For all WIN98 Users !!!
Gitte Tøgersen
There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think that it is
VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when I/we have
NO interrest what so ever in 98.
So, I've found these newsgroups for you, so you can go there
with your questions, and when/if I/we upgrade from WIN95 to WIN98,
I/we will gladly go there instead......
Hope you all can use some of these !!!!!!!!
comp.os.ms-windows.pre-release
comp.os.ms-windows.misc
microsoft.public.win98.comm.apps
microsoft.public.win98.comm.dun
microsoft.public.win98.comm.modem
microsoft.public.win98.disks.general
microsoft.public.win98.display.general
microsoft.public.win98.display.multi_monitor
microsoft.public.win98.fat32
microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
microsoft.public.win98.internet
microsoft.public.win98.internet.active_desktop
microsoft.public.win98.internet.browser
microsoft.public.win98.internet.netmeeting
microsoft.public.win98.internet.outlookexpress
microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update
microsoft.public.win98.msinfo32
microsoft.public.win98.multimedia
microsoft.public.win98.multimedia.directx5
microsoft.public.win98.networking
microsoft.public.win98.performance
microsoft.public.win98.pnp
microsoft.public.win98.power_mgmt
microsoft.public.win98.pre-release
microsoft.public.win98.printing
microsoft.public.win98.scanreq
microsoft.public.win98.setup
microsoft.public.win98.setup.win31
microsoft.public.win98.shell
microsoft.public.win98.sys_file_check
microsoft.public.win98.taskscheduler
microsoft.public.win98.webtv
--
Kind regards
Gitte Tøgersen
Denmark
Email: dans...@hotmail.com
----------
Henri Leboeuf
Gitte Tøgersen <g.tog...@sondagsavisen.dk> wrote in article
<6nt7dm$p0q$1...@news.uni-c.dk>...
John D. Goulden
Philly
<jgou...@flash.net> wrote:
>Not to mention the obvious but there's also alt.windows98...
I haven't subscribed to any of the below-listed Win98 newsgroups, but
I probably will subscribe to alt.windows98 when Mindspring (my ISP)
finally adds it. It's silly, but as a non-Win98 person I don't feel
like scrolling all the way down to those microsoft.public.win98
newsgroups, plus there are so many of them it's annoying. I can see
having a few subgroups, but 30+? A simple "alt.windows98" newsgroup
right next to alt.windows95 in my newsreader would be much nicer, in
my opinion. I could quickly scan that group for
educational/informational purposes, and more thoroughly scan
alt.windows95 for questions that I can answer.
I'm one of those who is a bit put off by the number of what I call
"Win98-only" questions appearing in alt.windows95 - questions that
pertain only to Windows 98 and not to Win95/98. There are more of them
than I expected. I find myself skimming through the new posts in
alt.windows95 much faster than I did in the past, and skipping at
least half the posts altogether. I don't contend that Win98 questions
"don't belong" in alt.windows95, but I think a widely available and
active alt.windows98 newsgroup would be a good thing.
--==Philly==--
>>Gitte T0gersen
>>Denmark
>>Email: dans...@hotmail.com
>>
>>----------
>>
>>
>
Ron O'Brien
<g.tog...@sondagsavisen.dk> writes
>Hi everybody !
>
>
>There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think that it is
>VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when I/we have
>NO interrest what so ever in 98.
>
new newsgroup download!
Also, many people will be up-grading from W95 to W98 therefore there is
bound to be cross references.
I often see references in this newsgroup to graphics cards - there are
specific newsgroups for that, so to peripherals such as SCSI, DTP,
scanners, joystick and games configurations
At least we haven't been infiltrated by the "Hi my name's Cindy" headers
- with links to adult web sites!
--
Ron O'Brien
Steve Shattuck
Non specific groups like you named or the Microsoft locations just don't cut
it. I'm not asking questions here, but this happens everytime a new release
comes out. It just takes time for new groups to be approved, take a cool
pill. In six months many of the knowledgeable people will have moved on and
you can complain because the quality of help has declined as a result.
Gitte Tøgersen wrote in message <6nt7dm$p0q$1...@news.uni-c.dk>...
>There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think that it is
>VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when I/we have
>NO interrest what so ever in 98.
Karen Morris
mentioned are worldwide, perhaps there should be a new group for the
UK Windows 98 operating system. (uk.comp.os.win98)
regards
Karen
On Tue, 7 Jul 1998 15:19:41 +0200, "Gitte Tøgersen"
<g.tog...@sondagsavisen.dk> wrote:
>Hi everybody !
>
>
>There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think that it is
>VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when I/we have
>NO interrest what so ever in 98.
>
>So, I've found these newsgroups for you, so you can go there
>with your questions, and when/if I/we upgrade from WIN95 to WIN98,
>I/we will gladly go there instead......
>
>Hope you all can use some of these !!!!!!!!
>
>--
>Kind regards
>
>Gitte Tøgersen
>Denmark
>Email: dans...@hotmail.com
>
>----------
>
>
\\\\//// "ICQ # 14352872"
{ O O } --> "Typing/Computer Services & Gardening Services"
{ L } www.netcomuk.co.uk/~klmorris/index.htm
{ ~ } Email klmo...@netcomuk.co.uk
Glenn Brensinger
might not see all the groups. Best way is to connect to
msnews.microsoft.com directly.
Ron O'Brien wrote in message ...
>In article <6nt7dm$p0q$1...@news.uni-c.dk>, Gitte Tøgersen
><g.tog...@sondagsavisen.dk> writes
>To be fair, the groups you list do not appear on my system - I will do a
>new newsgroup download!
Ken Blake
<6nt7dm$p0q$1...@news.uni-c.dk>...
>Hi everybody !
>
>
>There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think
that it is
>VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when
I/we have
>NO interrest what so ever in 98.
Although *some* others may agree with you, not everyone
does. Many of us *do* want to see Windows 98 questions here.
Just pass over any messages with topics you're not
interested in.
Ken Blake
To send me E-mail, delete the "X" in my address
John D. Goulden
One suggestion is to answer (politely) '98 posts here in alt.windows95,
mention that a more appropriate group (alt.windows98) does exist, and set
the follow-ups to that newsgroup. I realize that alt.windows98 is new and
isn't yet on many of the news servers, but it ought to be well established
within the next week or so. Same story for comp.os.mswindows.win95, although
I haven't yet seen an RFD for a 98 group there.
Sue Beardsley
list as suggested previously and no joy We Win 98 users would love our own
group Will try posting suggestions about it Do be gentle with us for now
wont you? Cheers and much joy
Dom wrote in message <6nu2t9$meo$1...@mail.mdsi.bc.ca>...
>
>>>
>>>There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>>>post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>>>I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think
>>that it is
>>>VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when
>>I/we have
>>>NO interrest what so ever in 98.
>
later
>..
John M Roberts
> Gitte Tøgersen wrote in message
> <6nt7dm$p0q$1...@news.uni-c.dk>...
>
> >Hi everybody !
> >
> >
> >There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
> >post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
> >I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think
> that it is
> >VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when
> I/we have
> >NO interrest what so ever in 98.
>
Some of us view the Q's/discussions about Win98 as spam. This group is
marked specifically for Win95, if you want a Win98 group, go get someone
to create uk.comp.os.win98, if you want a combined group go get someone
to create uk.comp.os.win32....
I'm paying for the net access I use, and phone bills etc. When I read
this n/g I would rather not be paying for others Win98 discussions - If
I want that I'll go find a Win98 n/g, and not expect to find Win95
questions in there...
--
Regards
John Roberts
magi...@mcmail.com
"I dunno quite how to put this ... but you're a psycho. I want to put
you on a rocketship and send you to the planet Flaflooga." - Eric
Matthews (Boy Meets World)
Dom
>>
>>There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>>post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>>I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think
>that it is
>>VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when
>I/we have
>>NO interrest what so ever in 98.
and whether you like it or not... you will HAVE TO use win98 sooner or later
..
BinaryBillTheSailor@sea++.com
that MANY ISP's don't carry it. I even saw a post from one person who
was flatly told by his ISP that they were not going to carry
Alt.windows.98 because they felt it would just be redundant for the
most part and there would be almost total cross-posting to
alt.windows95. You could tell that person that he needs a new ISP, but
I think his situation is far from unique. Those that do get
Alt.windows.98 are reporting that there is not much activity there.
That might suggest that in fact, very few ISP's are carrying it at
this point. I think we are looking at a substantially longer timeframe
than a week for this to settle out.
John Hamm
>
> and whether you like it or not... you will HAVE TO use win98 sooner or later
> ..
There are a number of operating systems available.
I've made my last Micro$oft mistake.
No more M$ operating systems.
--
John Hamm Buy/Sell/Trade
Vinyl, CDs, R2R tapes, Equipment, Literature
Motorcycles (Suzuki GT-750 Water Buffalos)
http://www.sunflower.com/~jlhamm/main.htm
John King
Some (ahem) open minded Windows 95 users might want to see the responses and
questions from Win98 users so that they can make a more informed decision of
when or if to upgrade.
Chris Blount
patient.
Phil Hawley
Incredible!!! All these Win98 questions too much for ya are they?
Phil
Gitte Tøgersen wrote in message <6nt7dm$p0q$1...@news.uni-c.dk>...
>Hi everybody !
>
>
>There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think that it is
>VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when I/we have
>NO interrest what so ever in 98.
>
Alan R. Miller
at: http://www.windows98.org/newsgroups.html
--
Alan R. Miller, Professor and Coord. of General Engineering
New Mexico Tech armi...@nmt.edu
Socorro NM 87801 http://www.nmt.edu/~armiller/
Phone: 505-835-5619 Office: Weir 156
Sue Beardsley wrote in message <6nu3fk$aba$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com>...
>Sorry Dom I have just tried the suggested alt.windows.98 on my newsgroups
>list as suggested previously and no joy We Win 98 users would love our own
>group Will try posting suggestions about it Do be gentle with us for
now
>wont you? Cheers and much joy
>Dom wrote in message <6nu2t9$meo$1...@mail.mdsi.bc.ca>...
>>
>>>>
>>>>There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>>>>post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>>>>I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think
>>>that it is
>>>>VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when
>>>I/we have
>>>>NO interrest what so ever in 98.
>>
David James Spillett
<jlh...@lawrence.ks.us> writes
>Dom wrote:
>>
>> and whether you like it or not... you will HAVE TO use win98 sooner or later
>No I won't........
>There are a number of operating systems available.
Too true. I find myself using Linux mor and more lately. I've just
installed StarOffice [a very good package BTW] for reports etc., I have
The GIMP for graphics [knocks PaintShopPro out of the water and makes
PhotoShop's feature set look less impresive] and will soon be moving my
'net connection to that side of my system.
All the above is abvailable free, BTW.
Once all that is done Win95 will only be used for supporting the
programs I have written for it, and a few games.
>I've made my last Micro$oft mistake.
>No more M$ operating systems.
Unfortunatly there are still things tying me to M$, and there will be
for a while. Although I won't be upgrading from Win95 for some time yet.
--
David James Spillett Ageing is compulsory
DJSpi...@bigfoot.com Maturing is optional...
http://www.djspillett.demon.co.uk (home of WholeSite v1.51,
the one-click web-site updater. Oh, and some strange humour...)
d7dot
(Guy Fawkes) wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Jul 1998 21:13:00 GMT, d...@mdsi.bc.ca (Dom) wrote:
>
>>
>>and whether you like it or not... you will HAVE TO use win98 sooner or later
>>..
>
>
>why? did MS scrap NT5?
Nope, and my gut feeling is that before too much longer we will all be
running NTx, there will be no Win9x available, least not as a new OS.
--
|| Brad - d7...@mindspring.com
|| Brad's Internet Help Resources
|| http://d7dot.home.mindspring.com
|| Mindspring-Quality Internet Provider
Guy Fawkes
>
>and whether you like it or not... you will HAVE TO use win98 sooner or later
>..
why? did MS scrap NT5?
GF
Grant Gardner
their server yet, and if you are paying for time online than you should
change your service......
John M Roberts wrote in message <35A29179...@mcmail.com>...
>Ken Blake wrote:
>
>> Gitte Tøgersen wrote in message
>> <6nt7dm$p0q$1...@news.uni-c.dk>...
>>
>> >Hi everybody !
>> >
>> >
>> >There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>> >post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>> >I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think
>> that it is
>> >VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when
>> I/we have
>> >NO interrest what so ever in 98.
>>
>> Although *some* others may agree with you, not everyone
>> does. Many of us *do* want to see Windows 98 questions here.
>>
>> Just pass over any messages with topics you're not
>> interested in.
>>
>> Ken Blake
>> To send me E-mail, delete the "X" in my address
>>
>> >
BinaryBillTheSailor@sea++.com
countries have different sets of rules to live by.
Megabrain
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.setup
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.multimedia
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.comm.apps
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.comm.dun
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.comm.modem
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.disks.general
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.display.general
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.display.multi_monitor
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.fat32
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.internet
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.internet.active_desktop
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.internet.browser
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.internet.netmeeting
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.internet.outlookexpress
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.msinfo32
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.multimedia
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.multimedia.directx5
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.networking
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.performance
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.pnp
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.power_mgmt
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.pre-release
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.printing
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.scanreq
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.setup
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.setup.win31
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.shell
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.sys_file_check
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.taskscheduler
news://207.68.144.15/microsoft.public.win98.webtv
I prefer to post it this way so that I can be lazy and not
have to load the groups just click the links and subscribe or not.
--
================,,,=========================
===============(o o)========================
===========oOO==(_)==OOo====================
mega...@cyberdude.com
Not an Intel Employee
Not a Microsoft Employee
Just a User.
Your Mileage May Vary. :)
===========ooooO==Ooooo=====================
===========( )==( )=====================
============\ (====) /======================
=============\_)==(_/=======================
Gitte Tøgersen
To defend myself, I like to say, that my ISP doesn't either have these
newsgroups -YET, but I hope this is a way off telling that there is a
need for those groups - you can all se how many questions about WIN98
there are in the existing groups, and they are almost outnumbering the
WIN95 questions...
The newsgroups that I'd found, I found searching the internet.
I don't know what it'll take to create such new newsgroups, but I hope
that someone who does, also read this, and will take an initiative to
do so.....
Kind regards
Gitte Tøgersen
Denmark
Email: dans...@hotmail.com
----------
Gitte Tøgersen skrev i meddelelsen <6nt7dm$p0q$1...@news.uni-c.dk>...
>Hi everybody !
>
>
>There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think that it is
>VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when I/we have
>NO interrest what so ever in 98.
>
Bill Watt Sr
<g.tog...@sondagsavisen.dk> wrote:
:Hi everybody !
:
:
:There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
:post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
:I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think that it is
:VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when I/we have
:NO interrest what so ever in 98.
Win95, a, b, c, d, OSR1, 2, 2.1 2.5, Win98. What's the
difference. They are all upgrades. MS calls it Win98 for
marketing purposes and adds IE. Most of the problems are the same
from version to version. Just indicate the version in the
subject. If we have separate groups for each the expertise is
diluted. Especially in the misc, general and setup type groups.
I'm concerned that Win98 users will think they are different and
desert us. What happens to the Win95 groups then? This is
probably the last upgrade for Win95 anyway. It looks like it will
be NT in 2000 and no DOS.
Just my 2 cents.
Regards,
Bill Watt Sr. bw...@epix.net http://www.epix.net/~bwatt/
Paul V. McCullough
far) and to be fair, is actually just Windows 95c with some
optimization...
Many of the topics herein apply to both Win95/98. So, as to your
request... nah.
A suggestion:
Don't read the Win98 labelled subjects- it'll save you some grief.
Gitte Tøgersen wrote:
>
> Hi everybody !
>
> There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
> post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
> I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think that it is
> VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when I/we have
> NO interrest what so ever in 98.
>
Mike
Isn't Win98 simply Win95 with the bug fixes?
tjohnson
Mike <tan...@usa.net> wrote in article
<6nvblk$ilj$1...@newton2.pacific.net.sg>...
> What's all the fuss about?
>
> Isn't Win98 simply Win95 with the bug fixes?
>
From what I read in all the post, it seems to me to be just the opposite.
Win98 is simply Win 95 with more bugs thrown in for good measure.
--
Tom
tjoh...@XYZcyberdude.com (remove the XYZ)
>
>
>
Ron O'Brien
<jo...@eskimo.com> writes
>
>Some (ahem) open minded Windows 95 users might want to see the responses and
>questions from Win98 users so that they can make a more informed decision of
>when or if to upgrade.
>
>
>
>
I have a PC and laptop on W98, by and large things are fine
--
Ron O'Brien
Ron O'Brien
writes
>What's all the fuss about?
>
>Isn't Win98 simply Win95 with the bug fixes?
>
>
>
price)
--
Ron O'Brien
Ken Blake
<35abbb50....@news.mindspring.com>...
>On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 00:11:55 GMT,
guy.f...@surfbaud.lobotomy.co.uk
>(Guy Fawkes) wrote:
>
>Nope, and my gut feeling is that before too much longer we
will all be
>running NTx, there will be no Win9x available, least not as
a new OS.
That's more than a gut feeling. Microsoft has announced that
98 is the last of the Windows 9x operating systems. Future
operating systems will all be based on the NT kernel,
although there will be two versions available: one for
consumers and one for businesses.
Bear
>
> Thanks, Gitte, for the information. I APOLOGIZE to all for using this
> newsgroup for WIN 98 -- I could not find WIN 98 newsgroup!!! This is the
> first time I've been on newsgroups in a long time! Again, SORRY...
No apology needed -- as you can tell from the replies, many of us
*welcome* Win98 traffic here, insofar as it and '95 are so closely
related.
Denny Salatino
*************
Bug fixes PLUS all the new ones to fix for next time.
Bill Watt Sr
<Resum...@tyler.net> wrote:
:Thanks, Gitte, for the information. I APOLOGIZE to all for using this
:newsgroup for WIN 98 -- I could not find WIN 98 newsgroup!!! This is the
:first time I've been on newsgroups in a long time! Again, SORRY...
:
:Ann
You did the logical thing, nothing wrong with being logical.
Hope you stick around. We'll help each other as we have with all
the Win95 upgrades.
Alastair S. Preston
> Win95, a, b, c, d, OSR1, 2, 2.1 2.5, Win98. What's the
> difference. They are all upgrades. MS calls it Win98 for
> marketing purposes and adds IE.
Hmmm. Isn't IE is an integral part of Windows 95 also? It certainly is on
the computer my wife just got - a lot of the windows, such as control
panel, etc., certainly look like an IE screen, complete with "back",
"stop" and other buttons.
Alastair Preston aspr...@calcna.ab.ca
Gitte Tøgersen
As You can se there are other people here reading the WIN95
newsgroups, who also are tired of all the WIN98 questions, and I've
talked to A LOT of others, who ALSO agree with me....
I can understand the questions, which are in connection with 95,
such as upgrade etc., but questions which are pure WIN98,
I, and as You can se others, don't care about, and if I want to
se what kind of truble I could get into by working with WIN98, I
would go to newsgroups consirning that.....
After seeing all these questions, and what kind of questions,I don't
think that there will be many who will upgrade to 98, but go directly
to NT instead....
Kind regards
Gitte Tøgersen
Denmark
Email: dans...@hotmail.com
----------
Paul V. McCullough skrev i meddelelsen <35A326C5...@voicenet.com>...
Goldy
Denny Salatino wrote in message <35a3e77...@news.metrobbs.com>...
it also adds a few good (and overdue) programs like system file checker
registry checker and backup , version conflict manager, and a system
cofiguration manager which is great solving start up problems
web tv (if you have a tunercard) though it seems to be a more primitive
version of the tv program that came with my tuner card :)
Roy Brown
<g.tog...@sondagsavisen.dk> writes
>Who is silly ???? What a stupid thing to say !!
Coming from someone who can't snip, and who posts answers above the
questions, that's rich......
>
>As You can se there are other people here reading the WIN95
>newsgroups, who also are tired of all the WIN98 questions, and I've
>talked to A LOT of others, who ALSO agree with me....
>
>I can understand the questions, which are in connection with 95,
>such as upgrade etc., but questions which are pure WIN98,
>I, and as You can se others, don't care about, and if I want to
>se what kind of truble I could get into by working with WIN98, I
>would go to newsgroups consirning that.....
>After seeing all these questions, and what kind of questions,I don't
>think that there will be many who will upgrade to 98, but go directly
>to NT instead....
>
WIN98 is WIN95 OSR3 + IE4, except you have to pay for it.
There will be few if any WIN98 problems or solutions that do not have
some resonance for WIN95 users.
I run a 500mB drive compressed with Drivespace 3 on WIN95 OSR1, and I
have felt just as cut off from WIN95 OSR2 issues, particularly about
FAT32, as you now feel about WIN98.
But any one of them might have been the key that made me say - 'Ah,
getting *that* feature/the solution to *that* problem makes it worth my
while upgrading to a new disk and OSR2'.
With WIN98, even more so.
My suggestion is that all WIN95 ngs, except for the most granular and
implementation-specific ones, should now be renamed as WIN9x groups.
Thus saying 3x, no, NT, no, but all else - yes.
--
Roy Brown Phone : (01684) 291710 Fax : (01684) 291712
Affirm Ltd Email : royb...@affirm.co.uk
The Great Barn, Mill St 'Have nothing on your systems that you do not
TEWKESBURY GL20 5SB (UK) know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful.'
Richard Dakin
Alastair S. Preston wrote in message <6o1k6n$8...@ds2.acs.ucalgary.ca>...
>Hmmm. Isn't IE is an integral part of Windows 95 also? It certainly is on
>the computer my wife just got - a lot of the windows, such as control
>panel, etc., certainly look like an IE screen, complete with "back",
>"stop" and other buttons.
IE4 isn't integrated into Win95.
It would appear that whoever installed Win95 on your wife's machine
installed the IE4 *Desktop Update* component as well.
Installing the DU is optional during IE4 setup.
Also, using the DU requires more memory to run Win95 than if your wife had
the regular Explorer.exe windows.
If she wants to dispose of the DU, she needs to go to add/remove programs in
control panel. Choose to uninstall IE4.
Click OK.
A window will pop up with a number of options.
Choose to uninstall the DU only (I can't recall the exact text).
Reboot & she'll have the regular Win95 interface but retain the IE4 browser
& any assorted add-ons & settings.
>
>
Richard Dakin
>
mailto:r.d...@virgin.net
http://freespace.virgin.net/r.dakin/index.htm
>
© 1998
Pls....@my.sig
}Hi everybody !
}
}
}There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
}post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
}I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think that it is
}VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when I/we have
}NO interrest what so ever in 98.
}
}So, I've found these newsgroups for you, so you can go there
}with your questions, and when/if I/we upgrade from WIN95 to WIN98,
}I/we will gladly go there instead......
Thanks for your efforts. I for one would love to make use of ANY of these groups but
unfortunately my ISP doesn't carry any of the ones you mentioned as of this moment... :(
So I am still here looking for info and will post a question regarding Win98 here when and
if I need to. This is in no way meant to pester or bother you or any other Win95 users but
is done because I have no other outlet. So please be patient until my ISP, and I'm sure
many others, start carrying these new groups. Thanks!
Doug
If you want to send email, send it to:db...@snet.net
Ken Blake
<35a57916...@news.dial.pipex.com>...
>On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 11:43:06 -0700, Bear <nos...@my.box>
wrote:
>
>>No apology needed -- as you can tell from the replies,
many of us
>>*welcome* Win98 traffic here, insofar as it and '95 are so
closely
>>related.
>
>Hear Hear! I have Win98 on one of my PCs and Win95 on
another. As
>far as I am concerned, Win98 is just another, newer,
version of Win95.
>I don't want separate newsgroups.
>
>If any change is needed, it should only be to change the
name of this
>newsgroup to include Win98 and well as Win95.
A good suggestion. I'd like to see alt.windows95 changed to
alt.windows95/98.
Richard Melville
internet access NOT be able to access msnew.microsoft.com ??
--
Richard Melville
http://www.melvcon.com
Chris Blount <cbl...@bigfoot.com> wrote in article
<6ntjk8$k...@news.dx.net>...
> Not everyone has access to the new Windows 98 newsgroups. You have to be
> patient.
>
>
>
>
Rowan Kerr
Lee Gregory
why.
1) WIN98 is basically a bug fix/service pack for win95. In fact, if you do
some digging into the .inf files on the CD, you'll find that WIN95 is still
referred to.
2) The look and feel of the OS is exactly the same as WIN95.
3) Nobody seems to mind the OSR2 posts, but the truth is, OSR2 is more
closely related to W98 than it is to W95, due to FAT32, IE4, etc.
4) Posts concerning WIN98 can help others make an informed decision whether
or not to do the upgrade.
5) IT'S NOT WORTH GETTING UPSET ABOUT.
Gitte Tøgersen wrote in message <6nt7dm$p0q$1...@news.uni-c.dk>...
>Hi everybody !
>
>
>There has been discussions whether you WIN98 users, should
>post your questions in the WIN95 groups.
>I personally, and I know that others agree with me, think that it is
>VERY irritating to see all the questions about 98, when I/we have
>NO interrest what so ever in 98.
>
>So, I've found these newsgroups for you, so you can go there
>with your questions, and when/if I/we upgrade from WIN95 to WIN98,
>I/we will gladly go there instead......
>
John King
News and www are seperate things. It is unlikely, but possible, to have an
ISP who offers news but limited www.
Richard Melville wrote in message <01bdaba6$01829da0$020aa8c0@main>...
Steve Leven
you?!
Michael Olin
> I'm one of those who is a bit put off by the number of what I call
> "Win98-only" questions appearing in alt.windows95 - questions that
> pertain only to Windows 98 and not to Win95/98. There are more of them
> than I expected. I find myself skimming through the new posts in
> alt.windows95 much faster than I did in the past, and skipping at
> least half the posts altogether. I don't contend that Win98 questions
> "don't belong" in alt.windows95, but I think a widely available and
> active alt.windows98 newsgroup would be a good thing.
Personally, I am not put off by them, but I am disappointed that
there is _SO MUCH_ traffic in the n/g. Unless you read this group
4 times a day, legitimate questions/answers/useful info slides off
the end of the universe.
--
.__________. http://people.mw.mediaone.net/olinm/ .___________.
|||
Keep up the fight ||| I love my country but
or lose the right / | \ I fear my government
It only stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone
collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there's service, there is
someone being served. Make no mistake about it, the man who speaks to
you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters - and he intends to
be the master.
-- Ayn Rand
Ron O'Brien
<leegr...@earthlink.net> writes
>5) IT'S NOT WORTH GETTING UPSET ABOUT.
>
>
Well said.
I have now found the W98 groups are available through my ISP. However,
no-one seems to respond to some of the simple questions posed, so
perhaps some people are resorting to the W95 groups to get answers. As
Lee correctly states, W98 is very - VERY - like OSR2, and people with
experience of OSR2 could well answer some of the W98 problems
--
Ron O'Brien
sryan
Win '98 is really just the 2.0 release of Windows 95. It's just that they
made the silly mistake of choosing a name related to the date. Now
if you're really not interested in a new release of the operating system
you are using then i suppose you have that option, albeit a pretty
ignorant one.
JP
sryan wrote in message <6o804h$u5$1...@shadow.skypoint.net>...
Definition time ----- Ignorant means uneducated or uninformed. Why should
someone who has no use for the newer options offered in '98 risk messing up
a perfectly stable '95 configuration ? I have no USB, no TV card, etc. "98
offers me nothing but the chance to spend $90 for no valid reason other than
to keep up with you. No thanks.
Bear
>
> Don't be ridiculous...
>
> Win '98 is really just the 2.0 release of Windows 95. It's just that they
> made the silly mistake of choosing a name related to the date. Now
> if you're really not interested in a new release of the operating system
> you are using then i suppose you have that option, albeit a pretty
> ignorant one.
2.0? I thought it was 4.1.
Lone Ranger
Let the masses suffer the pains of birth for a new os -- I'll wait till Septemeber for the patches.
that's aint ignorant, boy; thats smart!!!!!!
LR
JP wrote:
sryan wrote in message <6o804h$u5$1...@shadow.skypoint.net>...
>Don't be ridiculous...
>
>Win '98 is really just the 2.0 release of Windows 95. It's just that they
>made the silly mistake of choosing a name related to the date. Now
>if you're really not interested in a new release of the operating system
>you are using then i suppose you have that option, albeit a pretty
>ignorant one.
>
Definition time ----- Ignorant means uneducated or uninformed. Why should
Tonto
C. D. Kuder MVP
Ken Blake <kbl...@xprimenet.com> wrote in message
6o0c4s$e...@nntp02.primenet.com...
>d7dot wrote in message
><35abbb50....@news.mindspring.com>...
>
>>On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 00:11:55 GMT,
>guy.f...@surfbaud.lobotomy.co.uk
>>(Guy Fawkes) wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 07 Jul 1998 21:13:00 GMT, d...@mdsi.bc.ca (Dom)
>wrote:
>>>>and whether you like it or not... you will HAVE TO use
>win98 sooner or later
>
>That's more than a gut feeling. Microsoft has announced that
>98 is the last of the Windows 9x operating systems. Future
>operating systems will all be based on the NT kernel,
>although there will be two versions available: one for
>consumers and one for businesses.
>
Ken Blake
<35A803ED...@aljan.com.au>...
>Ken Blake wrote:
>
>> A good suggestion. I'd like to see alt.windows95 changed
to
>> alt.windows95/98.
>
>Yeah, and I`d like to see pigs fly too, but it ain`t going
to happen
>now, is it Ken? ;)
I agree--it's highly unlikely. But there's still nothing
wrong with expressing an opinion.
Richard Dakin
sryan wrote in message <6o804h$u5$1...@shadow.skypoint.net>...
>Don't be ridiculous...
>
>Win '98 is really just the 2.0 release of Windows 95. It's just that they
>made the silly mistake of choosing a name related to the date. Now
>if you're really not interested in a new release of the operating system
>you are using then i suppose you have that option, albeit a pretty
>ignorant one.
It's difficult knowing what you're responding to as you quoted no original
text
But why is this ignorance or ridiculous when you state that, *Win98 is
really just the 2.0 release of Windows 95*?
I have limited experience in Win98 & have only installed it on a handful of
machines.
I have no use for it though as my present OS runs all of my apps & hardware
& runs them well.
This isn't ignorance - why change for changes sake?
Allan Evans
BinaryBillTheSailor@sea++.com
There, now yov've seen it!
On 11 Jul 1998 19:33:00 -0700, "Ken Blake" <kbl...@xprimenet.com>
wrote:
>Allan Evans wrote in message
><35A803ED...@aljan.com.au>...
>
Richard Dakin
C. D. Kuder MVP wrote in message ...
>What makes you all think that win98 isn't utilizing an nt kernel ?
Well is it?
Andrew Johnson
<alte...@aljan.com.au> writes
>Ken Blake wrote:
>
>> A good suggestion. I'd like to see alt.windows95 changed to
>> alt.windows95/98.
>
>Yeah, and I`d like to see pigs fly too, but it ain`t going to happen
>now, is it Ken? ;)
Can I point you to RFC 1925 which states
(3) With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is
not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they
are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them
as they fly overhead.
--
Andrew Johnson
Brian Wall
have recently installed both and must say that they are a big
improvevement and the setup was so easy especially demon 3.5 it
configured itself - i had held back on the installation after reading
all the reports aaand i thopught that i would never use win98.IE4 but i
was very much mistaken. all i can advise is if anyone has problems look
to how you have set it up . i say use it it is very good- brian
In article <eKF5eAT...@uppssnewspub05.moswest.msn.net>, C. D. Kuder
MVP <chu...@ix.netcom.com> writes
>What makes you all think that win98 isn't utilizing an nt kernel ?
>
>6o0c4s$e...@nntp02.primenet.com...
>>d7dot wrote in message
>><35abbb50....@news.mindspring.com>...
>>
>>>On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 00:11:55 GMT,
>>guy.f...@surfbaud.lobotomy.co.uk
>>>(Guy Fawkes) wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 07 Jul 1998 21:13:00 GMT, d...@mdsi.bc.ca (Dom)
>>wrote:
>
>>>>>and whether you like it or not... you will HAVE TO use
>>win98 sooner or later
>
>>
>>That's more than a gut feeling. Microsoft has announced that
>>98 is the last of the Windows 9x operating systems. Future
>>operating systems will all be based on the NT kernel,
>>although there will be two versions available: one for
>>consumers and one for businesses.
>>
>> To send me E-mail, delete the "X" in my address
>>
>>
>
>
--
Brian Wall
John King
Lone Ranger wrote in message <35A7DB2C...@tonto.com>...
I have enough problems with w95 osr2, much less the reported problems
that I am reading here regarding w98.
Let the masses suffer the pains of birth for a new os -- I'll wait till
Septemeber for the patches.
Makes sense to me. I think that is smart.
I will say that I have not had that many problems in upgrading four
very different machines.
Still, I get the feeling that W98 isn't as polished as W95 was.
If you can backup fully, don't mind a little tinker time, try it and
see what you think.
Ken Blake
<6oga68$19t$1...@eskinews.eskimo.com>...
>
> Lone Ranger wrote in message
<35A7DB2C...@tonto.com>...
> I have enough problems with w95 osr2, much less the
reported problems
>that I am reading here regarding w98.
> Let the masses suffer the pains of birth for a new
os -- I'll wait till
>Septemeber for the patches.
>
> Makes sense to me. I think that is smart.
>
> I will say that I have not had that many problems
in upgrading four
>very different machines.
>
> Still, I get the feeling that W98 isn't as polished
as W95 was.
I view Windows 98 as the latest release of Windows 95.
Rather than being a new and different product, it's simply
the next evolutionary step. As such, I think it's *more*
polished than 95, not less.
I find it more stable and it runs here with virtually no
problems at all.
Ken Blake
To send me E-mail, delete the "X" in my address
>
Jim
> Lone Ranger wrote in message <35A7DB2C...@tonto.com>...
> I have enough problems with w95 osr2, much less the reported problems
>
with Win98.
Peter Wilkins
wrote :
>i want to know why some folks are complaining about win98 and IE4 - i
>have recently installed both and must say that they are a big
>improvevement and the setup was so easy especially demon 3.5 it
>configured itself - i had held back on the installation after reading
>all the reports aaand i thopught that i would never use win98.IE4 but i
>was very much mistaken. all i can advise is if anyone has problems look
>to how you have set it up . i say use it it is very good- brian
Couldn't agree more! I was the same- used Netscape through from V2 to
4.05, and refused to install IE4 because of all the horror stories.
Finally, my hand was forced by an upgrade to W98- had to get IE4.
Well, it's fine- so good and so well integrated into the O/S that after
only 3 weeks use of it, I changed my default browser from Netscape to IE
and just last week de-installed Netscape completely to save on disk space.
I haven't regretted it (yet!)
I don't like MS methods, and to Netscape I'm sorry, but I go by convenience
and results.
--
Regards,
Peter Wilkins (pet...@mortbay.com)
John King
success, therefore Microsoft is hated.
I am trying to really understand what is going on. You hear of trouble, yet
Microsoft says they are very very happy with the start, I read glowing
reviews and dire warnings.
I just read an article on yahoo/wired from an Australian source which seem
to say the sky is falling.
So there is a wide range of opinions. *I* think it is just fine, but more
ragged, at this point. It seems to me they made changes and did less
testing. I still think it is ok, but if I were a newbie I'd make darn sure
to backup and test you restore procedures and data before I did the upgrade.
Just in case.
I will say going from a creaky old Dos/w3.1 8bit network to w98's network is
like night and day. It is a huge improvement - fast (even at 10Mbps),
stable, painless, transparent, etc. etc. and INEXPENSIVE.
Brian Wall wrote in message ...
Pierre A. von Kaenel
(among other) situations:
1) win98 has problems with Winmodems (I think you need some patch -
anyone care to comment on this?) - I got a letter from Dell informing
their customers to check their web site for info on upgrading to '98 and
winmodems were listed as a problem.
2) Not doing a clean install results in problems for those using old
drivers or other files that cause conflicts in '98.
FWIW, I followed Windows Magazine's instructions (they strongly suggest
a clean install - but that means reinstalling all Win apps; and that
includes all patches and additions to apps you have installed - a big
job for some of us). I didn't format C:, but just deleted C:\WINDOWS.
When then installing win98, I got the error message that it couldn't
find a valid version of win95 or win3.1 - something the article didn't
warn me about (I got the "upgrade" version of win98). Fortunately, I
had my original win95 CD, popped it in the CD, it was recognized by the
'98 install, then win98 continued the install. This could be a disaster
for those who bought win95 computers without having the hardware include
a CD (and without a disk backup).
At any rate, my clean install went smoothly, and now win98 purrs along
as well as (if not better) than win95.
Advice: if you have win95b with FAT32 and have Norton Utilities or some
such product, I don't see you gaining much by upgrading. Yes, there are
some speed enhancements in win98, but so far they're not overwhelming!
And there *are* some enhancements to how windows behaves (e.g. you can
right click an item on the start menu to get to properties, etc.) If
you're not into customizing windows, then the upgrade is minor.
--
Pierre A. von Kaenel
Math & Computer Science Dept.
Skidmore College
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Martin Carl Hunt
Peter Wilkins wrote in message <35aedad6...@news.ozemail.com.au>...
>>have recently installed both and must say that they are a big
>>improvevement and the setup was so easy especially demon 3.5 it
>>configured itself - i had held back on the installation after reading
>>was very much mistaken. all i can advise is if anyone has problems look
>>to how you have set it up . i say use it it is very good- brian
>
my hard drive up but I have been having a few problems prior and had backed
up so no loss, and probably the old probs caused the failed installation.
>Couldn't agree more! I was the same- used Netscape through from V2 to
>4.05, and refused to install IE4 because of all the horror stories.
>
>Finally, my hand was forced by an upgrade to W98- had to get IE4.
>
>Well, it's fine- so good and so well integrated into the O/S that after
>only 3 weeks use of it, I changed my default browser from Netscape to IE
>and just last week de-installed Netscape completely to save on disk space.
>I haven't regretted it (yet!)
As a web page developper IE4 is a much better beast to create interactive
pages, there is a lot of stuff you can do easily with IE4 that is difficult
or impossible with Netscape. For an OTT IE4 page check out my homepage at
http://www.mchunt.demon.co.uk/ now trying doing that in Netscape!!
The only problem if everybody switched is that MS wouldn`t have any real
need to upgrade it anymore.
Viceroy
>
> Here is a question for you -- how can anyone with a news program and
> internet access NOT be able to access msnew.microsoft.com ??
> --
> Richard Melville
> http://www.melvcon.com
>
> Chris Blount <cbl...@bigfoot.com> wrote in article
> <6ntjk8$k...@news.dx.net>...
> > Not everyone has access to the new Windows 98 newsgroups. You have to be
> > patient.
> >
> >
> >
> >
Here is a response for you -- I just tried to add this newsgroup, and
received "Error: No Such Newsgroup".
My internet provider is CompuSmart, one of the larger computer retail
chains in Canada.
Be a pal and inform ME how I'm not able to see this newsgroup. While
you're at it, you may as well contact CompuSmart Canada, as well.
Don't imply we're idiots.
Viceroy
--------------
Note: Please remove numbers from my address when replying! Keep Spam in
the can!
Scott H
and I haven't. But then, I work in a shop, so we see (and have to fix)
machines where things went very wrong. In most cases it is not the
user's fault, as they did everything 'by the book'. Many of these
machines are fixable without data loss, though beyond most users'
abilities/knowledge. Granted, on a new machine the install usually goes
without a hitch. But I have to disagree with the statement that Win98
is more polished than '95b. Perhaps I've seen too many screwed-up 98
machines in the last week & a half, but to me, that is an indicator of
just how "polished" 98 really is - not very... After all, 98 is
_supposed_ to be able to work around problems with little or no user
intervention, and that simply is NOT the case. Others in this thread
have suggested waiting for patche(s), etc., that will be released.
That is sound advice...
Scott
Ken Blake wrote:
> I view Windows 98 as the latest release of Windows 95.
> Rather than being a new and different product, it's simply
> the next evolutionary step. As such, I think it's *more*
> polished than 95, not less.
>
> I find it more stable and it runs here with virtually no
> problems at all.
>
> Ken Blake
> To send me E-mail, delete the "X" in my address
>
--
~o~
Farouk Dindar
>
>I don't like MS methods, and to Netscape I'm sorry, but I go by convenience
>and results.
Hi Peter
I am using Netscape 3.04 and on 2 win 98 machines.
The only reason I use Netscape is because the bookmarks
are one single file which I can have as my Home Page.
I also copy this bookmark on a floppy everynight and take it
to my office to update my office computer.
I include Eudora addressbook on this floppy.
I cannot do this with IE 3 or 4. Do you have a solution?
Farouk Dindar
Mike Taylor
<fdi...@ibm.net> writes
Yes, there is a solution. URL's are stored as internet shortcuts, which
you can find in the FAVORITES folder under the WINDOWS folder if that is
where you installed Windows - eg. C:\windows\favorites.
Using Windows Explorer, open the Windows folder, right click on the
Favorites folder, select the 'Send to 3.5" Floppy" option. This will
copy the Favorites folder and all the shortcuts to a floppy. You can
then take this to another PC and copy them back to that PC's favorites
folder.
You could set up a BAT file to automate this.
Regards, Mike
Ron O'Brien
<sh...@teleport.com> writes
> After all, 98 is
>_supposed_ to be able to work around problems with little or no user
>intervention, and that simply is NOT the case. Others in this thread
>have suggested waiting for patche(s), etc., that will be released.
>That is sound advice...
>Scott
>
experience, new operating systems work best on newer equipment. You are
bound to have glitches when you have older machines - even P200's less
than a year old - where you will have different configurations, new
peripherals added (maybe incorrectly) plus all the thousands of
combinations of PC set-ups.
When you consider this, then Microsoft have done a fair job. I'm sure
all will agree that the road to W98 is 1000% smoother than the slow,
long and winding trail from 3.x to W95!
--
Ron O'Brien
Jeremy Poynton
Farouk Dindar <fdi...@ibm.net> wrote in message
6oj8gd$ml$1...@news.interlog.com...
>
>>
>>I don't like MS methods, and to Netscape I'm sorry, but I go by
convenience
>>and results.
>
>Hi Peter
>
>I am using Netscape 3.04 and on 2 win 98 machines.
>
>The only reason I use Netscape is because the bookmarks
>are one single file which I can have as my Home Page.
>
>I also copy this bookmark on a floppy everynight and take it
>to my office to update my office computer.
>
>I include Eudora addressbook on this floppy.
>
>I cannot do this with IE 3 or 4. Do you have a solution?
Yes - download 1E5, and you can do the same
JP
>
>
>Farouk Dindar
John Conley
98 retail version. All I have to say is that it isn愒 the best thing Ms has
made. From a clean formatted hd, everything went ok and 98 could fine all my
hardware, but it started acting strange after the next day. I never had such
a hard time booting my pc. I could boot 7-8 time before it would boot up and
it would hang on a small thing as pushing the start button. At least when
95 started acting up, I could still save my data before fdisk-ing it., but
with 98, it start renaming all of my dictionaries to dir0000001...
dir0000002..ect. The problem with that is that dir0000001 was now one file
and not a dictionary anymore, and to run scandisk/regscan when booting made
thing worse. I could keep going on for hours..but it愀 not nice to kick a
dog when it愀 down.
I am sure that Ms will be coming out with a lot of patches for their
brand new OS very soon, so keep an eye on their website for updates for
thing that should have been tested before they sold it. Like threwing good
money out of the window(s)
John
Bear skrev i meddelelsen <35A7CE24...@my.box>...
>sryan wrote:
>>
>> Don't be ridiculous...
>>
>> Win '98 is really just the 2.0 release of Windows 95. It's just that they
>> made the silly mistake of choosing a name related to the date. Now
>> if you're really not interested in a new release of the operating system
>> you are using then i suppose you have that option, albeit a pretty
>> ignorant one.
>
Lewis Zephyr
<br...@coombe2.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>want to know why some folks are complaining about win98 and IE4 - i
>have recently installed both and must say that they are a big
>improvevement and the setup was so easy especially demon 3.5 it
>configured itself - i had held back on the installation after reading
>all the reports aaand i thopught that i would never use win98.IE4 but i
>was very much mistaken. all i can advise is if anyone has problems loo
Well, IE4 I have had no problems with.
But now, Win 98. One machine has no issues at all.... wonderful,
runs smooth.
Another machine I have reinstalled the OS 4 times and still continue
to get issues from VXD blue screens to corrupt explorer.exe.
I have done a clean install on all 4 ocasions but still issues.
I say that this means it is unstable. With not much improvement on
telling you where the issue is. still get xxxxxxx has performed an
illegal operation and needs to be shutdown. and then click on details
and get some neferous answer that gives you no clue where to go.
Ill keep the one system on win 98. But the other I am going back to
the Win 95 B OSR-2. Much more stable.
Lewis Zephyr
<pv...@skidmore.edu> wrote:
<<snip>>
>Advice: if you have win95b with FAT32 and have Norton Utilities or some
>such product, I don't see you gaining much by upgrading. Yes, there are
>some speed enhancements in win98, but so far they're not overwhelming!
>And there *are* some enhancements to how windows behaves (e.g. you can
>right click an item on the start menu to get to properties, etc.) If
>you're not into customizing windows, then the upgrade is minor.
You can get this feature with MSIE 4.01 with active desktop.
[ART]Adz
win98 sucks
Lewis Zephyr wrote in message <35c81fd9...@newshost.micro.ti.com>...
Scott H
concerning Win98. It is MUCH more sensitive to hardware problems
(weren't they gonna fix that??) than 95b. Hardware (identical) that
makes 98 puke hard will often times run perfectly fine under 95b. RAM,
hard drives, video, to name 3 high-percentage culprtis, but it runs the
whole gamut... In fact, almost all problems I've seen with 98 are
hardware related.
Lewis Zephyr wrote:
<snip>
> But now, Win 98. One machine has no issues at all.... wonderful,
> runs smooth.
> Another machine I have reinstalled the OS 4 times and still continue
> to get issues from VXD blue screens to corrupt explorer.exe.
> I have done a clean install on all 4 ocasions but still issues.
> I say that this means it is unstable. With not much improvement on
> telling you where the issue is. still get xxxxxxx has performed an
> illegal operation and needs to be shutdown. and then click on details
> and get some neferous answer that gives you no clue where to go.
>
> Ill keep the one system on win 98. But the other I am going back to
> the Win 95 B OSR-2. Much more stable.
--
~o~
David A. Fuess
it is more like a driver problem than a core '98 problem. Perhaps MS
has too tightly controlled the driver production, or was too stingy
with coding requirements, interface details or some other critical
piece of information. I had a hell of a time getting '98 onto my
Aptiva L71 and even after I did there are still problems with the
drivers (Quake II hates the crystal audio drivers and struggles with
DirectX6). I keep looking through the manufacturers sites for updates
and never find any.
Scott H
you have to flash the BIOS in your Aptiva ?). And it also may have a lot
to do with MS being too hush-hush during 98's development, so hardware
manufacturers are now rushing to keep current. Perhaps an analogy :
Win98 is to the OpenGL or Direct3D APIs as Win95 is to pure software
drivers, in that 98 works more directly with hardware than 95 does. And
it seems that some hardware (actually quite a lot) doesn't like to be
treated that way by the OS. I dunno, I may be way off base in that
observation, but it would explain a lot. But, the biggest problem, I
feel, is that 98 was not developed sufficiently prior to release. I ran
2 BETAs, and many problems that existed with those versions were *not*
resolved in the final release. Cases in point : the Cirrus Logic 5446
PCI video card, as well as your Aptiva. I know MS can't perfect how 98
works with *every* piece of hardware, but they seem to have taken a step
backwards in the compatibility department from 95b. The woes of a new
operating system - instead of releasing 98 earlier this summer, they
should *still* be beta testing - and working more closely with hardware
manufacturers ... Just my opinion.
Paul Hornshaw
<lewis...@hotmail.com> writesSNIP
>Another machine I have reinstalled the OS 4 times and still continue
>to get issues from VXD blue screens to corrupt explorer.exe.
SNAP
>I have done a clean install on all 4 ocasions but still issues.
>I say that this means it is unstable. With not much improvement on
>telling you where the issue is. still get xxxxxxx has performed an
>illegal operation and needs to be shutdown. and then click on details
>and get some neferous answer that gives you no clue where to go.
>
>
to OSR2 last night. Much better, at least I can handle the bugs in OSR2
'cos I know how to avoid them.
Intel 233MMX, 64Meg SDRAM, S3 4MB vid, Top Gun TX Pro Mobo (1024kb L2 &
onboard sound), W30 NE2000 compat NIC, Advansys Scsi, Phillips 2660 CDR,
BTR 24x CDROM, Fujitsu 1.7 gig UDMA HDD.
--
Paul Hornshaw
Mike Hathaway
I'd guess the hardware problems are all driver related.
Windows 98 has this new driver standard (sorry, can't remember what it's
called) to make it compatible with Windows NT 5 . But in order to make old
hardware work, Microsoft has had to keep the old driver standards, meaning
two different driver standards. Could it be that the two standards don't
like each other? I mean if you have all Windows 98 supported hardware, then
no problems. But if you have one piece of hardware - say video card - which
needs to use the Windows 95 driver, it might screw your system. It's only a
hypothesis, as I've had no trouble, but all my hardware uses Windows 98
drivers, and I did a clean install.
David A. Fuess
>You are right in there being quite a shortage of drivers and info (did
>you have to flash the BIOS in your Aptiva ?).
I did, and do have flash BIOS. The IBM published procedure for
installing W98 started with installing the latest version of the BIOS.
>And it also may have a lot
>to do with MS being too hush-hush during 98's development, so hardware
>manufacturers are now rushing to keep current. Perhaps an analogy :
>Win98 is to the OpenGL or Direct3D APIs as Win95 is to pure software
>drivers, in that 98 works more directly with hardware than 95 does. And
>it seems that some hardware (actually quite a lot) doesn't like to be
>treated that way by the OS. I dunno, I may be way off base in that
>observation, but it would explain a lot.
It is a possible explanation for the vast differences among system
installs, but it sure would be a backwards step in the techology. I
think a more plausable explanation is insufficient driver development.
>But, the biggest problem, I
>feel, is that 98 was not developed sufficiently prior to release. I ran
>2 BETAs, and many problems that existed with those versions were *not*
>resolved in the final release. Cases in point : the Cirrus Logic 5446
>PCI video card, as well as your Aptiva. I know MS can't perfect how 98
>works with *every* piece of hardware, but they seem to have taken a step
>backwards in the compatibility department from 95b. The woes of a new
>operating system - instead of releasing 98 earlier this summer, they
>should *still* be beta testing - and working more closely with hardware
>manufacturers ... Just my opinion.
>
>David A. Fuess wrote:
>>
>> I agree with the "hardware problems" POV. However I would offer that
>> it is more like a driver problem than a core '98 problem. Perhaps MS
>> has too tightly controlled the driver production, or was too stingy
>> with coding requirements, interface details or some other critical
>> piece of information. I had a hell of a time getting '98 onto my
>> Aptiva L71 and even after I did there are still problems with the
>> drivers (Quake II hates the crystal audio drivers and struggles with
>> DirectX6). I keep looking through the manufacturers sites for updates
>> and never find any.
From the desk of
David A. Fuess
dfu...@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~dfuess
David A. Fuess
>
>I'd guess the hardware problems are all driver related.
>
>Windows 98 has this new driver standard (sorry, can't remember what it's
>called) to make it compatible with Windows NT 5 .
You mean they actually tried to get '98 to fail as often as NT :) ? I
am in the throws of a massive invation of NT machines at work. I find
NT 4 SP3 to be a very hard install and not as stable as '98 on the
Dell Dimension 410's. '98 runs well on my Dell OptiPlex GXi and IBM
ThinkPad, just tolerable on the Aptiva.
>But in order to make old
>hardware work, Microsoft has had to keep the old driver standards, meaning
>two different driver standards. Could it be that the two standards don't
>like each other? I mean if you have all Windows 98 supported hardware, then
>no problems. But if you have one piece of hardware - say video card - which
>needs to use the Windows 95 driver, it might screw your system. It's only a
>hypothesis, as I've had no trouble, but all my hardware uses Windows 98
>drivers, and I did a clean install.
>
It is an interesting point. Rather reminiscent of the '95 introduction
when the system could select 16 or 32 bit drivers.
Xalan
Mike Hathaway wrote in message <35c8e...@scooby.nildram.co.uk>...
:
:I'd guess the hardware problems are all driver related.
:
:Windows 98 has this new driver standard (sorry, can't remember what it's
:hardware work, Microsoft has had to keep the old driver standards, meaning
:two different driver standards. Could it be that the two standards don't
:like each other? I mean if you have all Windows 98 supported hardware, then
:no problems. But if you have one piece of hardware - say video card - which
:needs to use the Windows 95 driver, it might screw your system. It's only a
:hypothesis, as I've had no trouble, but all my hardware uses Windows 98
:drivers, and I did a clean install.
I am running a video card with the old driver for win95 and have had no
problems with win98. It seems to me that it is specific hardware that win98
doesn't like.
||| |||
|||
||| |||ALAN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
"The more you stretch the truth, the easier it is to see through it."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
Atheist#: 1211 ICQ#: 12811297
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------
My Website: http://www3.mistral.co.uk/xalan/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------
xman Charlie
other machine that has osr2 95 network.
Lucky for me I had 2 old video cards I saved that work
with win98, the drivers are on win98 cd.
Multimonitor sure works great for me.
Shane Martin
year ago and NT5 Beta 2 should be finally be coming out sometime this
month after so many delays. Also, Microsoft will be releasing NT5 Beta 3
(hopefully before the end of the year) and this will be made availible to
the general public just as Windows98 Beta 3 was.
--
Shane Martin
DirectX 6 Beta Tester
Berkley Systems Beta Tester
sma...@freenet.columbus.oh.us
Errol M. Nielsen
Or maybe I'm being naïve!!? <s>
Errol
WinNT Admin wrote
>Windows NT 5.0 has just been announced!! It contains code from the
>upcoming Windows 98, and it is absolutely amazing!!
>
>For starters, it runs apps and games at approximately 150% times faster
>than identical processors running Win95!!
>It also runs Win3.1 apps faster than Win3.1 does!!!
>
>Gone are the crashes and patchy system stability that plagued WinNT 4.0.
>Gone are the slowdowns and ten to twenty second swapping delays
>encountered in the memory hogging NT 4.0. This is Microsoft¹s first true
>multitasking memory protected symmetrically multiprocessing OS, and this
>is going to completely blow away the competition!!
>
>I got an alpha version to test and it BLAZES past Win95 and WinNT 4.0.
>There have been no crashes or slowdowns AT ALL!!
>
>For example, I got Quake 2, LightWave NT, Internet Explorer 4.0, and MDK to
>run SIMULTANEOUSLY at FULL SPEED in FOUR SEPARATE
>WINDOWS!!!!
>
>This really is the future of computing.
>If you¹re interested in an alpha release, send mail to
>mae...@tech-center.com
>
WinNT Admin
upcoming Windows 98, and it is absolutely amazing!!
For starters, it runs apps and games at approximately 150% times faster
than identical processors running Win95!!
It also runs Win3.1 apps faster than Win3.1 does!!!
Gone are the crashes and patchy system stability that plagued WinNT 4.0.
Gone are the slowdowns and ten to twenty second swapping delays
encountered in the memory hogging NT 4.0. This is Microsoftıs first true
multitasking memory protected symmetrically multiprocessing OS, and this
is going to completely blow away the competition!!
I got an alpha version to test and it BLAZES past Win95 and WinNT 4.0.
There have been no crashes or slowdowns AT ALL!!
For example, I got Quake 2, LightWave NT, Internet Explorer 4.0, and MDK to
run SIMULTANEOUSLY at FULL SPEED in FOUR SEPARATE
WINDOWS!!!!
This really is the future of computing.
If youıre interested in an alpha release, send mail to
mae...@tech-center.com
cqu...@iafrica.com
<mae...@tech-center.com> wrote:
>Windows NT 5.0 has just been announced!! It contains code from the
>upcoming Windows 98, and it is absolutely amazing!!
>For starters, it runs apps and games at approximately 150% times faster
>than identical processors running Win95!!
>It also runs Win3.1 apps faster than Win3.1 does!!!
>Gone are the crashes and patchy system stability that plagued WinNT 4.0.
>Gone are the slowdowns and ten to twenty second swapping delays
>encountered in the memory hogging NT 4.0. This is Microsoft零 first true
>multitasking memory protected symmetrically multiprocessing OS, and this
>is going to completely blow away the competition!!
Sounds good; mind if I carry on breathing while we wait?
>I got an alpha version to test and it BLAZES past Win95 and WinNT 4.0.
>There have been no crashes or slowdowns AT ALL!!
Alpha, eh? Chances are the end product will be rather slower due to
several sanity-checks and workarounds that inevitably get added so
that it works reliably in the field.
Or do you mean Alpha, as in Digital's CPU?
And - what about DOS GAMES? ;->
Willy
<mae...@tech-center.com> wrote:
>Windows NT 5.0 has just been announced!! It contains code from the
>upcoming Windows 98, and it is absolutely amazing!!
>
>For starters, it runs apps and games at approximately 150% times faster
>than identical processors running Win95!!
>It also runs Win3.1 apps faster than Win3.1 does!!!
>
>Gone are the crashes and patchy system stability that plagued WinNT 4.0.
>Gone are the slowdowns and ten to twenty second swapping delays
>encountered in the memory hogging NT 4.0. This is Microsoft零 first true
>multitasking memory protected symmetrically multiprocessing OS, and this
>is going to completely blow away the competition!!
>
>I got an alpha version to test and it BLAZES past Win95 and WinNT 4.0.
>There have been no crashes or slowdowns AT ALL!!
I'm not sure what version of NT you used previously, but my NT 4.0
already runs the same apps faster than Win3.1/95/98; never experiences
any slowdowns; doesn't hog memory; runs multiple processes at full
speed up to the capacity of the CPU; and never crashes.
I always have a Lotus Notes server, web server, ftp server, proxy
server, browser, Notes client, and Outlook 98 running on a Cyrix 200MX
CPU. It all works perfectly.
I'm sure NT 5 will be great; but I'm in no hurry.
SimMike
wait until next year.
Mike
Willy wrote in message <35cdff36...@news.asan.com>...
Derek Morton
wrote:
>Windows NT 5.0 has just been announced!! It contains code from the
I first ran NT5 beta one 3 months ago?
>upcoming Windows 98, and it is absolutely amazing!!
>
>For starters, it runs apps and games at approximately 150% times faster
>than identical processors running Win95!!
>It also runs Win3.1 apps faster than Win3.1 does!!!
>
>Gone are the crashes and patchy system stability that plagued WinNT 4.0.
Microsoft would like to hear about this behavour.
>Gone are the slowdowns and ten to twenty second swapping delays
>encountered in the memory hogging NT 4.0.
These don't seem to happen on my machine
>This is Microsoftıs first true
>multitasking memory protected symmetrically multiprocessing OS, and this
Now here is the best statement of all. Please send a copy of THIS to
microsoft I would LOVE to hear there comments. ( I thought NT4 did this)
>is going to completely blow away the competition!!
>
>I got an alpha version to test and it BLAZES past Win95 and WinNT 4.0.
>There have been no crashes or slowdowns AT ALL!!
This sounds just like my NT4
>
>For example, I got Quake 2, LightWave NT, Internet Explorer 4.0, and MDK to
>run SIMULTANEOUSLY at FULL SPEED in FOUR SEPARATE
>WINDOWS!!!!
You can always do this with enough ram.
Derek Morton, Eltham Aust
Clockmeister
WinNT Admin <mae...@tech-center.com> wrote in article
<35CD6B...@tech-center.com>...
> Windows NT 5.0 has just been announced!! It contains code from the
> upcoming Windows 98, and it is absolutely amazing!!
>
> For starters, it runs apps and games at approximately 150% times faster
> than identical processors running Win95!!
> It also runs Win3.1 apps faster than Win3.1 does!!!
Wow!
>
> Gone are the crashes and patchy system stability that plagued WinNT 4.0.
> Gone are the slowdowns and ten to twenty second swapping delays
> encountered in the memory hogging NT 4.0. This is Microsoftıs first true
> multitasking memory protected symmetrically multiprocessing OS, and this
zzzzzzzz........ Heard it all before...
> is going to completely blow away the competition!!
Only if M$ buys them out...
>
> I got an alpha version to test and it BLAZES past Win95 and WinNT 4.0.
> There have been no crashes or slowdowns AT ALL!!
zzzzzzzzzzz
>
> For example, I got Quake 2, LightWave NT, Internet Explorer 4.0, and MDK
to
> run SIMULTANEOUSLY at FULL SPEED in FOUR SEPARATE
> WINDOWS!!!!
>
No you didn't...
> This really is the future of computing.
Some OS's had this capability 10 years ago...
> If youıre interested in an alpha release, send mail to
> mae...@tech-center.com
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
>
d_ja...@my-dejanews.com
Or could it be that manufacturers are saying that 98 may be just a waste of
time and are focusing support on NT.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Walter Salvatore
and have had nothing but trouble with them. Half of our business software
has trouble running on there machines, and we tried to put four different
video accelerator cards in one machine, which only worked with one out of
four. IBM is not a good test for compatibility of any hardware or software.
d_ja...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6qpg7d$1em$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
Michael Luke
>time and are focusing support on NT.
More likely that by changeing the driver standard so that NT5 and Win98 use
the same format has just confused companies that never bothered with NT and
now have to learn to write a driver compatible with both.
The laziness of software companies never ceases to amaze me.
Michael Luke
University of Bristol, UK