Should Windows 98/ME be supported?
Wednesday, August 7, 2002 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize News
It's frustrating. I go over to download.com and see user reviews on WindowBlinds:http://download.com.com/3000-2326-10131236.html?tag=sptlt
And reading it, you'd think that WindowBlinds was junk. But we know it's not. We know it works really really well, especially on Windows 2000 and XP.
The problem is that on Windows 98 and ME, things get dodgy. Those versions of Windows have a limited number of GDI resources. So sometimes desktop enhancements (not just WindowBlinds) work perfectly and sometimes tweaking needs to be done to them.
According to the stats on WinCustomize, Only 19% of the visitors here even use Windows 98/ME. A year ago it was 45%.
This raises the question - how long should these cutomization unfriendly versions of Windows be supported? We're finding it to be a huge PR problem. People download customization software on their Windows 98 box, some percentage of them has problems due to the crummy neature of Windows 98/ME, and then when they eventually upgrade to a decent version of Windows they only remember that the software in question gave them problems and hence we end up with "I tried WindowBlinds and it was unstable" spread like gospel.
http://download.com.com/3000-2326-10131236.html?tag=sptlt
As I write this, fewer than 7 out of 10 people actually had a positive experience with it. Obviously there are some other issues involved such as registered users don't download the shareware so over time, the only users left downloading the shareware are people who have (for whatever reason) chosen not to register. But it's hard to help wondering that Windows 98Frogboy is also a major factor.
With only 1 out of 5 people on this site running Win98Frogboy in a world where 70% of desktops are running Win98/ME, it really demonstrates that those who are into customization or have a positive experience in customizing their comptuers are running Windows 2000 or Windows XP.
Therefore, what do you think? Should support for Windows 98Frogboy users be phased out and if so when?
 |
|
Page 4 of 5 | |
|
|---|
Paul Doland
Reply #62 Thursday, August 8, 2002 2:14 PM
Reply #62 Thursday, August 8, 2002 2:14 PM
Citizen Wulfn1 complains that people of limited resources won't be supported anymore. Well, nobody can take away the products you have! If you want to keep using what you got, that's just fine. But I've got a question - are you expecting MS to release a never version of Plus! 98? Fat chance. But you expect Stardock to release new versions of OD for 98?
Citizen C²zero says that 98 was a great OS for its time. Um, no, it wasn't. Though OS/2 never reached critical mass, it was a far better, far more stable OS and was out years earlier.
Stardock is right, Win 9XPaul Doland suck. I think the idea of saying, OD 2002 (Window Blinds 3.4) is the last to support 9X.
Citizen C²zero says that 98 was a great OS for its time. Um, no, it wasn't. Though OS/2 never reached critical mass, it was a far better, far more stable OS and was out years earlier.
Stardock is right, Win 9XPaul Doland suck. I think the idea of saying, OD 2002 (Window Blinds 3.4) is the last to support 9X.
Paul Doland
Reply #63 Thursday, August 8, 2002 2:17 PM
Reply #63 Thursday, August 8, 2002 2:17 PM
I did not say that Paul Doland sucks!!! This site seems to subsititue your own name when you type slash M E.
elvee
Reply #64 Thursday, August 8, 2002 6:25 PM
Reply #64 Thursday, August 8, 2002 6:25 PM
I say drop support for 98\ME with the release of WB4. Somehow clean up WB3.x to be more stable for 98\ME if that is possible. Lower the price about 25% for the lesser version, give limited support for a while or have a new section/message board just for 98\me version so people can exchange thier own information.
I agree with moving on with the times. I believe that the majority of 98\ME users will upgrade in time, so don't shut them out completely.
I agree with moving on with the times. I believe that the majority of 98\ME users will upgrade in time, so don't shut them out completely.
sig101
Reply #65 Thursday, August 8, 2002 6:39 PM
Reply #65 Thursday, August 8, 2002 6:39 PM
Just wondering. How many W98 customers did Stardock get when XP came out? People who wanted their GUI to look like XP or any of cool skins available here? And WindowBlinds and OB and other Stardock apps were the only way for them to do that? (No ThemeXP available for 9x, after all.) I'd guess more than a few.
I also recall comments in the ngs by Stardock after the WB 3.0 release about their desire to make WB more 98 friendly since not everyone will be running XP for quite a while and there's will still be a significant 9x user base.
For example, I'm running WB and OB on 98 and am aware of the limitations of the OS re: resources. I take care regarding what I run on my machine and rarely have problems of any magnitude worth mentioning. I became an OD subscriber (as well as a WC subscriber) all with my allegedly POS OS and PC. It just runs and works, as does my work machine which will not have an upgrade (software and hardware) for at least another year (I looked at their deployment plan). (And as far as MS support of the OS, what's that got to do with anything, really? Haven't had that [or needed it] in years.)
So is the critical issue for Stardock that it's too difficult or burdensome for Stardock to continue to support 9x? Not feasible or cost effective/beneficial to have an OS specific WB? If so, fine. Or is the primary issue (mentioned above) which really generated this discussion is that Stardock is concerned about comments at download.com and other sites from alleged 98 users? (And Stardock blames the OS and the users who must be clueless because they're running that OS? Gee, 98 was just fine for WB when I signed up as an OD subscriber.
)
So is the decision point really based on support issues or PR concerns? Does Stardock seriously think there'll be no more "Windowblinds SUCKS" "It crashed my machine and I had to reformat" kinds of comments at download.com once only XP is supported? And if these comments don't stop what will Stardock do then? Blame the OS and the users?
Hopefully Stardock develops its business plans based on something more grounded than what anonymous yahoos say at download.com and usenet.
Rather than "document" what is said at download.com (as if that's a credible source of information for statistical analysis) why not actually survey your registered users? Not just a poll on the website, or the discussion here since not all users engage here, but send out an email survey. Give your paying customers a chance to have a say, if that's what you want.
I also recall comments in the ngs by Stardock after the WB 3.0 release about their desire to make WB more 98 friendly since not everyone will be running XP for quite a while and there's will still be a significant 9x user base.
For example, I'm running WB and OB on 98 and am aware of the limitations of the OS re: resources. I take care regarding what I run on my machine and rarely have problems of any magnitude worth mentioning. I became an OD subscriber (as well as a WC subscriber) all with my allegedly POS OS and PC. It just runs and works, as does my work machine which will not have an upgrade (software and hardware) for at least another year (I looked at their deployment plan). (And as far as MS support of the OS, what's that got to do with anything, really? Haven't had that [or needed it] in years.)
So is the critical issue for Stardock that it's too difficult or burdensome for Stardock to continue to support 9x? Not feasible or cost effective/beneficial to have an OS specific WB? If so, fine. Or is the primary issue (mentioned above) which really generated this discussion is that Stardock is concerned about comments at download.com and other sites from alleged 98 users? (And Stardock blames the OS and the users who must be clueless because they're running that OS? Gee, 98 was just fine for WB when I signed up as an OD subscriber.
) So is the decision point really based on support issues or PR concerns? Does Stardock seriously think there'll be no more "Windowblinds SUCKS" "It crashed my machine and I had to reformat" kinds of comments at download.com once only XP is supported? And if these comments don't stop what will Stardock do then? Blame the OS and the users?
Hopefully Stardock develops its business plans based on something more grounded than what anonymous yahoos say at download.com and usenet.
Rather than "document" what is said at download.com (as if that's a credible source of information for statistical analysis) why not actually survey your registered users? Not just a poll on the website, or the discussion here since not all users engage here, but send out an email survey. Give your paying customers a chance to have a say, if that's what you want.
Tryzub
Reply #67 Thursday, August 8, 2002 6:50 PM
Reply #67 Thursday, August 8, 2002 6:50 PM
Just an observation, but if there are other users out there like C²zero paying similar prices for computer hardware that C²zero paid for the SiS video card, then that may be why you cannot afford new hardware. This observation is not meant to be a slam on C²zero, but, folks, you may want to shop around or ask your "geek" friends about where to get hardware and software. Sixty-four (64) MB cards were going for as low as $200 last year at this time.
With respect to my experience with OBNT, I'm nearing my third renewal for the suite of products. I've used the software on machines ranging from an AMD
-2 300 with 64 MB of RAM to my current machine, which is an AMD Athlon 850 with 512 MB of RAM. I only recently purchased XP. Prior to it, I used ODNT on an AMD -2 450 running 98, 98SE and WinME. As I upgraded versions of windows, I used WB 1.x and alpha/beta versions of DX. I can honestly say I didn't have any major problems with any system configuration.
As many have said here, there were the occational skins that didn't play nice, but overall my system performed as expected. Ah, "as expected." Yes, perhaps that is the issue: Users load their systems up with programs then throw ODNT in the mix...not in all cases, but I cannot believe that people using ODNT are "casual users" who don't also try other software that's out at download.com, tucows.com or nonags.com.
Solution: Make two different versions of the suite and apps within the suite: "Windowblinds Classic" and "Windowblinds 2002" for example. The "2002" nomenclature would increment as makes sense, "IP 2002", "ODNT 2003", "DX 2004", etc. If a user attempts to install the "2002" version of the software on a pre-NT kernel machine, they get a warning about the 2000/XP version potentially having unwanted effects on Win9x versions. Furthermore, notify your customer base that further development of enhancements for the "Classic" version will cease on "blah blah" date, but that you will continue to support the software (tech support, bug fixes, forums, whatever). You continue to support the product and many will continue to skin for it - just no further enhancements.
As far as full-blown product support, I think Stardock should follow the lead of MS. I'm not an MS "fan" by any means, but 2000 and XP have features that 9x will never support. Stop supporting the "Classic" version when MS is no longer supporting the OS for which it is intended.
With respect to my experience with OBNT, I'm nearing my third renewal for the suite of products. I've used the software on machines ranging from an AMD
-2 300 with 64 MB of RAM to my current machine, which is an AMD Athlon 850 with 512 MB of RAM. I only recently purchased XP. Prior to it, I used ODNT on an AMD -2 450 running 98, 98SE and WinME. As I upgraded versions of windows, I used WB 1.x and alpha/beta versions of DX. I can honestly say I didn't have any major problems with any system configuration.As many have said here, there were the occational skins that didn't play nice, but overall my system performed as expected. Ah, "as expected." Yes, perhaps that is the issue: Users load their systems up with programs then throw ODNT in the mix...not in all cases, but I cannot believe that people using ODNT are "casual users" who don't also try other software that's out at download.com, tucows.com or nonags.com.
Solution: Make two different versions of the suite and apps within the suite: "Windowblinds Classic" and "Windowblinds 2002" for example. The "2002" nomenclature would increment as makes sense, "IP 2002", "ODNT 2003", "DX 2004", etc. If a user attempts to install the "2002" version of the software on a pre-NT kernel machine, they get a warning about the 2000/XP version potentially having unwanted effects on Win9x versions. Furthermore, notify your customer base that further development of enhancements for the "Classic" version will cease on "blah blah" date, but that you will continue to support the software (tech support, bug fixes, forums, whatever). You continue to support the product and many will continue to skin for it - just no further enhancements.
As far as full-blown product support, I think Stardock should follow the lead of MS. I'm not an MS "fan" by any means, but 2000 and XP have features that 9x will never support. Stop supporting the "Classic" version when MS is no longer supporting the OS for which it is intended.
karma tba
Reply #68 Thursday, August 8, 2002 6:55 PM
Reply #68 Thursday, August 8, 2002 6:55 PM
When I began using WindowBlinds I had two PCs,one running 98,one running ME.My original intent was to emulate the look and feel of XP!I soon grew tired of pseudo XP and upgraded to the real thing.Aside from one incompatible app I am quite happy because there was a noticable increase in performance and decrease in lock ups and crashes.Those of you who have not upgraded for one reason or another I respect your decision but resistance is futile.Do yourself a favor let go,save up,and move on.
WolfwoodX
Reply #69 Thursday, August 8, 2002 7:20 PM
Reply #69 Thursday, August 8, 2002 7:20 PM
RE: Citizen Paul Doland:
Citizen C²zero says that 98 was a great OS for its time. Um, no, it wasn't. Though OS/2 never reached critical mass, it was a far better, far more stable OS and was out years earlier.
me:
I still use PCDOS 2000 and OS/2 on a few PCs
My only problem with OS/2 is that it was a pain to get it setup. IBM rules!
_____
RE: Developer Trizub:
Just an observation, but if there are other users out there like C²zero paying similar prices for computer hardware that C²zero paid for the SiS video card, then that may be why you cannot afford new hardware. This observation is not meant to be a slam on C²zero, but, folks, you may want to shop around or ask your "geek" friends about where to get hardware and software.
Hey, that video card came onbord, and the mainbord dose not have an AGP slot. I got it about 2yrs ago, over clocked my celeron 600 to run at 900, and got a CD-RW. You can say my PC is dated all you want, I don't care. I can't afford to upgrade anything (I am 15 and don't have a job). + my PC runs fine enuff for me (I don't play to many games, that is what the PS2 is for, I don't use heavy resorce grafic programs (can't afford them either, and I don't pirate), and I am one of those geek friends. I know what is out there, I know what is the "best". And I only have $5.00 and a bestbuy gift card with $15 on it. And, I am really trying to save up for a BMW 325i. I saw one yesterda... maby later. 
Citizen C²zero says that 98 was a great OS for its time. Um, no, it wasn't. Though OS/2 never reached critical mass, it was a far better, far more stable OS and was out years earlier.
me:
I still use PCDOS 2000 and OS/2 on a few PCs
My only problem with OS/2 is that it was a pain to get it setup. IBM rules!
_____
RE: Developer Trizub:
Just an observation, but if there are other users out there like C²zero paying similar prices for computer hardware that C²zero paid for the SiS video card, then that may be why you cannot afford new hardware. This observation is not meant to be a slam on C²zero, but, folks, you may want to shop around or ask your "geek" friends about where to get hardware and software.
Hey, that video card came onbord, and the mainbord dose not have an AGP slot. I got it about 2yrs ago, over clocked my celeron 600 to run at 900, and got a CD-RW. You can say my PC is dated all you want, I don't care. I can't afford to upgrade anything (I am 15 and don't have a job). + my PC runs fine enuff for me (I don't play to many games, that is what the PS2 is for, I don't use heavy resorce grafic programs (can't afford them either, and I don't pirate), and I am one of those geek friends. I know what is out there, I know what is the "best". And I only have $5.00 and a bestbuy gift card with $15 on it. And, I am really trying to save up for a BMW 325i
. I saw one yesterda... maby later. 
WolfwoodX
Reply #70 Thursday, August 8, 2002 7:25 PM
Reply #70 Thursday, August 8, 2002 7:25 PM
And yes, I have lots of old spare PC parts (mostly given to me) and build my own week PCs, and load old OS's on them.(PCDOS, OS/2, Windows 3.1, all the clasics 
)
)
sig101
Reply #71 Thursday, August 8, 2002 9:45 PM
Reply #71 Thursday, August 8, 2002 9:45 PM
Said by karma tba: "Those of you who have not upgraded for one reason or another I respect your decision but resistance is futile. Do yourself a favor let go,save up,and move on."
Why? What are the compelling reasons to upgrade? Not the reasons you had, but reasons for someone else who sees no need to upgrade?
For me it's not a matter of resistance or a lack of resources. I don't buy a new car every two, three years either, although I could do so if I wanted. Yeah they're shiny and new, but if my current ones do what I want and need, there's really no compelling reason to change ASAP. It's entirely discretionary.
If people want to upgrade, fine, but why *should* anyone upgrade if there is no compelling reason to do so? As an NT flavor XP reputedly is more stable. (Although I've seen lots of evidently clueless XP users in support forums begging for help and reformatting after a few weeks which I've never had to do in all the years with 98. Just goes to show that clueless users will always be with us and the OS is not always to blame.) But if stability is not a critical problem, what compelling reason is there to upgrade? It's really not a one size fits all proposition. Not everyone has the same needs, wants or priorities.
Actually I've nothing against XP except MS' increasingly intrusive Borgness and fondness for running unnecessary services and open ports. I'm sure I'd quite like it (and its "cartoony" GUI) although it takes a bit more effort to secure on its own. But I'd give any MS OS at least 6 months to a year in release so that issues are known and there's an SP1 or some such update. So while I certainly don't dissuade anyone from upgrading if they so choose, I don't understand the apparent desire to proselytize to those who haven't.
Why? What are the compelling reasons to upgrade? Not the reasons you had, but reasons for someone else who sees no need to upgrade?
For me it's not a matter of resistance or a lack of resources. I don't buy a new car every two, three years either, although I could do so if I wanted. Yeah they're shiny and new, but if my current ones do what I want and need, there's really no compelling reason to change ASAP. It's entirely discretionary.
If people want to upgrade, fine, but why *should* anyone upgrade if there is no compelling reason to do so? As an NT flavor XP reputedly is more stable. (Although I've seen lots of evidently clueless XP users in support forums begging for help and reformatting after a few weeks which I've never had to do in all the years with 98. Just goes to show that clueless users will always be with us and the OS is not always to blame.) But if stability is not a critical problem, what compelling reason is there to upgrade? It's really not a one size fits all proposition. Not everyone has the same needs, wants or priorities.
Actually I've nothing against XP except MS' increasingly intrusive Borgness and fondness for running unnecessary services and open ports. I'm sure I'd quite like it (and its "cartoony" GUI) although it takes a bit more effort to secure on its own. But I'd give any MS OS at least 6 months to a year in release so that issues are known and there's an SP1 or some such update. So while I certainly don't dissuade anyone from upgrading if they so choose, I don't understand the apparent desire to proselytize to those who haven't.
karma tba
Reply #72 Thursday, August 8, 2002 10:22 PM
Reply #72 Thursday, August 8, 2002 10:22 PM
Wow I guess there's no humor around here....my comments were meant to be funny....well at least you picked up on the Borg reference.
Tarkus
Reply #73 Thursday, August 8, 2002 11:33 PM
Reply #73 Thursday, August 8, 2002 11:33 PM
The problem with developing separate versions is that then everybody suffers, because focus and manpower would be going in two different directions.
I'd rather they focus their development on the current standard, and those using the old standard can continue to use the 3.x series indefinitely.
It's not like v3.x is going to stop working if Stardock drops support.
I'd rather they focus their development on the current standard, and those using the old standard can continue to use the 3.x series indefinitely.
It's not like v3.x is going to stop working if Stardock drops support.
franscape
Reply #74 Friday, August 9, 2002 11:26 AM
Reply #74 Friday, August 9, 2002 11:26 AM
i have ME and i use windowblinds, everything works just fine. currently i have only downloaded skins. i haven't created any of my own. almost everthing i have downloaded works almost perfectly. i hope windowblinds
doesn't plan on making it impossible for me users.
doesn't plan on making it impossible for me users.
GENEDAVID
Reply #75 Friday, August 9, 2002 12:59 PM
Reply #75 Friday, August 9, 2002 12:59 PM
i am using windows me
i hope they conuing
making all work with me
i hope they conuing
making all work with me
sig101
Reply #76 Friday, August 9, 2002 1:49 PM
Reply #76 Friday, August 9, 2002 1:49 PM
That's fine, Tarkus, and I can understand design and support issues with different OS's given what the OD apps do (and can do in the future). Those certainly are valid issues.
I just think that citing comments on download.com (and further assuming the complainers are credible, using 98 and that's the problem) as if that site presents a basis for a valid statistical analysis is a bit off IMO. To further extrapolate from comments at download.com that 98 users pose a PR problem and that's an additional reason to drop support?
. Guess I'll stop recommending WB to W98 users. Clueless peasants.
I just think that citing comments on download.com (and further assuming the complainers are credible, using 98 and that's the problem) as if that site presents a basis for a valid statistical analysis is a bit off IMO. To further extrapolate from comments at download.com that 98 users pose a PR problem and that's an additional reason to drop support?
. Guess I'll stop recommending WB to W98 users. Clueless peasants. 
bakerstreet
Reply #77 Friday, August 9, 2002 3:52 PM
Reply #77 Friday, August 9, 2002 3:52 PM
Just read an article on Microsoft ramping up the pressure on people who have 'borrowed' copies of XP Corporate... Sounds menacing...
There might be a lot of k1dd13s switching back to 98se abruptly when SP1 comes out...
There might be a lot of k1dd13s switching back to 98se abruptly when SP1 comes out...
WOM
Reply #78 Friday, August 9, 2002 6:50 PM
Reply #78 Friday, August 9, 2002 6:50 PM
I have XP PRO. I also have ME. ME is skinned. I don't use it much. I could care less if you stop supporting it. The only reason its still on my computer is XP doesn't support all of my equipment and I do not want to replace them yet. When I do ME is gone.
onurbnl
Reply #80 Friday, August 9, 2002 7:03 PM
Reply #80 Friday, August 9, 2002 7:03 PM
I use Object desktop on win 98 SE for the last year on two different pc's ( pentium 2 and AMD 1700+ ) Have no problems at all. Would not want to be left out skinning my windows.
Win 9x needs the visual pick-up more then XP does !!
Win 9x needs the visual pick-up more then XP does !!
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 4 of 5 | |
|
|---|
Reply #61 Thursday, August 8, 2002 1:49 PM