XP or 98

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Miguel, Oct 27, 2006.

  1. Miguel

    Miguel Guest

    Hi all....Some advice please.

    A friend has been given a second hand "surplus to requirements" laptop
    by his company. It's a three or four year old Toshiba, not sure of the
    exact specs but somewhere around 1.5Ghz CPU + 512MB RAM is pretty
    close.

    I'm going to set it up to dual boot MS and Ubuntu.

    I'll install my bright and shiny new Edgy Eft into the Ubuntu
    partition.

    But what I can't decide is whether or not to install XP or 98 for the
    MS partition. (I've got unused single license copies of both lying
    around since I moved to Ubuntu full-time)

    My friend is comfortable with 98 and has never used XP. He's not very
    computerate and familiarity counts big time. Also, he's off overseas
    soon so any support (hand-holding) by me will be minimal.

    However I'm not too sure if 98 is suitable for a modern-ish laptop. I
    know he wants a DVD burner installed. VOIP is a bit of a pain under 98.
    The hard drive is 40GB or thereabouts (unfriendly to FAT32). I believe
    surfing is easier for the CPU under XP (memory allocation).

    I think 98 will constrain the laptop a bit.

    All he really wants is an "entertainment" laptop for surfing, emails,
    dl'ing, watching avi's, dvd's, listening to mp3's....the usual stuff.
    Throw in some word processing, an image viewer plus some sort of VOIP
    and that about covers it.

    Long term I hope to have my friend using Ubuntu full time. The
    dual-boot is there so that when XP/98 crashes or hangs or gets attacked
    etc (which it will, and I'll not be there to sort things out) Ubuntu
    will allow normal transmission to be resumed. As it's such an easy O/S
    to use hopefully it will become a habit and then eventually there will
    be one less MS user to annoy me.

    But to save a lot of short term unhappiness I have to install an MS
    O/S. Any suggestions.

    Regards
    Miguel
    Miguel, Oct 27, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Miguel

    MarkH Guest

    "Miguel" <> wrote in news:1161915338.855358.82610
    @i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

    > A friend has been given a second hand "surplus to requirements" laptop
    > by his company. It's a three or four year old Toshiba, not sure of the
    > exact specs but somewhere around 1.5Ghz CPU + 512MB RAM is pretty
    > close.
    >
    > However I'm not too sure if 98 is suitable for a modern-ish laptop. I
    > know he wants a DVD burner installed. VOIP is a bit of a pain under 98.
    > The hard drive is 40GB or thereabouts (unfriendly to FAT32). I believe
    > surfing is easier for the CPU under XP (memory allocation).
    >
    > I think 98 will constrain the laptop a bit.


    I agree.

    > But to save a lot of short term unhappiness I have to install an MS
    > O/S. Any suggestions.


    WinXP should run OK with 512MB RAM. If you plug in an external HDD or a
    USB Flash drive WinXP will recognise it and voila it works! Win98 would
    need drivers loaded, which a random friend with a USB Flash Drive may not
    have available.



    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 27-May-06)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    Maskerade
    MarkH, Oct 27, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Miguel

    Zipper Guest

    MarkH wrote:
    > "Miguel" <> wrote in news:1161915338.855358.82610
    > @i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
    >
    >> A friend has been given a second hand "surplus to requirements" laptop
    >> by his company. It's a three or four year old Toshiba, not sure of the
    >> exact specs but somewhere around 1.5Ghz CPU + 512MB RAM is pretty
    >> close.
    >>
    >> However I'm not too sure if 98 is suitable for a modern-ish laptop. I
    >> know he wants a DVD burner installed. VOIP is a bit of a pain under 98.
    >> The hard drive is 40GB or thereabouts (unfriendly to FAT32). I believe
    >> surfing is easier for the CPU under XP (memory allocation).
    >>
    >> I think 98 will constrain the laptop a bit.

    >
    > I agree.
    >
    >> But to save a lot of short term unhappiness I have to install an MS
    >> O/S. Any suggestions.

    >
    > WinXP should run OK with 512MB RAM. If you plug in an external HDD or a
    > USB Flash drive WinXP will recognise it and voila it works! Win98 would
    > need drivers loaded, which a random friend with a USB Flash Drive may not
    > have available.


    There are generic Windows 98 USB mass storage drivers available here
    http://www.technical-assistance.co.uk/kb/usbmsd98.php

    A simple installation and windows 98 has full usb support

    I stumbled upon them googling once and they were mentioned in wikipedia.
    They have worked for me, they have recognised 3 different external
    drives and two cameras I have tried and a memory stick.

    >
    >
    >
    Zipper, Oct 27, 2006
    #3
  4. Miguel

    EMB Guest

    Zipper wrote:

    > There are generic Windows 98 USB mass storage drivers available here
    > http://www.technical-assistance.co.uk/kb/usbmsd98.php


    Also if you google for the Unofficial Windows 98 Service Pack and
    install it you get all the Microsoft patches, the Windows 2000 UI and
    the USB driver in the one download.


    --
    EMB
    EMB, Oct 27, 2006
    #4
  5. Miguel

    GraB Guest

    On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 16:55:19 +1300, EMB <> wrote:

    >Zipper wrote:
    >
    >> There are generic Windows 98 USB mass storage drivers available here
    >> http://www.technical-assistance.co.uk/kb/usbmsd98.php

    >
    >Also if you google for the Unofficial Windows 98 Service Pack and
    >install it you get all the Microsoft patches, the Windows 2000 UI and
    >the USB driver in the one download.


    I recommend that.
    GraB, Oct 27, 2006
    #5
  6. Miguel

    GraB Guest

    On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 02:33:49 GMT, MarkH <> wrote:

    >"Miguel" <> wrote in news:1161915338.855358.82610
    >@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
    >
    >> A friend has been given a second hand "surplus to requirements" laptop
    >> by his company. It's a three or four year old Toshiba, not sure of the
    >> exact specs but somewhere around 1.5Ghz CPU + 512MB RAM is pretty
    >> close.
    >>
    >> However I'm not too sure if 98 is suitable for a modern-ish laptop. I
    >> know he wants a DVD burner installed. VOIP is a bit of a pain under 98.
    >> The hard drive is 40GB or thereabouts (unfriendly to FAT32). I believe
    >> surfing is easier for the CPU under XP (memory allocation).
    >>
    >> I think 98 will constrain the laptop a bit.

    >
    >I agree.
    >
    >> But to save a lot of short term unhappiness I have to install an MS
    >> O/S. Any suggestions.

    >
    >WinXP should run OK with 512MB RAM. If you plug in an external HDD or a
    >USB Flash drive WinXP will recognise it and voila it works! Win98 would
    >need drivers loaded, which a random friend with a USB Flash Drive may not
    >have available.


    He could run XP in classic mode as he would be more comfortable with
    this?
    http://www.amherst.edu/it/software/xp/classic.html
    http://www.ahinc.com/wxp.htm#classic

    If you want to turn off 'intelligent menues' :
    http://www.theeldergeek.com/cancelling_intelligent_menus.htm
    GraB, Oct 27, 2006
    #6
  7. Miguel

    MaHogany Guest

    On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:15:38 -0700, Miguel wrote:

    > But to save a lot of short term unhappiness I have to install an MS
    > O/S. Any suggestions.


    While he is familiar with WIN4.1 and it does work faster than WinNT5.1, it
    is no longer being updated by M$, whereas WinNT5.1 is - for what that's
    worth.

    Also, if you're wanting to encourage your friend to move to *nix, then
    WinNT5.1 would be the better option, because there will be an element of
    unfamiliarity just like there will be an element of unfamiliarity with
    *nix.


    Ma Hogany

    --
    "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    fries with that, if prompted."
    MaHogany, Oct 27, 2006
    #7
  8. Miguel

    steve Guest

    Miguel wrote:


    > But to save a lot of short term unhappiness I have to install an MS
    > O/S. Any suggestions.


    Do what i have done a couple of time now:

    Install Win XP.

    Then....

    Install Ubuntu (latest version).

    Then...when WinXP collapses in a heap, he can dual-boot to Linux for the
    next several years until he gets around to repairing the WinXP system.

    This approach worked for my neighbour....and he still uses the Linux system
    now and has more or less given up on Windows. He had too much trouble with
    it what with viruses and spy/ad ware.

    Steve
    steve, Oct 27, 2006
    #8
  9. Miguel

    MarkH Guest

    Zipper <> wrote in news:45417c72$:

    > MarkH wrote:
    >> "Miguel" <> wrote in news:1161915338.855358.82610
    >> @i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
    >>
    >>> A friend has been given a second hand "surplus to requirements"
    >>> laptop by his company. It's a three or four year old Toshiba, not
    >>> sure of the exact specs but somewhere around 1.5Ghz CPU + 512MB RAM
    >>> is pretty close.
    >>>
    >>> However I'm not too sure if 98 is suitable for a modern-ish laptop.
    >>> I know he wants a DVD burner installed. VOIP is a bit of a pain
    >>> under 98. The hard drive is 40GB or thereabouts (unfriendly to
    >>> FAT32). I believe surfing is easier for the CPU under XP (memory
    >>> allocation).
    >>>
    >>> I think 98 will constrain the laptop a bit.

    >>
    >> I agree.
    >>
    >>> But to save a lot of short term unhappiness I have to install an MS
    >>> O/S. Any suggestions.

    >>
    >> WinXP should run OK with 512MB RAM. If you plug in an external HDD
    >> or a USB Flash drive WinXP will recognise it and voila it works!
    >> Win98 would need drivers loaded, which a random friend with a USB
    >> Flash Drive may not have available.

    >
    > There are generic Windows 98 USB mass storage drivers available here
    > http://www.technical-assistance.co.uk/kb/usbmsd98.php
    >
    > A simple installation and windows 98 has full usb support
    >
    > I stumbled upon them googling once and they were mentioned in
    > wikipedia. They have worked for me, they have recognised 3 different
    > external drives and two cameras I have tried and a memory stick.


    Thanks for that, I have downloaded the file. Now if I put it on my USB
    flash drive . . . damn, that's not going to work. Oh well, I guess I'll
    keep a driver CD in the car for the rare times I work with Win98.


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 27-May-06)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    Maskerade
    MarkH, Oct 27, 2006
    #9
  10. Miguel

    -=rjh=- Guest

    MarkH wrote:
    > Zipper <> wrote in news:45417c72$:
    >
    >> MarkH wrote:
    >>> "Miguel" <> wrote in news:1161915338.855358.82610
    >>> @i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
    >>>
    >>>> A friend has been given a second hand "surplus to requirements"
    >>>> laptop by his company. It's a three or four year old Toshiba, not
    >>>> sure of the exact specs but somewhere around 1.5Ghz CPU + 512MB RAM
    >>>> is pretty close.
    >>>>
    >>>> However I'm not too sure if 98 is suitable for a modern-ish laptop.
    >>>> I know he wants a DVD burner installed. VOIP is a bit of a pain
    >>>> under 98. The hard drive is 40GB or thereabouts (unfriendly to
    >>>> FAT32). I believe surfing is easier for the CPU under XP (memory
    >>>> allocation).
    >>>>
    >>>> I think 98 will constrain the laptop a bit.
    >>> I agree.
    >>>
    >>>> But to save a lot of short term unhappiness I have to install an MS
    >>>> O/S. Any suggestions.
    >>> WinXP should run OK with 512MB RAM. If you plug in an external HDD
    >>> or a USB Flash drive WinXP will recognise it and voila it works!
    >>> Win98 would need drivers loaded, which a random friend with a USB
    >>> Flash Drive may not have available.

    >> There are generic Windows 98 USB mass storage drivers available here
    >> http://www.technical-assistance.co.uk/kb/usbmsd98.php
    >>
    >> A simple installation and windows 98 has full usb support
    >>
    >> I stumbled upon them googling once and they were mentioned in
    >> wikipedia. They have worked for me, they have recognised 3 different
    >> external drives and two cameras I have tried and a memory stick.

    >
    > Thanks for that, I have downloaded the file. Now if I put it on my USB
    > flash drive . . . damn, that's not going to work. Oh well, I guess I'll
    > keep a driver CD in the car for the rare times I work with Win98.
    >
    >


    Send it to yourself at gmail (or somewhere) so you still have it if you
    forget your CD.
    -=rjh=-, Oct 27, 2006
    #10
  11. Miguel

    Miguel Guest

    Miguel wrote:

    > Hi all....Some advice please.
    >


    Thanks all....Looks like it's classic XP plus Edgy Eft.

    Regards
    Miguel
    Miguel, Oct 27, 2006
    #11
  12. Miguel

    MarkH Guest

    -=rjh=- <> wrote in news::

    >> Thanks for that, I have downloaded the file. Now if I put it on my
    >> USB flash drive . . . damn, that's not going to work. Oh well, I
    >> guess I'll keep a driver CD in the car for the rare times I work with
    >> Win98.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Send it to yourself at gmail (or somewhere) so you still have it if
    > you forget your CD.


    Thanks, damn good idea!



    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 27-May-06)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    Maskerade
    MarkH, Oct 28, 2006
    #12
  13. In message <e0n0h.491550$>, MarkH wrote:

    > Now if I put it on my USB
    > flash drive . . . damn, that's not going to work. Oh well, I guess I'll
    > keep a driver CD in the car for the rare times I work with Win98.


    Can't you slipstream it into the install CD somehow?
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 28, 2006
    #13
  14. Miguel

    Chris Lim Guest

    GraB wrote:
    > If you want to turn off 'intelligent menues' :
    > http://www.theeldergeek.com/cancelling_intelligent_menus.htm


    Man I hate those Intellimenus. Looking back, I see it was Microsoft's
    first step in this whole new UI approach of hiding stuff from users.
    Kind of a stupid idea though. Hide stuff from the user that they don't
    use, but how is a user supposed to know the options are there in the
    first place if they're initially hidden? If anything they should've
    made everything visible initially, then learn how the user uses an
    application for a while before hiding things.
    Chris Lim, Oct 28, 2006
    #14
  15. In message <>, Chris Lim
    wrote:

    > GraB wrote:
    >> If you want to turn off 'intelligent menues' :
    >> http://www.theeldergeek.com/cancelling_intelligent_menus.htm

    >
    > Man I hate those Intellimenus. Looking back, I see it was Microsoft's
    > first step in this whole new UI approach of hiding stuff from users.
    > Kind of a stupid idea though. Hide stuff from the user that they don't
    > use, but how is a user supposed to know the options are there in the
    > first place if they're initially hidden? If anything they should've
    > made everything visible initially, then learn how the user uses an
    > application for a while before hiding things.


    Unfortunately, that's a fundamental limitation of GUIs. Put every possible
    function in, and they become too complex to use. Take functions out, and
    you end up crippling your system.

    That's why you need an underlying scripting or command-line layer to
    implement your full functionality, with the GUI built as a separate layer
    on top of that. That's how *nix systems do it. That way the GUI is kept
    from getting too complex, because it's not the only way of doing things,
    the way it is under Windows.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 29, 2006
    #15
  16. Miguel

    Earl Grey Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message <>, Chris Lim
    > wrote:
    >
    >> GraB wrote:
    >>> If you want to turn off 'intelligent menues' :
    >>> http://www.theeldergeek.com/cancelling_intelligent_menus.htm

    >> Man I hate those Intellimenus. Looking back, I see it was Microsoft's
    >> first step in this whole new UI approach of hiding stuff from users.
    >> Kind of a stupid idea though. Hide stuff from the user that they don't
    >> use, but how is a user supposed to know the options are there in the
    >> first place if they're initially hidden? If anything they should've
    >> made everything visible initially, then learn how the user uses an
    >> application for a while before hiding things.

    >
    > Unfortunately, that's a fundamental limitation of GUIs. Put every possible
    > function in, and they become too complex to use. Take functions out, and
    > you end up crippling your system.
    >
    > That's why you need an underlying scripting or command-line layer to
    > implement your full functionality, with the GUI built as a separate layer
    > on top of that. That's how *nix systems do it. That way the GUI is kept
    > from getting too complex, because it's not the only way of doing things,
    > the way it is under Windows.


    I use Autocad on Windows with script commands all the time.
    What is this "only way" of which you speak ?
    Earl Grey, Oct 29, 2006
    #16
  17. Miguel

    Chris Lim Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > Unfortunately, that's a fundamental limitation of GUIs. Put every possible
    > function in, and they become too complex to use. Take functions out, and
    > you end up crippling your system.


    Maybe for the OS itself or low-level applications (disc partitioning
    etc), but for normal applications I don't think that's true. At least I
    can't think of any applications where the GUI is too complex, or has
    required a command-line layer to implement full functionality.
    Obviously it's great when an application supports functionality both
    via the GUI and command-line though, so you get the best of both
    worlds, but normally there's no reason to omit things from the GUI.
    Chris Lim, Oct 29, 2006
    #17
  18. In message <4543f7b2$>, Earl Grey wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> In message <>, Chris
    >> Lim wrote:
    >>
    >>> GraB wrote:
    >>>> If you want to turn off 'intelligent menues' :
    >>>> http://www.theeldergeek.com/cancelling_intelligent_menus.htm
    >>> Man I hate those Intellimenus. Looking back, I see it was Microsoft's
    >>> first step in this whole new UI approach of hiding stuff from users.
    >>> Kind of a stupid idea though. Hide stuff from the user that they don't
    >>> use, but how is a user supposed to know the options are there in the
    >>> first place if they're initially hidden? If anything they should've
    >>> made everything visible initially, then learn how the user uses an
    >>> application for a while before hiding things.

    >>
    >> Unfortunately, that's a fundamental limitation of GUIs. Put every
    >> possible function in, and they become too complex to use. Take functions
    >> out, and you end up crippling your system.
    >>
    >> That's why you need an underlying scripting or command-line layer to
    >> implement your full functionality, with the GUI built as a separate layer
    >> on top of that. That's how *nix systems do it. That way the GUI is kept
    >> from getting too complex, because it's not the only way of doing things,
    >> the way it is under Windows.

    >
    > I use Autocad on Windows with script commands all the time.
    > What is this "only way" of which you speak ?


    Think about why you need a REGEDIT-type tool on Windows, but not on Linux.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 30, 2006
    #18
  19. In message <>, Chris
    Lim wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> Unfortunately, that's a fundamental limitation of GUIs. Put every
    >> possible function in, and they become too complex to use. Take functions
    >> out, and you end up crippling your system.

    >
    > Maybe for the OS itself or low-level applications (disc partitioning
    > etc), but for normal applications I don't think that's true.


    That's a circular argument--you're just saying it's not true for
    applications where it's not true.

    > At least I can't think of any applications where the GUI is too complex,


    Think of the situations where Microsoft felt the need to introduce
    this "Intellimenus" concept that you were complaining about before.

    > Obviously it's great when an application supports functionality both
    > via the GUI and command-line though, so you get the best of both
    > worlds, but normally there's no reason to omit things from the GUI.


    I seem to recall that some Windows applications--might be specifically
    Internet Explorer--can be launched minimized if you invoke them with
    special options from the command line, and there's no GUI-based preference
    option for doing the same thing.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 30, 2006
    #19
  20. Miguel

    Earl Grey Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message <4543f7b2$>, Earl Grey wrote:
    >
    >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>> In message <>, Chris
    >>> Lim wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> GraB wrote:
    >>>>> If you want to turn off 'intelligent menues' :
    >>>>> http://www.theeldergeek.com/cancelling_intelligent_menus.htm
    >>>> Man I hate those Intellimenus. Looking back, I see it was Microsoft's
    >>>> first step in this whole new UI approach of hiding stuff from users.
    >>>> Kind of a stupid idea though. Hide stuff from the user that they don't
    >>>> use, but how is a user supposed to know the options are there in the
    >>>> first place if they're initially hidden? If anything they should've
    >>>> made everything visible initially, then learn how the user uses an
    >>>> application for a while before hiding things.
    >>> Unfortunately, that's a fundamental limitation of GUIs. Put every
    >>> possible function in, and they become too complex to use. Take functions
    >>> out, and you end up crippling your system.
    >>>
    >>> That's why you need an underlying scripting or command-line layer to
    >>> implement your full functionality, with the GUI built as a separate layer
    >>> on top of that. That's how *nix systems do it. That way the GUI is kept
    >>> from getting too complex, because it's not the only way of doing things,
    >>> the way it is under Windows.

    >> I use Autocad on Windows with script commands all the time.
    >> What is this "only way" of which you speak ?

    >
    > Think about why you need a REGEDIT-type tool on Windows, but not on Linux.


    Think why you don't use a text tool to edit a jpeg in Linux.
    Earl Grey, Oct 30, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.

Share This Page