Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 9th Jun 2006 22:42 UTC
Windows Microsoft will not fix a serious flaw in Windows 98 and Windows Millennium Edition because a patch could break other applications. The security bug relates to Windows Explorer and could let an intruder commandeer a vulnerable PC, Microsoft warned in April. The software maker has made fixes available for Windows Server 2003, Windows XP and Windows 2000, but it has found that eliminating the vulnerability in Windows 98 and ME is "not feasible," it said.
Permalink for comment 132601
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: who cares
by Decius on Mon 12th Jun 2006 06:08 UTC in reply to "who cares"
Member since:

I know it's already been stated that millions of users still use Win9x. It's important to look at some of the reasons why that is the case:

1) Cost -- It is fine to say, "A new computer with XP can be bought for only $300", but I know many people to whom that is not a feasible amount...most of them being on a fixed-income. Three-hundred dollars is only a great price if you have the means to pay that much, or have a credit card. I do a lot of computer installs on older hardware for seniors & those on some sort of disability, and it is easy enought to get really inexpensive AND legit copies of any of the Win9x family to put on those computers. With work (stripping out IE etc...) they can even be made to run not only quickly, but stably. For the few things that these people need them for the Win9x is ideal.

2) Quality -- Most cheap computers come with XP Home not XP Pro...I have no desire to start a flamefest, but I feel that have to state my opinion of XP Home...utter garbage. There are many experiences I've had w/XP Home and none of them has been positive. XP Pro is almost like a different animal. I know people will ask,'Why?' or 'Can you back that up?', but I have no desire to spend a lot of time on the subject, and as I's my opinion, nothing more, so I have no need to justify myself.

3) Alternatives -- For myself, I use/play around with ~14 different OSes. When one of the people I'm putting a computer together for is comfortable with the idea, I install a BSD or Linux. Everyone I install for gets tutorials on how to use a computer anyways, so many don't care what OS goes on it. If the machine does what they want and MAY want, they're tickled pink, but if they want Windows and cost is an issue (see point #1), then it's usually a Win9x. Fear of anything other than Windows is usually a factor in this last group of people, so alternative OSes are not a choice, and cost prevents them from going to the newer Windows offerings.

There are valid reasons for staying with this old tech.

Just my 2

Reply Parent Score: 1