Internet Explorer 6.0 Sp1 Component Update 3.0 for Windows 98

MEB wrote:

You forgot the era, AND the intent of creating the browser. Its a
transitional browser, as far as Microsoft was concerned, Win98
was moving to EOL...

What a joke.

IE6 was released in August 2001, only 2 years after Win-98se.

Only in your twisted mind could that time-frame be classified as "moving
to EOL".

The fact is that in Microsoft's eyes, every OS is moving toward EOL the
day it's released.

On 12/19/2009 09:14 PM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

You forgot the era, AND the intent of creating the browser. Its a
transitional browser, as far as Microsoft was concerned, Win98
was moving to EOL...

What a joke.

IE6 was released in August 2001, only 2 years after Win-98se.

Only in your twisted mind could that time-frame be classified as "moving
to EOL".

The fact is that in Microsoft's eyes, every OS is moving toward EOL the
day it's released.

Hey stupid, what year was XP being prepared for public offering...

You REALLY have no clue do you. Let me spell it out for you. IE 3 was
the transitional browser for Win 98, IE 4 was the transitional browser
for Win98SE, IE 5.5 was the transitional browser for Millennium [note
not even Microsoft considered Millennium to be a real offering, one
could easily say the entire OS was transitional], IE 6 was the
transitional browser for XP, IE 7 was the transitional browser for
VISTA, IE 8 is the transitional browser for Windows 7.

Here's a chart style so maybe you can understand WITHOUT having to
comprehend what you are reading.

IE Version Shipped With
1.0 Win 95 PLUS pack (not part of Win95 by default)
2.0 Win NT4
3.0 Win 95 OSR2
4.0 Win 98
5.0 Win 98 SE and Win 2000
5.5 Win Millennium Edition (ME)
6.0 Win XP Home/Pro
7.0 VISTA
8.0 Windows 7

And yes, Microsoft does have and follow PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE. The only
thing that gets in the way of that is the occasional suit that may force
extended activities.

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

On 12/19/2009 09:14 PM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

You forgot the era, AND the intent of creating the browser. Its a
transitional browser, as far as Microsoft was concerned, Win98
was moving to EOL...

What a joke.

IE6 was released in August 2001, only 2 years after Win-98se.

Only in your twisted mind could that time-frame be classified as "moving
to EOL".

The fact is that in Microsoft's eyes, every OS is moving toward EOL the
day it's released.

Hey stupid, what year was XP being prepared for public offering...

You REALLY have no clue do you. Let me spell it out for you. IE 3 was
the transitional browser for Win 98, IE 4 was the transitional browser
for Win98SE, IE 5.5 was the transitional browser for Millennium [note
not even Microsoft considered Millennium to be a real offering, one
could easily say the entire OS was transitional], IE 6 was the
transitional browser for XP, IE 7 was the transitional browser for
VISTA, IE 8 is the transitional browser for Windows 7.

Here's a chart style so maybe you can understand WITHOUT having to
comprehend what you are reading.

IE Version Shipped With
1.0 Win 95 PLUS pack (not part of Win95 by default)
2.0 Win NT4
3.0 Win 95 OSR2
4.0 Win 98
5.0 Win 98 SE and Win 2000
5.5 Win Millennium Edition (ME)
6.0 Win XP Home/Pro
7.0 VISTA
8.0 Windows 7

And yes, Microsoft does have and follow PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE. The only
thing that gets in the way of that is the occasional suit that may force
extended activities.

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

On 12/19/2009 09:09 PM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

Your believe that Win-98 is fatally flawed when IE6 is installed
into it, because you believe that IE6 was never properly "ported"
to windows 98.

WRONG AS USUAL.

You are such a disagreeable *******.

How can my statement (above) be WRONG, when later in that same post you
said:

No, stupid, as I have repeatedly advised, just as IE 5.5 was not
completely compatible with Win95, IE6 was not designed nor
compatible with Win98.

Are you so daft that you don't realize when you contradict yourself?


No, you still don't get it... look at the charted materials in the
other post. MAYBE it will dawn on you what the material means, though I
doubt it...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

On 12/19/2009 09:09 PM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

Your believe that Win-98 is fatally flawed when IE6 is installed
into it, because you believe that IE6 was never properly "ported"
to windows 98.

WRONG AS USUAL.

You are such a disagreeable *******.

How can my statement (above) be WRONG, when later in that same post you
said:

No, stupid, as I have repeatedly advised, just as IE 5.5 was not
completely compatible with Win95, IE6 was not designed nor
compatible with Win98.

Are you so daft that you don't realize when you contradict yourself?


No, you still don't get it... look at the charted materials in the
other post. MAYBE it will dawn on you what the material means, though I
doubt it...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

MEB wrote:

you believe that IE6 was never properly "ported" to windows 98.

WRONG AS USUAL.

How can my statement be WRONG, when later in that same post you
said:

"IE6 was not designed nor compatible with Win98."

Are you so daft that you don't realize when you contradict
yourself?

No, you still don't get it... look at the ...

No. I don't have to be distracted by your "look over there" answers.

You know that you've been caught out in a confused lie, and your
misdirections will not cover up that fact.

MEB wrote:

you believe that IE6 was never properly "ported" to windows 98.

WRONG AS USUAL.

How can my statement be WRONG, when later in that same post you
said:

"IE6 was not designed nor compatible with Win98."

Are you so daft that you don't realize when you contradict
yourself?

No, you still don't get it... look at the ...

No. I don't have to be distracted by your "look over there" answers.

You know that you've been caught out in a confused lie, and your
misdirections will not cover up that fact.

On 12/19/2009 11:48 PM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

you believe that IE6 was never properly "ported" to windows 98.

WRONG AS USUAL.

How can my statement be WRONG, when later in that same post you
said:

"IE6 was not designed nor compatible with Win98."

Are you so daft that you don't realize when you contradict
yourself?

No, you still don't get it... look at the ...

No. I don't have to be distracted by your "look over there" answers.

You know that you've been caught out in a confused lie, and your
misdirections will not cover up that fact.

WHERE was that you ignorant fool.

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

On 12/19/2009 11:48 PM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

you believe that IE6 was never properly "ported" to windows 98.

WRONG AS USUAL.

How can my statement be WRONG, when later in that same post you
said:

"IE6 was not designed nor compatible with Win98."

Are you so daft that you don't realize when you contradict
yourself?

No, you still don't get it... look at the ...

No. I don't have to be distracted by your "look over there" answers.

You know that you've been caught out in a confused lie, and your
misdirections will not cover up that fact.

WHERE was that you ignorant fool.

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

MEB wrote:

IE6 was released in August 2001, only 2 years after Win-98se.
Only in your twisted mind could that time-frame be classified
as "moving to EOL".

Hey stupid, what year was XP being prepared for public offering.

What does that have to do with anything?

Win-98 was supported for FIVE MORE YEARS after IE6 was released.
Win-98se was less than 1/3 of the way to EOL at the time that IE6 was
released.

You REALLY have no clue do you. Let me spell it out for you.
IE 3 was the transitional browser for Win 98

What exactly is your fixation on the time-line and pedigree of IE?

It's a known fact that MS likes to bring out a new version of IE just
prior to a new OS, basically for only ONE reason: They know that
various web-metrics measurements will try to guage the success of the
new OS by looking at how many hits they get with the new browser. By
introducing a new version of IE slightly before the new version of
Windoze, they make it difficult to guage the true growth of the new OS
because there will be a growing fraction of the older OS that will
update to the new version of IE.

IE 4 was the transitional browser for Win98SE

IE5 was released in March 1999 and was included with Windows 98se and
Office 2000. A bug-fix version 5.01 was released in December 1999 and
this is the version that shipped with win-2000.

So here again we see a commonality in IE between win-98 and 2K
platforms.

Here's a chart style so maybe you can understand WITHOUT
having to comprehend what you are reading.

What is that supposed to prove?

It's clear that IE 5, 5.5 and 6-SP1 were SIMULTANEOUSLY COMPATIBLE with
both the 9X/ME and NT platforms.

You can't wrap your head around that simple fact.

There is a major difference in the security model implimentation between
IE6 Sp1 and Sp2, and this is why the Sp2 version is not compatible with
win-98. This helps to illustrate the reason why IE6-SP1 is actually
MORE compatible with the 9x/me family rather than the NT line.