Post by thread:[OT] Windows Xp on W98 SE

Hi folks. I am going to buy a copy of Windows Xp, don´t know yet if Home or Pro. I currently run W98 SE in my box and I was wondering, what would you recommend: should I install XP over the W98 (like an upgrade) or I should make just a clean install, ie format the drive and fresh install XP? I have even read that I should format the drive, install W98 SE and then upgrade it to XP... This doesn´t sound logical to me but I am not an OS guru, so I though I should ask you guys first... Any thoughts? Regards, *Carlos Marcano* -Guri, Venezuela- -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.0.0 - Release Date: 08/11/04 ___________________________________________

On Friday 10 December 2004 05:24 pm, Carlos Marcano wrote: > Hi folks. > > I am going to buy a copy of Windows Xp, don´t know yet if Home or Pro. I > currently run W98 SE in my box and I was wondering, what would you > recommend: I'd recommend linux mandrake 10.1, but appears you're set on XP anyways. > should I install XP over the W98 (like an upgrade) or I should > make just a clean install, ie format the drive and fresh install XP? I > have even read that I should format the drive, install W98 SE and then > upgrade it to XP... This doesn´t sound logical to me but I am not an OS > guru, so I though I should ask you guys first... Any thoughts? Fresh install is the least maintenance since you no longer maintain the Win98. All the other suggestions is extra work which you will be repeating everytime you have to reinstall it again which will happen judging by the virus activity, adware, spyware all directed at windows machines. Don't expect everything you had running on Win98 to work on XP, therefore expect to toss-out some programs, and/or even some hardware. If you're willing to partition the drive as Win98 and XP, you may have a chance of keeping the programs or hardware you may have had to toss-out if you were running an XP only machine by running those problem programs in Win98 mode. ___________________________________________

Whenever possible, if I have to install an OS, like when I moved from 98SE to XP Pro (or even re-installing the existing OS) I do it with a clean drive. 98SE had been on there for some time and looked like taking forever to defrag - it was quicker to back up files to CD and re-format the drive. I also found that newer h/w was not not always supported by 9x and probably the previous drivers and so on were taking up space (admittedly maybe not much) I keep a small 98SE drive on another machine with drivers for older equipment (scanner, some cards etc) which I can't get XP drivers for It's said that 9x slowly deteriorates which, if true, is another reason to start afresh periodically. I don't know if that's true for XP ____________________________________________

> It's said that 9x slowly deteriorates which, if true, is > another reason to start afresh periodically. I don't know if > that's true for XP This is true. I hated 98 for the crashes and the fact that the more I used the machine the slower it got. The more I put on it the slower it got. XP fix both those problems. For current install is 2 years old and I've had no problem. I agree though some programs will not work. For instance, none ( a dozen or so) of my kids educational games worked worth a darn and most didn't work at all. Everything else though worked fine (except my handy-dandy radioshack probescope, which was for win 3.1). All my hardware worked fine after updated drivers which Win XP took care of. Unless you've got a multi thousand dollar DOS program, don't hesitate to make the switch. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.806 / Virus Database: 548 - Release Date: 12/5/2004 ____________________________________________

> Fresh install is the least maintenance agree. BUT make sure you have or can acquire drivers for everything you love utterly and must haveworking. If you upgrade to XP then it will/may pick up existing drivers. They may not work with XP but this is you best shot if you don't have access to the drivers. I tried a utility that was meant to create drivers from already installed drivers on a system and it crashed the system worst than most crashes I've seen. YMMV. If you install XP clean you will stop the garbage legacy of extending an existing system but everything must be installed again from scratch. I have a motherboard with onboard sound on a dual boot 98SE/XP machines. It runs fine under 98SE but refuses to autodetect sound under XP. I haven't been able to find drivers which will make XP recognise it. RM ____________________________________________

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jose Da Silva" <spam_OUTDigitalTakeThisOuTJoesCat.com> Subject: Re: [OT] Windows Xp on W98 SE > virus activity, adware, spyware all directed at windows machines. The numbers don't bear that out, and this past week has been an especially nasty one for non-M$ platforms. The only real difference seems to be that windoze gets all the press. Well, that and there are an awful lot of clueless people using Internet Exploder. > Don't expect everything you had running on Win98 to work on XP, therefore > expect to toss-out some programs, and/or even some hardware. On the one hand, this is generally good advice. Whenever you change operating systems, expect some challenges. On the other hand, XP is awfully good about compatibility with old stuff. Sometimes there are a lot of arcane settings you need to find, but in general, you can make the old stuff run on XP. Now, XP SP2 is another ball game, but it's main problems seem to be with software written for NT/W2K/XPSP1 rather than the 16 bit stuff, and even then, it is generally big enterprise applications that seem to have the problems. I can't think of a single DOS/Win3.1/Win95 thing I haven't been able to run on XP. Some things are ugly -- for example you need to log on as an administrator to run WinPic, but it runs. Now, there were a bunch of things I had to give up going to Win 95, and even more going to Win 98. Probably most of those I haven't tried on XP, but I have dragged a few out of the archives and have generally been able to make them work. M$ has quite a bit of stuff on their website for making old apps run. If I recall, it isn't the easiest stuff to find your way through, but sometimes you can find enough to give you the needed clues. Probably the biggest compatibility issue is that XP is too big to run effectively on a FAT-16 partition, so anything that does low level access to the disk will probably choke. You absolutely cannot live without something like Norton Ghost, unless you really enjoy re-installing all your apps. There just doesn't seem to be any other way to make a reasonable backup in finite time. Fortunately, DVD writers are cheap these days. --McD ____________________________________________

On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 09:24:17PM -0400, Carlos Marcano wrote: > Hi folks. > > I am going to buy a copy of Windows Xp, don?t know yet if Home or Pro. I > currently run W98 SE in my box and I was wondering, what would you > recommend: should I install XP over the W98 (like an upgrade) or I should > make just a clean install, ie format the drive and fresh install XP? I have > even read that I should format the drive, install W98 SE and then upgrade it > to XP... This doesn?t sound logical to me but I am not an OS guru, so I > though I should ask you guys first... Any thoughts? Truth in advertising: I'm a Linux guy. But given the circumstances: 1) Back up your W98 system. 2) Get XP Pro. Do not use Home. 3) Do a fresh install. You need NTFS underneath XP Pro. 4) Be sure to do all critical security updates before putting the system on the Internet. Ideally you want to connect it behind a firewall. 5) Restore any critical data files/applications from your W98. BAJ ____________________________________________

----- Original Message ----- From: "Stef Mientki" <.....s.mientkiKILLspam@spam@mailbox.kun.nl> Subject: Re: [OT] Windows Xp on W98 SE > >problem. I agree though some programs will not work. For instance, none ( a > >dozen or so) of my kids educational games worked worth a darn and most > >didn't work at all. > > > For all shortcuts, you can set the compatibility (make a shortcut, click > right on it) > This can solve the problem for almost all old programs. Microsloth has a "compatibility kit" that can solve the problems for many of those programs where this doesn't work. Sometimes the fixes are pretty non-obvious, though, and you better know Windows pretty well. Sometimes you need to move components of the programs to specific directories, sometimes make adjustments to the registry. The compatibility kit is really intended for corporate types, so if your knowledge of Windows is limited, it may do more harm than good. --McD ____________________________________________

----- Original Message ----- From: "Byron A Jeff" <byronKILLspamcc.gatech.edu> Subject: Re: [OT] Windows Xp on W98 SE > Truth in advertising: I'm a Linux guy. > 2) Get XP Pro. Do not use Home. I'm not so sure there really is a huge win to Pro, but for a "normal" person, I think I would go with Pro. There are some advantages to Pro if you are living with a Samba server on your LAN, but IMO, Home is probably easier for a Linux guy to deal with than it is for a normal person. > 3) Do a fresh install. You need NTFS underneath XP Pro. I'm not so sure you *need* NTFS, but it's an awfully good idea. However, it does introduce some issues that are pretty opaque to a non-Linux guy. I would suggest, however, that the combination of NTFS, XP Home and a non-Linux guy could be VERY difficult to deal with. --McD ____________________________________________

On Saturday 11 December 2004 10:21 am, John J. McDonough wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Byron A Jeff" <.....byronKILLspam.....cc.gatech.edu> > Subject: Re: [OT] Windows Xp on W98 SE > > > 3) Do a fresh install. You need NTFS underneath XP Pro. > > I'm not so sure you *need* NTFS, but it's an awfully good idea. However, > it does introduce some issues that are pretty opaque to a non-Linux guy. If you have sp2, you need NTFS since it won't install on a fresh partition. I had to put together a machine recently, used linux to create a win32 partition, and although my preference would have been to put XP on this win32 partition (so that it could be accessed as read/write via a linux bootup), unfortunately, my choices of install for this XP sp2 was ntfs or nothing because the install refused to install on a Win32 partition. I had to make the machine as WinXP=ntfs, driveD=win32, LinuxHome=ext2, LinuxRoot=ext2, LinuxSwap=swap. > I would suggest, however, that the combination of NTFS, XP Home and a > non-Linux guy could be VERY difficult to deal with. lacking knowledge, it is a struggle and you are correct. It would be interesting to know if Carlos had heard of Conectiva (Brazil) news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3445805.stm ____________________________________________

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jose Da Silva" <EraseMEDigitalspam_OUTTakeThisOuTJoesCat.com> Subject: Re: [OT] Windows Xp on W98 SE > If you have sp2, you need NTFS since it won't install on a fresh partition. I wonder if what you are seeing there is SP2 or the drive size. I noticed that on drives larger than about 50G or so, WinXP just goes ahead and formats it to NTFS without asking. I haven't done THAT many installs, but on smaller drives, I'm pretty sure it asked. I have only one machine to go on installing SP2, but it happens to be my only machine with a FAT32 boot partition. --McD ____________________________________________

XP will not format FAT32 on partitions greater that 32GB, so you are not offered that choice. If partition is <=32GB you can choose either NTFS or FAT32. On anything over about 8GB, FAT32 is hugely inefficient because the WHOLE table gets loaded into RAM. You CAN get FAT32 up to 127.9GB (it's limit) but you need to use a 3rd party program, Partition Magic (R), or the like to format it (or win98 CD). Robert (who just went through this exercise with a 160GB external HD that I wanted as FAT32/NTFS for backups). John J. McDonough wrote: > {Original Message removed}

Jose wrote: > It would be interesting to know if Carlos had heard of Conectiva (Brazil) > news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3445805.stm > _______________________________________________ Yes, I have heard of it. I have tried Linux before, but I have to admit I didn´t put the necessary time to get used to it, so I quitted on it. Althought I don´t oppose to try it again sometime in the future. Thanks for the tip. Regards, *Carlos Marcano* -Guri, Venezuela- -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.0.0 - Release Date: 08/11/04 ___________________________________________

On Saturday 11 December 2004 12:55 pm, Carlos Marcano wrote: > Jose wrote: > > It would be interesting to know if Carlos had heard of Conectiva > > (Brazil) news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3445805.stm > > _______________________________________________ > > Yes, I have heard of it. I have tried Linux before, but I have to admit I > didn´t put the necessary time to get used to it, so I quitted on it. Understandable. I haven't tried that particular brand either since I'm fairly happy with mandrake. That's why I say mandrake! mandrake! mandrake! If you were to try linux, it is highly recommended to go with something "very" easy to install and use.... some versions are very difficult to use and could/would leave a person screaming to go back to windows ;-) > Althought I don´t oppose to try it again sometime in the future. Thanks > for the tip. cheers, thanks for the reply. ___________________________________________

On Saturday 11 December 2004 12:17 pm, Robert Rolf wrote: > XP will not format FAT32 on partitions greater that 32GB, > so you are not offered that choice. If partition is <=32GB you can > choose either NTFS or FAT32. > > On anything over about 8GB, FAT32 is hugely inefficient > because the WHOLE table gets loaded into RAM. > > You CAN get FAT32 up to 127.9GB (it's limit) but you need > to use a 3rd party program, Partition Magic (R), or the like > to format it (or win98 CD). It was a while ago but that may have been the problem. I may have created a C partition at 100G and no driveD (using mandrake to format drive C for install, probably should have used a Win98 to format it, except it was one of those SATA drives which aren't recognized by Win98 without installing drivers). This machine had no traditional IDE harddrive on it. Anyhow, I think it's probably better now. drive C could get messed up and it doesn't matter too much (if I recall correctly, DriveC~40Gntfs, DriveD=100Gwin32, drive D used as partitionMagic backup as well as swap drive between winXP and linux). Partition Magic is a good program. Highly recommended. > Robert > (who just went through this exercise with a 160GB external > HD that I wanted as FAT32/NTFS for backups). > > John J. McDonough wrote: > > {Original Message removed}

On Dec 11, 2004, at 5:26 AM, Byron A Jeff wrote: > 2) Get XP Pro. Do not use Home. Ok, why not (use home)? When I looked at this the last couple of times, i couldn't find a compelling reason to spend the extra $100 or so... You mentioned using NTFS; maintaining fat32 for backward compatibility with existing disks/etc was one of the non-reasons for Pro for me. (agruably, the file protections in NTFS are worth having. Arguably, they're not :-) Did I miss something else? > 4) Be sure to do all critical security updates before putting the > system > on the Internet. Ideally you want to connect it behind a firewall. > Very much so. Some places, you won't get through the install process without being successfully attacked and compromised... BillW ____________________________________________

If your W98SE is healthy, it will install XP and save everything you need to go back to W98SE if the need should arise. XP can upgrade the disk to ntfs without losing anything but it is a one way operation. Going back from that is like starting from scratch. There is a program from MS on their support site that will check for compatibility issues with your hardware. The XP networking is easier to deal with than W98SE, the remote console feature is worth the extra cost of XP Pro to me. XP still don't tell you when your hardware is sick, it still pukes and makes you dig around on your own to find out... Most machines that run W98SE just fine are not enough to take on XP. BTW, the same holds true with Linux, all hardware is not supported. If you go that way be certain to verify your hardware is supported... Otherwise it wastes time & money! John Ferrell http://DixieNC.US {Original Message removed}

----- Original Message ----- From: "William Chops Westfield" <westfwspam_OUTmac.com> Subject: Re: [OT] Windows Xp on W98 SE > Ok, why not (use home)? I am using Home, and it's fine .... BUT There are two differences. Home does not integrate well with networking. If you have a Linux server, for example, that you want to be a primary domain controller, Home won't play in that environment. (I presume few people considering Home would have a Windows 2003 PDC). On the other hand, if you don't mind managing passwords machine by machine, it's no big deal. Samba plays just fine with Home, just not as a PDC. Secondly, and this is kind of a biggie ... Home provides no way to control file ownership. On NTFS, files have actual owners and privileges, and they are fiercly enforced. Most of the time, it is just fine. But if you want one user on a Home system to see a file created by another user, you probably might as well email it. You really have no way (unless you install some unix workalike software) to control the file ownership and privileges. This isn't much of an issue on FAT32, where ownership means nothing. But it's a biggie on NTFS. Even a user with administrative privileges can't always see another user's files. So if you need to clean something up, you need to log on as the user of the files. --McD ____________________________________________

> On NTFS, files have actual owners and privileges, and they > are fiercly enforced. Most of the time, it is just fine. But if you want > one user on a Home system to see a file created by another user, you > probably might as well email it. You really have no way (unless you > install > some unix workalike software) to control the file ownership and > privileges. > This isn't much of an issue on FAT32, where ownership means nothing. But > it's a biggie on NTFS. Even a user with administrative privileges can't > always see another user's files. So if you need to clean something up, > you > need to log on as the user of the files. Or just boot to a CD based Linux distro and blow right through NTFS's security, ownership rights and all - or so I've been told :-) RM ____________________________________________

On Saturday 11 December 2004 09:27 pm, Russell McMahon wrote: > Or just boot to a CD based Linux distro and blow right through NTFS's > security, ownership rights and all - or so I've been told :-) That's pretty well true with all operating systems except for those that encrypt to disk (or something to that effect). If a person who is not supposed to have access to hardware has access, then they could do anything they please despite it being windows, linux, dos os/2 or whatever is on the drive. If you look at laptop computers and business grade computers, you can set the bios not to boot from the floppy or the CDrom which is one level of security. Some computers have a sensor inside to test if the case has been open while some also have locks too so you can lock the case, therefore denying people access to the inards of a computer such as reseting the bios or installing or removing stuff (I recall working at some company where some thief stole the ram cards out of the computer and put cheaper tiny ones, the police caught the guy). Some companies actually remove the floppy drive too so you can't insert or copy stuff. ____________________________________________

----- Original Message ----- From: "Russell McMahon" <@spam@apptechKILLspamparadise.net.nz> Subject: Re: [OT] Windows Xp on W98 SE > Or just boot to a CD based Linux distro and blow right through NTFS's > security, ownership rights and all - or so I've been told :-) Actually, installing Cygwin give you most of the tools that are missing from Home, but then you gotta be a geeek. It is actually very simple to encrypt directories on NTFS. I don't know how secure the encryption is, but if you are seriously wanting to protect something, it's a path. I'm guessing booting Linux won't help you much there. The problem is not being able to get at file that you want to get at. Most home users aren't desparately trying to protect files from other family members, but it is nice to be able to keep "my" files separate from "her" files. The multiple login thing is kind of convenient that way. In fact, this is one place where Home is better than Pro. I see Fedora has implemented a user "chooser" a lot like Home. But, if you use multiple logins, the various users files are, by default, not readable by other users, nor are the directories writable. In Pro, you have the option of changing the file protections so you can open up a file to another user. In Home you have no such option (unless you load Cygwin, or as you mention, boot a Linux distro). --McD ____________________________________________

I believe some IBM laptops encrypt the hard-drive from bios something in both the bios and the hdd bios have to work in order for the hdd to boot/work at all. put the drive in another computer and it wont work at all. wrong bios password, same deal. Apparently even swapping the PCB on the drive doesn't work. I have used Linux "tools" to reset the administrator password on one customer who forgot it. "DO NOT FORGET THIS PASSWORD!!!", says I with emphasis "ok" says he "now I have told you not to forget this you understand?" says I patiently "yes" says he getting a little irritated "what did I just tell you to do" says I in my most polite tone of voice "not forget the password" says he rather irritated "ok then" says I thinking the case closed 4-6 weeks later "I just got this printer and it doesn't work" says he in the my car doesn't... "go" voice that all customers have "ok did you install the drivers?" "huh" "ok logout and login as administrator" (spells it) "what's the password" "*soulful sigh*" that is more or less (probably less in the second part) verbatim. What's scary is what are my kids going to be doing when they are 12 and will I become the next generation of "12:00 flasher"? (a 12:00 flasher is a person who has every digital clock in their house flashing 12:00 all the time ;->) > {Original Message removed}

John J. McDonough wrote: >> Ok, why not (use home)? > There are two differences. Home does not integrate well with networking. > If you have a Linux server, ... Not only Linux is the problem. AFAIK Home /always/ connects to shares on other computers with the Guest login (Pro for example defaults to the user who connects, and can connect with any other login, too). This can be a pain if you want to have some kind of access security on a small LAN -- there's no way to do that with Home on the client. This may also be the cause of the networking problems in other environments. > Secondly, and this is kind of a biggie ... Home provides no way to control > file ownership. On NTFS, files have actual owners and privileges, and they > are fiercly enforced. Most of the time, it is just fine. But if you want > one user on a Home system to see a file created by another user, you > probably might as well email it. We don't have a problem with this here. A few members of my family share an XP Home system (NTFS), and they don't have a problem at all seeing each others files. File ownership doesn't mean that others can't see the files. Gerhard ____________________________________________

----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerhard Fiedler" <KILLspamlistsKILLspamconnectionbrazil.com> Subject: Re: [OT] Windows Xp on W98 SE > Not only Linux is the problem. AFAIK Home /always/ connects to shares on > other computers with the Guest login (Pro for example defaults to the user > who connects, and can connect with any other login, too). This can be a > pain if you want to have some kind of access security on a small LAN -- > there's no way to do that with Home on the client. This may also be the > cause of the networking problems in other environments. No, that is not correct. Home connects to shares with the usercode of the logged on user (At least when connecting to a Samba or other Home share. I haven't played with W2003 shares). Home will not log into a PDC. If you have no shares connected at logon, and you connect to a share on a Samba server, Home will allow you to enter a usercode and password, but all shares on the same server must be connect via the same usercode. This can be a bit of a pain, but not unworkable. Also, the Home users must have Linux accounts to access the Samba shares. I'm not totally convinced that the Samba guest account actually works for Home. Seems like I've made guest shares but had to specifically allow Home users access to them, but I could be remembering wrong. > We don't have a problem with this here. A few members of my family share an > XP Home system (NTFS), and they don't have a problem at all seeing each > others files. File ownership doesn't mean that others can't see the files. Interesting. On my Home systems with NTFS, even the admin user can't read another users files, in general. You can see them in the directory, but not open them. It does seem to depend a bit on the directory. One one of those systems I have some FAT32 partitions, so copying the file to one of those partitions is a workaround. I can change the file protections in Cygwin with chmod, but I can't change the ownership since XP users don't seem to recognize each other's names, and the 'root' user doesn't have privileges over the other users files, anyway. If you have rwx, however, you can change the owner to yourself. I really should do some experimentation and find out the full behavior of this. I haven't fully explored what is going on. When I run into it, it's a pain, but I log on as the owner and chmod the file to 777 and I can continue on with what I was doing. --McD ____________________________________________

On Sunday 12 December 2004 05:53 am, Jake Anderson wrote: > that is more or less (probably less in the second part) verbatim. > What's scary is what are my kids going to be doing when they > are 12 and will I become the next generation of "12:00 flasher"? If you're part of this group.list, I think you may be a little ahead of the curve in terms of being a 12:00 flasher since you know more than your average electronics user, but I know what you mean when I see my younger cousins and relatives typing in those cryptic 1 letter replies in chat rooms like: I LUV 4 U 2 RPLY Cheers! ____________________________________________

John J. McDonough wrote: >> Not only Linux is the problem. AFAIK Home /always/ connects to shares on >> other computers with the Guest login (Pro for example defaults to the user >> who connects, and can connect with any other login, too). > No, that is not correct. Home connects to shares with the usercode of the > logged on user (At least when connecting to a Samba or other Home share. I > haven't played with W2003 shares). I'm talking about a situation where Home is connecting to Win2k shares. It has to do with the way Simple File Sharing works (which cannot be disabled on Home). This source seems to agree with me: http://labmice.techtarget.com/articles/winxpsecuritychecklist.htm . I couldn't find anything conclusive about this at Microsoft. Gerhard ____________________________________________