Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Still using Windows 98? NT4.0? 2000?  (Read 6419 times)
W4KYR
Member

Posts: 571




Ignore
« on: June 25, 2014, 02:46:26 PM »

Still using Windows 98? 98SE? NT4.0? 2000?

I would not suggest using them on the internet. But they are quite good to run older packet programs. I just fixed some old relics, the hard drive was shot on them, reinstalled the OS. Replaced the CMOS battery on some of them.

Besides being considered ancient by today's standard, they are still functional and still run good. In this day where 4 GB RAM is considered normal for a laptop. It is amazing that Windows 98 ran good on only 32 MB ram.

 If you have an older laptop lying around, refurbish it and use it for a portable packet station. Or use it for those old ham radio programs you have lying around in the drawer. Who knows? Maybe even Puppy Linux will run on them.  If it is old yet still works, don't toss it. Re-purpose it.

.

Logged

Still using Windows XP Pro.
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 6042




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: June 25, 2014, 04:25:31 PM »

Really can't be on the 'net.  The browser that these systems support are old and can't run on the net, and the newer browsers won't run on the older OSes, they're too old.

BUT...  Computers will still run the old OSes.  I run an older system on 98 for older applications with no problems.
Logged
VK6IS
Member

Posts: 87




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: June 26, 2014, 12:14:34 AM »

well,
- there is the win_3x laptop that runs some logging program,
that one likes, and the CW trainer that one likes, as well.
- then there is the win_98 PC that also has some program(s) on it, that one also likes.
& this thing also dual_boots with win_3x as well.

neither have a wireless card, - so they can't get on the 'net anyway. ..
& none of that stuff will work under a win_7 O/S either.

« Last Edit: June 26, 2014, 12:19:00 AM by VK6IS » Logged
G8YMW
Member

Posts: 237




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2014, 03:56:24 AM »

I have made a boot floppy with Win98's DOS for "Skyglobe" (A good planetarium program for astronomy) and playing Doom2.
After all these years I still like DOS
Logged

73 details Tony
Sent by WW2 Royal Navy signal lamp
AE4RV
Member

Posts: 963


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #4 on: June 26, 2014, 05:49:32 AM »

I have made a boot floppy with Win98's DOS for "Skyglobe" (A good planetarium program for astronomy) and playing Doom2.
After all these years I still like DOS

I use DOSbox for stuff like that.

http://www.dosbox.com/
Logged
G8YMW
Member

Posts: 237




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2014, 07:13:34 AM »

Quote
I use DOSbox for stuff like that.

I cannot get on with it. It may be OK but not for me
Logged

73 details Tony
Sent by WW2 Royal Navy signal lamp
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 6042




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2014, 01:54:12 PM »

Setting up Dosbox is almost as bad as setting up Linux.  I'll keep my dual system with a KVM switch.
Logged
KK4GGL
Member

Posts: 315




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2014, 02:41:49 PM »

Setting up Dosbox is almost as bad as setting up Linux.  I'll keep my dual system with a KVM switch.

And just how hard is it to set up Linux?
Logged

73,
Rick KK4GGL
G8YMW
Member

Posts: 237




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2014, 03:19:17 PM »

Quote
And just how hard is it to set up Linux?

Well I'm struggling despite playing for about 20 years. Am at the point of ripping it out and starting again.
On the surface, not too many problems.
Get under the bonnet (hood?) totally different to DOS/Windows
Logged

73 details Tony
Sent by WW2 Royal Navy signal lamp
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 6042




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2014, 03:33:55 PM »

Setting up the OS itself isn't hard at all, but setting up the additions and the associated software can be a real pain in the bottom. 
Logged
N4AAB
Member

Posts: 58


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #10 on: June 29, 2014, 05:01:59 PM »

Setting up Dosbox is almost as bad as setting up Linux.  I'll keep my dual system with a KVM switch.

And just how hard is it to set up Linux?

It would depend on the version of linux. Some are much easier to work with than others. i know smoe have install disks, from linux magazines, that don't need much configuration at all , just run the install. Some require linux knowledge.
Logged

KK4GGL
Member

Posts: 315




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: June 29, 2014, 07:20:03 PM »

Quote
And just how hard is it to set up Linux?

Well I'm struggling despite playing for about 20 years. Am at the point of ripping it out and starting again.
On the surface, not too many problems.
Get under the bonnet (hood?) totally different to DOS/Windows

And, again, I ask, just how hard is it to set up Linux? I have been installing GNU/Linux based distributions for almost 20 years, and other operating systems longer. Installing a GNU/Linux based distro these days is basically hitting return a bunch of times during the install.

And under the hood it is totally different than Windows? No duh. It's not Windows. On the other hand, the overwhelming number of applications are located in the distributions repositories, as opposed to Windows and MacOS. Much easier to find. Easy to install.

So what is so hard to set up?
Logged

73,
Rick KK4GGL
KK4GGL
Member

Posts: 315




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: June 29, 2014, 07:21:41 PM »

Setting up the OS itself isn't hard at all, but setting up the additions and the associated software can be a real pain in the bottom. 

What additions? What associated software? On what distribution?
Logged

73,
Rick KK4GGL
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 6042




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: July 01, 2014, 09:10:02 AM »

Sorry I can't be more certain in my description, but I just dumped the Linux installation from my primary PC in order to play with Win 8.1, so I can't reference it too easily.  What I'm referring to are the add in shells such as WINE, and the additional software that is available on the web, whatever terms that Linux uses for them.  

No, I'm not Linux 'educated,' but I try different things (I have to do something with my retirement hobby time after all) and getting up to speed on the Ubuntu/Mint linux is my next, just as soon as I can set up a spare computer with that OS installed.  That is so I can have a machine that I can still access the web on while I'm playing with the Linux machine.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2014, 09:12:24 AM by K1CJS » Logged
VE7MDT
Member

Posts: 3




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: July 02, 2014, 11:18:21 PM »

well,
- there is the win_3x laptop that runs some logging program,
that one likes, and the CW trainer that one likes, as well.
- then there is the win_98 PC that also has some program(s) on it, that one also likes.
& this thing also dual_boots with win_3x as well.

neither have a wireless card, - so they can't get on the 'net anyway. ..
& none of that stuff will work under a win_7 O/S either.



"Wireless card" exists with Windows 3.x driver(s). Cisco Aironet 350 is one of them. (used to be just Aironet before Cisco bought them). Look it up.

And don't know what you mean by "none of that stuff", but the OP was talking about W98, NT4 and W2K, he didn't mention Win 7 so it is irrelevant to the thread created by the OP.

And not only that, you don't need to have "wireless card" in order to get "on the net". It is the same thing if you have a telegraph key, you don't have to have a radio transmitter in order to send a signal. Have you heard of ethernet networking?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!