Page 1 of 1

operating systems showing their age

Posted: 2005-03-01 03:34am
by Dennis Toy
link

Creaky Operating Systems Show Their Age

Mon Feb 28,10:48 AM ET Technology - washingtonpost.com


By Rob Pegoraro

A program can't ever really die, but it can get old.

Very old.


This is a paradox millions of computer users are living with. Almost four years after the release of Windows XP (news - web sites) and Mac OS X (news - web sites), they boot their machines into more senior versions of Windows or the Mac OS.


Those operating systems still fire up in the morning as they always did. But they show their age in other ways -- newer programs and gadgets can't or won't coexist with them.


The research firm IDC estimates that of the roughly 514 million paid-for copies of Windows on desktops and laptops worldwide at the end of 2004, almost 21 percent were the aging Win 95, 98 and Millennium Edition releases. Among the 19 million Mac OS desktop and laptop installations IDC surveyed, just about half were running releases predating Mac OS X.


If your machine is among that contingent and you find that it performs its assigned tasks properly, there's no problem -- for you, the software is old but not obsolete. But if you're still using your machine for the tasks it was designed for, you are likely in a small minority. Home computing these days has little in common with five years ago, and not all of these changes leave room for older systems.


Here are how the past few consumer releases of Windows and the Mac OS compare in terms of viability:


Windows 95: This nearly-decade-old operating system is swimming with several anchors around its neck, the heaviest of them being its lack of USB support. That rules out using the vast bulk of the devices -- printers, digital cameras, MP3 players, handheld organizers -- made in the past few years.


Software support for Win 95 is vanishing, too. Microsoft last released a Win 95 version of its Internet Explorer browser five years ago; AOL's software last supported Win 95 in 2001. Nor can you run the current editions of Intuit's Quicken (news - web sites) and Microsoft Money in Win 95.


Windows 98 (news - web sites): This version has weathered the years better than Win 95. For one thing, USB does work in Win 98, although not perfectly (for instance, most of Creative's MP3 players, Epson's printer/scanner combos and many WiFi adapters need newer Windows releases).


For another, a lot of software still runs on Win 98 -- among the 20 top-selling Windows programs in December, as compiled by the research firm NPD Group, 15 are listed as Win 98-compatible. Media software is a big exception: If you want to make MP3 copies of your CDs, Win 98 offers few options.


Windows 98 Second Edition and Millennium Edition: Despite the chorus of yawns it was greeted with at its summer 1999 introduction, Win 98 SE turns out to be a fairly significant update seven years later -- it's the oldest Windows release I would consider halfway viable. Win ME, which shipped only a year later, offers almost the same compatibility.


These releases' USB support is good enough to accept almost all the peripherals you might plug into a new Win XP machine.


Win 98 SE and ME also remain the minimum system for many popular applications, such as Microsoft's Money and RealNetworks' RealPlayer. They can't, however, run some of the best-known media software, including Apple's iTunes, Napster (news - web sites), Roxio Easy CD and DVD Creator 7 and Adobe Photoshop Elements 3. You might not think that word processing demands the latest system software, but Microsoft Office 2003 won't run on these systems, either.


Windows 2000 (news - web sites): The immediate ancestor of Windows XP, used by few home users, is barely a year older than Win XP. Yet Microsoft is backing away from it anyway. The latest versions of its flagship Web and media programs -- the pop-up-blocking IE 6 and the cleaner, more capable Windows Media Player 10 -- both require XP.


With little or no built-in support for such wireless standards as WiFi and Bluetooth, Win 2000 is also far behind XP in the networking department.


On the Mac side, there have been far more system updates in recent years -- the downside of that being a quick sunset for older releases. This has continued past the onset of Mac OS X -- the 3 1/2-year-old Mac OS X 10.1 is now as far behind the times as Win 98 SE.





Mac OS 8 and 8.5: These 1997 and 1998 releases are as dead as Windows 95, thanks to their own lack of USB support -- as well as an even more complete abandonment by software developers. Not a single modern, compatible browser is available for these systems. Multimedia software is also hard to find.

Mac OS 8.6-9.2: These releases are slightly better in terms of software support -- there still aren't any good browsers, but you can run an old version of iTunes (which doesn't connect to the iTunes Music Store or recent iPod models). And you can plug in USB devices.

Mac OS X 10.0 and 10.1: The first two releases of Mac OS X have been so badly outclassed by succeeding releases that there is no good reason to run them.

Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar: This operating system, a mere 2 1/2 years old, is already being prepped for retirement. This is not the fault of third-party software developers or hardware manufacturers; most of whose wares function just fine in Jaguar. Instead, look to Apple, which is giving Jaguar the Windows 2000 treatment -- the current versions of its Safari Web browser and iPhoto and iLife packages require OS X 10.3 Panther.

If your system shows up on this list, that's not a death sentence. First, you can simply install the latest system software. A machine that runs Win 2000 or any Mac OS X version should handle Windows XP or Panther -- as long as you up its memory to 512 megabytes.

Second, you can look past Microsoft or Apple for your upgrades. Using Win 98, ME or 2000? Ditch Microsoft's Internet Explorer, essentially abandoned on pre-XP versions, for the free Firefox browser. The same recommendation applies in Jaguar; the version of Safari in that release doesn't display some sites properly. Microsoft Office 2003 may not tolerate Win 98 SE, but Corel's WordPerfect Office 12 and the free OpenOffice will.

But if you're spending any time with digital photos, music or video and you're not running at least Win 2000 or Jaguar, forget it. Take one common question I see, getting an iPod to work in Win 98. You can do it with a fair amount of tinkering -- but even then, you'll be stuck with a machine whose hard drive is probably smaller than the iPod's and which will take hours to copy over that music unless you upgrade its USB connections.

In that case, you either have to accept the limits of your old machine or ante up for a new one. The alternative is endless fussing with your computer, the kind of drudgery that will make you feel old.

.



Please dress your links - Phong

Posted: 2005-03-01 03:49am
by Uraniun235
Wait, how can Mac OS 8 not support USB? I was under the impression USB debuted on the Mac. And IIRC, USB support is present in the final release of Windows 95.

Anyway, since we're talking about obsolete software still running...

The school district I work at, until last year, probably had at least several hundred computers running Windows 95. Probably more; there were still teacher computers running 95. On one computer, I remember stumbling across some absurd version of IE like 3.0.

It's a little better now, thanks to a bunch of donated computers, a large purchase of Gateways for the high school faculty, and transitioning a lot of student computers over to Wyse thin clients powered by Windows Server 2003, but there's still schools out there with teachers running 95. (Some of us in the tech department were hoping that the transition from NT 4 to 2003 which occurred last year would break 95 and force a hardware upgrade, but no luck there...)

The sad thing is that every computer that runs 95 does so because they're too old to run anything newer, and even a lot of the nice donated Dells have to have 98 slapped on them because we can't afford enough XP licenses. (We have a glut of 98 licenses lying around, however.)

Posted: 2005-03-01 05:49am
by Crayz9000
Windows 95 shipped with Internet Explorer 3.0, but it was easy to uninstall (simply delete the IE folder and remove unneeded Registry entries).

As for Mac OS 8's lack of USB support, yes, that's true. OS 8 didn't ship with the USB-equipped iMacs. It only shipped with the old-world Mac models, pre-G3. 8.6 and up added USB support for the G3 platforms. Of course, it was a kludge, and OS 9 was a worse kludge. OS 7 was probably the best of the old MacOS releases, but it's severely dated now.

Posted: 2005-03-01 06:53am
by Pu-239
Still running NT on computer upstairs.

Posted: 2005-03-01 08:15am
by Xon
Uraniun235 wrote:The sad thing is that every computer that runs 95 does so because they're too old to run anything newer, and even a lot of the nice donated Dells have to have 98 slapped on them because we can't afford enough XP licenses. (We have a glut of 98 licenses lying around, however.)
I didnt know you could even buy just Win98 licenses any more. I know the latest XP & win2k3 licenses can be downgraded to allow for older version but you need to optin for that.

Also Microsoft practially chucks WinXP licenses at schools. A few hundred licenses would be peanuts for a school to buy

Posted: 2005-03-01 10:49am
by phongn
Crayz9000 wrote:As for Mac OS 8's lack of USB support, yes, that's true. OS 8 didn't ship with the USB-equipped iMacs. It only shipped with the old-world Mac models, pre-G3. 8.6 and up added USB support for the G3 platforms. Of course, it was a kludge, and OS 9 was a worse kludge. OS 7 was probably the best of the old MacOS releases, but it's severely dated now.
You know your OS is in trouble when SMP and threading support come by way of an extension.

Posted: 2005-03-01 11:23am
by Xon
phongn wrote:
Crayz9000 wrote:As for Mac OS 8's lack of USB support, yes, that's true. OS 8 didn't ship with the USB-equipped iMacs. It only shipped with the old-world Mac models, pre-G3. 8.6 and up added USB support for the G3 platforms. Of course, it was a kludge, and OS 9 was a worse kludge. OS 7 was probably the best of the old MacOS releases, but it's severely dated now.
You know your OS is in trouble when SMP and threading support come by way of an extension.
Windows 3.11 for workgroups had that!

Posted: 2005-03-01 11:24am
by White Haven
While this is a pretty good breakdown...it must have been a REAL slow day. 'Old sofware is old' is news now?

Posted: 2005-03-01 11:28am
by Mayabird
My mom's been complaining about this at her workplace for over a year now. The computers still run Win95 and when their software has bugs, nobody can fix it anymore because the companies have upgraded and don't keep up with the old crap.

You know the old stereotype of the Japanese company that will fling lots of yen/dollars at getting cool new industrial equipment but won't get computers? Yes. You have people hired under the old "employment for life" plan who still don't know how to use email (my mom's boss prints out EVERY SINGLE ONE he gets, even if it's one line, and then when he needs to find a memo he digs through his huge piles of printouts to unsuccessfully search for it), and have no reason to learn since they can't get fired. So their computers are obsolete and nobody can fix them when they break? So what?

Posted: 2005-03-01 12:45pm
by Durandal
Crayz9000 wrote:As for Mac OS 8's lack of USB support, yes, that's true. OS 8 didn't ship with the USB-equipped iMacs. It only shipped with the old-world Mac models, pre-G3. 8.6 and up added USB support for the G3 platforms. Of course, it was a kludge, and OS 9 was a worse kludge. OS 7 was probably the best of the old MacOS releases, but it's severely dated now.
Mac OS 8.5 did have USB support, if memory serves. It was the OS that came preloaded on the original iMac.

And I'd actually say that 8.6 was the best of the Classic releases. It was fairly stable and had lots of nice UI features. OS 9 was just a god-awful mess. It was horribly bloated and full of worthless crap.

Posted: 2005-03-01 01:07pm
by Uraniun235
ggs wrote:
Uraniun235 wrote:The sad thing is that every computer that runs 95 does so because they're too old to run anything newer, and even a lot of the nice donated Dells have to have 98 slapped on them because we can't afford enough XP licenses. (We have a glut of 98 licenses lying around, however.)
I didnt know you could even buy just Win98 licenses any more. I know the latest XP & win2k3 licenses can be downgraded to allow for older version but you need to optin for that.

Also Microsoft practially chucks WinXP licenses at schools. A few hundred licenses would be peanuts for a school to buy
I don't think we buy new 98 licenses, I think that what happened is we had a metric fuckton, then we transitioned a bunch of computers to XP, then we swapped out a bunch of computer labs for Wyse thin clients, which freed up a whole bunch of 98 licenses for use elsewhere.

And, XP Home or Pro?

Besides, one advantage of 98 is that 128 megs of RAM works just great with it (which is what I suspect a lot of the computers that were recently donated have), whereas XP + the antivirus software is pretty tight for memory - I know that when we pulled in a batch of Celery 700 computers to redistribute to teachers with XP on them we had to buy a couple thousand dollars worth of RAM so they'd run XP decently.
You have people hired under the old "employment for life" plan who still don't know how to use email...
Ran into something like that last month - the lady in charge of the high school's kitchen called complaining that emails she recieved weren't being shown in their entirety, that they were being cut off. This seemed like a rather bizarre problem to me when I heard it. When I got out there, I sat down, opened Outlook, double-clicked a message... all there, everything was fine.

"How did you do that?!?"
"I... double-clicked on the message..."

She wasn't ever opening her emails, she was just reading the auto-preview text beneath the message headers. Bloody district needs to realize that it's more than just the certified staff that needs training.