boobs not big enough 
dont the boobs technically get bigger and bigger as newer OS need more resources and memory?
Hmmm… you’re right. I wonder why Vis-tan doesn’t have Triple D’s yet. 
Of course, we all know that twincest 98’s are best.
EDIT
Okay. I get it now.
It seems there’s some debate about what Vis-tan should look like. It’s a toss-up between the exotic tan girl above, and the blue-green haired beauty below. She has the big boobs… well… her Ultimate version at least (I think Basic is the second one).
So for you, oh boobie seeking admin.
[ 03-27-2007, 03:59 PM: Message edited by: Nargrakhan ]
Bullshit. You’ll have to prove that to convince anyone.
The USB update I mentioned comes straight from Microsoft. The only difference between OSR 2.0 and OSR 2.1 is that the USB update is on the CD-ROM.
Which isn’t a problem, because you’re not going to plug in your keyboard and mouse after you turned on your computer.
But older ones never did either, so where are you coming from, calling PS/2 devices “hell”?
Of course. Though the majority still can’t be arsed what the W3C says. My point still stands; most websites use a table-based lay-out. Just look at Peach Princess’ website.
Mandatory install != integrated system component.
Drivers are not a system’s feature, they’re third-party software. You’re only making excuses for lazy people. I don’t get why people should search for drivers in the first place, it was common practice to shipp it with the hardware.
Yet it doesn’t seem to stop good browsers like Firefox, SeaMonkey and Opera from working.
This is why we have something called “updates”. And no, you don’t need IE to get them, you could get it separately.
I don’t play Japanese bishoujo games, so why should I care about locale compatibility, which isn’t even perfect in XP?
That’s because it’s a home OS, not a network OS.
Only from a programmer’s point of view. The end-user doesn’t care. He wants a good user interface. It doesn’t help that this is maybe the only thing superior to Win98.
This new GDI+ does bring the WMF exploit with it, though…
No, you just don’t understand how M$ has bloated its OS and added a lot of cruft.
Yes, Benoit, you just LOVE to argue about OS’s whenever you the opportunity presents itself.
You just derailed your own thread…
Sure, it’s why the site to which you linked to show how to remove IE has the user hack the install file or remove manually from the system some files?
So you think. Misconnecting PS/2 devices and hotplugging happens more than often to the end-user (reason why they became coloured in the end – to prevent misconnection – and why plug-and-play devices enjoyed such a success). You’re really not informed at all about what an end-user does and does not.
Go and ask any person doing tech. support back then and now.
Once again, you’re really not informed at all about what an end-user does and does not.
You have a weird definition of “integration”, where the non-integrated software is automatically installed and cannot be uninstalled without removing manually system files.
I’ll love to have you in a OS newsgroup.
What end-users are.
Drivers should be and (should have been) a system’s feature for that very reason.
And a bad practice.
You see, there used to not be standard for drivers, so every third-party would ship its own proprietary driver. Since the advent of Win98 then WinXP, standard were enforced, removing the pain to manage drivers being all-different the one from the others.
Something you can’t understand, since you know next to nothing to the needs and problems of end-users and computers in general.
You noticed of course that Firefox for instance recommends using WinXP?
For the rest, a software can always comes with its own proprietary library to palliate the OS deficiency. Doesn’t make the OS better.
It’s like the notion of certificates, which didn’t exist in Win95. Could you come up later with a browser managing them? Yes, of course, everything is possible in computer science. It’d be just hell to manage everything the system doesn’t and hell for the end-user to search for every little additional feature which comes bundled with a new OS.
Do you know how much end-user don’t manually update their computer? Do you know some people have no time to look for new features, updates and any little changes in their OS?
Before you reply, did you try to install the package? Did you read the “Readme.txt” file? Especially the “This includes the comctl32.dll from Internet Explorer version 5.0.” part? Do you understand what that means? Do you know why it was removed from IE5.0 and separately available as an “update”?
Because you’re an idiot you don’t know how the system works and how programs are programmed? Because you don’t know that more and more modern programs are UNICODE-compliant thus are converted by the system into ASCII before being managed by the kernel then converted back into UNICODE and that this operation has a cost?
Talking about the kernel, I could mention the lack of pre-emptive multitasking of the Win9x kernel but that’d be Win9x vs. WinXP and probably about notions you don’t understand well.
That limits the OS a lot, though, when it’s part of a network, and even when used as a home computer by several persons. The lack of the impersonating features (and what comes with it) is also a security hole since all the user informations aren’t secured from an account from another (hell, you could even press “Esc” at the logon and enter the system!)
Tells how much you don’t know anything. You understand GDI+ allows “a good user interface”, right?
What a programmer can’t do easily is what the end-user won’t have usually.
I could use your argument about updates and how an update of the concerned files would remove the problem but I’d rather insist on how Win98 wasn’t concerned by this problem and how this problem wouldn’t happen if users don’t click on spam emails nor visit “suspicious” Web pages, which are basic Internet good habits. The wmf exploit was a mole hole turned into a mountain by idiots such as you.
I’d suggest you to go to a system forum or a programmers forum and tell your idiocies and watch the result.
I’m sure I understand how the system works better than you will ever. I mean, I could talk about NTFS is more secure than FAT or FAT32 were, if only because the system files are locked on NTFS (i.e. WinXP) when they’re only hidden on FAT/FAT32, but I’m not sure about how well you’d understand the importance of that point.
Seriously, talk with system admins or programmers rather than listen to anti-Microsoft propaganda. Contrary to what you may think, sysadmins do benchmarks so you should be able to have access to some. Some OSes may be better than Windows (Linux~) but to say that Win95 is better than Win98SE or WinXP? Ha!
Again, mandatory install != integrated. I could edit the install files so that Irfanview is installed along with all the rest. Does that make Irfanview integrated? No.
Oh, so it’s a case of user stupidity. Doesn’t count.
See above. It would mean that if would install Irfanview on my system, that it’s an integrated system component.
Integrated means that the system depends on it, and that the system wouldn’t run well if it was removed.
No. This is exactly why the IT industry is such in a bad shape. End-users should get educated, not served on a silver platter.
I’m not sure this is such a bad thing. It would mean that the driver would work the best with the hardware.
Well, duh. Because it’s the most recent Windows OS.
That I can agree with.
That really depends on what kind of feature it is, and where it’s used.
Going by your logic, Windows XP is the most insecure piece of crap on the planet, because end-users don’t update it.
This is again a case of catering to uneducated end-user.
Yes, I installed the package. No, I didn’t read the readme.txt. What it means? It confirms how M$ bundled system updates with its browser to tie the user to it.
Yet further down you don’t care about the cost that using a network OS at home is.
Which is why we have home OSs and network OSs. Security between multiple accounts (when you don’t need multiple accounts in the first place) at home isn’t needed.
Oh, please. There were good user interfaces before Win98. The OS itself has a horrible user interface, so that doesn’t help your argument.
Touché.
Actually, I never made that big of a deal about it.
You fail to realise that NTFS only matters in a network. You also fail to realise that NTFS is a proprietary standard, which means your files belong to M$, not you.
Actually, I did. You don’t know how many of them have horror stories to tell.
You seem to have been poisoned by Microsoft propaganda.
Well all those are good arguments, but I think 98 is better than 95, because 98 has twincest (98 + 98SE). 95 is just a lonely loligoth.
See? Twinlicious 98’s. 
Mandatory and only removable through manual deleting of files in the system folder is pretty much integration. You could say it failed at being fully integrated, but not that it wasn’t integrated as in “being part of the system”.
Of course, it counts since it’s how the end-user is which matters.
No one cares about hackers.
No, it does not.
Or are you telling me the sound device management isn’t integrated to the system since you could remove the files and the system (which don’t need sound at all in order to work properly) would still run well?
Hahahahahahahahaha. Catering to end-users is the way to success. The way you talk, a GUI is absolutely useless and we should go back to UNIX command-line interface. Who needs a graphical interface? The end-user should just be educated in the marvel of the command-line! In fact, we should go back to using vi!
Oh god, another person who thinks proprietary is better than standard. Look, go take lessons about the history of computers pst successes and failures, would you?
(and yeah, Microsoft doesn’t follow all the standard but WinXP was a better start on the road than Win95)
Alas, no, not only.
Duh! That’s why the update process was automatized!!!
The simple fact you’re using “M$” show how much of an anti-Microsoft you are. Otherwise, no, the libraries were part of IE5.0 but were separated to give to users such as you a way to access the functions they didn’t have.
It’s like building a whole new car then trying to remove its parts to fit old cars because some idiots think their old car is better.
Of course, by doing so you’re little by little changing the old car into the new ones, but the user just won’t know it!
Which is an argument made by people who don’t know a thing about security.
The necessity to secure different accounts increase the overall security of an OS because you could secure differently each process (by running it under another user account). That includes your browser and what it can do on your computer, thus what potentially damaging programs you’re downloading can do to your computer.
Oh, and you fail to address the (lack of) preemptive multitasking nature of Win95.
Sure, we’re comparing Win98 to Win95, though and the point is that Win98 allows a better GUI than Win95.
As for the “horrible user interface”, UNIX and Linux back when were non-existing when MacOS had a comparable one. Want to tell me which one you think had a way better GUI?
You fail to realize it’s not the case. For instance, in NTFS, the filesystem is protected. In the FAT and FAT32, it’s not so an external software could damage it!
Because FAT and FAT32 weren’t proprietary?
Considering I just asked two of them prior to our discussions and some of the arguments I gave are from them, I have doubt about how you ever talked to any.
Windows compared to other OSes? Yeah, sure the others may have some better features. Win95 vs. Win98 vs WinXP? WinXP wins, no question asked.
Contrary to you who are only reading anti-Microsoft propaganda, I work in the computer business, thus read the different specs and changes, use them everyday and talk to sysadmins on a regular basis, yeah.
For the other people, sorry about the OT. I’ll stop here.
[ 03-28-2007, 03:11 PM: Message edited by: olf_le_fol ]
So, because there is no uninstall option means it’s integrated? What a stupid argument. Also, you modify files on the CD, not in the system folder (unless you mean indirectly, which still isn’t the case).
http://vorck.com/answers-ie.html#experts
But I haven’t been paying attention and/or I am stupid and I say that it’s an integral part of the OS!
You’re obviously talking about a different kind of integration.
That doesn’t make it right, though.
I never said that. End-users don’t even get educated about the GUI.
No, proprietary in general isn’t better than standard, but it has its place.
Not completely. Why do you think so many WinXP users still get affected by patched security holes?
Which doesn’t mean that I don’t have a clue.
If it really was a part of IE5, it wouldn’t work without it.
Oh, you mean different users as programs, not actual people. In that case, I agree.
It’s not such a big problem as you’d like to believe.
A better-looking one, maybe… WinXP looks more fancy, yet its GUI is a disaster.
But it could also access it faster. It’s a trade-off.
Nope. They were open industry standards. You might want to read up on FAT.
Well, not talked, per se.
http://toastytech.com/about/screwed.html
http://www.kmfms.com/whatsbad.php?n=upgrade_experience.html
You might want to read this, if you think you’re so objective:
http://www.kmfms.com/whatsbad.html
If you really believe catering to end-users is the way to success, then you have to admit that WinXP is a pile of shit, and that Win95 is better. Win95 offers a non-cluttered, non-annoying user interface, while WinXP looks like a toy with thousands bells and whistles that doesn’t stop annoying you.
…And you should stop annoying US with your pointless OS wars…
I’m sorry, I know you’re really getting into it with each other. But I can’t resist.
[begin bad jokes]
You have vi? When did you get vi? You’re just cheating now. I have to flip switches to edit my documents. You know how annoying it is to manually flip switches at 1 MBPS? And before that they were all on punch cards. Sometimes I had to bite holes in the punch cards with my teeth! And if they weren’t just right, you had to rip em all out and do the whole batch over. That’s if you didn’t accidentally bite down on the magnetic core “RAM” – then it became a real dental emergency.
cough
As you were. Flame on!
Then get other people to stop bashing my OS of choice. That’s all I ask.
By the way, don’t act as if a man came into your house and held a gun to your head, forcing you to read this thread.
Here’s a clarification as to what I mean with integration of an application:
-Ramming it in to the system kernel.
-Mixing its code with unrelated DLLs.
-Making other applications embed or call it for no good reason. (example: M$’ CHM help file format)
[ 03-28-2007, 09:21 PM: Message edited by: Benoit ]
I dunno…i thought there was a move to make lolis in vista since they still have the kernel and they just add a bunch of fluffy decorations around it that aren’t needed.
[ 04-04-2007, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: Jinnai ]
quote:
Well all those are good arguments, but I think 98 is better than 95, because 98 has twincest (98 + 98SE). 95 is just a lonely loligoth.
How about Win XP Home and Pro they are also twins, another pair is win server 2003 and XP Pro 64
[ 04-09-2007, 06:16 AM: Message edited by: Johan ]
What about Win XP Multimedia Center? That edition and the Pro version are almost identical twins.
Hey…lonely loligoth is a good thing. …well atleast the loligoth part.
I’ll never reveal my source!
Actually this page gets a few new ones every once in awhile (NSFW):
Just wanted to mention that I recently got to know that GDI+ works on Windows 95 too. That’s one less point for Windows 98.
From what i understand thought none of the drivers, even user-made ones, do not support SLI so playing any good 3D games with a widecreen is out.
[ 06-07-2007, 06:09 AM: Message edited by: Jinnai ]
Fixed.