Slightly OT - W98 or NT?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peter in New Zealand
  • Start date Start date
Re: Slightly OT - W98 or NT?

Peter in New Zealand wrote:
> Bill in Co. wrote:
>> Peter in New Zealand wrote:
>>> Lil' Dave wrote:
>>>> "Peter in New Zealand" <peterbalplug@extra.co.nz> wrote in message
>>>> news:1213679624.971855@ftpsrv1...
>>>>> My apologies for the OT post, but I am curious to ask an opinion on
>>>>> this.
>>>>> The machine I have originally came with your choice of 98 or NT4 on
>>>>> it.
>>>>> I
>>>>> have 98SE running pretty well thanks to the support and experience of
>>>>> this
>>>>> group. A friend of mine has a full install CD for NT4 Workstation he
>>>>> hasn't used for years and he is happy to gift it to me if I want it.
>>>>> Apart
>>>>> from the fact that NT groups on the Internet are fairly quiet
>>>>> now-a-days
>>>>> I
>>>>> think am more likely to get an unbiased opinion here I think from
>>>>> anyone
>>>>> who has used it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't use the machine for games - I run MS Office 97, and use
>>>>> Firefox
>>>>> and Thunderbird. I would gain stability from switching to NT4 from 98
>>>>> I
>>>>> know, but are there any gotchas I should be aware of? I will be
>>>>> imaging
>>>>> the drive before starting so I can return it to its 98 state pretty
>>>>> easily
>>>>> if I want to.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the USB issue I have decided to forget about it as I will be
>>>>> tossing
>>>>> in
>>>>> a network PC card when it arrives and then I can move stuff between it
>>>>> and
>>>>> my other machine without difficulty.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Peter in New Zealand. (Email address is fake)
>>>>> Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter,
>>>>> and
>>>>> compulsive computer fiddler.
>>>> Ran NT w/SP4 for awhile on one machine I had, and still have.
>>>> Ingelborg
>>>> mentions some common gotchas. You're stuck with original FAT, no USB
>>>> out
>>>> of
>>>> the box. What's going to be real interesting is finding drivers for
>>>> the
>>>> hardware for NT. Once going properly, NT is a rock as far as
>>>> stability.
>>>> In
>>>> fact I used that PC for a software firewall primary with ISP network
>>>> sharing
>>>> with 98SE and ME PC. I called the PC "brick".
>>>>
>>>> The now, am not sure what the intrusion ramificatios are for internet
>>>> access
>>>> with an NT PC, nevermind the dated IE that comes with it. Wouldn't
>>>> attempt
>>>> here.
>>> Thanks for the thoughts. Drivers for the laptop for NT4 are on the
>>> recovery CD, although the CD only "recovers" the machine to 98. So I am
>>> tempted to image the drive (currently 98SE) and try NT4 just for fun. As
>>> you point out it's getting pretty old now and might not be practical.
>>> Interesting though I was in our local branch of the bank I use earlier
>>> today and found their entire network is running on NT4. The lady's
>>> comment was - It's solid and never misses a beat. For our work it's
>>> perfect. Why on earth would we want to upgrade? On a similar OT note the
>>> Oncology Dept of the hospital in the nearest main centre is running all
>>> it's stuff on Windows 2K. So I guess having the latest and greatest is
>>> pointless if the oldest and leastist does what you need. (smile)
>>>
>>> Got a feeling I'll end up back with 98SE for practical purposes on the
>>> laptop, but in the meantime I'm gonna have a bit of fun with NT4.
>>
>> Or maybe consider trying out Win2K instead of NT4. I would think it
>> has
>> the benefits of NT4, PLUS some.
>>
>>
> Yes, 2K is a bit slower on it, but it also seems to have issues with the
> power settings, the machine won't hibernate, and the touchpad drivers
> won't with with it.

Well, that is most unfortunate.

> OTOH 2K does give me full USB.

And that's a NICE plus.

> Oh well, I've really
> appreciated the interest and helpful comments offered here, and also the
> helpful and gracious attitude in this group, which is a refreshing
> change after some of the groups dealing with XP and Vista. The attitude
> here might even persuade me to stay with W98 after all. How's that for
> an emotional response - grin!

Good! I like this group, too (over some of the XP ones) as it seems a bit
more technical, and has a bit less chaff and fluff in it. And I still have
the other computer running Win98SE (and DOS) sometimes. Plus I've been
here for ages, it seems. So welcome aboard, Peter. :-)
 
Re: Slightly OT - W98 or NT?

He didn't post his computer specs, how do you know if NT4 will run or
not on his computer? If the computer is from the Windows 98 era it will
probably, if not certainly, have enough power to run NT4.

NT 4.0 Minimum Hardware Requirements:

Windows NT Workstation:

- 12 MB of RAM
- VGA level video support
- Keyboard
- IDE, EIDE, SCSI, or ESDI hard disk
- 486/25 processor or better
- CD-ROM drive, floppy disk drive, or active network connection

Windows NT Server:

- 16 MB of RAM
- VGA level video support
- Keyboard
- IDE, EIDE, SCSI, or ESDI hard disk
- 486/25 processor or better
- CD-ROM drive, 1.44 MB or 1.2 MB floppy disk drive, or active network
connection

NOTE: On Windows NT Server, 16 MB of RAM affords minimal functionality;
Microsoft highly recommends 32 MB of RAM or more. Microsoft also
recommends the following preferred hardware:

- 486DX2/50 processor or better
- 28.8 v.34 external modem, for remote debugging and troubleshooting
- Windows NT compatible CD-ROM drive

Minimum Space Requirements for Windows NT Workstation and Server:

Standard Installation - 124 MB of free disk space
WINNT /b - 124 MB of free disk space
Copying I386 folder to hard disk - 223 MB of free disk space

I wouldn't recommend anything less than 64MB, preferably 128MB RAM but
then would anyone recommend running Windows 98 on less than 64MB RAM?

John

MEB wrote:
> Oh boy, aaahhm, your likely not going to like NT4 on that limited memory,
> disk space, and processor computer. Also, NT4 wasn't exactly the friendliest
> environment for most home users. If you're thinking that it would be much
> better with your XP [and VISTA if you have it] computers, personally I don't
> think you would like it very much. Let me modify that a bit by this: if you
> were interested in how *old NT* is compared to 2000, XP and above, then it
> would certainly be useful as a learning tool.
> Note though, that NTFS, file sharing, and a lot other are different, and
> you would need to get some files to connect it properly to your XP machines.
>
> You may also have difficulties finding drivers, and applications.
>
> Not a choice we can make for you of course.
>
 
Re: Slightly OT - W98 or NT?

MEB wrote:

> Well, your query concerned opinions on that usage. My thoughts were that
> unless you wished to play around with the old format NT which required much
> more *hands on* techniques rather than GUI, and its limited capabilities
> [work station]

With all due respect, what "limited capabilities" are you thinking of?
In terms of stability or computing performance NT4 blows Windows 98 to
kingdom come, it leaves Windows 98 in the dust!

John
 
Re: Slightly OT - W98 or NT?

He didn't post the specs, *I* did... best look again, at the prior *Return
to 98* 06/15/2008 discussion.
Here's that link so YOU can be up to speed.
http://www.acersupport.com/notebook/html/tm512dx_specs.html

We also know NT4 WILL run on his computer, that isn't the issue....

The issues are NOT NT4 stability; anyone who has used it knows it was
stable for its time period; it IS the necessity for command line setup of
certain aspects; it IS the lack of support for USB and PlugnPray; it IS the
possibility for lack of support for any newer devices [far more even than
98SE]; it IS the issue of FAT and the relationship with his XP/SE/other
network; it IS the networking in general [mixed network] {TCP/IP and other
aspects as well}; it IS a number of other KNOWN limitations and/or setup
issues of NT4.

We also know that NT4 is still in use in a number of networks in government
offices, libraries, small networks, corporations, and elsewhere. My comments
were therefore directed to him in this form:
He asked for opinions; which I suggested that SE would suit his purposes;
however, if he wished to learn an OLDER NT format/OS, then it would be a
good learning experience; that there WERE limitations within the OS which he
should make himself aware of PRIOR to using it; that if he wished better
functioning with NT4 or SE that 256 megs WOULD also be worth the money [I
had provided links to some memory indicating price]; and several other
opinions based upon my experiences. I had also indicated that should he wish
that NT4 experience/learning, then the SERVER would provide more.

NOW, should you and others wish to discuss NT4 setups, applications, AND
those limitations and setup issues, etc., then feel free to do so... just
don't attempt to attack or question MY posts without actually READING them,
and UNDERSTANDING the context in which they were presented...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"John John (MVP)" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
news:uCcm1uT0IHA.4424@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| He didn't post his computer specs, how do you know if NT4 will run or
| not on his computer? If the computer is from the Windows 98 era it will
| probably, if not certainly, have enough power to run NT4.
|
| NT 4.0 Minimum Hardware Requirements:
|
| Windows NT Workstation:
|
| - 12 MB of RAM
| - VGA level video support
| - Keyboard
| - IDE, EIDE, SCSI, or ESDI hard disk
| - 486/25 processor or better
| - CD-ROM drive, floppy disk drive, or active network connection
|
| Windows NT Server:
|
| - 16 MB of RAM
| - VGA level video support
| - Keyboard
| - IDE, EIDE, SCSI, or ESDI hard disk
| - 486/25 processor or better
| - CD-ROM drive, 1.44 MB or 1.2 MB floppy disk drive, or active network
| connection
|
| NOTE: On Windows NT Server, 16 MB of RAM affords minimal functionality;
| Microsoft highly recommends 32 MB of RAM or more. Microsoft also
| recommends the following preferred hardware:
|
| - 486DX2/50 processor or better
| - 28.8 v.34 external modem, for remote debugging and troubleshooting
| - Windows NT compatible CD-ROM drive
|
| Minimum Space Requirements for Windows NT Workstation and Server:
|
| Standard Installation - 124 MB of free disk space
| WINNT /b - 124 MB of free disk space
| Copying I386 folder to hard disk - 223 MB of free disk space
|
| I wouldn't recommend anything less than 64MB, preferably 128MB RAM but
| then would anyone recommend running Windows 98 on less than 64MB RAM?
|
| John
|
| MEB wrote:
| > Oh boy, aaahhm, your likely not going to like NT4 on that limited
memory,
| > disk space, and processor computer. Also, NT4 wasn't exactly the
friendliest
| > environment for most home users. If you're thinking that it would be
much
| > better with your XP [and VISTA if you have it] computers, personally I
don't
| > think you would like it very much. Let me modify that a bit by this: if
you
| > were interested in how *old NT* is compared to 2000, XP and above, then
it
| > would certainly be useful as a learning tool.
| > Note though, that NTFS, file sharing, and a lot other are different,
and
| > you would need to get some files to connect it properly to your XP
machines.
| >
| > You may also have difficulties finding drivers, and applications.
| >
| > Not a choice we can make for you of course.
| >
|
 
Re: Slightly OT - W98 or NT?

MEB wrote:
> He didn't post the specs, *I* did... best look again, at the prior *Return
> to 98* 06/15/2008 discussion.
> Here's that link so YOU can be up to speed.
> http://www.acersupport.com/notebook/html/tm512dx_specs.html
>
> We also know NT4 WILL run on his computer, that isn't the issue....
>
> The issues are NOT NT4 stability; anyone who has used it knows it was
> stable for its time period; it IS the necessity for command line setup of
> certain aspects; it IS the lack of support for USB and PlugnPray; it IS the
> possibility for lack of support for any newer devices [far more even than
> 98SE]; it IS the issue of FAT and the relationship with his XP/SE/other
> network; it IS the networking in general [mixed network] {TCP/IP and other
> aspects as well}; it IS a number of other KNOWN limitations and/or setup
> issues of NT4.
>
> We also know that NT4 is still in use in a number of networks in government
> offices, libraries, small networks, corporations, and elsewhere. My comments
> were therefore directed to him in this form:
> He asked for opinions; which I suggested that SE would suit his purposes;
> however, if he wished to learn an OLDER NT format/OS, then it would be a
> good learning experience; that there WERE limitations within the OS which he
> should make himself aware of PRIOR to using it; that if he wished better
> functioning with NT4 or SE that 256 megs WOULD also be worth the money [I
> had provided links to some memory indicating price]; and several other
> opinions based upon my experiences. I had also indicated that should he wish
> that NT4 experience/learning, then the SERVER would provide more.
>
> NOW, should you and others wish to discuss NT4 setups, applications, AND
> those limitations and setup issues, etc., then feel free to do so... just
> don't attempt to attack or question MY posts without actually READING them,
> and UNDERSTANDING the context in which they were presented...
>
Gentlemen - ALL your comments and statements are of great interest to
me. There is not one single post in this thread that I have not gained
something from in the way of knowledge, new ideas, warnings, and
cautions. By contrast, had I posted an equivalent question in one of the
groups dealing with XP or Vista, around 60% to 80% of the replies would
have been fluff and useless bickering - not to mention being told I am
an idiot for using Windows of any sort and should use nothing but Linux.
I would have had to plough through all that to extract what genuinely
helpful replies were buried in it all. By contrast, every reply here has
been helpful. I understand we all come from different perspectives and
sometimes I am not as clear as I ought to be. But I love the helpful and
pleasant attitude I have found here and I really appreciate your
openness and helpfulness to a new-comer.

I will be trying NT4 out of sheer cussed curiosity, probably in a week
or so, and I will let you all know what happens. I'll probably have to
eat humble pie and confess I'm back on good ol' 98SE. (chuckle) But I
will let you guys know - I promise!

--
Peter in New Zealand. (Email address is fake)
Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter, and
compulsive computer fiddler.
 
Re: Slightly OT - W98 or NT?


Sorry Peter, not really an argument here, its just that I'm not an MVP and
we tend to butt heads on some issues... though it rarely goes very far ...

Anyway, this group/forum seems to tolerate numerous discussions well
outside 98, so the NT4 discussions, if they occur, would not necessarily be
out of place. Personally, I haven't looked at an MS NT4 forum for quite some
time, though they likely aren't populated very much.

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________


"Peter in New Zealand" <peterbalplug@extra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:1213819538.549248@ftpsrv1...
| MEB wrote:
| > He didn't post the specs, *I* did... best look again, at the prior
*Return
| > to 98* 06/15/2008 discussion.
| > Here's that link so YOU can be up to speed.
| > http://www.acersupport.com/notebook/html/tm512dx_specs.html
| >
| > We also know NT4 WILL run on his computer, that isn't the issue....
| >
| > The issues are NOT NT4 stability; anyone who has used it knows it was
| > stable for its time period; it IS the necessity for command line setup
of
| > certain aspects; it IS the lack of support for USB and PlugnPray; it IS
the
| > possibility for lack of support for any newer devices [far more even
than
| > 98SE]; it IS the issue of FAT and the relationship with his XP/SE/other
| > network; it IS the networking in general [mixed network] {TCP/IP and
other
| > aspects as well}; it IS a number of other KNOWN limitations and/or
setup
| > issues of NT4.
| >
| > We also know that NT4 is still in use in a number of networks in
government
| > offices, libraries, small networks, corporations, and elsewhere. My
comments
| > were therefore directed to him in this form:
| > He asked for opinions; which I suggested that SE would suit his
purposes;
| > however, if he wished to learn an OLDER NT format/OS, then it would be a
| > good learning experience; that there WERE limitations within the OS
which he
| > should make himself aware of PRIOR to using it; that if he wished better
| > functioning with NT4 or SE that 256 megs WOULD also be worth the money
[I
| > had provided links to some memory indicating price]; and several other
| > opinions based upon my experiences. I had also indicated that should he
wish
| > that NT4 experience/learning, then the SERVER would provide more.
| >
| > NOW, should you and others wish to discuss NT4 setups, applications,
AND
| > those limitations and setup issues, etc., then feel free to do so...
just
| > don't attempt to attack or question MY posts without actually READING
them,
| > and UNDERSTANDING the context in which they were presented...
| >
| Gentlemen - ALL your comments and statements are of great interest to
| me. There is not one single post in this thread that I have not gained
| something from in the way of knowledge, new ideas, warnings, and
| cautions. By contrast, had I posted an equivalent question in one of the
| groups dealing with XP or Vista, around 60% to 80% of the replies would
| have been fluff and useless bickering - not to mention being told I am
| an idiot for using Windows of any sort and should use nothing but Linux.
| I would have had to plough through all that to extract what genuinely
| helpful replies were buried in it all. By contrast, every reply here has
| been helpful. I understand we all come from different perspectives and
| sometimes I am not as clear as I ought to be. But I love the helpful and
| pleasant attitude I have found here and I really appreciate your
| openness and helpfulness to a new-comer.
|
| I will be trying NT4 out of sheer cussed curiosity, probably in a week
| or so, and I will let you all know what happens. I'll probably have to
| eat humble pie and confess I'm back on good ol' 98SE. (chuckle) But I
| will let you guys know - I promise!
|
| --
| Peter in New Zealand. (Email address is fake)
| Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter, and
| compulsive computer fiddler.
 
Back
Top