Vikingod

Microsoft's own worst enemy for Windows Vista is the kinds of users who are still running Windows 95. What, if anything, might convince these die-hards to upgrade?

Microsoft officials have admitted one of their biggest challenges in continuing to grow the company's Windows business is the impression among some of its installed base that older Windows versions are good enough. The users of Windows 95, which turns ten years old on Wednesday, are a case in point.

Check out any of a number of Windows support forums and it is readily apparent there are still lots of Windows 95 die-hards out there.

In terms of real numbers, Windows 95 accounts for just over one percent of the Windows client operating environment installed base total today, said Al Gillen, a research director with International Data Corp. "The number has fallen off dramatically over the past couple of years," Gillen said.
__________
Read More/Source: Microsoft Watch

IvanV

Qindows 95 OSR2 (or whatever the name was) was a decent OS, trully good enough for a vast majority of home-users. The only reason why so few people use this OS, is that Microsoft stopped supporting it and new applications are made not to work under them.

__________________
If anyone has Portal 2 and hasn't played the co-op and wants to do me a favour, let me know (PM me or whatever).

Tipstaff

Microsoft should have put a bomb in their OS that goes off after 10 years. I, for one, hate the fact that people buy $2000 piece of equipment, and want me to install Windows 98SE on it.

Case in point: I have this one customer that still refuses to upgrade. Just won't do it. Last week he comes in looking to buy a new computer. A NEW COMPUTER. As in a Penitum 4 on a 945 board, 250Gig SATA hard drive, and a DVD burner. What does he want me to install?!? Windows 98SE. I got an instant migraine when I thought of the garbage I'd have to go through getting the onboard sound, and SATA working under 98SE, not to mention Zero support for USB2.0, and having to split up the hard drive (if I got it working under 98) into 7+ partitions thanks to FAT-Fing-32. Ugh!!

What this guy, and a lot of other people don't realize is that Microsoft isn't the only ones not supporting Win9X. Neither is Intel "completely" supporting it any longer. The Realtek onboard audio, for instance, that Intel is using doesn't work properly under 98SE unless you do some serious hacking to the drivers.

So, people, remember: if you want to keep using 9X operating systems (95/98/SE/ME) don't expect to pickup a new machine. It ain't gonna happen. Sorry.. but I just don't need another migraine.

<sigh> As you can see this sorta touch a raw nerve for me. Too tired...

__________________

CDsDontBurn

At my shop we found it impossible to install win98se on an intel 945 chipset MoBo. A customer requested this as well, we tried it even after warning him that the chances of it working was like less than 1%. We called him back, and told him to go XP. He agreed cuz he saw no way around it.

__________________

pr0digal jenius

do like Circuit City....we don't even SELL anything but windows XP

CDsDontBurn

what about those customers who bring in their copy of win9x???

__________________

pr0digal jenius

That's what the small hammer is for

Iria

I used to work for a company managing the Printer Driver group. It's amazing how many Japanese OEMs insisted we still provide some level of support for Windows 95 ... apparently many of their users still use 95 in Asia.

clicker666

I work for a radio communications dealer. Not only do I have to get Windows XP on our brand spanking new Fujitsu Lifebooks (they have serial ports), but DOS and Windows 98 SE as well. Of course, there are no drivers for the old stuff except for the Intel chipset - but it's enough for them to work.

I've got an old Dell laptop (286) and a 386 I also have to keep running so that the boys can program ancient pagers and radios.

Our radio suppliers have only recently begun to create Win 32 based software, it's quite sad really.

__________________

Tipstaff

I sort of exaggerated the parition stuff. One way to get around the limitation is to format using a Windows ME boot disk. Win98s max parition size is 127GiB, while WinMes theoretical size is 8 terabytes. BTW: Windows XP.. it's 32GiB. Go figure. At any rate, your still limited to a max file size of 4GiB.

I tell you.. do you want to know who the worst offenders are? The ones that still use older OS? Banks. They still run accounting software in DOS, and some of the trade systems run in Win3.1/DOS. Guys that run old version of ACCPAC, AutoCAD, and WordPerfect 5.1 are the others.

Thanks for letting me know about the Win98 problem with the 945 board, CDs. Last time I tried using 98 on a 915 board, and that was a headache, so it's not surprising it didn't work on the 945 one.

__________________

CDsDontBurn

ya, np man . I don't know what hardware you CAN still install win98 on an Athlon set up though. You have any experience on that one Tipstaff ???

__________________

Tipstaff

Don't usually sell Athlon systems since most of my clients are corporate. They are really picky about what they buy, and Intel is what they want. For the Athlon systems I do sell I usually stick with nForce based ones, and of those I've had success right up to nF3 boards. Seeing as how there are no nF4 Win9X/ME drivers I've never attempted it, and while the VIA based 939 boards have Win9X/Me support I'm hesitant to buy them. (Edit: thinking about it some more I might pickup an AV8 to test out).

As for Pentiums systems, I usually stick with boards that use Intel chipsets, or the occassional SIS chip for the cheap buggers. For the cheap buggers I usually go with Aopen or Asrock boards. I have one corporate client that buys cheap systems in bulk (always Celerons), and these have to have Win98SE installed for 2 reasons: 1) they have an accounting software that requires DOS, yet they need Windows too, and 2) there words: <whinny voice> "Cuz we own a bulk license for 98" . Funny thing is I can actually install Win9x/ME on all of these cheap boards right up to the 865 based ones. I just got one of the new 915 Dual series in, and I'll "have" to start testing it for 9x/ME compatibility since the 865 series is history.

As for actual Intel boards.. anything after 865 chipset, and it's just one painful experience after another. I can get the audio working, and I can get SATA working (sorta), but it takes so much time, so much hacking, so much manual loading, and back loading.. not worth it. Especially when it takes hours to do it, but I'm making pennies off of the sale.

__________________

CDsDontBurn

tell your clients to get newer software so that you don't have to deal w/the win9x problems. Tell them "you gotta spend money to make money". I'm sure that there is a newer version of the software that they use that is supported by winXP. Sure, they'll spend an arm and a leg at first, but in the long run, it will only benefit them, and yourself. If they decide not to do it; both you and i know that it will only be a matter of time before they are forced to upgrade their software and windows.

__________________

Resistor

Well the reason some people stick with the old OS is because of the Softwares they use. My company bought 2 new Autodesk software and that alone cost $18,000. So if you have a big corporate and uses many softwares will have a hard time getting things running. It is the cost of softwares are hindering the upgrade path...

The_Neon_Cowboy

OMG win98 is the 1st "real" windows 3.1 and 95 are like just a dos "GUI" LOL

__________________

Matth

Never mind Win95, there must be some people still on DOS / Win3.1.

Reasons for staying on older operating systems include:

1. "Can't be bothered updating", though if these people ever need a new machine, a decent software bundle should suit them, unless they can't be bothered learning it!
2. "Can't pay / Won't pay" - again, if they open their wallet long enough to buy a new machine, a bundle of software "worth" a fortune if you actually bought it off the shelf should please them immensely.
3. "Single specialist application" - a friend of mine keeps an old Win98 system to run some things that just do not work on WinXP and would be expensive or impossible to replace with XP versions.

A similar case is where there are 10 systems running an old application, and the new version is different enough to need at least some basic conversion training... deploying 1 new version (or 1 replacement machine) alongside the old is impractical, so it means either replacing all with a new version, or trying to make thee new system compatible with the old software.

4. There is a class that is the opposite of the "early adopter" - I'll call them the "catapult upgrader", who hangs back until the tension becomes too great, then springs forward - typically, they will skip one or more versions, maybe only jumping forward to a decent midrange system when they find something that cannot be done on the old machine.

Those who NEED old version compatibility, would be well advised to seek out secondhand hardware, the prices of which have been decimated by the power and performance of new "value" machines.


I do know people who have Win95 - the machine was old enough to need a new CMOS battery.. hang on, I actually know someone that's still running Win3.1 on a 386SX20.

In general, Win98SE is a better choice for the "forced staybacks" with things that dont run on XP, as I'm not aware of many issues (other than some CD-RW software) from 95 to 98.

There were some sites that gave lists of relevant updates...
http://www.infinisource.com/win95.html
Not the one I was looking for...

http://web.archive.org/web/200312030.../win95upd.html
Walbeehm's page, lives on in the archive, though maybe the links don't!

Vikingod

You're right to a certain extent. banks often run older software and operating systems. Depending on the size of the bank though, its not that big of a deal. At the bank I work for, the machines that run older versions are either stand alone machines (not on the network, serve a single purpose or for a specialized job) or being replaced at a great rate. Sarbanes Oxley has taken a toll on the old machines, you cant have them without the auditors throwing a shit fit (I cant blame them, btw). Core systems however are often dos based (or other non-gui) OS's because its doesnt make sense any other way. Security is not a issue, believe me, they are locked up pretty tight. Still very powerful, just not that pretty.

It does piss me off when i get a spreadsheet sent to me that I can't view without scowering the internet for some viewer because an accountant doesn't want to leave his 20 year old copy of word-perfect for a copy of ms office 2000.