. But it's one of the
feeblest OSes ever to sell well.
DOS-based Windows was a bodge, a kludge, a temporary fix because OS/2
bombed and NT took a while to get ready. But NT is a better OS in
every important or material way.
I don't run MS OSes any more. I've moved on. Life's too short. I'm a
domain expert in them: this is why I no longer use them.
I'm typing under Mac OS X (on a 30y old keyboard) and my laptops run
Linux. All require vastly less maintenance and are more stable and
reliable -- as well as much cheaper -- than MS solutions.
But anyone with an ounce of technical knowledge should know better
than to run an old, unmaintained, out-of-support MS OS on any live
Internet-facing machine. Even if it exchanges media with
Internet-facing machines, *no*. Don't do it.
Move on.
Retro computing is a great hobby, even a way of life, but whereas a
decades-old copy of anything from Linux to Multics is as safe today as
it ever was, OSes of the Internet era *cannot* be used safely once
they're well out of date. Old viruses are still out there, waiting to
pounce.
It's enough work fixing up old machines without fighting old malware too.
Don't do it.
Nothing older than Win7 on any Windows PC that accesses the Internet.
This includes email. Yes, Jerome Fine, I'm talking to you, among others.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) ? +420 702 829 053 (?R)
9:07 a.m.
New subject: R: Can Windows 98SE run on an Intel I7 with SATA hard drives?
Retro computing is a great hobby, even a way of life,
but whereas a decades-old copy of anything from Linux to Multics is as >safe today as
it ever was, OSes of the Internet era *cannot* be used safely once they're well out of
date. Old viruses are still >out there, waiting to pounce.
I would disagree on this point. Unix and linux, in all its flavours, had plenty of
security fixes in the same timeframe mentioned, so I would not consider them as safe as
etc
That they are less obvious to attack, in comparison, is another thing.
9:17 a.m.
On 4 February 2016 at 15:07, Mazzini Alessandro <mazzinia at tin.it> wrote:
I would disagree on this point. Unix and linux, in all its flavours, had plenty of
security fixes in the same timeframe mentioned, so I would not consider them as safe as
etc
That they are less obvious to attack, in comparison, is another thing.
Oh yes, true, but you need to think about the roles.
Unix was traditionally mostly used as a /server./ The exploits and
malware are about getting remote access to a server, or at least
taking it offline or rendering it inaccessible.
Windows is primarily a client OS, used for surfing, email, chat,
downloading & running programs, etc.
/Totally/ different usage patterns.
And the vast success of OS X as a client -- now the most successful
closed-source UNIX? of all time, with more installed seats than all
the others ever put together -- compared with the small amount of
malware and very few successful exploits, shows the difference.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) ? +420 702 829 053 (?R)
11:11 a.m.
New subject: R: Can Windows 98SE run on an Intel I7 with SATA hard drives?
Eheheh,
except that solaris had a good installed base of workstations too, and Hp-ux tended to
have the same (to make some examples). Technically clients
-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] Per conto di Liam Proven
Inviato: gioved? 4 febbraio 2016 15:17
A: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Oggetto: Re: Can Windows 98SE run on an Intel I7 with SATA hard drives?
On 4 February 2016 at 15:07, Mazzini Alessandro <mazzinia at tin.it> wrote:
I would disagree on this point. Unix and linux, in all its flavours,
had plenty of security fixes in the same timeframe mentioned, so I
would not consider them as safe as etc
That they are less obvious to attack, in comparison, is another thing.
Oh yes, true, but you need to think about the roles.
Unix was traditionally mostly used as a /server./ The exploits and malware are about
getting remote access to a server, or at least taking it offline or rendering it
inaccessible.
Windows is primarily a client OS, used for surfing, email, chat, downloading & running
programs, etc.
/Totally/ different usage patterns.
And the vast success of OS X as a client -- now the most successful closed-source UNIX? of
all time, with more installed seats than all the others ever put together -- compared with
the small amount of malware and very few successful exploits, shows the difference.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) ? +420 702 829 053 (?R)
9:20 a.m.
New subject: R: Can Windows 98SE run on an Intel I7 with SATA hard drives?
At 09:07 AM 2/4/2016, Mazzini Alessandro wrote:
... so I would not consider them as safe ...
The closest thing to a "safe" computer is one that is disconnected from all
communications links, powered down, and locked in a vault.
Dale H. Cook, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA
Osborne 1 / Kaypro 4-84 / Kaypro 1 / Amstrad PPC-640
http://plymouthcolony.net/starcity/radios/index.html
9:57 a.m.
On 2/4/2016 8:08 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
Nothing older than Win7 on any Windows
PC that accesses the Internet. This
includes email.
Well, my 2 cents: I still use WinXP for
all my primary, workhorse machines.
Rarely have any issues with it. Win7
is ok but annoyingly
over-user-friendly. Win 98, though...
I don't see the point of using it any
more. It can't do anything that XP
can't do far better.
- J.
10:12 a.m.
On 4 February 2016 at 15:57, js at cimmeri.com <js at cimmeri.com> wrote:
Well, my 2 cents: I still use WinXP for all my
primary, workhorse machines.
Rarely have any issues with it.
I *really* hope you've applied the registry hack to get EposReady
updates for it, then!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/26/german_tinkerer_gets_around_xpocaly…
Win7 is ok but annoyingly
over-user-friendly.
Agreed. I don't like the ribbons, the new fake-folders in Explorer --
but it works, it's supported and updated.
Win 98, though... I don't see the point of using
it
any more. It can't do anything that XP can't do far better.
Agreed, as far as Win32 apps go. DOS stuff, though, no. :(
To answer your offlist question, BTW: I am typing on an original Apple
Extended II keyboard attached to a 2011 Mac mini running OS X 10.10,
though an ADB-USB convertor.
My laptops run Ubuntu although I experiment regularly with all the
mainstream contenders. The workhorse is an old, cheap Thinkpad X200
with Ubuntu 14.04, the latest long-term support version. The
desktop-replacement, now sidelined by the Mac, has Ubuntu 15.10,
ArchLinux, CrunchBang and others.
Both the PCs can dual-boot into Win7, although I don't use it as much
as every *year* these days, so this always means a ton of updates
before I can do anything.
The Mac has a Win10 VM on it, just for playing with. I don't like it
much, to be honest. The last Windows version I really liked was
Windows 2000 -- since then, the bloat has piled on for little reward.
XP can be stripped down to nearly as lean as W2K, though. I sometimes
run the TinyXP 3rd party distro inside VMs.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) ? +420 702 829 053 (?R)
10:43 a.m.
On 2/4/16 10:12, Liam Proven wrote:
Yes, provided you're willing to sift through the available updates and
hide all the Microsoft spyware... err, "telemetry" patches and the
increasingly coercive Windows 10 upgrade offers.
For many people, the time cost and risk of doing that has exceeded any
benefit gained from updating Windows at all.
Win7 is ok
but annoyingly
over-user-friendly.
Agreed. I don't like the ribbons, the new fake-folders in Explorer --
but it works, it's supported and updated.
1:40 p.m.
At 09:57 AM 2/4/2016, J. wrote:
I still use WinXP for all my primary, workhorse
machines.
So do I. I am fully capable of keeping those machines secure online, something which M$
cannot do.
Win 98, though... I don't see the point of using it
any more. It can't do anything that XP can't do far better.
As I noted upstream, XP is useless for MS-DOS programs that need access to the UART's
registers, and that is something that I sometimes need for work. Some of us have to deal
with decades-old hardware that still does what it was intended to do, is still
maintainable, and that would be very expensive for a client to replace.
Dale H. Cook, GR / HP Collector, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA
http://plymouthcolony.net/starcity/radios/index.html
3091
days inactive
3095
days old
11 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
amh＠pobox.com -
cclist＠sydex.com -
jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu -
js＠cimmeri.com -
lproven＠gmail.com -
mazzinia＠tin.it -
radiotest＠juno.com -
tothwolf＠concentric.net