Windows 98 Remains Widespread

By on December 11, 2003, 11:17 AM
Microsoft is planning to end support for Windows 98 next month, but many businesses still have computers running on the operating system, a new study shows.

AssetMetrix, an Ottawa-based IT asset analysis tool vendor, collected data on over 370,000 PCs from 670 businesses in the U.S. and Canada. It found that 80 percent of those companies have at least one PC running either Windows 95 or Windows 98.
The older operating systems accounted for about 27 percent of operating systems found.

Read more: [URL=http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,113840,00.asp]PC World[/URL].




User Comments: 36

Got something to say? Post a comment
shnig said:
I keep tellin ya's 98 SE is the best theyve ever come out with.
MoRulez said:
I dont know about that. Too many extras that are un-needed. Windows ME is much better; Much more leaner (which is great for "power" users).Its about time they cut the line on Win98 and SE, I say. Too bad XP comes piled with spyware, and the plain english approach is taken to the point where sometimes I think XP options are trying to deceive the user into deciding in favour of options that allow Microsoft to avoid troubleshooting support.
Soul Harvester said:
ME leaner? I think you are very confused, my friend. ME is far more bloated then 98 and suffers from more memory management issues and general stability issues (primarily due to poor driver support) than Windows98.But, we all knew Microsoft won't support their operating systems forever. Not that it is terribly needed anymore ... A fully patched Windows 98 system is about as good as it could get, and works quite well. Time to start collecting patches!
Krugger said:
98 SE is the best they have? please. ME and 98 are terrible. Constant program errors, explorer shutdowns, and bsods result from normal use. the only fix, restart restart restart, everytime. XP is no comparision. Once it's set up it runs itself.
MoRulez said:
To the contrary, ME is more efficient in it's layout and design, comes with built-in support for ZIP files, the ability to search your network for other shared resources, among other minimal updates to the 9x series. It is the last in the line of 9xs so it was, expectedly, better.
MoRulez said:
True, XP is, I think, the most stable of all the home-user class OSs. But it's goal was to appeal to the "lowest-common denominator" of computer users. A power user would be just fine with 98,98SE,or ME. Benchmarks already show that that 98, ME, and XP OSs dont show any noticeable performance advantages in PC games either. The main advantage 98 has over ME is the driver support, but if you use notable hardware products, you are just fine. Otherwise, using that "Super-Turbo-Extra Mainboard" from a town in Kajikistan will yield problems.But no OS can compete with XP's built-in spyware. It wins in that department hands-down.
agrav8r said:
[quote][i]But, we all knew Microsoft won't support their operating systems forever. Not that it is terribly needed anymore ... A fully patched Windows 98 system is about as good as it could get, and works quite well. Time to start collecting patches! [/quote] I would disagree, 98 has tons of issues form networking to plug and play. Issues with new components would be enough to make it useless. Unless a 98 community decides to make drivers for every new componet developed, it won't be long before you want a dvd burner ($99 now :grinthumb ) and it won't play.Once MS drops it, all the rest will follow suit. I don't think it will get as much longevity as say the voodoo cards did ( they are still making drivers) . For businesses the NT system is more secure and definately more stable, so they will eventually upgrade. I personally am not sad to see it go. XP is a much more stable system- not problem free mind you, but less tempermental.
Skyfrog said:
I can't believe after all this time people are still claiming that XP is loaded with spyware. As far as which is faster, in all the benchmarks I've tried XP usually beats out 98SE or is pretty much dead even. The 9x kernel is severely outdated, unstable, and inefficient and it's well past the time to lay it to rest. I don't even want to mention Me, that was just a disaster from the beginning.
MrGaribaldi said:
Lol, so this old discussion has reared it's head once again... Can't be bothered to search for it now, but I seem to recall several heated discussions about how 98(se) was much better than Me, and neither of them coming close to XP, which again couldn't hold a candle to W2k etc... Personally I rank MS' OS' the following way:[list=1][*]Win2k[*]Win95 RC3 (or was that RC2)[*]Win98SE[*]XP[*]Win98[*]Win95 OSR2[*]Win95[*]WinME[/list]Guess some of you might wonder why I gave W95 such a high rank, but that's release candidate 3 (or 2 I can't remember) before MS decided to split it up into W95 and Plus! and remove some of the functionality... I used it for several months, and it only crashed a couple of times... Anyways, my point is that the argument is moot as we all have different tastes... Some prefer the 9x core, some 2k, others like the (imo) bloated W2k/NT based OS called XP ;), and others again actually like ME :D... This mostly isn't based on actual performance on several machines, but how the OS works/worked on their machine...And even if you've got two identical machines (same hw) it doesn't mean that it'll perform the same...I once saw two ME machines side by side. One worked like a charm, and the other allmost wouldn't boot...And they were built with the "same" parts... (Dunno about hw revisions though)So it all comes down to how the OS performs on your machine when you are using the apps that you use... If you're happy with the OS you're using, and think it's the best, then good for you. But please allow others to have opinions which differs.A bit more back to the topic. I think it's sad that MS is retiring W98 (though I think SE might have a couple of months more before it's gone), as it is/was a good OS, well suited for many home users. Now with MS retiring it, there won't be any new drivers & such (though that is up to the manufacturers) which again means that many will have to upgrade their entire machines if they want to upgrade anything (hw or sw).Well, that's my .02$ on the matters :)
Krugger said:
show me the spyware.
Vehementi said:
Heh, just last week I downgraded 10 machines from Windows 2000 to 98 SE. But that's because the machines were too slow to handle 2000.
Soul Harvester said:
You two are misreading my post. I was referring to 98 as opposed to, well, 98, not the any of the NT series. 98 has been patched up and bandaged and sewed together since the very start, my point was that "fixing it up" can only get you so far.And no, Windows ME is by no means superior to Windows 98. In terms of memory management it is on an equal or inferior level. In terms of driver support, ME has far less vendor support than Windows 98 did, and will never have better driver support. ME brought interfaces that were designed for NT into the 9x world and it did them very shoddily. I have used or repaired ME on about 15 different workstations and would never in my entire life suggest someone use ME. I don't really want to get into a battle over this however, my original point was that 98 has gone as far as it should go.
Soul Harvester said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by MoRulez [/i]But no OS can compete with XP's built-in spyware. It wins in that department hands-down. [/quote] I am sorry, but when you start saying things like that, your credibility goes right out the window. You have no real basis for this other then heresay perhaps. Classify "spyware" in the XP world and give me a real-world example.
Soul Harvester said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by Vehementi [/i]Heh, just last week I downgraded 10 machines from Windows 2000 to 98 SE. But that's because the machines were too slow to handle 2000. [/quote] Veh, what are the specs of these machines?I ran Windows 2000 on a 486 DX4-100 @ 160mhz / 64mb FPM ram for a long time and it was quite pleasent. Of course, I specialize in tweaking Windows... but still...
MoRulez said:
Wow, MrGirbaldi, how can you put ME dead last like that? Have u tried it? I can honestly say I have used both 98 and ME and ME has given me NO problems and is much more convenient and efficient in so many ways.Like I said, unless you're using some "value" class hardware, Win ME is potentially more vulnerable to hardware related errors. Most cheap hardware producers, particularly products from the Asian markets use 98 drivers, and that alone.But Xp deserves to be in the top 5, if only because of it's ease of use for an average consumer. In terms of XP spyware:[URL=http://www.darwinmag.com/read/thoughts/comment.
tml?ID=2412]inetinfo.exe spyware...[/URL] [URL=http://www.tecchannel.com/security/client/58/]tecChannel (German site, in english) has an extensive in-depth 16 page report on spyware they discovered with Windows Update...[/URL]
Soul Harvester said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by MoRulez [/i][URL=http://www.darwinmag.com/read/thoughts/comment.html
ID=2412]inetinfo.exe spyware...[/URL] [URL=http://www.tecchannel.com/security/client/58/]tecChannel (German site, in english) has an extensive in-depth 16 page report on spyware they discovered with Windows Update...[/URL] [/quote] [i]User-initiated[/i] to begin with. I don't blame Microsoft for collecting such info when you directly connect to their servers on potentially pirated software. At the end of the day you still can maintain full control of your system, should you choose to learn how to do so. That is 16 pages about Windows Update. Useless? To me, yes. Think twice before clicking, "I Agree".I run XP on about 7 machines here at home and I assure you that not one bit of information I do not want going "out" ever goes "out". None of that is spyware because if you read the EULA as well as the agreement for Windows Update it details that it will gather such information. Lame ware? Maybe, but malware and spyware it is not.
Tarkus said:
I don't blame MS for ending Win98 support. I stopped supporting it two years ago. When people come to me with computer problems and they say they are running Win98 I tell them to buy a new computer.
Soul Harvester said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by Tarkus [/i]I don't blame MS for ending Win98 support. I stopped supporting it two years ago. When people come to me with computer problems and they say they are running Win98 I tell them to buy a new computer. [/quote] [url]http://soulnet.tk/images/x/xpold.jpg[/url];)
---agissi--- said:
Damn now thats impressive Soul Harvester. I dont know why you speak so highly of ME MoRulez. Its very sluggish and crashed on me all the time. XP is very very stable [hasnt ever crashed on me before].I think its time Microsoft end support for Windows98, it may have been a great OS but face it - its old and is becoming outdated.
MoRulez said:
Call it what you wish, but at it's core, it's still spyware. Spyware definition: "In general, spyware is any technology that aids in gathering information about a person or organization without their knowledge." ([url]http://www.cyberhome-fl.com/spywaredef.htm[/url])Updat
ng your Windows OS, something most users do (and rightfully so), and not knowing that Microsoft now has gained knowledge (whether it be your hardware configuration or your PC usage habits) without you knowing exactly what is being taken and how, is deceiving. According to Security Focus, ([url]http://www.securityfocus.com/news/2746[/url]) the EULA states "Windows Update must collect a certain amount of configuration information from your computer" and the info includes "OS version number, IE version number and "version numbers of other software for which Windows Update provides updates" along with plug and play ID numbers and regional settings. "But (they cite tecCHANNEL's Windows Update discovery) " there's no mention of collecting data on software from other vendors running on a machine. And this software can't be updated using Windows Update. So why is Microsoft collecting this data?"What do you have to say about the inetinfo spyware?Oh, i guess i seem the lone lucky user of ME...odd... maybe Im lucky to use well known hardware products on my system (asus mboard, etc.)Wow, amazing Harvestor, thats a marvel in itself.
werty316 said:
I am not surprised by this. Some people just don't like to change to something new. You have to intergrate into the new OS. I switched to XP just in the summer time. I was fed up with the blue screen of death. Hehe
BrownPaper said:
i remember a lot of people had problems upgrading from ME. that is where most of the horror stories about ME came about. as with every MS OS, people always advise others to do a clean, full installation instead of installing via upgrade. 2k and xp are much better than 98 and ME when it comes to memory management. i got a lot of memory leaks on 98 and ME.some things that are bad about 2k and xp is that some old games do not work on it, even with compatibility settings. well i can always dual boot for that.
agrav8r said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by MoRulez [/i]Call it what you wish, but at it's core, it's still spyware. Spyware definition: "In general, spyware is any technology that aids in gathering information about a person or organization without their knowledge." ([url]http://www.cyberhome-fl.com/spywaredef.htm[/url])Updat
ng your Windows OS, something most users do (and rightfully so), and not knowing that Microsoft now has gained knowledge (whether it be your hardware configuration or your PC usage habits) without you knowing exactly what is being taken and how, is deceiving. According to Security Focus, ([url]http://www.securityfocus.com/news/2746[/url]) the EULA states "Windows Update must collect a certain amount of configuration information from your computer" and the info includes "OS version number, IE version number and "version numbers of other software for which Windows Update provides updates" along with plug and play ID numbers and regional settings. "But (they cite tecCHANNEL's Windows Update discovery) " there's no mention of collecting data on software from other vendors running on a machine. And this software can't be updated using Windows Update. So why is Microsoft collecting this data?"What do you have to say about the inetinfo spyware?Oh, i guess i seem the lone lucky user of ME...odd... maybe Im lucky to use well known hardware products on my system (asus mboard, etc.)Wow, amazing Harvestor, thats a marvel in itself. [/quote] Tell me if I am wrong here, but you don't have to use window update, you can go to the patches directly off the download page, and last I checked it just straight downloads. it may take longer but it would stop your worries. Also does it pull it off every drive letter or only the one windows is on? If that is the case, just partition your drive and load everything else on the other side. Also there are hacked pacthes that I have seen SP! for instance that spoof other info, if big brother is watching:rolleyes: Or for the truly paranoid, use 2 hard drives with XP and copy the files over yourself making adjustments when required.I have found that reading a book and fishing are the only sure ways to prevent spyware however:p
StormBringer said:
I don't think you can call it "without your knowledge" as Windows Update can be enabled to auto, manual, or turned off completely. Personally, I have it set to scan once a week, and thats the only time it tries to access(I know this because I also have to allow it access through my firewall)IMO, its about time people stop trying to live in the past, there is no reason to keep using Win 9x for your primary OS. I am still amazed at the number of people trying to run 95, not just on old machines, but carrying the OS to a new build and having trouble because they can't get proper drivers for some hardware. This same thing is about to happen with 98. It is dead, its for the better. While I will agree that 98 SE was pretty good, especially with proper registry hacking, it was not "all that"
MoRulez said:
Well I personally have never used Windows Update, ever, but just think of all those people who do. And thats beside the fact that there are other components of XP that are allegedly used to send back facts about your computer that most people ignore.When i stated "without your knowledge" i meant that it (Windows Update and inetinfo.exe, for example) both send info that the majority of users don't know is being sent:Windows update is "telling" MS the listing of pretty much all your programs on your computer (maybe through the registry). And possible inetinfo.exe is sending some other sort of information back as well (but MS states its for debugging...).Yes, the WU says it gathers info in its Users Agreement, but it doesn't state anywhere that it gathers the list of software ion your computer. You may think it's not harmful, but this is how MS gains an unfair monopoly.
StormBringer said:
Windows NEVER tries to connect except when it does its weekly thing, at least on this machine. If it does, then it does it in a way that it slips past my firewall, which is set to make all apps ask permission before they connect. All this paranoia makes me wonder what you have on your machines that you need to hide.
Vehementi said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by Soul Harvester [/i]Veh, what are the specs of these machines?I ran Windows 2000 on a 486 DX4-100 @ 160mhz / 64mb FPM ram for a long time and it was quite pleasent. Of course, I specialize in tweaking Windows... but still... [/quote] They were all Pentium Classics I think. It wasn't me who thought they were slow, it was the people I was installing them for.Exactly in MERulez's words, Windows XP is not spyware. It isn't without your consent, you agreed to it in the EULA. Get a grip, guys. And no, it doesn't send a list of all the programs in your registry. Give me a break. If it were true, Microsoft would never be able to get away with it.I didn't know people were around still that believed everything they read on the internet.Now, if we could get back on the topic of Microsoft ending support for Windows 98, hey, that would be excellent.
MoRulez said:
The process of MS allegedly gaining info on your software happens along with the process where it communicates with your computer from it's servers. So it happens when you run Windows Update ; its not a seperate procedure.And it's not about whether you have anything to hide or not (at least not for me), it's whether MS discloses ALL the "spyware" actions. tecCHANNEL's claims are quiet serious (since MS doesn't say anything in it's User Agreement about software info gathering). There are accusations of other XP files trying to access windows servers as well.But the only reason I brought all this spyware talk up was because some people wanted me to back up my claims of XP spyware. And I did. Whether those reports have any relevancy is up to the reader to decide. Untill then, I believe in tecCHANNELs testing, especially since most of us know how insane MS is on monopolizing the industry any way it can. Why wouldn't MS try to go further in analyzing it's user's software list in order to better it's strangle hold on the industry and it's consumers dollars.Case closed.
agrav8r said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by MoRulez [/i]The process of MS allegedly gaining info on your software happens along with the process where it communicates with your computer from it's servers. So it happens when you run Windows Update ; its not a seperate procedure.Case closed. [/quote] But the point is yopu don't have to go to the update screen. If you go to the xp section and go to direct download , it will list all the items that it filters out when you use windows auto update. Therefore you can update your windows without it using the scan, and thus collecting my precious , preciouuuuussss ( sorry waiting for lord of the rings) info. If you don't want to go through every file, then use the filter and send the data.Now, having looked at the full list, they do have some individual product fixes that get filtered out, as well and certain component combinations. so yes they are collecting info on your computer, just as much as when you send info on bugs ( when it states report, don't report it will gather your registry to determine if it was a programming prob on theirs or another program) As to whether they are using that infomation in an unethical way has yet to be determined , but is assumed by many. Every warrenty card on every product you buy , collects info on you, and most businesses have no problem selling that information to advertisers as well as within their own company.your point on using this information to keep their monopoly is somewhat flawed, as for OS the only true competitors are MAC OS ( apple only) and linux which , excluding windows, is not something you could give to your grandmother or parents to use on a daily basis. the majority of people are computer illiterate, and MS has done a wonderful job of dumbing down the OS for the common man. that is why so many of us , tweak it to get more power and functionality. your standard user only wants to take pictures and send emails.Sorry i got long winded:dead:
MrGaribaldi said:
MoRulez> Why I put ME dead last? Because it caused me no end of problems, and that was [i]without[/i] legacy hardware.... I installed a new logitech mouse, and the entire OS went belly up... (I could go on forever about that so I'll just stop now...)As for the spyware thingy...Veh> So if you consent to it in the EULA it's ok and not spyware? If so, how is gator & newnet spyware? They're mostly installed alongside some other program, and you accept it in the EULA... Thus by your reasoning, it's not really spyware since you've agreed to it.I'm sorry, but that just doesn't fit my own definition of it. Any program that collects data on my computer and sends it off somewhere is spyware... The question is if I know about it and allow it, or if it happens behind my back! If it's the former, then good, I know what is happening. But if it's the latter, then get the **** off my computer and don't come back!And I don't really care if you agree to it somewhere deep down in an EULA, as they're so full of lawyer-speak that it's allmost impossible to understand them.No, I prefer the honest companies which pop up a window during installation telling you that you are about to install a dataminer, and that this is required for the program you want to run, [i]but gives you a chance not to install the spyware[/i]. That is the honest, truthful way to do it, as then you [b]know[/b] what you're doing.This also puts me in mind of an old userfriendly strip where Pitr adds in certain lines in the EULA which gives him complete control over your computer, and no-one sees it. Why? Because allmost no-one actually sits down and reads all the EULA's they're subjected to.[EDIT] Ooops, forgot to mention that I don't look at XP as being spyware, though I do wish they'd give the user a bit more warning about what they're doing when using WindowsUpdate[/EDIT]
Krugger said:
first don't post something without reading it:the first link, this is just gossip "Packets are sent from the process to sa.windows.com, who knows whats in them"first of all, i don't have a program called inetinfo.exe(for referrence: InetInfo is Part of Microsoft Internet Infomation Services (IIS) and is used for debugging.Seen primarily on Windows NT4/2000 Server where it provides Internet Proxy and Web Server services.)but say some people did, to assume that it's 'spying' on you and then call xp spyware b/c of it is silly. so we'll move on to the other link you posted.alright, i read that whole thing, and again it's nothing. did you read it? where is the spyware. yes windows update scans your hardware to see if there are any updates... did you not know that?Privacy Statement: This information includes:Operating-system version number Internet Explorer version number Version numbers of other software for which Windows Update provides updates Plug and Play ID numbers of hardware devices Region and Language setting none of that can personally identify anyone, that's the point.site is quite clear about what they track. also, none of this speculation singles out XP does it? so how can you say XP is full of spyware??? Again, MS is quite clear in what they do, and you of course have the option of not using update. that is not spyware. i hate when people make a bold claim like that and don't back it up. the first article was vague and just plain wrong, and the second was very technical but told me nothing the WU site itself didn't tell me.-edit i just saw your response, and if that is your definition of spyware than this discussion can't really go any further, just admit that it has nothing to do with XP itself, it's all the windows update site. nothing is on your computer tracking you...the rest of the world's definition of spyware resembles:"In general, spyware is any technology that aids in gathering information about a person or organization [b]without their knowledge[/b]" Without their knowledge is the key here. If it says what they do quite clearly on the page itself, and a bit more one click away (NOT in the EULA, but on the About Windows Update page [url]http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/en/about.asp?[/ur
] ) then it is NOT spyware. maybe you don't like it sending ANY information and preferred it did it the other way, then fine say that. don't use it if you don't like it. don't just call it spyware.
shnig said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by MoRulez [/i]Case closed. [/quote] The case isnt closed when you have had your rant.I have never had probloms running 98se however I nearly blew a few gaskets trying to get anything to work using me.I am now useing XP and like it a lot but time will tell me if its better then 98 SE or not (Xp is certainly better on the networking side of things anyway).
asand4 said:
Like the subject title says, "The Obvious" is that they are getting rid of 98 not only because it is becoming an outdating O/S but because it's keeping more users away from their newer crap. So far. I must say that XP is fairly stable, but still has many compatibility issues that can become very frustrating, especially to the (not so PC savy) user. If someone doesn't know what they are doing, the problems that arise with the compatibility and with the lack of drivers available for XP can cause a whole lot of grief.Another thing that we should remember is that XP, unlike it's predessors, XP uses a lot of cache memory which makes it more stable in that sense, because even if your hard drive is maxed out it, it can still function without any glitches. Of course, there is the downside, because it uses cache as its main resource, it requires an above average of RAM. As we all know, there is no point in running XP unless you have a minimum of 256MB SDRAM or DDR. Granted, I have run it at 128MB but, believe me the performance is horrible. In my opinion, XP requires no less than 512MB to see any real difference is performance speed and stability. Also, another point to keep in mind is that if you are using an intergrated video card, many of them now share memory with the processor so if you have only 256MB of RAM and your video card requires 64MB to function properly, well you are now down to only 192MB for XP to function with, hence, you have an underperforming system.Nevertheless, I still like XP but I think my preference is Win2K as is has been proven as very stable and it is the choice of most businesses, even with XP available. I currently run XP on my desktop and Win2K on my Toshiba notebook and I am very please with 2000's performance, considering my notebook is only a 400MHz Celeron running with 192MB of RAM. I have had absolutely no issues with applications hanging or with crashes, which I can't say for my XP driven PC.Well that's my piece on this. I hope it helps to weigh the pros and cons of both.As for the other O/S systems, having worked with them all and having friends in network security and programming that will vouch the same, they aren't worth a plug nickel. Too many issues arise for more involved PC users. Perhaps for the occassional surfer or document prep, 98SE can be tolerated, but the rest are just a disaster waiting to happen.asand4:grinthumb
MoRulez said:
First off, Krugger asked for evidence of spyware that I stated was on XP, and I showed him evidence. The inetinfo.exe is without a doubt sending information to the MS servers. There's no way you know exactly what is completly in it unless your from MS. If you think it's harmless, thats fine. If you think it's potentially harmful for whatever reason, thats fine too. It's an opinion. Personally I don't use XP so I dont care. If you read my earlier post Krugger, you would have noticed I said these are [b]alleged[/b] spyware activities. The report by tecCHANNEL states: "The ability of the GetSystemSpec() function of the COM component to list the software vendors of all installed software packages ( tag) is currently unused by Windows Update, but it might become a privacy issue in the future." and:"The approach that older versions of Windows Update took was to download a complete list of updates and then filter out the relevant ones on the user's computer - without transferring any sensitive information to Microsoft. Why does the current version implement an approach that transfers the information required for the filtering from the user's computer to the Microsoft server, which then does the filtering and returns a list of updates that is tailored to the configuration of the user's computer? Bandwidth is hardly a limiting factor today and downloading a complete list of updates would probably take only a few seconds. This question therefore remains unanswered."So you can believe that information about your software list is being transfered, or not. Both opinions are fine since both have good reasons behind them to back them up. Again, its called an opinion. The User's Agreement (or as you say, the "Windows Update About"page says Windows Update gathers, along with other info: "version numbers of other software for which Windows Update provides updates" That means other MS software, such as Outlook. Not other vendor's software for updating, such as Winamp. What tecCHANNEL was highlighting was Windows Update was sending encrypted info on your [b]complete[/b] software list (that means Winamp and other non-MS software). Now, none of the agreements state that it gathers info on non-Windows software, so if this allegation is true, then MS is in big trouble.Of course, the informed user wouldn't have to use Windows Update, like agrav8r made light of, and instead download updates off the 'net from a website. And as far as using that info: MS is a ruthless corporation. This is an excelleent way for it to, maybe say, optimize software that is commonly used, or sell the info for marketer's money. Of course it is marketed only as fixing bugs/incompatibilities with the OS. Maybe that is all they will do with the info, maybe not. You can't tell for sure unless you're from MS. And whether you think everything MS says is 200% true, is also your own opinion. Remember, they are a corporation with a monopoly....and ruthless one at that. Why do you think they're completly opposed to open-source? Other than losing software efficiency and performance, there is nothing for this monopolized OS to lose.Asand4, thx for guiding us back to the subject of Windows 98 support coming to an end. That's definityl one of the major reasons why people are sticking to older OSs: performance. I know that's my main reasons for sure. And of course XP takes up much more HD space too, which is definitly not something I need.
Krugger said:
about the ability to get complete software lists: [b]your own site says it's not being used[/b]... so what's your point?[b]The ability[/b] of the GetSystemSpec() function of the COM component [b]to list the software vendors of all installed software packages[/b] ( tag) [b]is currently unused by Windows Update[/b] inetinfo... i dont know what to say. it's not on my computer, and therefore i would wager based on the fact that its iis related that it's not tied to XP and not standard. so again, your two points don't seem valid, as that application isn't on an XP machine by default, update [b]DOESN'T[/b] get a list of software or do anything other then it states it does,and i guess we agree to disagree on the spyware definition... so while this is an interesting debate, i think thats all i can go for now, before we continue in circles...moving on :)-Krugger
khosw said:
Windows 98 was easy to fix, only drawback was that it crashed for no reasons, also required a system refresh once or twice a week...
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.