"kraut" wrote:

 

 

> >> I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to upgrade, but it

 

> >> seems there's just too much stuff that dont work in 98 anymore. I

 

> >> just bought another (used) computer with XP installed, and will keep

 

> >> my Win98 computer as it is. That way I can use either one. The old

 

> >> one was too slow for XP and dual booting seemed like a hassle to

 

> >> setup. So, now I just have 2 computers.

 

> >>

 

> >> Anyhow, I recall someone long ago saying there's a way to make XP look

 

> >> and act like Win98. I really dont care to have to get used to a new

 

> >> look, and XP has too much junk I dont care to use anyhow, like that

 

> >> dog cartoon. Not only do I not want that stuff, but I have always

 

> >> believed that any computer should use it's power for tasks, not

 

> >> unneeded toys, which is one reason I never load anything not required

 

> >> by the OS into memory upon booting. I dont even run automatic virus

 

> >> scans. I do it manually. I dont run screen savers or any of that

 

> >> junk.

 

> >>

 

> >> So, what's the method to make XP look like Win98?

 

> >>

 

> >

 

> >I too have been happier with Win98 than with WinXP, for many reasons.

 

> >I agree that MS should have spent more time providing useful software

 

> >rather than ruining an effective search tool along with the foolish

 

> >dog cartoons.

 

> >

 

> >I highly recommend you keep the WinXP look, so that you are always

 

> >reminded that you are NOT using Win98. I originally set up one of the

 

> >WinXP machines to look like Win98, but every now and then, I'd ask for

 

> >something to happen expecting results like I was used to getting, only

 

> >to have the 'improvements' in WinXP destroy/confuse what I was trying

 

> >to do. Thus, changed back to always keep that reminder in front of

 

> >me.

 

> >

 

> >On the WinXP [brought out every month or so to get access to what I

 

> >can't do on Win98] I installed everything that had been ruined by MS

 

> >as they changed to WinXP, such as, Win98 Notepad, Win98 Paint, and had

 

> >to install 3rd party search tool, called Agent Ransack.

 

> >

 

> >Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me. I

 

> >know there was an improvement for MS by requiring registration of the

 

> >product. When I must use the WinXP, I miss the 'snappy' response

 

> >[even on a slower machine] of this Win98. Have any of you followed

 

> >how Linux boots up in less than 1 second?

 

>

 

>

 

> I too miss my 98 system but it was getting so most of the newer

 

> software and hardware would not run on 98.

 

>

 

> My old Deskjet 550 died and I had to get a new printer and think I

 

> could find on for 98?!?!? I did eventually but it took a while. The

 

> najority of them are made for XP / Vista now.

 

>

 

> I finally went to XP when the on / off switch on my old PackardBell 98

 

> box gave out. That machine started as a new Windows 95 machine and

 

> served me well through 98SE but did not have the umph to run XP. Can

 

> not bare to get rid of it so it is setting in the corner for now.

 

>

 

>

 

> .

 

>

 

 

 

I may end up adding an extra video card to my desktop but I love my Ati

 

Radeon 9800 XT video card on my desktop. The reason I have not become a fan

 

of Nvidia video cards is because I find their backwards compatibility is

 

lacking compared to Ati video cards. Sure, Nvidia may have the best video

 

cards or Ati now but I have been burned when I installed an Nvidia video card

 

upgrading from a 3dfx in an old system in the past. I had numerous problems

 

and then tried an Ati video card and the upgrade was smooth and both were

 

supposed to work fine and I did do my research.

All the poor saps that use Win2K all thinking that there're really using

 

Windows 98!!!

 

 

 

Thank God for XP's Big Bold Blue interface, so we don't immediately all

 

think we've gone back in time to 1999!!!

 

 

 

==

 

 

 

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. :-)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Don Phillipson" wrote in message

 

news:%23Z3fCymBLHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

 

> "Robert Macy" wrote in message

 

> news:2c92caf5-1cc3-4caa-98f4-998a9f8d6dba@s1g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

 

>

 

>> I highly recommend you keep the WinXP look, so that you are always

 

>> reminded that you are NOT using Win98.

 

>

 

> Yes, confirmed.

 

>

 

>> On the WinXP [brought out every month or so to get access to what I

 

>> can't do on Win98] I installed everything that had been ruined by MS

 

>> as they changed to WinXP, such as, Win98 Notepad, Win98 Paint, and had

 

>> to install 3rd party search tool, called Agent Ransack.

 

>

 

> 1. Earlier versions of Notepad, Write and Wordpad run just

 

> as well under WinXP. I don't use MSPaint because Photoshop Light

 

> is just as free and runs just as well.

 

> 3. Avantis/V-Com PFind is superior to Windows find tools (just as

 

> the bundled PowerDesk is superior to Explorer.exe (My Computer)

 

> for people accustomed to Win98.

 

>

 

>> Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me.

 

>

 

> Main improvements are:

 

> 1. NT file system (more resistant to software errors)

 

> 2. Registry Hive, more nearly capable of self-repair than Win98.

 

> 3. User-friendliness: the OS does by itself half the housekeeping

 

> functions Win98 users need to know about: so WinXP users do not

 

> need to know.

 

>

 

> --

 

> Don Phillipson

 

> Carlsbad Springs

 

> (Ottawa, Canada)

 

>

 

>

All the poor saps that use Win2K all thinking that there're really using

 

Windows 98!!!

 

 

 

Thank God for XP's Big Bold Blue interface, so we don't immediately all

 

think we've gone back in time to 1999!!!

 

 

 

==

 

 

 

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. :-)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Don Phillipson" wrote in message

 

news:%23Z3fCymBLHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

 

> "Robert Macy" wrote in message

 

> news:2c92caf5-1cc3-4caa-98f4-998a9f8d6dba@s1g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

 

>

 

>> I highly recommend you keep the WinXP look, so that you are always

 

>> reminded that you are NOT using Win98.

 

>

 

> Yes, confirmed.

 

>

 

>> On the WinXP [brought out every month or so to get access to what I

 

>> can't do on Win98] I installed everything that had been ruined by MS

 

>> as they changed to WinXP, such as, Win98 Notepad, Win98 Paint, and had

 

>> to install 3rd party search tool, called Agent Ransack.

 

>

 

> 1. Earlier versions of Notepad, Write and Wordpad run just

 

> as well under WinXP. I don't use MSPaint because Photoshop Light

 

> is just as free and runs just as well.

 

> 3. Avantis/V-Com PFind is superior to Windows find tools (just as

 

> the bundled PowerDesk is superior to Explorer.exe (My Computer)

 

> for people accustomed to Win98.

 

>

 

>> Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me.

 

>

 

> Main improvements are:

 

> 1. NT file system (more resistant to software errors)

 

> 2. Registry Hive, more nearly capable of self-repair than Win98.

 

> 3. User-friendliness: the OS does by itself half the housekeeping

 

> functions Win98 users need to know about: so WinXP users do not

 

> need to know.

 

>

 

> --

 

> Don Phillipson

 

> Carlsbad Springs

 

> (Ottawa, Canada)

 

>

 

>

Robert Macy wrote:

 

 

> On Jun 6, 9:39 pm, jerome.h...@nospam.com wrote:

 

>

 

>>I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to upgrade, but it

 

>>seems there's just too much stuff that dont work in 98 anymore. I

 

>>just bought another (used) computer with XP installed, and will keep

 

>>my Win98 computer as it is. That way I can use either one. The old

 

>>one was too slow for XP and dual booting seemed like a hassle to

 

>>setup. So, now I just have 2 computers.

 

>>

 

>>Anyhow, I recall someone long ago saying there's a way to make XP look

 

>>and act like Win98. I really dont care to have to get used to a new

 

>>look, and XP has too much junk I dont care to use anyhow, like that

 

>>dog cartoon. Not only do I not want that stuff, but I have always

 

>>believed that any computer should use it's power for tasks, not

 

>>unneeded toys, which is one reason I never load anything not required

 

>>by the OS into memory upon booting. I dont even run automatic virus

 

>>scans. I do it manually. I dont run screen savers or any of that

 

>>junk.

 

>>

 

>>So, what's the method to make XP look like Win98?

 

>>

 

>>Thanks

 

>>

 

>>Jerome

 

>

 

>

 

Hi

 

 

 

To make WinXP look like Win98, do the *five* things listed below. All

 

folders will have the files listed as Win98 did.

 

 

 

Then if there are any folders where you would like to see the icons

 

instead of the listings, in that folder, go to "view" and then click

 

on icons instead of details.

 

 

 

Henry

 

 

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

 

 

1: Right click on lower task bar. Select "Properties". Select Start

 

Menu. Select Classic Start Menu. OK yourself out.

 

 

 

2. In Control Panel, select Tools/ Folder Options / General / Use

 

Windows Classic Folders. Select Open each folder in the same window.

 

OK yourself out.

 

 

 

3. In Control Panel, select "Display" / Appearances. Under Windows

 

and buttons select Windows Classic style. Under Color scheme, select

 

Windows Standard. OK yourself out.

 

 

 

4. In Windows Explorer go to Tools / Folder Options / View and click

 

so a dot shows before Show hidden files and folders and OK yourself

 

out. Make sure you also untick "Hide file extensions for known file

 

types" if that is an option that is ticked.

 

 

 

5. Go to Start/Settings/Taskbar/start menu tab/customize

 

and in the advanced start menu options, Uncheck

 

"use personialized menus". OK yourself out.

 

 

 

I think that those are the only things that need changing to make it

 

look pretty much like windows 98.

 

 

 

You may have to go to Windows Explorer and under View, check Details.

 

I'm not sure if the above does that or not it's been so long that I

 

did this.

 

 

 

Henry

Robert Macy wrote:

 

 

> On Jun 6, 9:39 pm, jerome.h...@nospam.com wrote:

 

>

 

>>I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to upgrade, but it

 

>>seems there's just too much stuff that dont work in 98 anymore. I

 

>>just bought another (used) computer with XP installed, and will keep

 

>>my Win98 computer as it is. That way I can use either one. The old

 

>>one was too slow for XP and dual booting seemed like a hassle to

 

>>setup. So, now I just have 2 computers.

 

>>

 

>>Anyhow, I recall someone long ago saying there's a way to make XP look

 

>>and act like Win98. I really dont care to have to get used to a new

 

>>look, and XP has too much junk I dont care to use anyhow, like that

 

>>dog cartoon. Not only do I not want that stuff, but I have always

 

>>believed that any computer should use it's power for tasks, not

 

>>unneeded toys, which is one reason I never load anything not required

 

>>by the OS into memory upon booting. I dont even run automatic virus

 

>>scans. I do it manually. I dont run screen savers or any of that

 

>>junk.

 

>>

 

>>So, what's the method to make XP look like Win98?

 

>>

 

>>Thanks

 

>>

 

>>Jerome

 

>

 

>

 

Hi

 

 

 

To make WinXP look like Win98, do the *five* things listed below. All

 

folders will have the files listed as Win98 did.

 

 

 

Then if there are any folders where you would like to see the icons

 

instead of the listings, in that folder, go to "view" and then click

 

on icons instead of details.

 

 

 

Henry

 

 

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

 

 

1: Right click on lower task bar. Select "Properties". Select Start

 

Menu. Select Classic Start Menu. OK yourself out.

 

 

 

2. In Control Panel, select Tools/ Folder Options / General / Use

 

Windows Classic Folders. Select Open each folder in the same window.

 

OK yourself out.

 

 

 

3. In Control Panel, select "Display" / Appearances. Under Windows

 

and buttons select Windows Classic style. Under Color scheme, select

 

Windows Standard. OK yourself out.

 

 

 

4. In Windows Explorer go to Tools / Folder Options / View and click

 

so a dot shows before Show hidden files and folders and OK yourself

 

out. Make sure you also untick "Hide file extensions for known file

 

types" if that is an option that is ticked.

 

 

 

5. Go to Start/Settings/Taskbar/start menu tab/customize

 

and in the advanced start menu options, Uncheck

 

"use personialized menus". OK yourself out.

 

 

 

I think that those are the only things that need changing to make it

 

look pretty much like windows 98.

 

 

 

You may have to go to Windows Explorer and under View, check Details.

 

I'm not sure if the above does that or not it's been so long that I

 

did this.

 

 

 

Henry

Why change the Explorer setting for "Hide file extensions for known file

 

types" in order to make it more like Win98 ??

 

 

 

This setting is exactly the same in Windows98 !!

 

 

 

Windows Explorer > Folder Options > View

 

 

 

Even the registry setting is identical for both W98 and XP!

 

 

 

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Advanced]

 

"HideFileExt"=dword:00000001

 

 

 

==

 

 

 

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. :-)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Henry" wrote in message

 

news:hujibu$t5d$1@news.eternal-september.org...

 

> Robert Macy wrote:

 

>

 

>> On Jun 6, 9:39 pm, jerome.h...@nospam.com wrote:

 

>>

 

>>>I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to upgrade, but it

 

>>>seems there's just too much stuff that dont work in 98 anymore. I

 

>>>just bought another (used) computer with XP installed, and will keep

 

>>>my Win98 computer as it is. That way I can use either one. The old

 

>>>one was too slow for XP and dual booting seemed like a hassle to

 

>>>setup. So, now I just have 2 computers.

 

>>>Anyhow, I recall someone long ago saying there's a way to make XP look

 

>>>and act like Win98. I really dont care to have to get used to a new

 

>>>look, and XP has too much junk I dont care to use anyhow, like that

 

>>>dog cartoon. Not only do I not want that stuff, but I have always

 

>>>believed that any computer should use it's power for tasks, not

 

>>>unneeded toys, which is one reason I never load anything not required

 

>>>by the OS into memory upon booting. I dont even run automatic virus

 

>>>scans. I do it manually. I dont run screen savers or any of that

 

>>>junk.

 

>>>So, what's the method to make XP look like Win98?

 

>>>

 

>>>Thanks

 

>>>

 

>>>Jerome

 

>>

 

>>

 

> Hi

 

>

 

> To make WinXP look like Win98, do the *five* things listed below. All

 

> folders will have the files listed as Win98 did.

 

>

 

> Then if there are any folders where you would like to see the icons

 

> instead of the listings, in that folder, go to "view" and then click

 

> on icons instead of details.

 

>

 

> Henry

 

>

 

> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

>

 

> 1: Right click on lower task bar. Select "Properties". Select Start

 

> Menu. Select Classic Start Menu. OK yourself out.

 

>

 

> 2. In Control Panel, select Tools/ Folder Options / General / Use

 

> Windows Classic Folders. Select Open each folder in the same window.

 

> OK yourself out.

 

>

 

> 3. In Control Panel, select "Display" / Appearances. Under Windows

 

> and buttons select Windows Classic style. Under Color scheme, select

 

> Windows Standard. OK yourself out.

 

>

 

> 4. In Windows Explorer go to Tools / Folder Options / View and click

 

> so a dot shows before Show hidden files and folders and OK yourself

 

> out. Make sure you also untick "Hide file extensions for known file

 

> types" if that is an option that is ticked.

 

>

 

> 5. Go to Start/Settings/Taskbar/start menu tab/customize

 

> and in the advanced start menu options, Uncheck

 

> "use personialized menus". OK yourself out.

 

>

 

> I think that those are the only things that need changing to make it

 

> look pretty much like windows 98.

 

>

 

> You may have to go to Windows Explorer and under View, check Details.

 

> I'm not sure if the above does that or not it's been so long that I

 

> did this.

 

>

 

> Henry

Why change the Explorer setting for "Hide file extensions for known file

 

types" in order to make it more like Win98 ??

 

 

 

This setting is exactly the same in Windows98 !!

 

 

 

Windows Explorer > Folder Options > View

 

 

 

Even the registry setting is identical for both W98 and XP!

 

 

 

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Advanced]

 

"HideFileExt"=dword:00000001

 

 

 

==

 

 

 

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. :-)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Henry" wrote in message

 

news:hujibu$t5d$1@news.eternal-september.org...

 

> Robert Macy wrote:

 

>

 

>> On Jun 6, 9:39 pm, jerome.h...@nospam.com wrote:

 

>>

 

>>>I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to upgrade, but it

 

>>>seems there's just too much stuff that dont work in 98 anymore. I

 

>>>just bought another (used) computer with XP installed, and will keep

 

>>>my Win98 computer as it is. That way I can use either one. The old

 

>>>one was too slow for XP and dual booting seemed like a hassle to

 

>>>setup. So, now I just have 2 computers.

 

>>>Anyhow, I recall someone long ago saying there's a way to make XP look

 

>>>and act like Win98. I really dont care to have to get used to a new

 

>>>look, and XP has too much junk I dont care to use anyhow, like that

 

>>>dog cartoon. Not only do I not want that stuff, but I have always

 

>>>believed that any computer should use it's power for tasks, not

 

>>>unneeded toys, which is one reason I never load anything not required

 

>>>by the OS into memory upon booting. I dont even run automatic virus

 

>>>scans. I do it manually. I dont run screen savers or any of that

 

>>>junk.

 

>>>So, what's the method to make XP look like Win98?

 

>>>

 

>>>Thanks

 

>>>

 

>>>Jerome

 

>>

 

>>

 

> Hi

 

>

 

> To make WinXP look like Win98, do the *five* things listed below. All

 

> folders will have the files listed as Win98 did.

 

>

 

> Then if there are any folders where you would like to see the icons

 

> instead of the listings, in that folder, go to "view" and then click

 

> on icons instead of details.

 

>

 

> Henry

 

>

 

> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

>

 

> 1: Right click on lower task bar. Select "Properties". Select Start

 

> Menu. Select Classic Start Menu. OK yourself out.

 

>

 

> 2. In Control Panel, select Tools/ Folder Options / General / Use

 

> Windows Classic Folders. Select Open each folder in the same window.

 

> OK yourself out.

 

>

 

> 3. In Control Panel, select "Display" / Appearances. Under Windows

 

> and buttons select Windows Classic style. Under Color scheme, select

 

> Windows Standard. OK yourself out.

 

>

 

> 4. In Windows Explorer go to Tools / Folder Options / View and click

 

> so a dot shows before Show hidden files and folders and OK yourself

 

> out. Make sure you also untick "Hide file extensions for known file

 

> types" if that is an option that is ticked.

 

>

 

> 5. Go to Start/Settings/Taskbar/start menu tab/customize

 

> and in the advanced start menu options, Uncheck

 

> "use personialized menus". OK yourself out.

 

>

 

> I think that those are the only things that need changing to make it

 

> look pretty much like windows 98.

 

>

 

> You may have to go to Windows Explorer and under View, check Details.

 

> I'm not sure if the above does that or not it's been so long that I

 

> did this.

 

>

 

> Henry

on XP have just right click on start

 

Click programs

 

pick Classic Start Click Apply OK

 

 

 

 

 

"Mike S" wrote in message

 

news:huhu3e$1f8$1@news.eternal-september.org...

 

> On 6/6/2010 9:39 PM, jerome.hill@nospam.com wrote:

 

>> I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to upgrade, but it

 

>> seems there's just too much stuff that dont work in 98 anymore. I

 

>> just bought another (used) computer with XP installed, and will keep

 

>> my Win98 computer as it is. That way I can use either one. The old

 

>> one was too slow for XP and dual booting seemed like a hassle to

 

>> setup. So, now I just have 2 computers.

 

>>

 

>> Anyhow, I recall someone long ago saying there's a way to make XP look

 

>> and act like Win98. I really dont care to have to get used to a new

 

>> look, and XP has too much junk I dont care to use anyhow, like that

 

>> dog cartoon. Not only do I not want that stuff, but I have always

 

>> believed that any computer should use it's power for tasks, not

 

>> unneeded toys, which is one reason I never load anything not required

 

>> by the OS into memory upon booting. I dont even run automatic virus

 

>> scans. I do it manually. I dont run screen savers or any of that

 

>> junk.

 

>>

 

>> So, what's the method to make XP look like Win98?

 

>>

 

>> Thanks

 

>>

 

>> Jerome

 

>

 

> You can get a lot of tips from the first page of hits alone:

 

>

 

> http://www.google.com/search?q=make+xp+look+like+win98

 

>

on XP have just right click on start

 

Click programs

 

pick Classic Start Click Apply OK

 

 

 

 

 

"Mike S" wrote in message

 

news:huhu3e$1f8$1@news.eternal-september.org...

 

> On 6/6/2010 9:39 PM, jerome.hill@nospam.com wrote:

 

>> I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to upgrade, but it

 

>> seems there's just too much stuff that dont work in 98 anymore. I

 

>> just bought another (used) computer with XP installed, and will keep

 

>> my Win98 computer as it is. That way I can use either one. The old

 

>> one was too slow for XP and dual booting seemed like a hassle to

 

>> setup. So, now I just have 2 computers.

 

>>

 

>> Anyhow, I recall someone long ago saying there's a way to make XP look

 

>> and act like Win98. I really dont care to have to get used to a new

 

>> look, and XP has too much junk I dont care to use anyhow, like that

 

>> dog cartoon. Not only do I not want that stuff, but I have always

 

>> believed that any computer should use it's power for tasks, not

 

>> unneeded toys, which is one reason I never load anything not required

 

>> by the OS into memory upon booting. I dont even run automatic virus

 

>> scans. I do it manually. I dont run screen savers or any of that

 

>> junk.

 

>>

 

>> So, what's the method to make XP look like Win98?

 

>>

 

>> Thanks

 

>>

 

>> Jerome

 

>

 

> You can get a lot of tips from the first page of hits alone:

 

>

 

> http://www.google.com/search?q=make+xp+look+like+win98

 

>

OT Re: Making XP desktop look like Win98

 

Can be Done!

 

 

 

 

 

"Jose" wrote in message

 

news:ac9ed933-188d-4ba0-9e38-3c7bc8cd7911@z10g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...

 

> On Jun 7, 10:28 am, "Twayne" wrote:

 

>> Innews:%23JfxMhgBLHA.4388@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl,

 

>> PA Bear [MS MVP] typed:

 

>>

 

>> > jerome.h...@nospam.com wrote:

 

>> >> I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to

 

>> >> upgrade, but it seems there's just too much stuff that

 

>> >> dont work in 98 anymore...

 

>>

 

>> > Like your grammar/spelling checker?

 

>>

 

>> Pa' a condescending idiot a lot of times.

 

>

 

> I would like my system to look like Super Mario Brothers.

 

>

 

> Alas.

OT Re: Making XP desktop look like Win98

 

Can be Done!

 

 

 

 

 

"Jose" wrote in message

 

news:ac9ed933-188d-4ba0-9e38-3c7bc8cd7911@z10g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...

 

> On Jun 7, 10:28 am, "Twayne" wrote:

 

>> Innews:%23JfxMhgBLHA.4388@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl,

 

>> PA Bear [MS MVP] typed:

 

>>

 

>> > jerome.h...@nospam.com wrote:

 

>> >> I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to

 

>> >> upgrade, but it seems there's just too much stuff that

 

>> >> dont work in 98 anymore...

 

>>

 

>> > Like your grammar/spelling checker?

 

>>

 

>> Pa' a condescending idiot a lot of times.

 

>

 

> I would like my system to look like Super Mario Brothers.

 

>

 

> Alas.

Robert Macy wrote:

 

>

 

> Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me.

 

 

 

That's easy. XP is built on the NT base, not DOS. There are many benefits,

 

none the least of which is that it is impossible for an ill-behaved program

 

to bother another. Further, XP has preemptive multi-tasking. It is

 

impossible for one application program to lock down a machine completely. A

 

more robust file system that is less prone to error (NTFS), virtually

 

unlimited memory space, and hundreds of other improvements make XT FAR

 

superior to Win98 in almost every category.

 

 

 

 

> I

 

> know there was an improvement for MS by requiring registration of the

 

> product. When I must use the WinXP, I miss the 'snappy' response

 

> [even on a slower machine] of this Win98.

 

 

 

XP does require better hardware, I'll give you that.

 

 

> Have any of you followed

 

> how Linux boots up in less than 1 second?

 

 

 

And a blow-up doll is ready to have sex in less than that.

Robert Macy wrote:

 

>

 

> Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me.

 

 

 

That's easy. XP is built on the NT base, not DOS. There are many benefits,

 

none the least of which is that it is impossible for an ill-behaved program

 

to bother another. Further, XP has preemptive multi-tasking. It is

 

impossible for one application program to lock down a machine completely. A

 

more robust file system that is less prone to error (NTFS), virtually

 

unlimited memory space, and hundreds of other improvements make XT FAR

 

superior to Win98 in almost every category.

 

 

 

 

> I

 

> know there was an improvement for MS by requiring registration of the

 

> product. When I must use the WinXP, I miss the 'snappy' response

 

> [even on a slower machine] of this Win98.

 

 

 

XP does require better hardware, I'll give you that.

 

 

> Have any of you followed

 

> how Linux boots up in less than 1 second?

 

 

 

And a blow-up doll is ready to have sex in less than that.

"dadiOH" wrote in message

 

news:%23zMyASkBLHA.980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

 

> jerome.hill@nospam.com wrote:

 

>> I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to upgrade, but it

 

>> seems there's just too much stuff that dont work in 98 anymore. I

 

>> just bought another (used) computer with XP installed, and will keep

 

>> my Win98 computer as it is. That way I can use either one. The old

 

>> one was too slow for XP and dual booting seemed like a hassle to

 

>> setup. So, now I just have 2 computers.

 

>>

 

>> Anyhow, I recall someone long ago saying there's a way to make XP

 

>> look

 

>> and act like Win98. I really dont care to have to get used to a new

 

>> look, and XP has too much junk I dont care to use anyhow, like that

 

>> dog cartoon. Not only do I not want that stuff, but I have always

 

>> believed that any computer should use it's power for tasks, not

 

>> unneeded toys, which is one reason I never load anything not required

 

>> by the OS into memory upon booting. I dont even run automatic virus

 

>> scans. I do it manually. I dont run screen savers or any of that

 

>> junk.

 

>>

 

>> So, what's the method to make XP look like Win98?

 

>>

 

>> Thanks

 

>>

 

>> Jerome

 

>

 

> Display Properties

 

> Appearance tab

 

> Windows and buttons

 

> Select "Windows Classic Style"

 

>

 

> Right click the taskbar

 

> Properties

 

> Start Menu tab

 

> Check "Classic Start menu"

 

>

 

> Those will clean it up pretty well.

 

 

 

 

 

I would add one more:

 

Download the Microsoft Powertoys for Windows XP. All you need is Tweak

 

UI for XP from the package.

 

Install and then run TweakUI.

 

Go to the Explorer sub-menu. In the details pane find "Use Classic

 

Search in Explorer" and select it.

 

Click Apply> OK.

 

 

 

That will replace the brainless XP search function (and the dog) with

 

the simpler Win2K search window.

 

 

 

Microsoft PowerToys for Windows XP

 

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx

 

 

 

This and other tips can be found here:

 

http://www.petri.co.il/restore_classic_search_in_windows_xp.htm

 

 

 

--

 

Glen Ventura, MS MVP Oct. 2002 - Sept. 2009

 

A+

 

http://dts-l.net/

"dadiOH" wrote in message

 

news:%23zMyASkBLHA.980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

 

> jerome.hill@nospam.com wrote:

 

>> I have used Win98 since 98. I really didn't care to upgrade, but it

 

>> seems there's just too much stuff that dont work in 98 anymore. I

 

>> just bought another (used) computer with XP installed, and will keep

 

>> my Win98 computer as it is. That way I can use either one. The old

 

>> one was too slow for XP and dual booting seemed like a hassle to

 

>> setup. So, now I just have 2 computers.

 

>>

 

>> Anyhow, I recall someone long ago saying there's a way to make XP

 

>> look

 

>> and act like Win98. I really dont care to have to get used to a new

 

>> look, and XP has too much junk I dont care to use anyhow, like that

 

>> dog cartoon. Not only do I not want that stuff, but I have always

 

>> believed that any computer should use it's power for tasks, not

 

>> unneeded toys, which is one reason I never load anything not required

 

>> by the OS into memory upon booting. I dont even run automatic virus

 

>> scans. I do it manually. I dont run screen savers or any of that

 

>> junk.

 

>>

 

>> So, what's the method to make XP look like Win98?

 

>>

 

>> Thanks

 

>>

 

>> Jerome

 

>

 

> Display Properties

 

> Appearance tab

 

> Windows and buttons

 

> Select "Windows Classic Style"

 

>

 

> Right click the taskbar

 

> Properties

 

> Start Menu tab

 

> Check "Classic Start menu"

 

>

 

> Those will clean it up pretty well.

 

 

 

 

 

I would add one more:

 

Download the Microsoft Powertoys for Windows XP. All you need is Tweak

 

UI for XP from the package.

 

Install and then run TweakUI.

 

Go to the Explorer sub-menu. In the details pane find "Use Classic

 

Search in Explorer" and select it.

 

Click Apply> OK.

 

 

 

That will replace the brainless XP search function (and the dog) with

 

the simpler Win2K search window.

 

 

 

Microsoft PowerToys for Windows XP

 

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx

 

 

 

This and other tips can be found here:

 

http://www.petri.co.il/restore_classic_search_in_windows_xp.htm

 

 

 

--

 

Glen Ventura, MS MVP Oct. 2002 - Sept. 2009

 

A+

 

http://dts-l.net/

"HeyBub" wrote in

 

news:Owe2cVqBLHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:

 

 

>> Have any of you followed

 

>> how Linux boots up in less than 1 second?

 

>

 

> And a blow-up doll is ready to have sex in less than that.

 

 

 

Unless you actually like it to have /some/ (such as they are)

 

shape, not just a flaccid (ahem) plastic bag.

 

 

 

 

 

--

 

Of course, it is no easy matter to be polite in so far, I mean,

 

as it requires us to show great respect for everybody, whereas

 

most people deserve none at all and again in so far as it

 

demands that we should feign the most lively interest in people,

 

when we must be very glad that we have nothing to do with them.

 

- Arthur Schopenhauer

"HeyBub" wrote in

 

news:Owe2cVqBLHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:

 

 

>> Have any of you followed

 

>> how Linux boots up in less than 1 second?

 

>

 

> And a blow-up doll is ready to have sex in less than that.

 

 

 

Unless you actually like it to have /some/ (such as they are)

 

shape, not just a flaccid (ahem) plastic bag.

 

 

 

 

 

--

 

Of course, it is no easy matter to be polite in so far, I mean,

 

as it requires us to show great respect for everybody, whereas

 

most people deserve none at all and again in so far as it

 

demands that we should feign the most lively interest in people,

 

when we must be very glad that we have nothing to do with them.

 

- Arthur Schopenhauer

On Jun 7, 5:55 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

 

> Robert Macy wrote:

 

>

 

> > Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me.

 

>

 

> That's easy. XP is built on the NT base, not DOS. There are many benefits,

 

> none the least of which is that it is impossible for an ill-behaved program

 

> to bother another. Further, XP has preemptive multi-tasking. It is

 

> impossible for one application program to lock down a machine completely.A

 

> more robust file system that is less prone to error (NTFS), virtually

 

> unlimited memory space, and hundreds of other improvements make XT FAR

 

> superior to Win98 in almost every category.

 

>

 

 

 

These sound great, except I don't get to see their effects much. NT

 

base vs DOS base sounds higher level.

 

1. I don't have any applications that 'hog' the system

 

2. NTFS is less prone to error: Would I have seen this type of error?

 

3. Yes, unlimited memory space is an improvement, except WinXP seems

 

to be the one using that space

 

4. superior in every way? then someone should have paid attention to

 

what I can see, for example, the long delay between transitions. 1

 

minute to start up a simple application, when Win98 starts it

 

immediately, those kinds of things, what I see.

 

 

 

It's just that I've given up precious 'time' for not much. But in

 

deference, a friend of mine said he uses WinXP because of its ability

 

to recover from a blown install. Too difficult with Win98

 

 

> > I

 

> > know there was an improvement for MS by requiring registration of the

 

> > product.  When I must use the WinXP, I miss the 'snappy' response

 

> > [even on a slower machine] of this Win98.

 

>

 

> XP does require better hardware, I'll give you that.

 

 

 

along with memory

 

 

>

 

> > Have any of you followed

 

> > how Linux boots up in less than 1 second?

 

>

 

> And a blow-up doll is ready to have sex in less than that.

 

 

 

what?

On Jun 7, 5:55 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

 

> Robert Macy wrote:

 

>

 

> > Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me.

 

>

 

> That's easy. XP is built on the NT base, not DOS. There are many benefits,

 

> none the least of which is that it is impossible for an ill-behaved program

 

> to bother another. Further, XP has preemptive multi-tasking. It is

 

> impossible for one application program to lock down a machine completely.A

 

> more robust file system that is less prone to error (NTFS), virtually

 

> unlimited memory space, and hundreds of other improvements make XT FAR

 

> superior to Win98 in almost every category.

 

>

 

 

 

These sound great, except I don't get to see their effects much. NT

 

base vs DOS base sounds higher level.

 

1. I don't have any applications that 'hog' the system

 

2. NTFS is less prone to error: Would I have seen this type of error?

 

3. Yes, unlimited memory space is an improvement, except WinXP seems

 

to be the one using that space

 

4. superior in every way? then someone should have paid attention to

 

what I can see, for example, the long delay between transitions. 1

 

minute to start up a simple application, when Win98 starts it

 

immediately, those kinds of things, what I see.

 

 

 

It's just that I've given up precious 'time' for not much. But in

 

deference, a friend of mine said he uses WinXP because of its ability

 

to recover from a blown install. Too difficult with Win98

 

 

> > I

 

> > know there was an improvement for MS by requiring registration of the

 

> > product.  When I must use the WinXP, I miss the 'snappy' response

 

> > [even on a slower machine] of this Win98.

 

>

 

> XP does require better hardware, I'll give you that.

 

 

 

along with memory

 

 

>

 

> > Have any of you followed

 

> > how Linux boots up in less than 1 second?

 

>

 

> And a blow-up doll is ready to have sex in less than that.

 

 

 

what?

Robert Macy wrote:

 

> On Jun 7, 5:55 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

 

>> Robert Macy wrote:

 

>>

 

>>> Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me.

 

>>

 

>> That's easy. XP is built on the NT base, not DOS. There are many

 

>> benefits, none the least of which is that it is impossible for an

 

>> ill-behaved program to bother another. Further, XP has preemptive

 

>> multi-tasking. It is impossible for one application program to lock

 

>> down a machine completely. A more robust file system that is less

 

>> prone to error (NTFS), virtually unlimited memory space, and

 

>> hundreds of other improvements make XT FAR superior to Win98 in

 

>> almost every category.

 

>>

 

>

 

> 4. superior in every way? then someone should have paid attention to

 

> what I can see, for example, the long delay between transitions. 1

 

> minute to start up a simple application, when Win98 starts it

 

> immediately, those kinds of things, what I see.

 

 

 

That has nothing to do with XP in general, just your FUBARed install of it.

 

 

 

--

 

 

 

dadiOH

 

____________________________

 

 

 

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...

 

....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from

 

LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.

 

Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

Robert Macy wrote:

 

> On Jun 7, 5:55 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

 

>> Robert Macy wrote:

 

>>

 

>>> Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me.

 

>>

 

>> That's easy. XP is built on the NT base, not DOS. There are many

 

>> benefits, none the least of which is that it is impossible for an

 

>> ill-behaved program to bother another. Further, XP has preemptive

 

>> multi-tasking. It is impossible for one application program to lock

 

>> down a machine completely. A more robust file system that is less

 

>> prone to error (NTFS), virtually unlimited memory space, and

 

>> hundreds of other improvements make XT FAR superior to Win98 in

 

>> almost every category.

 

>>

 

>

 

> 4. superior in every way? then someone should have paid attention to

 

> what I can see, for example, the long delay between transitions. 1

 

> minute to start up a simple application, when Win98 starts it

 

> immediately, those kinds of things, what I see.

 

 

 

That has nothing to do with XP in general, just your FUBARed install of it.

 

 

 

--

 

 

 

dadiOH

 

____________________________

 

 

 

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...

 

....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from

 

LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.

 

Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

HeyBub wrote:

 

> Robert Macy wrote:

 

>> Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me.

 

 

>> Have any of you followed

 

>> how Linux boots up in less than 1 second?

 

>

 

> And a blow-up doll is ready to have sex in less than that.

 

>

 

 

 

You must have a good set of lungs!

HeyBub wrote:

 

> Robert Macy wrote:

 

>> Someday, someone will explain how WinXP is an improvement for me.

 

 

>> Have any of you followed

 

>> how Linux boots up in less than 1 second?

 

>

 

> And a blow-up doll is ready to have sex in less than that.

 

>

 

 

 

You must have a good set of lungs!

"dadiOH" wrote in

 

news:#baoDbxBLHA.5476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:

 

 

> That has nothing to do with XP in general, just your

 

> FUBARed install of it.

 

 

 

While I know you are far more knowledgeable than me, my limited

 

experience with XP forces me to disagree here. My P1 166 with

 

64RAM runs at the same or faster speed than either 98SELite or

 

XP I have installed on a 2GHz P4 with 1 GB of RAM (more than

 

200-400 of it NEVER being used, nor the swap file accessed,

 

ever). It boots in 35 seconds.

 

 

 

I haven't bothered to time how long XP takes to boot up, but it

 

takes a good while - and I have virtually all "services" and

 

"hand holding" let alone stuff like AV, indexing, etc.,

 

disabled. I actually have to WAIT a few seconds for the

 

identical generic icons on the desktop to turn into what they

 

should be. Programs run at about the same speed - but if I did

 

not have the Intel Appl. Accel. installed, they would not.

 

During all the installs and messing around I forgot about the

 

IAA and the machine ran noticeably slower until I installed it.

 

 

 

Tiny XP platinum, OTOH, ran like a demon - unfortunately, since

 

it is so stripped down, it would not let me install some

 

programs - I kept getting bizarre "things missing/not

 

connecting" errors which disappeared after a complete clean

 

install of XPSP3 - but also brought a lot of waiting with it.

 

 

 

Not to mention the most common complaint about XP by users not

 

sophisticated enough to see it as an idiot-targeted OS (and

 

complain about THOSE assorted "features") is that it is SLOW.

 

 

 

 

 

--

 

Of course, it is no easy matter to be polite in so far, I mean,

 

as it requires us to show great respect for everybody, whereas

 

most people deserve none at all and again in so far as it

 

demands that we should feign the most lively interest in people,

 

when we must be very glad that we have nothing to do with them.

 

- Arthur Schopenhauer

"dadiOH" wrote in

 

news:#baoDbxBLHA.5476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:

 

 

> That has nothing to do with XP in general, just your

 

> FUBARed install of it.

 

 

 

While I know you are far more knowledgeable than me, my limited

 

experience with XP forces me to disagree here. My P1 166 with

 

64RAM runs at the same or faster speed than either 98SELite or

 

XP I have installed on a 2GHz P4 with 1 GB of RAM (more than

 

200-400 of it NEVER being used, nor the swap file accessed,

 

ever). It boots in 35 seconds.

 

 

 

I haven't bothered to time how long XP takes to boot up, but it

 

takes a good while - and I have virtually all "services" and

 

"hand holding" let alone stuff like AV, indexing, etc.,

 

disabled. I actually have to WAIT a few seconds for the

 

identical generic icons on the desktop to turn into what they

 

should be. Programs run at about the same speed - but if I did

 

not have the Intel Appl. Accel. installed, they would not.

 

During all the installs and messing around I forgot about the

 

IAA and the machine ran noticeably slower until I installed it.

 

 

 

Tiny XP platinum, OTOH, ran like a demon - unfortunately, since

 

it is so stripped down, it would not let me install some

 

programs - I kept getting bizarre "things missing/not

 

connecting" errors which disappeared after a complete clean

 

install of XPSP3 - but also brought a lot of waiting with it.

 

 

 

Not to mention the most common complaint about XP by users not

 

sophisticated enough to see it as an idiot-targeted OS (and

 

complain about THOSE assorted "features") is that it is SLOW.

 

 

 

 

 

--

 

Of course, it is no easy matter to be polite in so far, I mean,

 

as it requires us to show great respect for everybody, whereas

 

most people deserve none at all and again in so far as it

 

demands that we should feign the most lively interest in people,

 

when we must be very glad that we have nothing to do with them.

 

- Arthur Schopenhauer