No More Support For Windows 98 and ME

Frankly Harry, I think that people using Windows 98 or Windows ME are either still living in the computing time equivalent to the middle ages i.e. the late 1990s or cannot simply afford to upgrade to Windows XP.

Windows XP Rocks !!

I am running XP - but oddly, I always found ME to be the most stable Windows. I loved it.

I've been keeping 98 around for compatibility reasons for a while, even though I have XP Pro. I might be discontinuing it soon because I've gotten all my software to run under XP. Some of it requires a bit of constant tweaking, which is annoying, but I'll live. An example is that RealPlayer 10 runs miserably without full hardware acceleration, but Unreal won't run on my sound card without sound acceleration turned town at least one notch. One thing that would worry me is if they stopped providing patches and updates for 98 et al, no matter how out-dated. I don't mind the loss of ME, but 98 should be kept available so if desperate, ME users can at least downgrade to the more compatible 98, albeit with a possible loss of reliability if a number of device drivers are loaded.

I'm still using 98SE, but really I have been meaning to upgrade for a while now... just haven't gotten round to it.

The lack of support is not something that should worry Win 98 Se users. I use it along with AVG, Ad-aware SE personal and Spybot S&D, which protect me. I can play all my old games. It was reported that Win XP was pushed out prematurely to preempt some legal rulings. My brother who has Win XP Pro had many problems with his Celeron machine. Loading SP2 has made it very sluggish. It is bloatware that I do not need. I will stick to Win 98 SE as long as I do not need to upgrade.

I wouldn't place too much upon AVG, Spybot and Ad-Aware. They are good, but they are not a substitute for patching the OS itself, especially when we are in the day of "zero-day" vulnerability exploits. Not patching your OS is roughly similar to having four levels of protection reduced to three. Considering what CAN happen, I don't know that it's worth that kind of gamble, to have a 25% less secure system. Of course, if you're savvy and carefull in addition to using these tools properly, your chances are good of avoiding a disaster. Hopefully that's the case.

I have an old laptop and desktop that are still Win98SE. The PII/300/192MB laptop works fine (it's for the my nieces who visit, and as a backup in case my personal XP laptop breaks, like it has once before). The laptop is only used occasionally, and has Avast/ZoneAlarm/Ad-aware, etc behind a firewall. I use the old PIII/500/128 desktop as a network file backup.

I am considering taking everything out of the PIII and putting Linux on it with two big disks in the hopes that it will be faster and more reliable as a backup.

My main laptop and desktop run XP (with Office 2000+Firefox) and I have no intention of upgrading to Vista...

I prefer old stuff that works to new stuff that might not :)

How a bout this combination. Linux for firewall. Windows inside 98 and XP with anything but Internet Explorer. Most on-line time is done with Linux. I guess you'd better up your Linux counts. You just don't know....

I use Win98SE because it works. I used to download and install all of MS's critical updates until I realized they were actually for IE and OE, so I switched to Firebird (now Firefox) and Thunderbird. I do hide my computer behind a hardware firewall, and I'm betting most virus writers are aiming at the big target - WinXP.
I'll upgrade my OS when I need to, not because MS needs a continuous revenue stream.

I now use WinXP but I found that Win98SE was faster and better... I'm not planning to upgrade all of my machines to WinXP... I might even degrade my newer machines to Win98 just because most of the apps that our office ever uses are old apps... Who needs the newer ones

To me I don't care if they have support on the OS, if it works then it works and as of now WinXP doesn't work.

You guys are all talking nonscene! Get a MAC, you'll like it better than boken windows xp

Wonder, the freebees that are posted in this website have spyware and other tracking or malicious software in it?

Personally I think it's time for that OS to go. It was good in it hey day but now, I use mostly Win2000 or XP on the desktops.

Win98 was good and it will have a place in history.

I used to ridicule XP. I used to call it XPee.

I must say that after being an XP user that I'm much happier now than I was using Windows 98SE. I used to have those blue screen crashes at least once a week for no apparent reason.

I learned more about building and repairing computers by using 98. I used to think that having blue screens monthly (sometimes wekly) was just a way of life.

I was wrong. Now nearly nothing goes wrong by using XP. Eor those of you that are experiencing sluggish computers from upgrading to Xp from 98SE or ME remember that XP needs a faster processor and more memory installed.

XP is a real memory hog that also has more running processes at start up than 98 or ME.

I note that Zone Alarm 6.5 will not support Windows 98; instep with Microsoft.

I use Open Office and now considering SuSe 10.1.

98se good 5 or 6 years ago me no good at all xp is good never had a problem vista will be great cant wait .

The author of the original article should be aware that Windows 98 SE actually stands for "Second Edition" not "Special Edition". But ya, after years of patience and 4 or 5 versions of Windows, vainly waiting for reliable, stable and intuitive version of Windows, and talking smack about Macs, I switched and have looked back with only scorn.

I have a Windows 98 Classic Edition, but I don't feel like an orphan now that MS is abandoning us. I keep that machine simply because a client of mine requires me to use an old program once a year. I'm using XP most of the time.

Until I had to buy a computer over-the-counter about 6 months ago, (I've built my own since the x486 processor- just had my main system fry when I had some important work due NOW, so I had to buy one), I've "topped out" at Win98SE as my operating system on my computers. Since then, I've found a lot of sentiment among pro "techies" that a well-patched 98SE system is often a better performing, and more stable, system than WinXP, etc. Of course, if we take into account the need for some people to be able to just plug it in and have it work, (or complain to someone else if it doesn't), then there's a reason why so many people are using XP. But it doesn't mean that 98SE is bad. It's a proven quantity!

The worst, the very worst OS on the face of the earth was ME... 98SE was all the patches for 98. I have friends who 98 and 98SE that I'm constantly working on. They want stuff, they want the latest.. I finally told them get rid of the door stoop and get XP.

I still have a PC with Windows 98 on it and it works perfectly fine. It helps me to get from point A to point B, which in my case is really, surfing the web, replying to emails and typing on MS Word.

I have AVG, Adware, S&D and feel fairly confident about the security. More importantly, I think virus writers rather attack XP then the poor old lady called Windows 98.

Its a good OS, could be better...I will upgrade when & if VISTA comes out.

I simply can't afford an upgrade right now and it's killing me

My $5000 PC running Windows 3.11 WFW still going with bi-yearly re-installs. Surfing, e-mail and reports.

I have a 6 year old HP Pavilion with a 633 mHz Celeron processor running ME with 512megs RAM and a 20gig HD. I use ZA free firewall, AD-Aware SE, Spybot S&D, a-squared, and AVG (free). My GF has XP SP2 on her new compaq desktop and mine is much faster. Also I surf the web like crazy and never get infected. When XP becomes as safe as ME I'll consider an upgrade, but until then I'll continue to visit all the malware forums and read about today's virus or trojan that I won't get! Also I resent the author's contention that just because someone can't afford a new puter or an upgrade that we are too lazy or ignorant to keep up with our patches. That's narrow minded and rude.

I like Windows XP SP2. It's a nice OS. Fast and stable in my PC -- 1,5 GB of RAM; soon to be 2 GB of RAM. Facts about Win XP SP2 are: It needs a lot of RAM; It fragments the OS partition a lot -- I need to defragment it every 15 or 20 days; It's slow the way it comes from Microsoft -- I tweak Win XP SP2 and it turns to another OS, better than Win 2000 Professional.

I used Win 95 OSR2 and Win 98 SE, and I liked these OS very much. There's no comparison among Win XP SP2 and the other OS of its kind, even Win NT 4 Workstation and Win 2K Pro.

Ironically and without explanation, Windows ME was the best OS ever for early Pentium machines. Still running it on my Toshiba Libretto

This is WAY too amusing. Win XP SP2 runs great on a pc that has the horsepower to run it. If you were to install Win 98 SE and Win XP SP2 on a machine like mine; 3.73 P4 EE, 2 gig RAM, 2 Raptors in Raid 1, GeForce 7800, Win XP would run circles around it ( I know I won a bet doing this). Win 98 SE and Win ME have run their course. In the case of 98 SE, it was a great OS. If you can?t afford to upgrade, and 98 SE is working fine, hey, keep running it. I see no problem with that. But don?t sit there and tell me that Win 98 SE, or as dude said, Win ME, is better than XP. Find a place that gives free CAT scans, and have them check you out, twice ;).

If you read my post you'll note that i never said Windows ME is "better" than XP. Rivie only talks about speed. I guess the "dude" concedes my malware statement. As for the CAT scan, i'd have to take off my tin foil hat, which i refuse to do.

I still use Windows ME. I have no issues with it.

I have an XP machine and a Windows 98 Machine. The latter is my main work machine because I have several man-years of scientific DOS programs which will run on the XP but you cannot capture a full screen DOS image on the XP as you can with Windows 98. Yet another Bill Gates gotcha. I have contacted the leading screen capture companies and they assure me that such a screen capture is impossible on XP.

I kept building new personal PC's...but still had my Win98se disk. No matter how "cutting edge" my hardware was...never "needed" to buy new OpSys....98se always loaded fine. & it always excepted upgrade programs. I regularly back-up pre-recorded DVD movies, it's a wireless desktop on a 54g home network. It runs multiple monitors / handles 4GB ddr400 (even dual channel) if i max it (Asus A7V880)/ with gigabit ethernet/ 8 usb 2.0/ & with Sygate firewall...nothing go's in/out without my permission (unlike MS firewall-in only) / i use AMD chips & Firefox browser. Bells & whistles it didn't have integrated...i easily added to the platform. It just keeps running & running......& it doesn't give me problems. When stable 64 bit OpSys with plentiful programs & Blu-Ray/HD-DVD burners are mainstream (2007) i'll build another kickass system that i can use for yrs. Just can't justify building when aware current systems will be obsolete so soon. & i haven't needed anyway. She does all i ask, doesn't complain.

I also have a ME machine and a XP machine. Unfortunately my printer and other hardware and software won't run on XP, (there are no drivers). Also many things, such as the above mentioned full screen capture, full screen display on IE etc dont work on XP. I also dislike having to call up to reinstall XP, and many other similar ?soft 'funnies'. I do not have any protection whatsoever on the ME machine and have never had any virus etc problems whatsoever. Any work I do needs (at a guess) about 50% less mouse clicks on ME as with XP. XP is however much better for video work. I hate to think of the all the new problems and hours of work that we are going to get with the next windows.

As a tech with near 25 years of experience who custom builds high end gaming machines I have found that each OS has it's place or use. In my personal network I have two dual core pentium machines and two high end AMD K7's on Motherboards (Epox) employing the coveted nVida chipsets. For my fifth I have an old 500 mhz PII dual processor machine running Windows ME. While my four High end machines are running XP SP2 which after much tweaking I now am personally satisfied with, my ME machine still runs strong using Avast 4 home, Ad Aware SE & spybot S&D, and Zone alarm firewall (all my machines use this security config). my point is: Anyone can find something to complain about everything. so use the OS your comfortable with. Not one just because "everyone esle is."

I have one of those 2001 ME machines that was installed with rdram. The rdram is just as fast as ddr2 under XP and ME knows how to use it. MSDN products that can come out of this machine is rated for XP too.

I used Win 98SE until I decided I had to upgrade due to the termination of support from Microsoft. I found the 98 did what I needed, seldom had problems, and, in contrast to the snide comment from the article's author, I kep it religiously updated. It ended up costing me $350 just to change to XP - the OS, memory upgrade, and new hard drive. I could almost have bought a whole new PC for that.

Anyone actually read the article:

"Microsoft will end support for Windows 98, Windows 98 Special Edition (SE)"

Wow, didn't know 98 was that "Special".

Irregardless, Win98 SE still has it's place on older (166MHz-500MHz) machines. Unfortunately, lots of them are sitting in landfills and the rest of them are here in my basement....

It's only an issue at work. We have 2 workstatations that use 98. I know some schools that are strapped for cash use it too because, as long as it's still working, they will use the computer.

I'll be sure that everything is going well with our machines when I return to work Monday. Maybe this will prompt the bosslady to fork over some more cash.

I use Windows 98SE and I love it. It runs fine, it works no problem, and most viruses are incompatible with it. I'll probably upgrade when Vista comes out. For now though I see no reason to upgrade right away. When we do upgrade we'll upgrade the whole computer. Brand new one from scratch, probably.

Anyway, I like my Windows 98SE comp, 800 MHz processor, 640 MB RAM, a total of 100 GB storage space. It's a great computer.

Sticking to my WinME. PC on 256MB RAM don't run WinXP well. Otherwise, I'm happy with my Dell Desktop bought in June 2001.....just before XP was released!!

My highly unscientific opinion of the OSs I have had on my pcs over the years:
DOS 6.22 - An antique now but good at the time
Win 3.1 - I actually liked DOSShell better for some reason
Win 95 - I liked it
Win 98 - I liked it
Win Me - I hated it; it always locked up my machine
Win 2K - I liked it
Win XP - I like it still

I guess Win 3.1 & Win Me were the only two OSs that I didn't care for AND I really didn't care for Win Me at all...

ME was just a marketing operating system for microsoft to get more cash - looked like win2000, but under the hood it was nothing like it at all!

memory issues, no ntfs, just to name a few.

95osr2 and 98se and of course NT4 were perfect for those older pcs - win2000 and xp are the way to go, if the pc has the goods and you have a decent motherboard with a good chipset!

3.11 did its job well, but that was like another generation ago, and tricky to get setup with the net, unless tcpip was installed.

the mac world is totally different, not much to do though, but less spam and stable, and more expensive - again its not apples with apples!

I'm glad microsoft will drop 98 and me support and focus on vista!

Windows98 was the template for reliablity for Microsoft. Well, Windows ME was just wrong. But like everyone, we all make mistakes and learn from them. Prior to Windows 98, 95, 311 3.1 where good, but not as reliable as 98 has been. Since then the OS from Microsoft continue to be much more reliable and stable. But Windows 98 updates should continue regardless how old the os is.

Roadmap = Linux

This Linux is supposed to install over win98/me

winlinux

I have an XP machine and a Windows 98SE Machine. The latter is used for my internet connection.
Since I also have an XP, I haved once again lined the pockets of Bill Gates with my dollars.
The least Microsoft could do is to continue to provide support for Win98SE or is it just that Microsoft cannot support the monetary burden,HaHa?

I think its ridiculous. Some of us have older computers being run for special purposes. I keep every single one of my computers updated as much as possible, but I can't legally put a copy of XP on every single one except at great expense. M$ created this problem and now they're trying to wash their hands of it. I guess the 'net will just have to suffer through all the DDOS attacks its going to get now that updates and firewalls are unavailable for so many machines.

I believe that many users are not reconizing a certain segment of our population that use WIN 98SE. I work primarily with Seniors (55+). These people have no need, desire or the funds to upgrade to XP. They exchange email with home bound friends and far away children/family members. I think MS does them a dis-service by not keeping up the patches.

Just bought Windows 98 SE to reinstall on an older machine (Toshiba Libretto). Newer Windows OS's exceed Libretto capacity. Libretto small enought to fit in wall safes during travel. Will replace Libretto with modern machine when size/price is right. In meantime, am stuck with obsolete 98 SE.

I use Windows 98SE on my laptop with an external CD Writer, because my Sony Mavica CD1000 camera that records pictures on pocket CD's, is not compatible with Windows XP, which I have on my desktop computer.

I have read possible fixes on the web that were supposed to work, but have not been able to get one to work yet. If I want to keep using my camera I have to keep 98SE or Me.

I think Microsoft dropping support for 98 and Me is an attempt to force people to upgrade and quite frankly, I don't like the tactic.

I have been updating my 98 version everytime there was an available update or everytime I turned on my laptop, whichever came first.

My laptop will not support XP without quite a bit of upgrades that I can't afford, or buying a newer laptop that would cost even more. I would have to purchase 98SE to install on it, more than likely, and either reformat the harddrive to install it or set it up for multiple OSes.

I will check for updates today and hope for the best in the future. That is all I can do at this point in time.

yes, see told you Ben..

I've found these comments very helpful.I'm running ME and I hate it.Blue Screen Crashes are common for me.Most everybody is saying XP not that great and slow.I think Windows 2000 will do.

Well Microsoft should setup a archive at least for updates to date. Most hardware manf. do that with their old drivers. It's not too expensive to have a self serve server dedicated with a few hundred kps worth of bandwidth. Anyways, i have just about every OS by microsoft and i have good and bad experiances with all of them. Sadly if you want to keep up with the time, you have to upgrade and update at cruishal times. IE Win xp, Vista for the new hardware. for the end users out there finding driver support for older OS's will become daunting if you are not an expert of the Net.

Imagine if General Motors of Ford decided there would be no repair for any of their vehicles over 7 years old. Nothing, no repairs, no parts, no service. The uproar would be heard around the world. Microsoft should at least leave the current updates available for users to download in case of a reinstall.
And someone tell T-R-A there's no such word as "Irregardless", not even in 98 Special Edition.

Yet one more reason to ditch Microsoft and move to Linux It's a pain, but supported by people that care about more the this quarters profits.

Well I certainly am upset that MS has decided to ditch WIN98SE. I paid $20 for the upgrade and have used this system for a number of years. What a waste of money to only last 5-7years for an operating system. It is bad enough the system is so flawed that it requires numberous updates and patches for operating problems. Can you imagine the uproar if you had to get your car fixed every other day because of poor security or software flaws in the computer chip?

Now we have a new system coming out in VISTA that replaces the system that was supposed to be the answer, (XP), for a good operating system. My concern is that each and every year we are asked to pony up a few more dollars for buying trash. Not only that, we have to buy other software in virus protection because the system is so flaws.

I guess I'll have to bite the bullet and trade in my good old 32MB of memory 486 machine. Darn I wish things would last a little longer.

While the "kids" out there are easily swayed that they need the latest and greatest, I would be concerned about the durability and stability of an operating system. I guess I'll have to just upgrade my

It definately is a tactic. I used 98SE for a long long time, but finally switched to xp .. I like xp, but I'd like linux even better since it's open source. If I could get my games to run in linux then I'd ditch xp and just run linux. Linux does what I need it to do. Plain and simple.

We have been running a relatively small network (75 clients) of mostly Win98SE. We have about 6 machines running 2000 that give me nothing but trouble. We would like nothing better than to have had the resources to upgrade about 3 years ago. There are many of us in Education and I'm sure in other industries with limited resources in the same boat. Contrary to the writer's opinion I am very fastidious about updates and system maintenance.

I think its good that win98 is not supported. What has changed? The only difference is MS needs to get a few dollars more.

The odd thing is that Microsoft and XP users are not concerned about the potential for windows 98 machines to become the virus/spybot cultures of the future. I run multiple machines with 98SE, XP home, XP pro. Use platform consistent with task at hand. However, upgrade of OS not the issue, it is all of the peripheral hardware, drivers and new application software.
The existing apps work just fine (even keep DOS 6 and windows 3.11 to run apps no loonger available such as dbase IV and V.

Was using 98SE.....now Ubuntu here I come!!

In Regards to Brian's comment about GM not fixing vehicles over 7 years old.

Consider how much technology has changed over the past 7 years from Win 98 to XP and the upcoming VISTA. It's complaining that you cannot find brand new parts for your Model T in the year 2006!
A majority of the new programs released will cause Win 98 systems to crash at the sight of the system requirements. And no I don't mean a brand new system with Win 98 put on rather than XP, I mean the machines with that cute sticker "Designed to run Windows 98".
Win 98 was a good OS and if the case arises where I have an older program to run I will gladly install it on my test machine again but for effiency sake of keepilng my software and the needs of my clients up to date, I will continue to use my XP machine

Let's face it, Win98 users are like Mac users; neither is very concerned about using last century's technology. I wonder how many Win98 users are not even aware that online updates were available?

What a scam!
Microsoft is just trying to get everyone to spend hundreds more on another os that does little more than the old one.
Just like the xbox 360 with its new controllers that cost $80 and games $60.
when will someone step up and make a real alternative to microsoft.

I am amazed by the number of naive comments regarding Windows 98 and the newer Windows XP operating systems.
First, you are comparing a 1998 version (think Oldsmobile) with a brand new car (think Toyota). While both can get you from Point A to Point B, don't you like the CD player, air conditioning, air bags, safety features, better gas mileage, and more that you can get with a new car?
I know there are "collectors" who want to stay with the old model, and there are others that think the new car should be free "because who should keep paying for a new car", but both are not reasons to complain on this forum.

WinME is a piece of junk.. I'm surprised they didn't quit supporting it the moment it was released.

Then again I'm biased; I'm part of the 3.74% using OSX.

Guys Win 98 Second Edition is the System (Core) with the GUI included in XP 2001. Microsoft just replaced the FAT file System Win 98 used for the N.ew T.echnology file system to be more stable in the Internet and Viola they make more millions with the same old cow.DOS evolved some but still underneat any Win System Microsoft still Using.

i work for a pc repair company. and to be honest thank god! i cant beleave that people still use that crap! get with the times. its coming up to 10 years! i mean most people these days dont even drive 10 year old cars and they cost from ?1000 to ?50,000 for a new car so why cant people send around ?50 to 100 for windows xp!

Fear not! Linux can run games! Just be ready to spend hours fighting with the encodings to get it to work...

I use Windows 98 for my DOS gaming habit. Alot of the programs will not run in the XP DOS shell, and come up with a batch of Runtime errors. Even for my 98 machine (its a P2) I have to cheat a little and use my awesome SloMo program to clock down the CPU so some programs can safely operate. XP is good for the new stuff, but I'm Oldskool baby!

Windows sucks, Get a Mac..

To all you computer gurus out there...some of us are just too poor after losing great paying jobs in 2001 because of all the politics and money hungry corporations out there making tons more money by selling new, latest and greatest of everything to every rich person out there that has nothing better to spend money on than MORE computer stuff. I was lucky enough to get windows ME in 2000 because of a bonus from the same place that laid me off after 25 years of service the very next year. I would love to keep up with the "TIMES" and the "JONES" but I have to feed my kids and get them to college.

Windows XP is Ok, 2000 Pro is great, and Windows 98SE was/is the greatest OS for a point of sale system. It doesnt demand as many resources, it doesnt have the bloody 10 user file share 2k and XP have. when is saturday night at the sports bar, game 5 of the world series, top of the 6th and I can get the bar terminal up by swapping hard drives from a failed terminal to a replacment and its up and running 10 minutes after I walk in the door, I am the greatest thing since sliced bread to the owner. XP falls flat on its face trying that.
In the end it depends on the intended use of the computer.
Oh and MacLover, thats all well in good, if I want to limit myself to just 10% of the software out there in the world

Come on its the 21 centry who the hell would still be useing windows 98 get with the times

guys, please check out suse (novell) linux desktop or opensuse.org 10. oddly enough, it has all the promised features of vista including 3d!

if you must use 98 for old programs, use vmware or virtual pc.,

win98 se should've been called win95 sp1. don't believe me? at a 98 command prompt type "version" answer " 4.1" not 5!
5.0 was Win2000.
keep in mind xp reports 5.1 NOT 6.

pay attention guys. they're ripping us for service packs by beta testing new features!@$%T$#%$#
ME was gui test for xp
XP was gui test for vista
quit paying them to test THEIR OS!

Unfortunately two systems that we use to run production based ink jet printers for direct mail still use win98se. We've tried to use Win2K and XP , but the print queues on both xp and 2K both won't support the software correctly.

So we're stuck using 98 until we get newer systems in, which will probably be never.

This really "stinks" (think something uprintable - and this from a 49 year old mom!). Many households run several computers with different operating systems to get the benefits of each. Many older games only work on Windows 98 or earlier. Now they may not have as cool graphics as some others we have, but my kids love those old games that they grew up on, and I hate the idea that there will be no support for the older platforms. Can anyone say "built-in obsolescence?"

Keep in mind that some hobbyists and small companies use Windows 98 when using older technologies that do not need and therefore do not use the hord of features and complexities of Windows XP. For example, CNC machining applications and some older telcom applications. Don't get me wrong... I'm an hard core Windows XP fan and use it exclusively (along with Windows Server 2003). I figure that Windows 98 is soooo simple anyway, it'll probably run forever on the newer hardware of today and run faster and faster until it just ceases to run at all! Kind of like the ol' DOS based processor clocking software utilities that wouldn't run anymore on 486's!

Amiga Will Rules Forever

I'm still browsing with a 60MHz machine 12 year old.
My MC68060 have no CPU cooler ! ! !
Where are your 486 ? ? ?

I have multiple machines - 3 with 98SE and 1 with XP Pro. I would rather have support remain for 98SE since there are many pieces of hardware that, even using the "compatability" option with XP, do not accept the drivers. I also find it easier to do manual tweaks to the system running 98SE as opposed to letting XP do it by itself. I have another computer without an OS that I'm going to set up as a Linux machine.

O.K., You buy a new car and 5 years down the road the dealer says when you come for repairs, we no longer support this model and parts are no available, you need a new car! ME was on my first computer and it has never been in for repairs after 6 years of use. Problems, sure but I grind through them and remain satified.

Well this is great. Now we get to upgrade to Home xp which will be obsolete by January with VISTA. Hmmmm. A couple of dollars here. A couple of dollars there. WTF? Why not wait until VISTA is ready and then people can upgrade to the most current system.

O.K., You buy a new car today and in five years when you are in need of some repair work the dealer tells you that model is no longer supported and no parts are available. That is how I feel about it. ME was on my first computer and I am in my 6th year of that and have never been anywhere for repairs. Why fix what isn't broke?

Print Screen Deluxe willl screen capture (full or selected) from XP..... that "problem" non-existant... the funcionality exists (and then some)

I still run Windows 98SE on my P.C. I can't upgrade to Windows XP because my computer is too old to run it. I can't afford a new computer because I am very poor. So, I'll continue to use Windows 98SE without the Microsoft update support.

"Dusty," if you did your research, you'd learn that Macintosh supports the good majority of popular programs. Just because it's not Windows-based doesn't mean it's obsolete.

Why is everyone comparing cars to computers. Neither one the same. Cars, if obsolete can still find parts, no matter how old. If none is found you rebuild or make your own. Computers are different usually when they break they break no repair or rebuild. MS, MAC, Linux are all great OS's just depends on what you want to do. MAC, great for movies, graphics. Linux, great for web development, (php), and for firewalls. MS is great for the lastest and more powerfull development languages, IE vb.net,c#,asp.net. Its all in what you want to do.

I still have Windows 98 on my work computer and let me tell you I dont' care if they pull the plug I hate this system! Now maybe my boss will have an excuse to get me XP. I have XP and ME on computers at home and with out a doubt I would pick XP over 98 and ME any day! I can't stand either of them and I have had nothing but problems with 98. If I try to run AUTOCAD forget it! It is a guranteed melt down at least 4 times a day.

Richard (12 July) claims that Print Screen Deluxe will solve my DOS full VGA screen (not text) capture problem in XP. It doesn't. I have sent him a small program to see if he can capture the output as a challenge. I fear he has not understood the nature of the problem. I have tried such programs as SNAGIT and commmunicated with their helpful help people. Anyone else want to have a go?
Incidently Windows is hell to program for compared to DOS.

Microsoft, the most profitable company the world has ever known, continues to sell an inferior product at a premium price and has a built in obsolescent feature called 'ceasing support'. I've never had any support so I won't miss the support that has 'ceased'
If I were confident enough I would run LINUX and be done with Microsoft.

I have an old 500 megahertz AMD machine that runs Windows 98 for the sole purpose of software compatibility. My home network consists of a DVR, a couple of hi-end workstations and some dedicated gaming machines. All of them run windows XP. The software compatiblity feature in XP does not always work. So my Win98 machine serves an important niche in my network. I have a fully patched copy of Win98 ghosted on another storage hard drive in case I need a reload. I've expected Microsoft to pull the plug, so I was prepared. Regardless of support from Microsoft or not, I'll continue to use Win 98 in my AMD machine for the forseeable future.

I like 98 too, does that justify the cost of lifetime patches...got an XP 1.6g/768ddr, 128mb video card, with a Creative X-Fi, all I'll ever need...try to keep your processes around 35 or less, disable any ports, serial conn/usb/modems in the device manager your not using..I'm idling at 0% CPU in the task manager...no speed issues...like any OS, you have to know how to use it...there's actually a 98 compatability mode for any program....and if Mac's ever REALLY get popular, somebody might CARE enough to write a virus for it...

Well I agree partially with Microsoft. That a software product should have some type of life cycle. Where I disagree is that I think the start of when the life cycle begins is when the program is stable and can run competently. I know that as a developer, if I give a program to a customer, I am not paid until it is right. XP has not got there yet, with SP1, then SP2 and 52 updates later, Microsoft is more concerned about licensing than they are with making a finished product. This is unprofessional programming and should come with a disclaimer that this is a work in progress. There are so many features that do not work as they are intended and the ablility to repair the OS even with Microsoft paid support, in my view is wrong. So many of the features that are added are not needed or wanted by the masses. It is much like cell phones. We just want a phone, that is it. We don't need GPS, etc., just a phone. Al we want is an OS that is stable and can be repaired easily. Microsoft took away the ability in the console to do any real OS repairs. You can not fix the things that matter most to the OS, the registry. Oh, you can replace the registry with the original that doesn't have all your programs, etc. but if you need to correct one entry in the registy, you can't. I could go on, but I won't. I do like XP, but it has a long way to go before it is a completed work. We are still paying for their experiment. I we bought anything that was a work in progress, i.e. a car, and we had to take it back for multiple fixes, it would be under the lemon law. Where it the lemon law for XP. No one seems to care that the product has had and still has so many fixes.....My thoughts. Guys, XPSP2 is still a GREAT OS, it just needs to be a finished product, not a "Practacing OS" . . . .

I use win98SE and will continue to use it until you are not able to any more!!! I am a single parent with 2 sons and DO NOT have the fund$ to upgrade to winxp!! My machine has no problems at all' so why fix what's not broken?? When the time does come to upgrade i will switch to linux. BILL GATES HAS ENOUGH MONEY!!!!

Millions of perfectly good computers are being dumped into landfills every year, because their owners have neither the time nor expertise to keep them working properly. Some of us are trying to intercept those machines, fix them up, and make them available to the millions of people who would otherwise be deprived. A large percentage of those computers have to run on Win98. Now, thanks to Microsoft?s lack of social conscience and their mercenary (as opposed to civically responsible) decision to cease support for older operating systems, even more perfectly good computers will intensify the landfill/computers-for-the-poor problem. Microsoft, where is your vision?

I think that Microsoft is making a mistake.
What they should do instead is make available on a DVD or multiple CD's all of the versions of DOS and DOS based Windows and call it "Classic MS-DOS and Windows" for resale to consumers interested in retrocomputing so that a single user could install any of these versions on older or antique collectable machines using blank CD-R's,Microdisks or Floppy disks.
Microsoft could continue to provide critical updates for the Win 98 versions or ME though.That way Microsoft could still profit off of their old operating systems and GUI shells.
I still like Windows 98SE and still use it.
I also love Macs and use Linux as well.
Yes,I have Windows 2000 and XP as well.
I owned my first microcomputer in 1975 and I agree with S.J.P.'s post.

I use 98 at home and XP at work. I have to reboot at work constantly, but 98 seems to just quietly keep working better. I have no desire to profit Microsoft to replace something that works with a newer model. That's like buying a new vehicle just so I could say I have a newer vehicle.

I think Vista is just another money maker for Bill gates and the rest of his corporates...There was never anything wrong with 98, 98SE, or ME, (besides the fact you cant make money from something "oversold")...The non support only forces you to keep up to date by buying new.

The comparison of cars and computers is flawed because it's not the hardware that isn't working....
It's more like the fuel for your car became obsolete... the hardware is still functioning as it was intended.
Win98SE proved itself to be probably the most stable Windows build ever. I've run all of them from win3.1 to XP pro (incluiding the various builds of 95, 98, NT, 2000, and XP). Still run 98SE on a machine mostly for DOS based game compatibility
(XP gacks at several of the games). Vista coming out has nothing to do with folks still running older systems because of hardware requirements. The implication that 98 users don't upgrade/update is ludicrous, it's the only way to keep the OS functioning. End of support will be hard on a lot of people who simply can't afford to "Keep up with the times/Jones'

There will probably be some kind of "aftermarket" support service spring up for Win98, just like there is for auto parts. I'll be on the lookout for it, as I am another one of those guys who has never had any trouble with the system and like it just fine as compared to newer OS's I use at work, etc.

Well, if this don't beat all! So, MS is going to just drop WIN 98/ME users that need their support...I'm a widowed mother of three children, and I attend college at night, and work by day which means I need my PC. I have WIN 98/ME on my PC, and has never had any serious problems; kept the upgrade in patches, etc. Thats Okay. Until I am able to afford the upgrade in "The System" me and ME are hangin' tuff! ;)

This sucks just another way to kill of the old users I think 98 was the best running program they had!!!

I run DOS for my DOS games. I run Windows 98SE for my suite of Windows 98 compatible softeware like Office 97, Works, and SimCity 2000. I run XP on a laptop that accesses the internet. Apparently, you can install DOS to any made for windows machine, and it appears to be stable. I wished Microsoft could make a completely stable OS that can run on any machine, and I realized they hadn't done that since DOS. Try harder, Microsoft.

I have a six year old PC 128MB RAM with 48GB Hard disks (two) PIII (400 MHz Celeron). It rund Win98Se. It has been running quite smoothly and the unstability has mostly been due toexcess software loads I have put on the machine. It is as fast as my office machine which has 256 MB RAM Pentium 3.0 GHZ running XP Professional. If you have excess money then go ahead and buy an XP. I have not tried it but I believe that you will get a much faster machine with a WIN 98 SE running on PIV 3.0 GHZ and 512 MB RAM.

i run ME on my computer and ive had to baby the thing for every year that ive owned it. it works great as long as you baby it along, but try and push the limits and bam! blue screen of death. oh well, it works great for what i need it for, just frustrating at times

Well I'll add another post.
I myself prefer to use Windows 98SE so in addition I dual boot using the Xandros Operating System if I want to use the Internet.Xandros is great.It's a very(VERY) easy to install Linux Operating System and very secure.It looks a lot like Windows.Go to Wikipedia and search Xandros.It's sold in some retail stores as well.The premium edition or the business edition is the best one to get.
Windows 98 is great for the older Win 9X & DOS applications and Games.You don't have to give Windows 98 or ME up just use Xandros in addition.

Windows 98 SE continues to work fine for me. I've used a hardware fire wall and software fire wall for years. Stopped using anti virus software years ago. Doesn't seem to have made a differene. Still virus free. XP just seems like more of the same to me. Maybe more of it! BSOD was never a big problem with my meager sofware. I'm probably going to have to find another browser before too much longer if I want to keep using 98. I see no pressing reason to change yet!