Slashdot Mirror


Can Linux Pick Up Users Abandoning Win98?

Mark writes, "When Microsoft announced the end of support for Windows 98 and Millennium Edition on June 30th, there was a lot of talk of these users migrating over to Linux desktops. In the weeks since this announcement, there is a very noticeable increase of activity on community boards and blogs from newbies asking questions about switching over to Linux, and how would they support their new systems." According to OneStat.com, Windows 98 and Windows ME account for about 4% of the total PCs in the world.

17 of 491 comments (clear)

  1. nah. by sporkme · · Score: 4, Insightful

    http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/11/ 0218250 quasi-dupe. I hope so, but I doubt it. I have always believed that the most likely inroads for for Linux is through people that have never owned a Windows box, or have never learned to use a computer. I expect that almost all Win98 users will go/have gone to buy a new computer with XP or Vista preloaded. Most linux converts are already geeks.

    1. Re:nah. by CaymanIslandCarpedie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agreed. For the most part the OS is and should be a non-issue. To paraphrase what my long post could be, the answer is "Its the apps stupid!". And before I get a ton of replies about there are apps that can do much of what they need for Linux. The issue is most people don't care. They know an app, they are comfortable with it, and it doesn't matter what other apps can do. Until THAT app is available, Linux is a non-issue.

      --
      "reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
    2. Re:nah. by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I don't think most people even know what apps are on their PC.

      As someone who fixes computers for a (partial) living, I have to disagree on that. That was true until about three years ago, I'd say. Now most people running 98 have been running it long enough to know what they're doing. The vast majority don't upgrade simply because they don't need to. Since it still works fine for them, I can see their point. When I get hold of a Win98 box, it's usually because of one piece of hardware going bad. Contrast that with all of the spyware-filled, virused XP boxes I get on a weekly basis.

      I think this article is mostly so much wishful thinking, though. What good can Linux do for people running Win98 on older hardware? Unless they're going to be switching to Damn Small Linux, I'd say not much. Tons of hardware support was dropped from the 2.6 kernel, not all of it legacy hardware by any means. I still have a computer with a Via 10/100 ethernet card that worked perfectly with the 2.4 kernel and still works fine with DSL, but no distro with a 2.6 kernel can configure it. That ethernet card is hardly legacy hardware since it came out about the same time as Windows XP. How could you possibly recommend Linux to someone running hardware even older than that?

      Now don't get me wrong, I'm a happy Debian-user, but I think the days when Linux was good for older hardware are gone, and the majority of Linux supporters don't seem to have realized this. I'd recommend DesltopBSD over Linux to someone running older hardware, since I don't think DSL is really a newbie-friendly distro.

      As to the number being 4% I think that's off as well. I'd say it's much higher than that. I know lots of people still running 98. And as long as their hardware works fine, I'm not going to tell them that they need to upgrade. Non-geeks have other things to spend their money on, like their kids. That's something that geeks seem to have trouble understanding, that not everyone wants to spend a ton of money on the latest and greatest hardware. But most people are like that, and if they bring you a computer wanting a memory upgrade and you try to get them to upgrade the whole system, you're going to lose a customer.

      --
      I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
  2. Upgrading boxes by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You probably cannot run Vista on a box that currently happily runs 98, so anyone moving to Vista will likely have a spare PC. That's likely to free up a few healthy machines that people might redeploy as Linux PCs..... or there might just be a whole lot of PCs going to the landfill.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Upgrading boxes by cloricus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I was about to say this...Windows 98 users have very little trouble switching to Linux. Back when XP came out it was a sidegrade to Linux which a huge group took advantage of and now it is an upgrade which being free should really be pushed hard. Linux with the help of wine practically runs every 3.1/9x program in existence and supports every chunk of hardware sitting out there on boxes that old. It should be a case of dropping in a Ubuntu install cd and everything works...Or even better a wizard based low requirements distro that grabs all of their data from win9x and dumps it on an iPod or similar and then installs Linux with all of their documents moved across. Really the Linux community should pull together and push this chance for what it's worth.

      --
      I ate your fish.
    2. Re:Upgrading boxes by AJWM · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What has Citrix solved that X Windows and VNC haven't solved decades earlier?

      How to market to PHBs.

      --
      -- Alastair
  3. support by cool_arrow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps I don't understand the support issue, but I doubt someone currently using windows 98 is all that concerned about support for the product.

    1. Re:support by A+Numinous+Cohort · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Someone on Win98 doesn't *need* that much support --someone switching to Linux *does*. I'm not exactly new to Linux but when I got dial-up at home and needed to set up a softmodem, I had to compile a kernel module to do it--not something a newbie should be called upon to do. The (Smartlink) modem works perfectly well in Win98.

  4. Funniest thing I ever heard by topham · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You expect someone who ran Windows98 until recently to switch to Linux?

    They wouldn't know how to download it.

    1. Re:Funniest thing I ever heard by ozmanjusri · · Score: 5, Insightful
      They wouldn't know how to download it.

      They don't. The way this normally happens is that they call their local geek friend when their Win98 install is too hosed to be usable. The geek thinks about how much time they've wasted keeping the system clean of malware and the general designed in bit-rot that seems to slow down Win 9x systems, weighs it up against the occasional free meal and displays of affection, then makes a decision.

      I know that lately, a lot of friends and family with still-functional P3 class machines have been getting the gift of Linux from me. Most seem to cope well.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  5. In a word... by Billosaur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No.

    Why? Because most of the people who have the misfortune of still running Windows 98 do so because they are comfortable with it and have no intention of changing until their hard drive melts. They got their computer eons ago, it does everything they want it to do, they don't need to play World of Warcraft or run complicated programs, and the thought of upgrading to even Windows 2000 makes them break out in cold sweats. Up until 6 months ago, my stepmother was still running her Win98 machine, until it got so undeniably slow that she was forced by necessity to upgrade to WinXP.

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  6. Red Herring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People aren't going to swtich to Linux from Win98/ME just because Microsoft decides to cut off support. It's complete nonsense. What percentage of Win98/ME users actually needed support and/or actively used it? The whole idea that Win98/ME users are going to flock over to Linux on the sole basis that support had ended is a red herring.

  7. It might not even run by ClosedSource · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Although I'm sure one could build a version of Linux that can run on a typical Win98 PC configuration, I doubt that contemporary mainstream distros would run very well on it (if it all).

    Anyone who is still using Win98 isn't particularly concerned with system stability and probably wants compatiblity with their old applications: Linux doesn't sound like a good fit.

  8. I sure hope not. by jakoz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'll tell you who's using the majority of the Win98 boxes: the parents and grandparents of the world. They use it now and then, flick it on when they need it, send an email or two and shut the thing down. They probably don't notice much slowdown or stability problems, since they probably don't have it on long enough. In short: it does what they need.

    So why should they use Linux? Why should we even give a shit if they do?

    What they need is a simple OS. They need a web browser. They need a couple of Office-like applications. They don't want a lot of problems. Why would Linux be the best solution? For them it is more trouble to set up than just buying a new box (despite what people on here might say, IMHO Linux is not easier to set up for a n00b). They need something like a Mac, which will do what they need for the forseeable future.

    Alternatively, they should just stick with Win98. All jokes aside, their boxes are probably so full of spyware and shit after up to 8 YEARS of operation, that if they can go this far, they can probabably go a little further.

    Look. I love Linux. I've used it as my primary OS for years, and used it during that time as a server admin too, but I just don't understand this "more users at any cost" approach. What is the good of getting these users? What will it achieve? At the least, you'll potentially end up with a hell of a lot of pissed off (and minimally equipped for repairs) users with broken computers badmouthing the operating system to anyone who will listen.

  9. It really amazes me... by JKConsult · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That there is such a level of vitriol against people who still run Win98. I run it on my home PC. When I'm at home, this is the one I use (my notebook runs XP.) From a crowd that continually decries the need to upgrade to the newest version of Office, I simply don't see why so many find it worthy of mockery that someone would still be running 98. I don't play games, except Age of Empires II, on occasion. Office 2000 has every feature I need. I run the latest versions of Firefox and OO.

    Explain to me why I should have felt the remotest need to upgrade to 2k, ME, or XP? This machine does exactly what I need it to do: surf the web, run Dreamweaver 4 for some light HTML editing, run Photoshop 6 for some light image editing, and play on Poker Stars. I'm not a clueless idiot, nor are many of the people who are still running 98. Many of you cry out "Why upgrade?" and then do it, anyway. We put our money where our mouth is.

  10. would win98 users notice if the support stopped? by jaronc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My feeling is probably not.

    I'm guessing there would be a number of people on 98 that wouldn't know an update if it bit them. These people probably don't even know Microsoft supports them now.

    I looked at a friends xp laptop yesterday. It was running SP1, which it came with, and they had never willingly installed an update on it. Despite a popup at the bottom of the screen warning support for SP1 was ending soon.

    My friend didn't care, he just ignored the warnings and kept doing his work. I ran some checks and could find no evidence of spyware or viruses.

    Of course I am just speaking on feelings here. No evidence, and I don't even know anyone who uses win98, or linux for that matter.

  11. Re:Yes but why would you want that kind of user? by bladesjester · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some people use older hardware because they don't really have much choice. I hate to break it to you, but not everyone can afford the luxury of a new computer and some others can't justify the expense (and for some people a few hundred dollars is a large expense) to replace something that still works for them.

    Let's face it, apart from playing games, most people use computers at home for looking at things online, writing email, and maybe doing some basic word processing or other similar things.

    Most of the people who browse slashdot are pretty well off in the scheme of things. Appreciate that, because not everyone is so lucky.

    --
    Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.