Slashdot Mirror

Hows that?

The hardware setup of a PVR is pretty easy to figure out - many posts here show the gubbins you'll need to put a nicely specced box together.
The software is a different matter.

For me, OS wise, I'd stick onWin98Lite Win2k version or the XP version when it comes out.

But channel wise, it's not as straightforward. To UK users I'd suggest using the amazingly excellent Digiguide which is an online TV Guide with a staggering amount of personal tweaks and doohickeys and has plug ins that allow it to connect directly to the also excellent Snapstream.
Digiguide is £4.99 a year - worth it even if you don't build a PVR and Snapstream is $49.99 (about £34) from their website.

My +2 virtual karma points for sharing the link

fixes all problems with IE, present and future alike. www.98lite.net/ieradicator.html

You would hold your AV vendor responsible if a non-viral file like format.com is used through an IE vulnerability to destroy your data, but not Microsoft, because IE is free?
The kids in your neighborhood may like to leave paper bags on your doorstep that are full of something just as free and about as pleasant.

You actually pay for IE a little with every purchase of MS' products. The money to subsidize its development has to come from somewhere.
They also force you to install it with windows wether you like it or not, and provide no means with which to uninstall it. That's downright obnoxious, IMHO. 98lite can take care of it, but such measures really shouldn't be neccessary in the first place.

You can do it manually like that if you like, or you can just get 98lite and have it do the grunt work for you. Best $15 you'll ever spend if you're forced to use Windows on a semi-regular basis (for gaming, Office, etc.)

That light stuff is called "CE". However bloat and all the latest stuff seem to belong together. A lot of software doesn't run under CE.

If you want a lite version of win98 try win 98 lite to remove the internet exploder.

But there are always light versions. If you want simple word processing you can choose wordpad. If you want simple browsing you can use opera (5.12, 6.0 is beta quality) or ie. 3.0 (or netscape 2.0). However if you want all the latest you will find that you need all kinds of updates of the OS. Lots of cpu and ram help, however you do not need them (yet) for you wordprocessing.

Note that i am writing this on a windows 95(b) company machine, that still does telnet fine, and will telnet fine the next year. (I could get NT4, but they block the registry there, I like to edit the registry for oracle)

IE can certainly be removed from windows. I've done it several times.
same here, up to 98se click here

See, the point is during the trial in front of Judge Jackson, they committed purjury...why MS's legal team or it's officers did not wind up in Jail for a few nites is beyond me.
Lying, Doctoring evidence, delaying (granted not illegal) and such a condecending attitude during the trial...sheesh, even 5 seconds upon leaving the courthouse and hitting the cameras.

Shock the sh*t out of me that no one used thier finegaling *in the court of public opinion* against them...If they did, then I missed it somehow.

Oh, back on the train of thought:
a 98lite'd system is actuall quite stable to the point of being shocking.
Once you "unbolt" I.E from 98se, feed the program a 95b cd (need 5 files, IIRC) it *screams* on even a lowly PII.
I got a p200/64M and it is *very* usable.

Can't remove IE...bullshit! MS can, but then how would they keep their monopoly in browser software?

Crap, just asked and answerd my own question...I seem to be getting quite good at that.

Haven't tried killing IE6 in WinXP yet - I don't expect that to go very well.

Besides, I've set Mozilla to be my default mail and html program, and that works great, as long as I don't have any instances of IE open on the desktop at the same time. As soon as you open one IE window, Windows decides that it should open ALL webpages in IE instead of mozilla, like I've told it to do on ALL occurrences of running across HTML files and links people post to IM clients, programs, etc. So I completely agree, it's a Windows problem, not just an IE problem. What's funny is that despite warning people how active scripting can cause problems without having all the appropriate security patches installed, they're displaying this info with an .asp page! Now that's what I call a short attention span.

I use Opera for my web browsing.

And I make IE request permission from Zone Alarm every time it tries to access the Internet.

When 98 Lite comes out with it's Win2000 version, I won't have IE on my system at all.

have you tried 98lite on some of those boxes?

I've got an old p200 apitva that cranks fairly well once it is "lited". 98se's usb is good but I wanted the speed 95 had...this is the way to get the best of both worlds.

One word of warning tho:
Stability seems to be quite good, if not better than either 95/98 combined, but seeing as neither is going to be supported soon, I wonder if it will void support on 2000/xp?
2 wrongs don't make a right, then try 3 way of thinking.
And, I suppose you could be charged under the DMCA for doing this, seeing as it bypasses window's built in crash routines.
J/K :\

Moose

Well I'll agree that windows 95 CAN be stable, but crashing only once a year? That I find hard to believe. I have an older computer (Pentium 133Mhz) with 95b and it crashes probably once every 2 boots although generally I don't use it that much - and I mean I watch that machine very carefully with a minimum of software installed. If I do anything semi serious (like heavy graphic editing) then it doesn't take long at all to go down for the count. If you have a computer that's above 250Mhz, then I think its probably best to use Windows 98 Lite, using the windows 98SE core with the windows 95 shell grafted in.

Make IE optional

I'd say less than 50%, but I have to agree with you. The Microsoft groupie at the ISP I used to work at and I would always have shouting matches whenever he thought we should put the latest and greatest IE on our install CD and have it be the exclusive option. He won out, and tech support would have to deal with it utterly destroying several machines.

To this day I have a machine that will run quite well (for Windows) :-) if installed with 98lite, but if you put standard Windows 98 on it, either with IE4 or SE with IE5, the machine will bluescreen and fry. Without IE, the machine is fine...

...someone comes out with a patch for XP Lite, a la 98lite?

OK, I haven't played with XP... but what components are optional? It'd be very nice to be able to uncheck baggage that I know I won't use, like IE. In previous versions, I wasn't allowed to do that without some hacking, and even then, I'd get a dodgy system a good percentage of the time.

--

Maybe this is the future of third-party software - stuff that removes preloaded Microsoft crap, just to free up resources for real work.

"The 1995 launch of Microsoft's revolutionary new product"

Yeah, instead of having to buy Windows 4.0 and MS-DOS 7.0 in two different packages, you could buy it all in one box!

"product's stability, appearance and intuitive interface"

Actually, when we all jumped ship, we discovered that it was about as stable as 3.11 was. And the interface wasn't all that intuitive when the whole world was used to 3.x.

"Then, as in the early 80s, when Microsoft were instrumental in the first truly personal computerThen, as in the early 80s, when Microsoft were instrumental in the first truly personal computer"

How could they be responsible for the same thing twice, unless one (or both?) of them didn't really happen? "For the first time, the elderly, the young, and the technically illiterate were empowered to use computers"

No, they're still all on hold with Microsoft tech support.

"Although computers still betrayed some of their arcane origins of a time when computing was the real of those with genius IQs and degrees in mathematics",/I>

I first started tinkering with the BASIC package of my ADAM when I was 5. In the early 90's, I figured out how to get onto the local BBS scene with my 286/12, 2400 modem, and Telemate. I'm no genius, and neither were all the flamers and l33t hax0rs that also frequented the boards. It was an awful lot like /., actually, without the pretty HTML.

"This was achieved by always providing what the market needed"

I think you mean "convincing the market that they needed it." How much did they spend on advertising and playing that Rolling Stones song over and over? They should have let the lyrics keep going... "You make a grown man cry..."

"The Microsoft formula was to pile 'em high and sell 'em cheap"

I prefer the name "slash and burn" myself...

"Microsoft's success came through out-maneuvering the competition."

I think you meant to say "hype and intimidation."

"Revolutionary was the approach that said that a spreadsheet, which at one would have cost over a thousand dollars, could be sold for a fraction of the price",

Besides the fact that no version of Windows has ever come with a spreadsheet app, Microsoft Excel for Windows (1988, "Windows" being "Windows 2.0") cost around $200 or so.

The only reason Excel's price has come down from that is because, when all is said and done, 90% of it is still the same old code they've had since the 80's. It'd be down further if they didn't put in all those damned easer eggs and talking paperclips.

"This approach drove the computing revolution of the 80s" If it were released in 1995...

"and the net revolution of the 90s"

95 has no intrinsic web hosting capabilities. NT still relied to heavily on NetBEUI to make it all that good of a hosting platform. It wasn't until Windows 2000 that Microsoft actually released an OS that spoke TCP/IP as a first language.

I'd say Al Gore did more to help the internet than Bill Gates.

"Microsoft's aggressive approach made computing far more affordable"

Even if you don't take into the account the price of the OS itself and the glorified bug-fixes they sell for $80, just about every major computer and buisiness magazine in publication agrees that the cost of ownership of a Windows PC is simply too high for a business.

"Microsoft's approach of providing the product the market wanted "

You're still confusing it with "convincing the market that it's what they wanted." Nobody wants built-in obsalescence.

"empowering thousands of small businesses,"

... by forcing them to bend over and pay $1000s in software and client liscences for products with 1000s of known bugs?

"often without the funds to employ dedicated IT admin staff"

If you don't need a dedicated IT staff, then why is the job market for MCSEs so good?

"to manage their own computer networks and to sell themselves on the web,"

As I said in an earlier post, the box might as well say right on the front "MCSE Not Included." The average small business without a dedicated IT department will not be able to utilize NT or 2000 in that way out of the box because the average small business owner has a business to run, which leaves them no time to spend a month reading texts and documentation.

If it were so easy, Microsoft wouldn't be telling you that it takes at least 7 months to get your MCSE cert.

"Similarly, Microsoft's masterful integration of the internet within Windows means that for most people the internet MEANS Internet Explorer."

Sites like this one put the lie to Microsoft's "integrated" claim.

On the other hand, instead of integrating core internet technologies like TCP/IP in their products, NT came with products like "NetBIOS over IP" and WINS, products that can only be described as shoddy work-arounds for NT's native NetBIOS networking structure. This instead of a genuine OS patch to get NT to speak TCP/IP natively.

Microsoft is at least three steps behind when it comes to the internet.

"by making their product vastly superior to the competition"

Logic time: If it were vastly superior to the competition, why is there still competition?

"the consumer sees that he is benefiting and is happy to acquiesce"

No, the consumer only sees the way that what was once done with blazing speed on a 90 MHz Pentium now all but requires gigahertz speed and gigahertz pricing. Why do you think hardware sales (and, subsequently, Windows ME sales as well) are in such a slump?

"but for the companies, small and large, who were able to compete thanks to the low barrier to entry erected by Microsoft."

Oh? By all accounts, XP won't run any MP3 software except that written by Microsoft. That sounds like a very high barrier to entry to me.

"described as an end to frustration for the millions of computer users"

By your own arguments, Windows 95 was that supposed end. Why should we believe that XP will be more of a solution than 95?

Requiring a Pentium II processor to run your OS is more indicative of a problem than a solution.

"discover the highly logical (but also deeply complicated) way that computing systems such as Windows"

I've spent the past few weeks studying to be an MCSE (I figure it'd provide income while I pursue a college degreen in physics). The more I read, the more it becomes patently appearant that what you call "logical" is more than 50% work-arounds of their old code. They insist on piling more on top of their old code instead of sitting down and actually writing something new (which, to my knowledge, Microsoft has never done). The books (published by Microsoft, mind you) spend more time telling you the ways that you CAN'T do something than the ways you can.

"Millions of dollars of research, of observation"

If you need to spend millions of dollars to learn about your customer base, how in-touch with them could you possibly be?

"a product where computing is a natural experience rather than a painful one, with effortless remote maintenance and inter-computer interaction. "

Again, I thought you said that's what 95 was.

"At the same time that Microsoft is on the brink of launching of a product that makes them feel 'super super excited'"

If I were going to launch something I expected would make me billions (if not trillions) of dollars, I'd be "super super excited," too.

"the competition is still hopeless"

Then why is it still around? Better yet, why is it gaining market share?

"Particularly for Linux, the outlook looks bleak"

In order to make that statement true, you need to replace the word 'Linux' with the phrase 'Windows 2000'

"No longer buffeted by the heady currents of the internet goldrush"

Didn't you just say that Microsoft was responsible for that gold rush? If so, then wouldn't the current economy be the fault of Microsoft as well? Can we really trust them, then?

"Linux-based companies - which have never made any appreciable amount of money "

IBM what?

"they are also recognizing that companies required by their underlying philosophy to give their product away, do not have significant revenue opportunities. "

Then in what way is the price-slashing you espoused earlier better?

"relies on ideas stolen directly from Windows. "

1.) Windows was stolen from Apple and Xerox
2.) I've yet to see anything in KDE or Gnome that were anything but an improvement on what Windows offered. Really. Name one thing about the Windows interface that is better than either of those two.

"and enormous goodwill to shoddy workmanship and incomplete and buggy software (the likes of which would not be tolerated from commercial software)"

If it really weren't tolerated, then Microsoft wouldn't have gotten away with releasing Windows 98 (Windows 4.1) or Windows ME (Windows 4.9)after releasing Windows 95 (Windows 4.0). Each with a premium price.

"The in-fighting and lack of commercial rigor of the Unix and open source world has left a system of wild inconsistencies and rough edges, "

... which makes the way Windows 2000 is steadily losing market share to them all the more damning...

"For everyone else, Linux remains something that is frustrating to use, with its bewildering array of arcane concepts (file permissions,

Linux's short list of file permissions (user, group, everyone each can have read/write/execute permissions) pales in comparison with the monolithic list of NT/2000 file permissions (many of which seemingly overlap).

"symbolic links"

And what would you call a Windows 95 shortcut? Oh, and speaking of which, a "new" feater of Windows 2000 is the ability to mount a hard drive partition to a folder...

"compilers to install software"

Haven't touched a compiler since that C course 5 years ago.

(something users used to InstallShield would find troubling))"

I find InstallShield more difficult to use and comprehend than RedHat's Packagme Manager.

If all of these concepts were so bad, why is Windows trying so hard to include them? And if they really are bad, what does this say about Windows' efforts to include them?

"The almost total lack of co-operation between projects means that there is no consistent graphical configuration tool to match Windows' Control Panel. "

If you want something that puts Control Panel to shame, look at Mandrake 8.0.

"The ultimate cause of it in many cases is probably human nature, as there is no doubt that we are programmed to be resentful of success and to be envious of those who succeed -"

Then we should be hating IBM, not Microsoft. Of the two, IBM has more money (and is therefore more "successful.")

"That these feelings should be directed at a company largely responsible for the massively improved levels of prosperity brought by bringing computing to the masses"

Again, we should also be hating IBM for their open-architecture PC.

"since as humans are essentially selfish beings, personal reassurance is a far more important emotion than altruism."

Then we should be far more concerned about the interests of Microsoft and it's One True Leader than the Linux collective. How can we counteract any selfishness on the part of Bill Gates? Claiming that Bill Gates is altruistic and may be the only non-selfish person out there sounds a little too close to Nazi propoganda for comfort.

", resentful in part that computing should become accessible to the uninitiated,"

No, I'm resentful of the time I worked in Dell tech support, and all the times I had to tell an angry customer that there was nothing I could do for them, because the problem was a "feature" of Windows. I'm resentful of the fact that networking with Windows 2000 has such a high barrier to entry due to its price and liscencing racket. I'm resentful that the latest and greatest operating systems from Microsoft shuts down my dial-up networking connection for no appearant reason. I'm resentful of the fact that, as a Windows user, I cannot choose to not use IE. I'm resentful of the fact that I need a minimum of 100 MB of hard drive space to install a Microsoft product that's marginally equivalent to WordPerfect 5.1. I'm resentful of the fact that Microsoft would knowingly ship a product with 65,000 known bugs, and then try to push for these products to be used in mission-critical environments. I'm resentful of the fact that Microsoft is single-handedly responsible for the anti-virus software market, with the way they leave security holes through their "functionality" that no well-informed person would accept. I'm resentful of the way that Microsoft works hard to make sure that there are as few "well-informed" people as possible. I'm resentful of the fact that my parents had to pay for and learn a new operating system when they paid for a new computer. I'm resentful of the way I have to tell my parents that their new $2000 machine has bugs like the aforementioned dial-up problems, and that the only explaination I can offer them is "It's Windows." I'm resentful of the fact that a Pentium 233 MMX with 96 MB of RAM boots Windows 98 faster than a Pentium 4 1.3 GHz with 256 MB of RAM boots Windows ME (even with the fast boot option configured in the BIOS). And, last but not least, I resent any company that works planned obsolescence into their product, and then has the balls to say to a court of law that it's "innovation."

OK, I now return you to your regularly scheduled flame war.

the Active desktop has been renamed, and is coming back in all sorts of user freindly features in the future. Just watch>

IE on an open fair market is one thing. Fine. Forcing me to use it, and blocking out the competition I suppose is superior marketing, And making it damn hard to remove is another.

The proof in the pudding are products like 98Lite that remove Internet Explorer from windows, and result in faster and more stable systems. Rememeber, MS has testified in court that not only was this impossible, but that doing this would destroy windows.

ha. nice try

Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip

Do you believe that Windows 95 was lawful with regard to its combination of a GUI and DOS?

Technically, no, I don't think it was lawful.

On the other hand, I have yet to see a demonstration where Windows 95 was successfully executed on a non-MS-DOS operating system. Caldera claimed to have a tiny (on the order of several dozen kilobytes) TSR that would allow Windows 95 to run on DR-DOS, but never released the TSR to the public. So, based on the evidence that has come into the public domain, I have a strong suspicion that Windows 98 and MS-DOS 7 were artifically wedded - but I can't prove it, so all I can do is grumble.

On the other hand, I have seen a machine stripped of IE continue working, albeit with certain applications non-functional, with no loss of stability or performance. The 98micro option of 98Lite will strip IE out completely, and in fact can boost the performance of Windows by several percent.

Also what were the chief benefits of Windows 95 and were they 'tautological' under Hollaar's analysis?

I'm not going to provide a list, simply because there will always be things I forgot that you, or somebody else, will challenge me on. Suffice it to say, things like the improved GUI, improved programs, and so on, as well as the single install, help, and configuration options, are either due to the tautological benefits that Hollaar espoused or due to the improvement in the components themselves, rather than any specific improvement arising from the coupling of Windows 95 and MS-DOS 7.

Perhaps you can provide me with an example of something that could not be accomplished by having Windows 95 be a separate GUI rather than tied to MS-DOS 7?

--

Do you believe that Windows 95 was lawful with regard to its combination of a GUI and DOS?

Technically, no, I don't think it was lawful.

On the other hand, I have yet to see a demonstration where Windows 95 was successfully executed on a non-MS-DOS operating system. Caldera claimed to have a tiny (on the order of several dozen kilobytes) TSR that would allow Windows 95 to run on DR-DOS, but never released the TSR to the public. So, based on the evidence that has come into the public domain, I have a strong suspicion that Windows 98 and MS-DOS 7 were artifically wedded - but I can't prove it, so all I can do is grumble.

On the other hand, I have seen a machine stripped of IE continue working, albeit with certain applications non-functional, with no loss of stability or performance. The 98micro option of 98Lite will strip IE out completely, and in fact can boost the performance of Windows by several percent.

Also what were the chief benefits of Windows 95 and were they 'tautological' under Hollaar's analysis?

I'm not going to provide a list, simply because there will always be things I forgot that you, or somebody else, will challenge me on. Suffice it to say, things like the improved GUI, improved programs, and so on, as well as the single install, help, and configuration options, are either due to the tautological benefits that Hollaar espoused or due to the improvement in the components themselves, rather than any specific improvement arising from the coupling of Windows 95 and MS-DOS 7.

Perhaps you can provide me with an example of something that could not be accomplished by having Windows 95 be a separate GUI rather than tied to MS-DOS 7?

--

If I remember right, that program is called 98lite. See www.98lite.net.

Remember, IE was once optional too.

Still is - www.98lite.net

Remove IE from Win98

The response is still available, though.

Also, Win98lite is the tool that actually removes IE.

well, I hate to say this but he's actually right, if greatly oversimplifying it... 98Lite for example is able to separate Win98v1/v2 from its MSIE baggage by (mostly) replacing IIRC 3 DLLs and explorer.exe with their Win95 counterparts. I would imagine if you set your shell= to something else after doing the DLL-fixing you'd be able to remove your explorer.exe/iexplore.exe without a problem...
BRTB

• from the windows-help.net web site...
• According to Microsoft, Office 10 will also offer significant new security features, including a central security panel; advanced password encryption; higher default security settings for Excel and PowerPoint; the option to not install Visual Basic for Applications with Office; and the functionality of the Outlook Email Security Update

So remove MSIE completely. In the future, return any software that turns out to require MSIE components.

The process is quite nicely automated by [98Lite] which, despite the site name, actually has utilities that will remove MSIE from Win95, Win98, WIN98SE, and WinME. It'll nuke MSIEv3 through v5.x, and it does it safely.

Worth a shot, at any rate!


--

Cheers

These folks would like to disagree with you for Windows 98.

--

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the DLLs comprise most of IE? Certainly the HTML renderer, and iexplore.exe is merely the front end. Most of the DLL usage isn't listed with that.

To prove my point, try 98lite and check the default system free memory afterwards. The last Win98 machine I tried ended up with 10 more Mb free RAM after startup with IE 4 removed.

Online Services? You don't need to worry about that if you had 98lite

98lite

Microsoft insists that Web integration is so tightly integrated into Windows 98 that there is no way to remove it. Well, look what I found: 98 Lite is a setup utility that helps you strip out all the garbage (like web integration) from Win98. So much for "tightly integrated".

Here is the Opt Out Link fixed: Opt Out!

Off-topic, but good stuff. Get 98lite here and configure your Win98 the way you want! 98lite Worth Checking Out!!

But you can easily remove this kernel option - or almost any other option.

To remove IE, you need to brute-force it with a program like 98lite or Revenge of Mozilla.

Interesting how MS advocates always emphasize that having a monopoly is not against the law. Never mind that it was their abuse of monopoly power that got them in trouble? If there's a reasonable way to take away their monopoly, so they'd have to compete on their products' merit, that would be highly appropriate!

As for MS claims that breaking up the company would ruin them: How credible is that?! It looks like they're taking the most obvious remedy and claiming that it's extreme just to gain sympathy when it's exactly what happens. Never mind that they already seem to be reorganizing along the divisions that would leave them most profitable?

It's obvious why the DOJ would like a settlement: The remedies would go into effect right away. I'd much prefer to see a ruling for the same reason MS would not: There would be an unambiguous statement of exactly how they've broken the law.

It's not integrated at all. Go to 98lite.net and see for yourself.

Wrong about Netscape on Linux. Wrong. Wrong. NS is more unstable on Win32, especially if you haven't removed Internet Exploder.
Yes, NS has been incredibly unstable on Redhat and other distros in the past. This could be traced to some dependencies being mishandled by RH's supplied packages (75dpi fonts). Followup on your installs and you'll see that those packages have been updated--for just this reason--for a while now. I use NS 4.7 and it can run all day long on Linux without crashing. And my fonts aren't ugly at all. In fact, Netscape using XFS +truetype fonts (some of which are freely downloadable from Microsoft) has unquestionably better looking fonts that Netscape + TrueType fonts on Macintosh OS-8.x.(Don't know about OS-9's trutype performance) Mozilla isn't going change squat about plug-in support on Linux--only the spread of the Linux platform and knocking a few heads can fix that. Mozilla may help in that regard by being componetized, something the Netscape management refused to provide before, and being componetized, will be used in other people's products.
As for financial apps, well if Moneydance doesn't cut it, you could go online like businesses do. Free online, very comprehensive, personal finance management for your Mom is available from FNCentral If she can handle Quicken she can handle this.

I have to tell you that your remarks about Netscape and Linux just don't reflect very well on your skills and diligence. I have Netscape4.7 sessions that go for days without crashing on Linux. (rh6.1 ns 4.7 (irix session management.)) Also Netscape 4.61 packaged for Debian. There are issues with libc5 versions of Netscape run on libc6 distros. There are advisories about distributions with improperly packaged 75dpi fonts (rh6.0), causing Java to set fire to your swap file. There are notes for setting your MOZILLA_HOME variable in ~/.bashrc in case your netscape packages are installed outside your $PATH. In short there are specific, known issues -AND- there are things you can do about them, if you have trouble and aren't afraid to read a bit. What's more there are fixed versions in updates directories for some distros. No effort required, or next to none. I've had the troubles you've had, Spudnic, but it's been months since I fixed them, with help from Redhat's package maintainers and Netscape coders, also I assume. That's on the Linux side.

At present the only help for Netscape on Win-NeinX seems to be to deinstall Internet Destroyer with the aid of 98lite or ieRemove, which is advisable for security and performance issues anyway. Then things improve markedly for netscape. Don't ask me why that's so -- go ask Bill Gates & Steve Ballmer, or rather their lawyers since they seem to be the only MS employees qualified to speak on such matters lately. Is Netscape4.x exemplary programming? I expect it's far from that. But the oooh it just doesn't work whine is crap, OK?, and as time goes by gets on my nerves more and more. Says a lot more about the complainer than the product IMO.
Proudly posted with Mozilla M13 (which didn't crash once during the composition of this harangue).

For a while, it looked like the DOJ was paying attention to some of the better potential remedies they elecited. It's disappointing to see them go with the old, obvious, easy-to-implement plan.

Not to nitpick, but 98lite.com points to some cheapo internet access provider. I'm guessing it's 98lite.net that you want.

98lite basically just replaces elements of the Windows 98 installation (mainly the shell) with those from Windows 95. I guess you get to keep the kernel, but lose the Internet Explorer based shell.

Not to nitpick, but 98lite.com points to some cheapo internet access provider. I'm guessing it's 98lite.net that you want.

98lite basically just replaces elements of the Windows 98 installation (mainly the shell) with those from Windows 95. I guess you get to keep the kernel, but lose the Internet Explorer based shell.

I feel the same way, which is why I use Opera as a matter of course, as well as preference, when I'm forced to work under win*. MSIE and I just don't get along. Netscape for windows isn't much better.

and while I have used win98, it was truly a horror to get into until I unharfed it by removing a browser I don't even use from it.

I need something I can work with.

Perhaps MSIE works fine for you in win*... not a big deal. For Linux, you'll prolly be better off waiting for Opera.

(Until then, I'd personally use lynx if netscape gets edgy, which isn't often these days. This, even if there was a MSIE for Linux. It's all about perception, and MS has permanently earned my disdain on this one. I've given them many chances, even when I should've told them to piss off ages ago.)

--

Where does M$'s other OS fit? (NT)

Here's my 2 cents,

Yes MS is a Monopoly, So what are you going to do about it?
Nothing. What can you do, close them down, sure, they move all of their 30,000 employees to Canada(not likely, but think about what you would do to save your company if you are the richest person on the planet. Make your own country). Oh, boy what will the US gov do then.

Also, nearly every government for nearly every country is dependant on Microsoft, and Microsoft related products. Are you going to tell them that no one can fix their software related problems? No more hot fixes.

Closing them is not a solution, it only creates more problems.

Here's a couple more questions I've been pondering.
Why does a word processor cost more than an operating system?
When does the NT shell get ported to Linux?

Thanks
Chris Gray

If you want to install 98 w/o IE
I shouldn't have to tell you to click.

Perhaps, but they are very integral. Type in C:\ in an Internet Explorer window. Familiar looking, isn't it? Type a URL in the Explorer window. Behold, it loads. That is Microsoft's defense of having IE built into the OS, that it is part of the shell and everything else. If you have heard of 98lite, which removes IE from Windows 98, its features lists having to use the Windows 95 Explorer due to the Windows 98 Explorer requiring IE.

Perhaps, but they are very integral. Type in C:\ in an Internet Explorer window. Familiar looking, isn't it? Type a URL in the Explorer window. Behold, it loads. That is Microsoft's defense of having IE built into the OS, that it is part of the shell and everything else. If you have heard of 98lite, which removes IE from Windows 98, its features lists having to use the Windows 95 Explorer due to the Windows 98 Explorer requiring IE.

...you would know that it's impossible.

Bzzzt. Wrong.

98lite.net

I know, eh? Optiplex's are sweet. Man, if I could get an Optiplex w/ Linux at work, you can bet your ass it would take me half a second to expense it :-) (our company has a contract or something with Dell so that all our new workstations are Dells - the Optiplex pIII/450's are nice, but Win98 is *such* a pig on it. I gotta get permission to wipe and reinstall with 98lite)