Q: help. i cannot find or services on a win 98 box. where is it ?
Best Answer: The CiaB series is well-regarded and generally gets good reviews
http://prodesigntools.com/get-the-best-a…
Also, 14 hours of free new video tutorials for all CS5 products were just released, including 2+ hours for Illustrator, might also be helpful
http://prodesigntools.com/free-new-video…
Re:Mods, can we get a custom title for guy? Like "Win9x Public Enemy #1" or something?
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
oh no..
*waits for guy to come chiming in about how Windows 98 is a POS operating system*
He's right, it is a POS, but everyone knows that.
Not exactly, it's a POS compared to what we have (windows world speaking) now. It was good in it's day.
I didn't think so. I only ran it if I had a game to play that wouldn't run in Windows NT. 
Well said.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
oh no..
*waits for guy to come chiming in about how Windows 98 is a POS operating system*
He's right, it is a POS, but everyone knows that.
Not exactly, it's a POS compared to what we have (windows world speaking) now. It was good in it's day.
I didn't think so. I only ran it if I had a game to play that wouldn't run in Windows NT.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
oh no..
*waits for guy to come chiming in about how Windows 98 is a POS operating system*
He's right, it is a POS, but everyone knows that.
Not exactly, it's a POS compared to what we have (windows world speaking) now. It was good in it's day.
It was NOT good in its day compared to what we could and should have had even back then.
OS/2 WARP would have been so much better than Windows 98 could have ever dreamed of being, had it been given a chance in the home computing desktop market. It is such a shame that a POS OS was forced down the public's throat all because of the control MS had. OS/2 WARP was by far a superior OS to anything POS Windows 9X based.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
oh no..
*waits for guy to come chiming in about how Windows 98 is a POS operating system*
He's right, it is a POS, but everyone knows that.
Not exactly, it's a POS compared to what we have (windows world speaking) now. It was good in it's day.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
oh no..
*waits for guy to come chiming in about how Windows 98 is a POS operating system*
He's right, it is a POS, but everyone knows that.
Re:If you were a gamer, NT was craptastic, and 98 was where it was at. 2k game support was shakey early on…
Actually NT4 was great for OpenGL stuff.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
If you were a gamer, NT was craptastic, and 98 was where it was at. 2k game support was shakey early on…
That's only because of Microsoft making a big mistake in focusuing on Windows 98. If they would have focused on Windows NT, it would have had the latest DirectX and been much better for gaming than Windows 98 could have ever dreamed of being.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
If you were a gamer, NT was craptastic, and 98 was where it was at. 2k game support was shakey early on…
Bingo..
If you needed anything above DirectX 3, then 98 was the only way to go
Re:If you were a gamer, NT was craptastic, and 98 was where it was at. 2k game support was shakey early on…
Re:Hardware is advancing.. Microsoft is advancing.. The Windows operating system needed advanced. Windows 98 was a start; Windows 2000 improved upon that with great features of NT with familiar features of Windows 98 threw in the mix.. Windows XP keeps improving upon that..
Windows 98 was not a good start. Windows 2000 didn't evolve from it. WIndows 2000 evolved from Windows NT. MS would have been much wiser to design all opertaing systems to be based on Windows NT 10 years ago.
Re:To the OP; here is some text I copied from another source. As someone already mentioned, MSCONFIG should point you to some "services" that are started on start up. Here is the other source of programs/apps/services that run on startup:
——————————————————————————————————-
In Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows NT the programs unexpectedly begin to be started, though they are not present in a folder Startup or in win.ini.
What for the programs hide?
1. System utilities.
2. Any user programs.
3. Trojan programs. Example: Back Office, Back Door etc.
Whence are they started?
From the Windows system registry.
For start in Windows 95 the following keys of the registry are used:
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run Services
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Current Version\Run
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
for its time 98 was great. ME should have never been created.
I'd say win 98 was also rubbish for its time. I guess MS was more worried about programme compatibility or something like that instead of system stability.
Never mind, it's all thankfully in the past now (well for most people).
I agree with you totally. IN NO WAY WAS Windows 98 great for its time. WIndows 2000/XP are so much better for their time than Windows 98 ever was, even for its time.
Now, if the whole computing world was using a true 32-bit OS the last 10 years, then you could make comparisons like that.
Windows 9X was never a good OS, even for its time. MS should have been much more worried about system stability and efficiency than compatibility. Or they could have made it easy for beginners to setup a dual boot between legacy WIndows 3.1 DOS, and a true 32-bit good quality NT based Windows. That way, users could boot to Windows 3.1 to run legacy applictaions, and boot to Windows NT to run 32-bit applications produced in 1996 to present.
Oh for crying out fvcking loud.. stop babbling about 32-bit… DOS, NT, Windows 3.1..bluh fvcking bluh..
Windows 98 was released; people ran it.. people loved it…and it was fine until Windows 2000 came along, and a majority of people upgraded, or waited till Windows XP.. so deal with it…
Your comments are like saying that "color television is better than black & white".. Well no fvcking $hit..
Hardware is advancing.. Microsoft is advancing.. The Windows operating system needed advanced. Windows 98 was a start; Windows 2000 improved upon that with great features of NT with familiar features of Windows 98 threw in the mix.. Windows XP keeps improving upon that..
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
for its time 98 was great. ME should have never been created.
I'd say win 98 was also rubbish for its time. I guess MS was more worried about programme compatibility or something like that instead of system stability.
Never mind, it's all thankfully in the past now (well for most people).
I agree with you totally. IN NO WAY WAS Windows 98 great for its time. WIndows 2000/XP are so much better for their time than Windows 98 ever was, even for its time.
Now, if the whole computing world was using a true 32-bit OS the last 10 years, then you could make comparisons like that.
Windows 9X was never a good OS, even for its time. MS should have been much more worried about system stability and efficiency than compatibility. Or they could have made it easy for beginners to setup a dual boot between legacy WIndows 3.1 DOS, and a true 32-bit good quality NT based Windows. That way, users could boot to Windows 3.1 to run legacy applictaions, and boot to Windows NT to run 32-bit applications produced in 1996 to present.
MS could have included Windows 3.1 and DOS on the same installation media as Widnows NT and made it easy to run an installation program that would do separate installs of Windows NT and WIN 3.1/DOS, and setup a boot menu to boot to either one.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
for its time 98 was great. ME should have never been created.
I'd say win 98 was also rubbish for its time. I guess MS was more worried about programme compatibility or something like that instead of system stability.
Never mind, it's all thankfully in the past now (well for most people).
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
oh no..
*waits for guy to come chiming in about how Windows 98 is a POS operating system*
well, at least he didn't use the term POS this time 
Instead, I will use a differernt term. Windows 98/ME are sh*tty quality operating systems.
for its time 98 was great. ME should have never been created.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
oh no..
*waits for guy to come chiming in about how Windows 98 is a POS operating system*
well, at least he didn't use the term POS this time
Instead, I will use a differernt term. Windows 98/ME are sh*tty quality operating systems.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
oh no..
*waits for guy to come chiming in about how Windows 98 is a POS operating system*
well, at least he didn't use the term POS this time
Re:A good quality opertaing system should have services, and not ancient TSRs.
Re:oh no..
*waits for guy to come chiming in about how Windows 98 is a POS operating system*
Re:thanks guys, no wonder i couldnt find it.
Re:98 doesnt use services.
Re:I don't think Win98 had services like 2k/XP does. If does have msconfig though so you can use that to some extent.
0 Comments.