Windows 98SE - Am I alone?

[Ebony Ivory]

I've recently posted two Windows 98SE queries in the T4x forum (specifically re. the T43), and was just wondering whether I'm alone in this community preferring to run a Win98 system over WinXP, or even Win2K?

My preferred working environment boots directly into Win98's MS-DOS, and I run Windows when I want to by typing WIN98 (I've renamed WIN.COM WIN98.COM). When I exit from Windows ("Shutdown"), I return to the MS-DOS prompt, just like in the old days of Win31.

The reason I work this way is partly because I've been a DOS programmer for about 25 years, and know/like the DOS environment, and have over 200 home-written utilities doing everything from searching, listing, benchmarking, etc., to tracing DOS calls, interrupts, whatever; but it's also because working from DOS gives me total control over my Windows environment.

I can - and regularly do - ZIP my entire Windows setup, including system files, applications and the registry, and write this onto a CD. Currently, I can get two setups on a standard CD - despite using many major applications. On another (bootable) CD, I store all my source files and personal data files at least once a week as permanent backup.

If I want to completely refresh my machine, I can even FDISK (re-partition) the entire drive, install "C:" from a bootable backup, and then D: (where Windows 98 and the apps live) from the Windows CD, before recovering anything else on other partitions from whatever sources are appropriate.

So I'm completely in control of my working environment, can reinstall it in minutes from a pair of CDs, and don't need to use the "Access IBM" button to dig my way out of a problem.

Am I the only person doing something like this? If so, I count myself lucky (if nerdy! ), but I'd love to hear from others who may work in a similar way.

Brian

[christopher_wolf]

I used to do something similar with an old Compaq 1900 Presario running Windows 98SE, but I very recently retired that system as it was getting old and there was a waning need for having Windows 98SE and the DOS environment along with it. Then again, I was never a real hardcore DOS programmer.

[440roadrunner]

You are not alone. I still have a separate hard drive for one of my 600x's with '98Se on there, as well as an old P750 desktop, and an Ascentia laptop. All are setup to boot to a DOS prompt

Some of my older machines are this way for radio programming of GE/ Ericsson, Maxon, and Motorola two way radios. The older programming software must be run in DOS

I also have a few other old DOS programs that I simply refuse to give up on. Also, there are certain file copying situations I do, concerning slaved hard drives, that is simply easier to deal with with a DOS based/ Win98SE environment, rather than haggle with X tra P utrid or other NT based systems.

[Ebony Ivory]

Glad to hear I'm not quite alone, then! I currently have a little farm of laptops, two brand new (my T43 and an all-bells-and-whistles Compaq nc6320), and three older Compaqs. Even the oldest, a 150MHz Pentium MMX is just able to run Windows XP, but all of these except the new 6320 are really sweet running Windows 98SE in boot-to-DOS mode.

Sure, on my T43, I've had to ignore my fingerprint reader, and for now, I'm networking via a D-Link USB WiFi dongle, but I have every hope I'll coerce the built-in networking into life, just as I have the Radeon X300 graphics and SoundMax audio, using generic drivers and hand-tweaked .INF files to get them accepted.

I just love being able to boot from cold (not just from standby/hibernation) into my working environment in a matter of 3-4 seconds, and being able to safely turn the machine off when done, rather than wait for an interminable shutdown sequence!

Brian

[jdhurst]

Windows 98 is long past it. I have run it and view it as one of Microsoft's most useless offerings. The only thing worse was Windows ME. I hardly see it any more in my (wide) travels, so I would say, while not alone, certainly you are accompanied by an exceedingly small minority.

Any of Windows NT4, Windows 2000 and Windows XP Pro are vastly more reliable than Windows 98. I could even make Windows 95 and Windows 3.1 run more reliably than 98. And, while NT4 and 2000 are not gaming machines, Windows XP runs many games. I am not a gamer, so I can't say which ones, but lots of people run games on XP.

... JD Hurst

[GomJabbar]

I don't think you are alone running Windows 98SE. But the one that runs 98SE on a T43 is a rare breed indeed!

I am giving you a little bit of a hard time here, but really IMO, what matters is what works best for you.

[leoblob]

I continue to run WIN98SE on my TP365X... I don't think it has enough muscle to run anything newer. I was a long-time hold-out on WIN98SE on my desktops. It took me quite a while to get used to WIN2K (still getting used to it, in fact) but now I do prefer it for what I do.

I agree that it's all a function of what you need the machine for.

[440roadrunner]

jdhurst, what you say has no bearing in some circles.

First, that you "view it as one of Microsoft's most useless offerings. The only thing worse was Windows ME"

is your opinion, but there are other factors, including the fact that you are comparing NT products to DOS based products, a completely different horse, and about as valid as comparing something to a MAC.


I have some old software that runs quite nicely under Whenhozed98SE, as well as some DOS applications that are in some vein nearly irreplaceable. I've got some DOS based radio programming stuff that WILL NOT run on an NT based system, as well as some phone system software that is no longer supported, even though I can still obtain replacement hardware for the system. I simply have no choice, or replace the system.


Also, there ARE systems out there that were poorly or not at all supported under NT/ W2K. There's a ton of aging hardware that simply will not work with NT. Whenhoed95/98 was about your only choice on some of that stuff.

I simply don't agree that Winhoe95 was somehow better or more reliable, although I do have one old Thinkpad (360xx) that won't run 98, and so 3.x or 95 is the only choice. (Your'e crazy if you think I'm gonna fiddle with NT3xx for that thing.

I also feel that W3x is not very comparable for this arguement. Since it is truely "really" a DOS environment, again it's a differnt horse. W3x was pretty darn limited in a lot of respects, and simply getting some things configured is a real pain.


For the record, my newest two desktops run X tra P utrid, and one of my 600X's has a hard drive that I use with W2k on.

I do agree with you that I have NO use for ME.

[jdhurst]

I don't disagree with your points about old software. I was speaking in terms of a host system. I, too, have a client with old radio programming software. Carrying two computers is a pain, so we have most of them running Windows 98 in a VMware session. That solves most of the radio programming software issues (most, but not every one, unfortunately). And Windows 98 has problems as a guest machine, even though I built it very carefully. That is why I said what I did.

The worst offenders of old radio programming software are gradually coming out with XP-compliant versions. Since Vista is rearing its head, and since some of these radios will last like my 30-year old 7704A Tek Lab Scope, they have no choice but to change the software.

People can run what they want. I was just reporting my experiences, and I am not asking anyone to change.

... JD Hurst

[K0LO]

7704A - great scope! Loved that series and don't think that the UI on oscilloscopes has done anything but get worse since then.

I picked up a 7603R for $80 at a swap-fest 10 years ago and use it all the time. The current Digital Scopes are great for measurement and documentation but useless for troubleshooting. You need a good analog scope to do that.