Slashdot Mirror
Creaky Operating Systems Form IT Foundations
maotx writes "The Washington Post has an article on how aging operating systems are still widely used. The article states that "The research firm IDC estimates that of the roughly 514 million paid-for copies of Windows on desktops and laptops worldwide at the end of 2004, almost 21 percent were the aging Win 95, 98 and Millennium Edition releases." That equates to around 108 million copies being used."
A bank I did work at recently still ran Win95a
This sounds like a message for the users, but maybe it is a wakeup for the OS makers. If that many people still see their OS as viable and are willing to use it... then should the OS companies really be holding a gun to their head in what can only be an attempt to wring more money from them?
It's like the toaster to them. Who buys a new toaster or blender until the old one breaks? Same with computers for a surprising number of people. I've seen it with my relatives, I've seen it with friends. I've been appalled by what some of them use, but talk to them about upgrading and it's "No thanks, it works just fine."
I used NT 4.0 forever because it just had such a workmanlike user interface.
Actually, ObOnTopic, the most interesting thing to me about this topic is how easily Microsoft killed NT 4.0 by simply witholding support for USB. NT4 actually was, ah, very workable, if not workmanlike, except for that crucial missing USB connectivity in the later years.
I still use Wndows 98 because I don't want to pay for an OS I won't use for more then a few months. I'm switching to Ubuntu Linux soon and if my modem wasn't a winmodem I'd already be using it.
I like muppets.
are using.
I used to work for the company that wrote a software for IBM mainframes. We had to deal with the different agencies. each used something REALLY old, I had to maintain virtual machine environment, so we can bring up some of those older OS versions if necessary for debugging. I remember one funny case when someone called from the agency I won't give a name (but you can figure it out), the guy said he had the software crashed, but he DID NOT WANT to give any details of what was wrong, neither to tell which operating system he was using. We had to deal with his boss and his boss' boss to get the information we needed to debug the problem.
Well, there were two reasons why they've used OS'es that old. First, if it works, don't upgrade it. It ain't broken so don't fix it. Second, upgrade may require bigger hardware, and you have to justify the cost of upgrade, so why bother?
For those familiar with the history of IBM mainframe-based OS'es, we had to maintain OS/VS1 (or something like that). blah.
1) 98se, especially with 98lite installed and IE removed, *smokes* any other MS-windows based OS I've ever seen (and I've seen 'em all) in terms of performance. My machine crawls when I boot to the 2000 side, the 98 side is like *butter*, and I hardly ever have to reboot. Sure, the buttons aren't all round and bubbly, and there's no transparency support, but I have yet to find a single thing that I want to do that 98 won't support.
2) DOS-based (which is to say, 95, 98 and ME) OS's are not nearly as widely targeted by virus writers. The vast majority of new viruses target the 2k/XP/2k3 systems, for the simple reason that they're SOOOOO full of holes.
3) 95 and 98 (ME, eh, not so much) have been out long enough that 99% of the problems with them have been fixed. Of course, I wouldn't go to 98 until ME came out. My rule of thumb is go with whichever MS OS is the second most current one. That said, I still don't feel the burning need to upgrade to XP, and I doubt I ever will.
4) Like somebody already said, if it's not broke, and it's paid for, why change? Why waste money on the new version and then waste more money on the man-hours for MicroServices to install it, migrate everything, deal with all the users whining about where all their desktop wallpaper went, etc... just to wind up with a system that's ultimately slower and more vulnerable to attack?
They will never stop until somebody makes the
Look at that - a hundred million+ machines running Win9x. This should be exactly where Linux shines, revamping old machines with new desktop life. Except, of course, that combos of KDE/GNOME + OpenOffice.org + Mozilla are even weightier than their Windows equivalents, thus destroying an upgrade path.
It's very frustrating. Yeah, you can use Fluxbox and Dillo and stuff like that, but it's hardly an enterprise desktop, is it?
Much as I love Linux, it's painful to see massive Microsoftian bloat in the major desktops and apps, all the time removing an incentive to upgrade. Or, in cases like this, eliminating an upgrade path altogether!
If Linux was slim, fast and snappy, it'd be an absolutely perfect solution. But while it offers barely any perfomance advantages over XP/MSO, it's not so attractive.
These 100 million machines could and should be running Linux, if we'd paid attention to elegant code and performance. But instead we're seeing ever more newcomers turned off by the weight and sluggish performance. It's distressing.
About six months ago I had to access some information on an aging (as in 13 year old) PICK server. The multiport board was fried years ago and I couldn't raise a terminal on the serial port. After a few hours of trying to capture the data I had the person who needed access to it copy it to a pad of paper from the screen.
Not good, to say the least, but the server in question hadn't been fired up in years.
Since then I've been putting disk images of our currently running database software on a Qemu image along with a copy of the qemu source and binaries on a DVD (and in the future the media might change, but you get the idea).
For emergency situations I can put a dvd into any available machine and have a "live" version of our DB running in minutes. I'd have loved it if I could've booted that PICK server in an emulator.
-dameron
A copy of a 10-year-old OS does everything it did when it was first compiled and installed (and maybe a bit more with the right add-ons). It is the software-industry (and virus writers) that reset peoples expectations and make the old OS seem decrepit.
Sometimes maintaining an old OS for an old system can be the best use of time and money. I have a 10-year-old machine that does a great job scanning old slides, negatives, and photos. And another 10-year-old laptop ($20 for the laptop, $2 for a WiFi card for it) that is perfect for light editing jobs and running a much-loved application that is no longer supported on newer machines (and that has no modern counterpart). So many common computing tasks don't need GHz speed or the latest OS.
Sometimes the best tool for the job is an old tool because old software never wears out (and old hardware is so delightfully cheap).
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
One of the less obvious advantages of not using either Win2k or XP is that many of the more recent worms are designed specifically with them in mind. Even if one enters your system, it probably can't run, and the vulnerabilities it's looking for aren't there. Win98 is more mature than either, and has less openings remaining to exploit.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Same here - WFWG 3.11, Opera 3.62, Netscape 2.02 & 3.04, MSIE 5.02, DOS 5.01, SPRINT.
No worries about viruses, trojans, popups, pupunders, spyware, flash animations, redirects, and so on.
No worries about upgrading. If a site doesn't work with these clients, generally there is nothing there I want anyway. The only problem is some pdf files won't work in Acrobat 3. Then I use Linux with Suse. YMMV.
All the best,
Mike Monett
OS/2 2.1.1 at the Quantas VIP Lounge in LAX and maybe other places.
Simplicity if the hallmark of truth.
Upgrading the jag machines won't slow them down-- Panther will actually dramtically speed them up. I did similiar upgrades in an education setting and the difference was quite palpable. Apple releases (for the most part) only speed up (esp. since X was first announced). As far as the ancient macs, let 'em be. You're right in that case if it's broke don't fix it, but if you're looking to upgrade functionality while mantianing speed-- Linux may be an option.
transmission_err
When I got out of the military in 1998 I bought my Mom a replacement computer for her 286.
I booted it up to get the files off of it, and was very surprised at how reponsive it was. 16 Mhz and I was flying though menus, and bringing up Wordperfect in seconds.
Now it's the same thing. She's still using the same computer from 1998, and I figure it's time for a replacement. I decided against it when I went home for Christmas and cleaned it out and patched it up. Windows 98 was flying. The thing could use some more memory, but other than that it worked great.
So I set up a script to backup all her files to a zip disk and told her to call me when the PC dies.
Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
In other news, 50% of all cars on the road are 8 years old or older.
This may seem amazing to some slashpeople, but not everyone can afford a computer upgrade and a new OS every couple of years.
If what they have works, why bother spending the money? After all, there are other useful endeavors the money can be spent on.
Like beer.
~X~
~X~
UNOFFICIAL Windows98 SE SP1 1.6.2
http://www.majorgeeks.com/download4131.html
Rhapsody
(work in progress)
http://www.openstep.se/
~hylas
The system uses an ISA hardware encryption board and runs on DOS.
In the late 90's, the Fed was working on developing a Fedline system for Windows (NT at the time), but was unable to deliver it.
They are now working on a web based solution (not sure about how much more secure that will be than an NT based solution...) which, if adequately secure, will be much nicer to work with than the old Fedline solution.
The one nice thing about Fedline is that it gives you a place to put old, out of service machines. My most current Fedline machine is a Pentium-90 with a bunch of RAM - horribly over performing for the task, but it met the specs required to run Fedline (ISA slot, DOS compatible) when the last one died.
A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
My old high-school still runs most of it's student-oriented desktops on either Win 3.11 or Win95. The "newer" Pentium 90's run '95, the old 486's run 3.11 on top of Dos 6.22.
This equipment does the job, but it ain't exactly Hot Shit anymore. Personally I think it says alot about how schools here in Sweden are low priority. Much more important to let the politicians buy luxury apartments.
(alas, they do have two high-powered Pentium2-400's with a whopping 128 meg RAM that they use for the kids who want to do video-editing. Also some Pentium-133 class machines in the teachers lounge. These run 98 First Edition.)
I enjoy large posteriors and I cannot prevaricate.
The problem with using legacy systems like that, is what happens when they need to be updated? Or the hardware fails? It's possible the software will no longer run on modern systems..
Even working hardware should be refreshed every few years just to keep up with the times and decrease the possibility of losing the whole operation because of outdated hardware and software. Sure it's not as cheap as keeping the old junk, but I think ultimately it's a better practice.
You can then donate the old hardware and write it off for tax purposes... not bad at all...
Uh.
;) - so what's left are the "golden oldies".
Once the standard hardware stops support their DOS stuff they can get/buy the cheapest hardware, and run their app using emulation/virtualization. VMware or something similar - see MAME32 for evidence of old hardware being emulated.
Could even be better = snapshots etc.
AFAIK you can also run many DOS apps on one of those DOS emulators on Linux. Not games. But I'm sure most business apps are OK.
I dare say many plain data entry stuff is fine with DOS.
"Refreshed to keep with the times".
LOL. This IT. Not the fashion industry. As long has they have backups and don't do crazy stuff - like improper power and cooling, they'll be fine.
Old hardware isn't a problem in itself. Crappy faulty hardware is. Whilst some old stuff is crap, lots of new stuff is crap too. In fact, if you have 4 year old hardware that still works within specs, it's likely to work for as long as brand new hardware. Most new stuff fails soon after the warranty
Right, I run tech support for (currently) six suburban schools in my area, being the sole person responsible for upgrading, maintaining etc. I am in high demand.
Yes, we have just got one school left which is running 98 in any significant amount. For large installations and computers which "need" to be up 24/7, you do need a nice shiny new OS. Most of the schools have a mixture of XP and 98, one has 95/98, one has 2000 throughout.
I can see the argument for those having to be upgraded, but there is a significant cost involved in doing so that means a complete upheaval of the entire computer base.
However, at home my most powerful machines run 98SE. It's cheap, easily available, VERY easily repairable. If maintained properly, there are no security problems, you just have to not rely on the OS seperating out user privileges like in XP.
I've actually seen people deliberately run commands (e.g. testing their unverified downloads out) on their computer just because they believe the OS will seperate the danger out enough because it's under a non-privileged user.
Most home users don't want the hassle and thus most home machines are probably running under a single, full-access account anyway. Also, an experienced user, with some simple freeware and an adequate firewall, is just as well protected as a modern OS user.
The older OS are not as stable, no, unless they are well-maintained (not installing crap just to see what it looks like). If the older OS's do go belly-up, though, they are VERY easy to recover (even down to the filesystem level, FAT is much simpler to recover from than NTFS).
I bought this machine 2-3 years ago, installed 98SE that I had bought an auction and it replaced my 6 year old machine that has been running 98 all that time.
Point 1) I've never had to reformat. This "do it every six months" is NOT a solution, not practical, nonsensical, inconvenient and totally unnecessary. I've worked on home machines that have been collecting spyware, viruses etc. for years and brought them back from the dead without having to reformat.
Point 2) My computer HAS NOT slowed down just because it's had more software installed. I carefully control exactly what software I use and how it's set up. On machines that have been allowed to do that, I've seen ten-fold increases in speed just by running AdAware, Spybot and getting rid of 90% of the crap using Startup Control Panel.
OS's do not get slower the more you install, they get slower the LESS you manage WHAT you install. They can ALWAYS be brought back to speed.
Point 3) Stability is not that great a problem compared to modern OS's. Yes, XP is less likely to crash Word on me and need a reboot but similarly if 98 goes COMPLETELY belly up, I can bring it back by copying an day-old registry file over the current ones.
I don't get stuck in constant blue-screen reboot loops (seen at least 6 of these in schools recently that, because the computers can be booted over the network and restore to their original configuration, I end up just reinstalling). If 98 ever did do that to me, it's much easier to fix. Additionally, 98's are used as home machines where 24/7 stability is not essential and most people use them for an hour or so at a time.
Point 4) I refuse to fund an organisation that is demanding money from me if I wish to upgrade to a "stable" system. Stability problems didn't suddenly get discovered in the year 2000, they were ALWAYS in there. The fact that every few years MS redesigns it's systems, charges EXTORTIONATE amounts for the next version, drops support for older versions and then discovers that they are just as buggy as the older versions makes my blood boil.
In my early years, Microsoft made more than enough money from myself. DOS was worth it. Windows 3.0/3.1 were worth it. Office up to and including 2000 was ALMOST worth it. After that, it just got silly. Now I buy my OS and Office packages from eBay. Money is VERY important to home use
From memory from the training book we used....
... at the time even the trainer was born after Kennedy was President. Most of the effort from that course was unlearning the junk taught and relearning how you were suppose to do it now.
"IBM Job Control Language was written when Kennedy was President, and before some of you were born, concepts in computing have changed somewhat since then".
Unix is a newbie in the software survival stakes, when you've maintained Fortran code obviously written for a pre-Fortran 66 compiler the 1970's begins to feel quite sophisticated.
But the thing that is most impressive about the Unix API is how well it still works. The old IBM mainframe stuff was full of stupid limits, but part of the philosophy that grew at that time was not to have these arbitary limits. But IBM was obsessed with backward compatibility, so many of them still applied last time I touched a mainframe.
No one mention time as a signed 32 bit integer, or 15 character filenames.