Have microsoft gone too far?

[RoSs_bg2_rox]

Ok so you everyone heard that as of january this year Microsoft were cutting their support for Win98 and 98SE.

Well get this, Microsoft have now extended this date till april 2006, good for us, but the real reason is probably to stop Linux getting into big business, what do u think?

(I dont have a source, it was out of a mag and I cant remember the name)

[ryaldin]

So, you think it's a bad thing that Microsoft is actually providing support for their buggy software?

I think it's a perfectly reasonable thing to do, even if it is motivated by a desire to prevent Linux from gaining a foothold in the market(which I daresay it's already done). I doubt whether microsoft providing support for 98 or not, will affect how many people switch to Linux. Most people who own 98, are probably well beyond the point of needing help at this point, or at least, have managed to find a way to peacefully coexist without needing tech support.

[Timber Loftis]

Yeah, watch out that Linux stuff, it may threaten to topple micro$oft.

[Rokenn]

People still use windows 98? *boggle*

[img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Thoran]

It didn't say "use" win98... it says "own". I have not used a non NT based Microsoft OS in years (they're junk), but I own them all... every version of DOS, every version of OS/2 (which early on was an IBM/M$ collaboration), all the Dos based and NT based Windows versions. I even own some weird non-microsoft Intel OS's like CP/M, Beos, and a couple versions of Linux that came with books I've bought (most of the time with linux I just download em... not sure if "own" applies there... maybe "possess" [img]smile.gif[/img] ). It's possible I've got every OS that ever ran on an Intel 8086/8088 derivative platform. It's been a long road, I may make fun of Win98 now but back when it was released it was a pretty cool upgrade to 95 and I used it. I guess it only "stinks" in relation to the technology available in 2000 and XP systems today. There's no reason to run it IMO unless you have an old PC or a bunch of ancient games/hardware that you can't get to run on 2000 or XP. I've long since given away all my Pentium II and older systems but I do know a few people running 98 on old Pentium's and P2's with a whopping 64 or 128 meg of ram... lol.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Rokenn: People still use windows 98? *boggle* [img]tongue.gif[/img]

*raises furry hand*

What...you gonna tell a Wookie not to use the OS of his or her choice?

Besides it works just fine. If it didn't work just fine then I could justify the expense for XP. Otherwise M$ doesn't get my dough for essentially the same damn thing. Take that Gates!!!!

[ryaldin]

Originally posted by Rokenn: People still use windows 98? *boggle* [img]tongue.gif[/img]

If my laptop hadn't fizzled out, I too would still use 98. I'm not computer-literate enough to figure out linux.

[Cloudbringer]

Rokenn, many places you wouldn't believe still use them are using versions of 98! Heck, til last year, MY pc had win 95 on it in the OFFICE! [img]tongue.gif[/img] I've got XPpro now, but that's because Dell ships with it installed!

Money's tight in many institutions, so they do as Chewy mentions, stick with what's working til it stops working or they can't get support/parts.

[Zero Alpha]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Yeah, watch out that Linux stuff, it may threaten to topple micro$oft.

1. its more stable
2. its more secure
3. its FREE

aside from needing to know the basics of computers (and with KDE you barely need to know a command line, its all graphical), its really easy to use.

I cant figure out anyone who has an excuse not to have tried it. sure no gamer in there right mind would give up a stack of games for a stable system, but aside from games most functions can be done on linux the same or better than windows. plus you get things like OpenOffice, which is a free virsion of office (and open source) http://www.openoffice.org/

linux can run on anything. supprisingly enough, the best Xbox front end is linux. there is even a PS2 virsion of linux.

[Azred]

Why shouldn't Microsoft attempt to maintain as large a share of the market as they possibly can? Being a corporation, Microsoft exists to make money, not flawlessly-programmed software (although that would be a bonus).

I still use Windows 98 on a computer I bought in February 2000. I have added some upgrades in that time, but the only time this computer has crashed was when the original hard drive fizzled out. I never have the "blue screen of death", I never catch viruses/worms, and all my programs do everything I need them to do when I need them to do it. I see no reason to upgrade my operating system until I am forced to buy a new computer. It's all really very simple. [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]