On Mar 12, 11:59*pm, 98 Guy wrote:
Industrial One wrote:
4. All I hear is "we're using win98, it doesn't support all the
latest codecs n ****"! Well, that's your field. You are the
classic OS genius, figure out how to get the latest **** to
work without it needing to be a hassle

I haven't been following this thread, so I don't know what led to your
rant, and really it doesn't matter.

They were helping me troubleshoot a DOS 6.22 problem and I uploaded
some screencaps to show the problem in a format Lostgallifreyan wasn't
able to play, so he got all sensitive and started bitching at me for
assuming he knew how to get them to play. I guess some people obtain
knowledge at the expense of social skills and offer help on forums for
narcissistic instead of altruistic reasons. or as I call them - dorks.

With regard to your comment (above) about x264 (or is it h264?) not
being compatible with win-98, I'm not sure who's saying that, but it's
probably someone here with an anemic PC (pentium 2, 300 mhz or some junk
like that) and who's never tried kernelex and VLC (that is probably
about half the people who read this win-98 newsgroup).

Most likely.

I do a lot of downloading and I'm seeing more video's (movies, tv-rips)
being posted as MPEG-4 (x264) and not xvid, and a lot of other people

XviD is MPEG-4 too, though it really should've been called MPEG-3. In
the ITU naming convention, XviD is the H.263 standard and MPEG-4 part
2 (ASP) is the ISO equivalent. Just like H.264 is MPEG-4 part 10
(AVC). I find the ITU terminology a lot simpler to follow. Don't
attempt to make sense out of them, I regret ever taking the time to do
so.


are bitching about the end of Xvid in a lot of different forums (and I
don't know what their problem is), but win-98 and VLC can play 264 ****

Problem is they are change-resistant fanboys who have no dick. Do
yourself a favor and don't attempt to understand them either, I regret
ever trying.