Thread: Still in use ?

We have a few clients who still have to use 98 as they use specialist software that won't run on XP.

Where's the 3.0/WFWG sub topic?

One of my contract clients has about 13 Win95 machines, 4 Win98 SE, and a couple of ME :/

Does anyone still use Windows 95-ME ?

Originally Posted by Hypermediocrity

One of my contract clients has about 13 Win95 machines, 4 Win98 SE, and a couple of ME :/

ME! oh dear (im sure it was meant to be called muppet edition not millenium)

The problem is that Microsoft ( in their infinite wisdom ) have decided not to support 95 / 98 any more. So all new security patches will not be available, exposing users to potentially harmful attacks.
IMHO this is wrong, as you rightly say - some users can not upgrade to XP due to application software performance.

I only upgraded my home computer to XP because I was using the internet more and found out that I was exposed to these attacks - other than that I would have chosen to upgrade as I don't see any benefit with XP over 98

I have don't have any clients still on old versions.

I do have friends & family on 95 & 98 who refuse to upgrade due to the cost of buying a new machine as well as a new Windows license. It's these ones that cause the most support headaches

Originally Posted by Brent

The problem is that Microsoft ( in their infinite wisdom ) have decided not to support 95 / 98 any more. So all new security patches will not be available, exposing users to potentially harmful attacks.
IMHO this is wrong, as you rightly say - some users can not upgrade to XP due to application software performance.

I only upgraded my home computer to XP because I was using the internet more and found out that I was exposed to these attacks - other than that I would have chosen to upgrade as I don't see any benefit with XP over 98

I'm suprised that you cannot see the difference between 98 and XP, even 2000 is much much better than 98.

I can't see anything wrong with Microsoft not wanting to support 11 year old software any more.

Originally Posted by JonRohan

I'm suprised that you cannot see the difference between 98 and XP, even 2000 is much much better than 98.

I can't see anything wrong with Microsoft not wanting to support 11 year old software any more.

I was stating the fact that - as a very light user of a home computer - I do not see the benefit of XP over 98.

I do agree that an 11 yrs old package should no longer be supported but MS do tend to go about these things a bit underhand

We still have clients using dos 6.22 as well as wfw3.11 and win-nt 3.51 (thats still very popular with corporates)

With software certification and testing potentially taking yeras, followed by a roll-out to 5000+ branches worldwide, its inevitable that some things are circa 5-10 years behind the "latest" o/s - but if it works why change it - remember it wasnt too long ago that computers cost several million $ each, and had a life expectancy of 30 years !

showing your age there, rob

Actually, that reminds me - one of my clients is still running WinNT 3.51 server - part of Microsoft BackOffice 2.0!

Needless to say we've just started installing a new SBS 2003 network in it's place!