New k/board has an USB plug

Hey, MEB, GFY. Then learn to read. Because I'll no longer have these
discussions with you until YOU read and reply to MY points with the same
respect you expect from me. That whole last discussion I spent answering
your questions while you ignored mine. Again, GFY.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...

Let's see, XP is fostered as a better system because:

SECURITY

Individual Settings more defined than when policies were used in 9X. Yet
most of those same settings and abilities were available 9X.

Next, hmm, more security in XP because of the available NTFS file
system...
but then with the way files are handled BY NTFS, there are always bits and
pieces of files readily available for review/recovery by ANYONE,
particularly with the now supplied, Microsoft supplied, hack tools.

ALL other major purported security aspects were previously available via
third party applications in 9X [Kerberos, encryption, firewall, web proxy,
etc.].

SYSTEM

Greater web integration in XP,,, right, the very thing that makes you more
vulnerable...

Greater Plug and Pray/branding abilities in XP. The trade off in XP is
that
once connected, the device will likely NOT work elsewhere/in another OS.

Greater hard drive size/capacity via SATA. This easily could have been
adapted to during support life for SE, there really is NO excuse for not
doing so.
Greater hard drive capacity due to NTFS... well yeah, since Fat32 was
deliberately limited by Microsoft's own design.

STABILITY

Restore points to help recover from catastrophic failures... hmm,
interesting concept, the whole system is purported to be designed as
failure
proof,, yet without this ability XP would have been junked long ago...
gosh,
ME had this as well.

Very few BSODs. Ah yeah, but then the design does place these in separate
server/service areas with *crash protection*, hmm, seems that was also
being
done in 9X by third parties, at least until the installation of IE 5/6...
what's the major CAUSE of BSODs, poor coding. either Microsoft's or the
application developer's. Second, memory issues, which also generally
reverts
to poor coding.

Greater memory handling capacity. Yeah, and to merely run the OS its
needed, and better have a fast processor to go with it...

DEVICES

Wow, that's a no brainer. Just as Microsoft with-held support for the
*next-gen* devices in 95, then 98, then 98SE. And now the future is USB,,,
no, USB is too limited. Firewire? No, has its own issues.. SATA, maybe for
awhile. PCIe/ePCI well maybe for awhile longer... hmm,,

NETWORKING

AH, here it shines [at least with itself] but then it IS designed for
SECURED, *LOCAL*, corporate networks, behind hard and software firewalls
and
other ... we have to overlook NAP, sharing, and other issues constantly
being screwed up by updates, and its vulnerabilities when connected to the
Internet.

Your turn...

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
| We've been around this block before. You say "intrusive", I say
"progress",
| blah, blah. When you can actually stoop to answer serious questions put
to
| you about your theories of comparative OSes, you let me know. Until
then,
if
| you really need an argument, go read our last one.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| http://grystmill.com
|
| "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| ...
| Gee, okay, Mr. Sheeple,,, so spend your time downloading hundreds of
| "fixes"
| for your XP and VISTA machines, that STILL leave you vulnerable, open
new
| vulnerabilities, and support or rather DEMAND YOU support all those
Web
| 2.0,
| DRM, and other intrusions; and while knowing that supposedly secure
system
| you run CAN BE and IS constantly being attacked while on the
Internet...
| its
| part of the design FEATURE.....
|
| Run some tests Gary, expand your knowledge..
|
| --
| MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| --
| _________
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| ...
| | Go diagnose a BSOD, Luddite. Though in your case, you probably
belong
| with
| | 9x. You apparently don't actually use your computers for anything
but
| | useless "testing" and posting to the Usenet, maybe some plain text
| internet
| | surfing. 98's good enough for that.
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | http://grystmill.com
| |
| | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | ...
| | If you want to thump your chest about being a sheeple continue
on...
| |
| | What's wrong, all the young XP and Vista users run you guys out of
| those
| | forums or what...
| |
| | --
| | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | --
| | _________
| |
| | "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| | ...
| | | With a machine as old as yours, you're right. No USB printer for
| you --
| | | unless you were to bother to install a USB2 card. But for mouses
and
| | | keyboards there are USB to AT or PS/2 connectors converters
readily
| | | available. Heck, lots of USB keyboards and mouses come with a
PS/2
| | converter
| | | included.
| | |
| | | But if you want to thump your chest about being a Luddite, go
right
| | ahead.
| | |
| | | --
| | | Gary S. Terhune
| | | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | | http://grystmill.com
| | |
| | | wrote in message
| | | ...
| | | On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 10:47:25 +1000, "Jason James"

| wrote:
| | |
| | |
| | | "philo" wrote in message
| | | . ..
| | |
| | | "Jason James" wrote in message
| | | ...
| | | I've had my win98se PC since 1999. Its running 85% free
| resources
| | atm.
| | | I've
| | | finally had to buy another k/board which has a USB plug
only.
| | | There is a USB port on the rear of the PC and mention of a
| heap
| of
| | USB
| | | files
| | | after doing a "search for files".
| | |
| | | My question is: can I simply remove the existing KB from
it's
| | circular
| | | socket and plug in the new KB to the single USB?
| | |
| | | I did plug in a coffee-cup warmer to the USB once, but
removed
| it
| | when
| | | I
| | | found it could only supply 500ma (found this info in one
of
| the
| | port
| | | specs
| | | list) the CCup was 800ma.
| | | Thanx for any clues,....Jason
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | Win98 should be able to detect and install your USB
keyboard.
| | | It will not draw too much current, so you should be OK...
| | | However I'd advise you to use a PS/2 keyboard as you *might*
not
| | have
| | | USB
| | | keyboard support in the bios
| | |
| | | Yes, I switched off the PC, unplugged the old KB, and selected
the
| LHS
| | USB
| | | port to plug in the new KB. Windows then prompted me 3 times
to
| select
| | | various files, then it was all systems go.
| | | Thanx for your assistance. I'm not very good at PCs, and I was
| worried
| | I
| | | would blow something up :-)
| | | Jason
| | |
| | |
| | | You wont blow anything up, but if you want to use raw dos, you
| will
| | | NOT have a working keyboard. I got a usb mouse and since I
use
| dos,
| I
| | | could not have mouse support in dos. I went back to a serial
| mouse
| | | and dumped that usb piece of crap on someone that only uses
XP.
| | | Seems they make everything for USB these days. I really dont
| | | understand why. No USB mice, keyboards, printers for me.
| | |
| | | Why would anyone abuse their power supply with a coffee
warmer.
| You
| | | do have an AC outlet on the wall, right? I wonder how much
that
| thing
| | | slowed down your computer? Just because someone makes stuff
like
| that
| | | does not mean it's practical or safe. I got a USB light as a
| gift.
| | | It's pretty much useless. It has only one blue-white LED, so
I
am
| not
| | | worried about power use, but I have yet to find a need for it.
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|

And I bought the (slightly older) HP Laser Jet 1018 (USB) for precisely the
reason that it WILL also work with my Win98SE computer, because it still has
that driver support (I mean that version does, but some of the newer ones,
like the 1020(?), apparently don't).

But I think you're right, it's getting harder to find. Plus - it's nice
not having to use that bulky parallel port cable, too. :-)

On the downside, I believe that if I want to print anything in DOS, that's a
no-go (at least without some additional driver, assuming that is even
available.

Hmmm, maybe there is some driver that could also still work in a DOS shell
for a USB printer, but not in Real DOS mode? - not sure - can't recall)


Jeff Richards wrote:
They might not be common, but they certainly exist. For instance,
http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~heha.../index.html.en

But, in any case, I wasn't advocating that solution. For most current
printers, finding drivers that work with W98 is going to be the bigger
problem. If the drivers are available, then adding a USB PCI card or even
a
USB PCMCIA device is easier than trying to use the parallel port.
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"Ingeborg" wrote in message
...
Jeff Richards wrote:

Any printer you buy today is going to be USB. You can get parallel to
USB adapters to solve the connection problem, but you would still have
to check that w98 drivers for the printer were available.

I don't think so. An USB-parallel adapter is designed to connect a
parallel printer to an usb port. Not inversed.

When you need a new printer, and don't want/not able to use usb, you'd
better look for a network printer, or maybe use a printerserver like
this:
http://www.sweex.ch/pers.php?detail=80&sectie=laatste&subsectie=produc ten
(Don't forget to check if that server supports your printer, and W98)

I was involved in sourcing one for a client who had a parallel port security
dongle. The software assumed the printer was on the same port, so when they
upgraded the printer we had to find a solution that enabled them to use the
new printer on the same port that the dongle was plugged into. The device
worked extremely well, but that was a very simple printing operation so I
don't know if it supports advanced features of the parallel port.
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"Ingeborg" wrote in message
...
Jeff Richards wrote:

They might not be common, but they certainly exist. For instance,


Great! ) Do you have any experience with this? According to the 'USB2LPT
- Evaluation system' photo it does not contain any non-trivial logic. So I
suppose all work is done by the driver. I wonder what that means for
processor load while printing.