Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (
More info?)
What is the best way inyho to acquire MS-DOS 6.22, Glen?
"glee" wrote:
> While I understand and agree with most of your original statements regarding the
> need to upgrade in order to remain secure online for the most part, I don't see how
> you make the quantum leap that someone using Win98SE three years from now will find
> themselves severely limited in browser functionality. Just because IE6 may not be
> able to handle some of the web pages three years from now (just as IE4 became
> outdated a few years ago), does not mean that there won't be capable browsers
> available that will still support Win98SE....Firefox, Mozilla, Opera, Deepnet
> Explorer. Gary, I have a 486 with only DOS 6.22 installed, and I can surf the
> Internet just fine, and use email, using the DOS Arachne browser. Plenty of
> functionality still there. I think there will be browsers available that will
> operate on Win98 and allow all the web's functionality, years from now. Take a look
> at the win3x_wfw_dos group and you will find a number of users still fully
> functioning online, with those old operating systems, and not posing any security
> risks....indeed, many of today's malware won't run on those systems.
>
> There are currently still a large number of people worldwide, such as in Eastern
> Europe, who still use 486's and even 386's. There are a lot of users right here in
> the US still using their old Pentium 166, or PII 233. A co-worker of mine is very
> happy since I got him a "new" pc.....a PII 450. While I fully understand that
> legacy hardware is being phased out, that simply does not mean that it will no
> longer be in use. I find that we "geek" types sometimes forget that not everyone
> buys or builds a new computer every couple of years, and a lot of folks expect their
> investment to last them a long while.
>
> I am definitely not arguing with most of what you are saying....I agree with most of
> it, for better or worse....but I do not think that Win98SE will become quite as
> "dead" as the picture you paint. As for dial-up, I don't see that changing in the
> way you describe, and I am quite likely to still be on dial-up three years from now.
> Other than that, I think we agree. ;-)
> --
> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
>
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
> news:u2gQ7SXQFHA.1096@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > No, I'm saying that *whatever* web browser you find yourself using in
> > 2008, it will either be severely limited in functionality or it won't be
> > installed on a Win9x system. I just used IE as the primary example.
> >
> > But that's not all I'm saying. Less and less new equipment will support
> > Win9x, dwindling to negligible by the end of the decade, and whatever
> > equipment now exists that supports Win9x will either be incompatible
> > with the rest of the world or will be burned out. Not only that, I'm
> > betting that dial-up connections will be so rare that they will cost a
> > mint to use, and that the alternatives will, again, be entirely
> > incompatible with Win9x systems. Another aspect that I haven't mentioned
> > yet, and which may or may not ever occur, and even if it does will
> > probably take a bit longer than three years to fulfill--In the eyes of
> > many, *Something* has to be done about the wild-west nature of the
> > internet and the resulting *expensive* garbage, invasion of privacy,
> > etc., etc., and I'm guessing it will involve technologies that will
> > force a good part of what's out there today into quick oblivion. Look
> > for this to be a major issue in politics over the next few years.
> >
> > In short, by the end of this decade, even *if* you can make it to the
> > internet, or even run Win9x at all, perhaps, it will be as a child
> > system on a LAN that is based upon XP or later, or, just maybe, from
> > within a VPC. Which kinda defeats the purpose, don't you think?
> >
> > No, I don't think *all* of this will have come to pass in the next three
> > years, but a great portion will have, and my predictions will be fully
> > realized by 2010 or so. So says I.
> >
> > (Hey, what fun is predicting the future if you don't stick your neck out
> > just a bit, <bg>?)
> >
> > --
> > Gary S. Terhune
> > MS MVP Shell/User
> >
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> >
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
> >
> > "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
> > news:eE$NbJXQFHA.3816@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > >
> > > "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
> > > news:exaOn%23WQFHA.3336@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl..
> > > <snip>
> > > > Additionally, a vast number of websites, including most of the ones
> > that
> > > > even you probably consider required reading today, will be adopting
> > > > technologies that Windows 9x system with IE 6.1 won't be able to
> > use.
> > > > The situation will be comparable to "text-only" alternate versions
> > that
> > > > were quite common up until a few years ago. (And the current version
> > of
> > > > IE *will* be the last IE that's installable to any Win9x system.)
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > So you are saying that using an alternate web browser will not allow
> > one to use the
> > > Internet anymore? One must use an XP system's IE or get off the
> > Internet? I am
> > > having a hard time buying that part of your argument, Gary.
> > > --
> > > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> > >
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> > >
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
> > >
> >
>
>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram