Thank you, Microsoft, for convincing me to update my video driver. I had run the same video driver for two years, ever since I built this computer. But thanks to your automatic updates hosing my video driver, I now have the latest video drivers. All it took was about four hours of fighting the software you trashed.
I'm not using some off-brand video chip, either. Nvidia is one of the top chips and the video board runs great and has for two years. Until Microsoft hosed it, of course.
I realize this isn't a big deal, unless of course you have 50 machines with Nvidia graphic chips and Microsoft hoses them all. But it is aggravating, isn't it, when a perfectly fine computer downloads updates and goes all wonky?
While we're picking on Microsoft, the 50 million of you still using Windows 98 (according to some estimates) better make a decision quickly. Microsoft ended support for Windows 98 this week, meaning no more security upgrades. Windows 98 security wasn't much to talk about anyway, since Microsoft released that operating system before they grokked the Internet, but at least they made the effort. No more of that, friends. If you haven't replaced Internet Explorer with Firefox of Opera on your Windows 98 machines yet, better hop to it. That will help keep the spyware folks at bay.
Some (including me to at least half the people I talk to about Windows 98) advocate switching those older computers to Linux. More efficient with older computer hardware than Windows, a Linux operating system will improve performance on standard business functions over Windows 98 on the same computer. You'll also avoid about 99.9 percent of the spyware and viruses that plague Windows systems as well.
I have friends who believe SimplyMEPIS is the best Linux operating system for Windows refugees. Others swear by Xandros, especially their new Home Edition. You can get these or other Linux operating systems at many of the sites we've been talking about for schools, or check out LinuxWorld for other ideas.
The only real problem with replacing Windows 98 with Linux is that many custom applications that run businesses all over the place must use Windows 98 (or 95) because those operating systems strongly support of DOS. That's why those Windows 98 computers weren't updated to Windows 2000 or Windows XP in many cases, because the two newest Microsoft operating systems ruined the ability for developers to run DOS applications with full access to the computer hardware.
Once again, thanks a lot, Microsoft.
Back to Small Business Tech Notes
C'mon, I am so sick and tired of all this Microsoft bashing. It is just too easy. My question is "why are you still running Win 98 and expecting Microsoft to support it?" Would you expect a car yiou purchased in 1998 to still be under warranty 8 years later? I suppose so, if you bought a Kia Spectra, but that is not the business they are in, nor should they be. If you want to push Linux, by all means, do so on its own merit. Don't complain to us about having issues with your Win 98 machines. GET OVER IT!
Posted by: jobu on July 19, 2006 09:12 AM
I switched to Linux three years ago and love it.
Suse 10.1 is great for home desktop users, business users, mom and dad, grampa and grama etc...
Mandriva is also nice.
Posted by: datruth on July 20, 2006 01:24 PM
quote #1 from jobu...
"Don't complain to us about having issues with your Win 98 machines."
Why not? People have a right to complain and with Microsoft, it's justified.
Security issues have plagued Windows 98 since it's release. There are a lot of small to medium sized business users that still MUST use Windows 98. Ending support for for these users puts them at a much higher risk.
quote #2 from jobu...
"C'mon, I am so sick and tired of all this Microsoft bashing. It is just too easy."
It's much easier to sit back and criticize, than to post a well thought out, constructive comment.
Posted by: datruth on July 20, 2006 01:45 PM
There's yet another issue with Windows 98. I call it the "Ernie Ball" problem. Several years ago, the BSA barged into Ernie Ball, Inc.'s (the guitar string maker) offices with armed marshals, demanding a computer software audit...right then and there. Again, with *armed marshals*. The BSA found five older, recycled computers for which Ernie Ball, Inc. couldn't immediately find the OEM license papers, even though these same computers had the "Genuine Windows" stickers on them. US$88,000 later, Sterling Ball, the current CEO and Ernie's son, told his IT staff, "get everything Microsoft out of here within six months."
It has been nearly six years since then. They've had to have a few custom apps written, probably to replace those DOS apps that you mentioned above (and I agree that this is an issue). When I first heard about that, I figured, there go their cost savings. Turns out I was way, way wrong.
Sterling Ball has let it be known that his company saves somewhere in the six figures per year in computer maintenance, and that this is the biggest savings. Now, add to that the cost savings from not having to pay Microsoft's prices, and the freedom from any further BSA audit threats and related lawsuits. The money that he's had to spend having apps written for GNU/Linux was "cheap by comparison."
Posted by: Sum Yung Gai on July 20, 2006 04:48 PM
The nVidia hardware upgrades Windows Update pushes have been bad for at least a year! After hosing 2 PCs here, I don't install them anymore.
Posted by: Jokl on July 20, 2006 05:57 PM
What a ridiculous commentary. I mean really, at a certain point rants like this break down and become little more than unrestrained bitterness.
So MSFT should now be chastised for dropping real mode DOS support six years ago?!
I'm not even sure where to begin with an article like this. All I can say is follow your own advice, pretend Microsoft doesnt exist, run (and write about) Linux exclusively and stay committed to 10 year old apps running on 10 year old hardware supported by a 10 year old build.
And all of this angst because you *elected* to not screen updates before they are just installed? I'd hope that if you had 50 machines, you'd be running SUS and would actually review and test patches before you deployed them (and maybe you would never allow *drive* updates, hmmm?)
When I read complaints like this I have to wonder how the author could possibly be any better off with a *NIX variant. Are you blindly deploying Linux patches? Or are you not patching Linux at all since it "doesnt need it"? If its the latter, I really wish you luck!
Posted by: quantum flux on July 20, 2006 11:04 PM
See also Ubuntu Linux http://www.ubuntu.org
In addition, notice that there is a DOS emulator in the Linux world as well.
The old model for device drivers makes your machine into the test lab. The hardware vendor and the OS vendor don't get to test a driver and an new OS update working together.
So it's not a Microsoft problem -- it's a problem in the cooperation model that Microsoft and the hardware vendors have.
The Linux model works when hardware vendors cooperate with it.
Links to other driver stories and a good explanation of the Linux model:
http://www.linuxworld.com/community/?q=node/122
Guess what? I traded XP for Suse Linux! I have been using Linux for the past 2 years an I love it. Folks, trying switching to linux and you will be delighted! Have fun and to Microsoft I say, build better software. Guess what? You are too late, the penguin is here to stay! Long live the penguin!
Posted by: Michael Ganesan on July 25, 2006 06:35 PM
There aren't "easy" answers here, are there?
I think the Windows product line suffers from the accumulated side-effects of "backward compatibility": Many of Microsoft's OS releases were specifically altered by a special subteam dedicated to compatibility testing so that older software would run under the newer flavor of Windows. (Joel Spolsky talks about this, and links to the blog of Microsoft's Raymond Chen, in the following article on his site: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/printerFriendly/articles/APIWar.html)
How far can this be pushed before something really breaks in a spectacular fashion, or before the security and reliability problems created by such a business decision are painfully obvious to all? I believe that we are starting to see the results, aren't we? The "innovator's dilemma" is that such "backwards compatibility enforcement" may have made absolutely reasonable business sense at the time, but also runs the risk of "mortgaging your future."
I might suggest for a start to read "Linux for Windows Addicts" by Michael Joseph Miller. It might help those being abandoned by Microsoft! Perhaps there are other books in this genre too! This book might just be the "one candle that lights the darkness!"
Posted by: Duane Xavier on August 3, 2006 04:49 PM
|
Does Verizon's Voyager stack up to the iPhone? |
5 IT skills that won't boost your salary 
[1,407]
Women 4 times more likely than men to cough up personal info [589]
Japan's 10 funniest tech-related commercials [Videos] [407]
Throwing away a promo CD is "unauthorized distribution"? [1,265]
Adults too quick to dismiss educational video games [682]
Attack of the iPhone clones [Slideshow] [578]
10 things IT needs to know about AJAX [1,258]
This Year's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries [Slideshow] [409]
Network World on Twitter: Get our tweets and stay plugged in to networking news