flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > Windows 98?

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
decard



Joined: 11 Sep 2003
Posts: 1092
Location: Poland
decard
Proably you are right, XP isn't perfect too.
What kind of errors?
Post 26 Jan 2006, 18:35
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Borsuc



Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
XP is not about better functionality than 98. it's about wasting resources (fancy graphics, some crap security). true, it has a little more stable kernel, but not really for something 'that' spectacular.

veach1 wrote:
I`ve got several good dos tools (never seen suitable replacement under win)

yes, me too. it's about functionality that make good tools Wink. not eye-candy is the point here, but rather *wasting* more resources so making people believe XP is powerful because it needs a lot of (wasted) resources.

The security things I hate most are the RUN-TIME parameter checking. Really, this thing should be done at assembly/compile-time, not run-time.. I have never seen any programs that are buggy because of parameter passing.

This sould be done at compile-time (parameter checking)... why have all API use that 'security' protection when there's no need if the person is smart enough and has a decent compiler/assembler. Or at least make it in 'debug' version of program, not 'release' version. (like making 'debug' version verify parameters, etc.)

Seriously, how buggy is a program entirely if only the simple parameter passing (with the aid of compiler/debugger) is incorrect. i would definetaly turn away from such program, because it may crash my comp surely.


I think writing Fresh work on 98 is a good thing. XP doesn't really have much *useful* or *necessary* features, as I described above. so by making it work in 98 you can be pretty confident that your program is not using those not-very-useful 'features'
Post 26 Jan 2006, 19:14
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
decard: silently fixes your stack error, which causes on your XP it runs, but people with 98 get crash
Post 26 Jan 2006, 20:04
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
RedGhost



Joined: 18 May 2005
Posts: 443
Location: BC, Canada
RedGhost
maybe it's just me, but you guys seem to think XP is only a little more stable than windows 98, i remember so many frustrating nights getting the blue screen of death and crashes and freezes for no reason (not testing my own applications) just doing simple tasks and it would randomly crash, my friend brian would get the BSOD every night at 12am sharp on his windows 98, so it can't have just been mine Very Happy
Post 27 Jan 2006, 03:14
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger Reply with quote
shoorick



Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: Ukraine
shoorick
my personal experience: i prefer w2k as more known to me and well stable. also i can use many languages without any additional tool same time: english, russian and chinese (.. and can even more).
although 2k visually slightly slower then 98, when i wrote cd with nero on k5/133 (speed x4) i noticed, that filling buffer on 2k is stable, when on 98 any event could lead to empty buffer.
from other side, i've been using 95 on ciryx 486dlc/40 with 8mb ram and 170 mb hdd - it worked ok! and my friend even had been using 95 without ie on 85mb hdd on 386dx/40 Wink
Post 27 Jan 2006, 07:18
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
According to some stuff I read at Wikipedia (among other places), Windows 98 and ME were both the last DOS-based Windows. After that, Windows 2000 (which the XBox 1 uses a modified version of) and XP are both completely 32-bit and independant of DOS. Hence, anything DOS-related probably runs much better on 98 than XP. Win 98 will soon be phased out later this year:

Quote:

Windows 98 and Windows 98 Second Edition support was scheduled to end on January 16, 2004. The continual evaluation of the Support Lifecycle policy revealed, however, that customers in the smaller and the emerging markets needed additional time to upgrade their product. Therefore, Microsoft will continue to support Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, and Windows Me through June 30, 2006.

Critical security updates will be provided on the Windows Update site through June 30, 2006.


XP supposedly "requires 64 MB of RAM to install" but:
Quote:

The system requirements of Windows 98 Second Edition are: a 66 MHz processor, 24 MB RAM and at least 210 MB of free hard disk space.
Post 27 Jan 2006, 20:26
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
shoorick



Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: Ukraine
shoorick
w98se runs on 16M ok
Post 03 Feb 2006, 08:23
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
xp forbid the direct to disk access and some int don't works well
int 33h 7 & 8(get/set mouse bounds) don't work at all
Post 22 Sep 2007, 02:48
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
madmatt



Joined: 07 Oct 2003
Posts: 1045
Location: Michigan, USA
madmatt
edfed wrote:
xp forbid the direct to disk access and some int don't works well
int 33h 7 & 8(get/set mouse bounds) don't work at all


I guess in XP it is assumed that you will use window mouse messages (WM_MBUTTONDOWN, WM_MBUTTONUP, etc.) rather than old 16-bit dos interupts.
Post 23 Sep 2007, 15:56
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
yes but
MS say proudly that they have a full compatibility

it's not true
Post 23 Sep 2007, 16:14
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DOS386



Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 1901
DOS386
> I would like to know if someone is still using windows 98...
> I wonder how important it is to make program work in both 98 and XP.

Good idea ... even better: make it compatible with DOS via HX or even best a native DOS version ... then you can safely forget Windaube 98 Laughing

> w98se runs on 16M ok

Not OK. Extremely slowly. 64 MiB is a "usable" minimum. And XP needs 256 MiB for the same, and Vi$ta only 1 GiB. Where do you want to go tomorrow, dude ?

lim sizeof(Windows) = ??? Laughing
time->future

_________________
Bug Nr.: 12345

Title: Hello World program compiles to 100 KB !!!

Status: Closed: NOT a Bug


Last edited by DOS386 on 29 Dec 2007, 04:36; edited 1 time in total
Post 22 Oct 2007, 22:24
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
Q=sizeof(windows)
P=random
P>>1
Qn=PQn-1

Code:
     ooooo       ooooo
    oo     oo  oo      oo
    oo      oooo       oo
    oo     oo  oo      oo
     ooooo       ooooo
    
Post 22 Oct 2007, 22:46
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
0.1



Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 474
Location: India
0.1
You gotta understand that Windows XP is most popular right now!
And I suspect that the same will be true for Windows Vista too (after some time).
So to survive we have to support the Windows*** for as long as they exist.

There are so many ways to do a thing in software world!
That is what makes us software develop
ers earn our bread and butter!

_________________
Code:
 o__=-
 )
(\
 /\  
    
Post 23 Oct 2007, 13:18
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MCD



Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 604
Location: Germany
MCD
I also use use Win98 from time to time for some good old DOS-programs and win developpment
Post 25 Oct 2007, 17:49
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
soon windows 98 is 10 years old...
it bugs like the begining... erf...
10 years old and still as dumb.. Sad

the brothers and sisters, XP, NT4, 2000, are still the same...
bug bug bug bug driver bug bug driver driver update bug slow bug slow delete fast bug reboot switchoff reset ... erf, i know, i am a executionner for my computers...

that's why i try to code in asm...
to make a robust OS... that is "like" win98...
Post 24 Dec 2007, 20:40
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DOS386



Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 1901
DOS386
> that's why i try to code in asm...
> to make a robust OS... that is "like" win98 ...

Will take some time .. judging from your posts in "OS construction" subforum Laughing
Post 28 Dec 2007, 00:46
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Rahsennor



Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 61
Rahsennor
I use Windows 98 exclusively, because newer versions are simply too slow on my machine. It's a bit like being stuck on an island with a rising sea level. Everything from games to the GIMP no longer functions.

Linux, anyone? Very Happy
Post 29 Dec 2007, 00:45
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
Quote:
10 years old and still as dumb

which part would you design differently, and why?
Post 29 Dec 2007, 01:22
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
which parts?

-startup, make it less than 3 seconds
-language support, no incoherence
-operation timing, more precise, and not buggy, i had a transfert that needed 321432324 minutes in theory
-real time global disk occupation overview, drive/ property
-one unique driver for all USB flash drives
-shift lock, shift, anullation of shift lock with shift lock
-don't try to access all drives when accessing to the meta folder, current machine.
-no need to reconfigure all the system each install, and possibility to make a custom distribution, including more features, like opensource programms...
-possibility ( graphics ) to put textures on windows, instead of only sad square color block.
-no more bug
-no need to use ctrl alt del to fix problems with instable programs.
-less sensitive to IE bugs
-no need of echec less mode
possibility to have more than one desktop, don't speak about the poor nvidia desktop manager, or the possibility to have more desktop something like linux would be good
-no need task planifier
-no need disconect user
-no need active desktop
-no need a lot of things...
-need the complete open source
-need (graphix) transparent text frames on icons.
-need prolongate standby support
-need to become as free as menuet OS
-need custom features like rename files like if it was a pure text string, bored of F2, arrows, del and insert
-no need of the big WIN98 logo at startup and switch off
-no need any copyright or royalties references... win98 is mine, not the property of MS, i use WIN98, they don't
-lock task bar option
-support for more Files systems
-i don't need the dustbag on my desktop
-sometimes, i want to change icons for many things, but impossible...
-shortcut tag is very ugly
-some buttons in explorer are really endless like cutcopypaste, there is the contextual menu for that...
-change the name, windows 98 sounds like: i love to be fist-fucked.
-some upgrades , win98 don't recognise PIII
-some optimisations, like less stages before to print something.
-many others things...

one theory
win98 is a beta version of what it can be...
10 years after, i think we have a complete idea of what to change ...
the positive feedback can act now
Post 29 Dec 2007, 01:56
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Dex4u



Joined: 08 Feb 2005
Posts: 1601
Location: web
Dex4u
I still use Win98 to code DexOS on, i have xp, vista, linux, but i coded 80% of DexOS on a old PC with win98 on.
The other 20% on DexOS its self, but more and more as i make progress i code on DexOS its self.
Post 29 Dec 2007, 02:44
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.