Comic Genesis Forums

I have three machines in my house running 98SE. One is a P-166 which is ONLY used as a digital effects processor because the EMU effects processor built into it's Sound Blaster Live card is very good quality and easy to use and doesn't require much system resources since it's all hardware. This machine runs fine because... well... it really isn't running much in the way of software at all.

The second machine is my P-II 333 which runs more or less okay. It's definetly long in the tooth. The serial ports on it are wonky which causes the mouse to go batshit insane every now and then randomly flying about the screen right and left clicking all over the place (which can be very annoying online I can tell you). Software wise everything works fine and I only have to maintain it every now and then.

The third machine is my wife's and kid's computer a P-II 233. This machine is the COMPUTER FROM HELL!!!!

Direct X and Virtual Machine seem to have no idea what they're doing on this machine and anytime I run software that uses either one of those it keeps coming back with "CANNOT LOCATE blahblahblah.DLL" errors. But the fucking .DLL files are right there in fucking /WINDOWS/SYSTEM.

This fucking machine is the bane of my existance. I've reformated it and reinstalled everything from scratch and it just doesn't seem to EVER get it's shit together. Any ideas what I need to do to make this machine see the .DLL files that I myself can clearly see sitting right there in the fucking /WINDOWS/SYSTEM directory?

Man, I'm in serious need of some new computers in this house. Of course I'm certain that once I upgrade to a newer system running windows XP I'll discover joy of joys that none of my fucking hardware will work with it anymore and I'll have to buy new TV/VIDEO Capture card and scanner etc. etc. At least I know my new printer will work with XP.

It's times like these I almost wish computers never advanced beyond the Atari ST. Now that computer I fucking understood and it had a rock solid operating system too.

The G Man wrote:It's times like these I almost wish computers never advanced beyond the Atari ST. Now that computer I fucking understood and it had a rock solid operating system too.

Of course it's rock solid, it's hard to screw up only 6 lines of code

And while XP may not be very backwards compatable, that's because they finally got away from the old buggy as hell core (and used a new buggy as hell one, but at least it's jacked up in different ways now )

i advise a treatment of several rounds of 12 gauge 00 buck 3 times a day for a week

Well I finally got the machine working... again... for how long is anyone's guess.

when you instlal XP, make sure you immediately install all te service updates at least through Service Pack 2, which will enable compatibility mode, and set all the older programs to run in compatibility mode of win 98 or win 2k

but stop before you get to Service Pack 2. Unless you REALLY want to talk about compatability issues.

no, SP2 is what you need to be able to enable the assorted compatibility modes and simulate win 95/98/2kruntime environments on an XP machine.

kite-san wrote:no, SP2 is what you need to be able to enable the assorted compatibility modes and simulate win 95/98/2kruntime environments on an XP machine.

When I dl'd Servicepack 2, my computer was wonkier more than a snozzwanger. It really made things more trouble than they were before, so I uninstalled it.

You could upgrade to Winfows ME. I use it in my laptop (P-II 233) and it works great. It will work better than old SE but it wont give you the compatibility problems of XP.

Sounds like Ghastly should pull a Flem and start a hardware drive!

ME sucks balls In my not so humble 98 se is more stable most of the time

RantinAn wrote:ME sucks balls In my not so humble 98 se is more stable most of the time

If Windows ME sucked it would be good for something. W2KPro is more stable. WinXP is a step or three beyond it.

A note on XPSP2. It's got a number of fixes that you really need. Unfortunately, if you have broadband the time it takes to download and install the service pack is somewhat longer than the mean time it will take for your box to be pwned by one of the huge number of attack-zombie machines out there. It's best to order the CD from Microsoft and install it offline.

Ghastly -

Why does Win98 hate you so? Because it is its job to do so. Hey, look on the bright side, at least you are fighting with SE, SE's older brother First Edition is even more ornery. And you can also count you blessings that you don't have Windows ME running, the only OS that managed to rank as the worst OS ever made by Microsoft.

Now, for halfway decent OS's made:

Windows 95 - Problem: Older than dirt, nothing is likely to run on it other than your Pentium I's and older computers, assuming they still reside in your midst that is...

Windows 2000 Pro - Problem: Even though this one was the apex of accomplishment along the whole NT line, and one of the most secure (can the word secure actual be said with a straight face when speaking about Microsoft?), it has the NT problem of not being compatable with anything much when it comes ot software and hardware.

Windows XP Home - Problem: The XP OS is one of their best yet, but the Home Edition is very much the "Lite" Edition of the Profession Edition. Just fork out the extra $100 to get the real OS.

Recommended:

Windows XP Professional - Problem: Microsoft made it, it's still Windows, even if it is the best one money can buy.



FYI: The joy of the XP OS's is that Microsoft actually made a *good* design choice and made the XP capable of recognizing the older OS's and when it can't run them normally it runs them in a little shell OS, so all those games or devices that used to run on older versions of Windows will run on your XP.

2nd FYI: It is a good investment to buy the "from scratch" version of an OS as opposed to the "upgrade" version of an OS. Think cloned baby versus frankenstein baby... Yeah.

I know budget is a concern with just about every home user, but I ALWAYS buy the "from scratch" version and use that as my installer disk. If I decide to buy additional licenses, that's the only time you buy the upgrade packs, you save the money, and then only use the license numbers of those boxes.

I hope y'all find this helpful... 8)



Oh, last thing. Yeah, listen to Tellner. He's right on with the SP2 thing. FORTUNATELY, for those who are buying WinXPpro now as opposed to when it came out, you can usually find a box with the SP2 included. That's what I did, I sat around patiently, waiting for the right SP level of the OS and then bought and upgraded...

WhatMeWorry? wrote: Windows 2000 Pro - Problem: Even though this one was the apex of accomplishment along the whole NT line, and one of the most secure (can the word secure actual be said with a straight face when speaking about Microsoft?), it has the NT problem of not being compatable with anything much when it comes ot software and hardware.

I've not had any such problems, myself. Plus W2k doesn't have the activation BS that XP does...

WhatMeWorry? wrote:2nd FYI: It is a good investment to buy the "from scratch" version of an OS as opposed to the "upgrade" version of an OS. Think cloned baby versus frankenstein baby... Yeah.

Unless they've changed since the 98SE upgrade disc I bought years ago, which they might have, the only difference between the "Full" disc and the "Upgrade" disc is the license number. The Upgrade license includes a code that says to the installer, "check for a previous version." Otherwise, the discs are identical. I know this because I managed to talk an MS tech support guy into giving me a full-version code for my upgrade disc (under unusual but perfectly legal circumstances. He traced some problems to a probable flawed base install, so he gave me the code. Actually it turned out the be a driver issue, but I didn't find that out till later )

RantinAn wrote:ME sucks balls In my not so humble 98 se is more stable most of the time

Windows ME was horrible. My sister had that on her computer for two years before I finally convinced her to upgrade to XP.

My first comp has 98SE, which I liked, except it would freeze occasionally.

TOXIC AVENGER! wrote:

RantinAn wrote:ME sucks balls In my not so humble 98 se is more stable most of the time

Windows ME was horrible. My sister had that on her computer for two years before I finally convinced her to upgrade to XP.

My first comp has 98SE, which I liked, except it would freeze occasionally.

I have found that in the long run, under fairly consistent internet use but infrequent hardware/software modifications/installs/uninstalls, ME is actually the more stable.
The entire Win9x line, when put under consistant, regular use, has a half-life stability point, after which it just about needs to be reformatted/reinstalled. For Win98, in my experience, this is about every 6-8 months, maybe a full year before it becomes too unstable and resorts to crashing nearly daily. Win98se is a little better, able to push the envelope to a full year, maybe a year and a half, so long as it gets a reboot every day or 3. WinME, I have been able to get just over 2 years out of a clean install (it starts to get a bit wonky after a year, so you have to keep an eye on it - my parents have had it for 4 years, I did a reinstall on that once since I originally gave it to them. We got my dad an iMac this year so I wouldn't have to do it again.), and reboot intervals stretch to a week or more at times if usage isn't exceptionally heavy.
I have yet to test out WinXP on older hardware (currently running it on a newer homebuilt PVR computer and my Oqo handtop), though I am considering convering my main internet desktop into a WinXP fileserver, provided I can get the Soundblaster Platinum and tv-tuner video card to work properly in it. Else I may have to scavenge and rebuild another system from somewhere for filestorage (hoping to do a Raid 5 SATA setup, just undecided on the total amount of space needed at this time).

I know you have to be into S&M if you are willing to put yourself through this!

Please, I beg of you. I'm on hands and knees. Pleaseeeeeee Just try it out(A mac).

LostNgone wrote:
Please, I beg of you. I'm on hands and knees. Pleaseeeeeee Just try it out(A mac).

Amen, brother.

Seriously though....as a person who has long time experience with both, I can say that you should give both a try....and now that Apple's are affordable, there is no excuse not to

*Apple Powermac G5 owner, and DAMN proud of it*

Btw, lostngone, what kind of mac do you run?

"The box said 'Requires Windows 98 or better", so I installed Linux"

I've heard tell that Macs are awesome for graphics. As for a Windows OS, can't go wrong with XP Pro. At least that's my preference.