Quantative Measure of People Still Using 98?

[Smith]

This presents a legitimate question for software developers
updating their programs.

To my recollection, the last 98 computer was sold in 2001. That
would make the last sold computer seven years old. You would
think that the number of such systems still around would be near
zero.

Yet, anecdotally, lots of 98 users seem to be around. They speak
up on newsgroups and forums. They still seem to like their
systems and boast of not changing their operating systems. Still
having a ten year old operating system does reflect some
sophistication of computer skills.

I have long wondered if there is any reliable quantitative
measure of continuing 98 users. Various measures surface from
time to time most all of which seem to raise doubts of the
accuracy of the numbers and the interests of who is publishing
them. The question of what portion of the universe the numbers
reflect always seems problematic.

I recently came across a measure, that while hardly perfect,
appears to be objective, not subject to anyone's special
influence, and relevant to the issue.

I found on the Guliverkli2 site counts of downloads of win98
files and winxp versions at
https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=205650&pac
kage_id=246121&release_id=541232 and
https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=205650&pac
kage_id=245753&release_id=540363

While the absolute numbers might be problematic, the proportion
of win 98 to win xp users would seem to be significant as an
approximate measure of a continuing 98 user base for purposes of
software developers of similar programs.

The first program was Media Player Classic 6.4.9.1. This is an
excellent program that puts its developers in the software hall
of fame. It plays lots of files well. The download counts are

98 15,417 (12%)
xp 100,239 (88%)

There is nothing special about this program for 98. Other
similar programs, zoom player and vlc player, too run on 98.



The other page was for directvobsub. The numbers were

98 2,053 (24%)
xp 6,568 (76%)


The fact that 12% of the persons downloading the win 98 version
of the program, a OS version not sold commercially in seven
years, would indicate a still significant base of sophisticated
users keeping their software current consistent with the number
of 98 users raising their voice on news groups and forums.

This would contradict the claim heard from the Pacific Northwest
that no one uses 98 any more.

 

[gibson]

> There is nothing special about this program for 98. Other
> similar programs, zoom player and vlc player, too run on 98.
>

that may be so smithy,, but i d/loaded vlc player using 98se and Still cant get it to work!
something about an 'error' and 'file missing' blah blah...
if you got any tips on how to make it work, i'm all fingers and toes... (ears)

5strings (one short)

 

[Don Phillipson]

"Smith" <smith@no-spam.com> wrote in message
news:%233K%23KUDBJHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> To my recollection, the last 98 computer was sold in 2001. That
> would make the last sold computer seven years old. You would
> think that the number of such systems still around would be near
> zero.

The last Win98 PC I bought new was custom-built to my
specifications in July 2004. Reasons for this included hardware
and software e.g. my WP is Borland Sprint, an MS-DOS
implementation of Emacs, that requires a DOS-capable
printer. (Some manufacturers e.g. Brother still offer DOS-capable
printers.)

The PC hardware and software markets were focussed a
decade ago on security (firewalls, antivirus screens etc.)
and secondarily multiple functions in office applications.
(E.g. office word processors now are configured
for fancy printing, watermarks etc., and to borrow tabular
data from related software this makes the software
bulky and slow although, when writing a legal brief or a
student essay, we do not need fancy printing etc.)

The market has changed in two respects. It now
emphasizes security less (because security apps are
now built into the Operating System and processing
power maintains operating speed) and instead
offers multimedia entertainment (TV and music via
Internet.) Entertainment software has improved
enormously in the last decade (and is supported
by hardware improvements) but changes in office
software are largely cosmetic.

Planned obsolence appears to characterize the
market in the 21st century in ways not done in the
20th, probably because of collapsing prices. My
first three PCs, 1983 to about 1993, each cost new
close too $2500. (This generated a useful rule when
planning to upgrade: first design a dream machine,
then watch component prices so as to buy when the
total cost fell to $2500.) But my fourth and fifth cost
less than $1000 each. Most recently I bought (used)
one year ago a complete WinXP PC (1.5 GHz, 512 Mb
RAM, 40 Gb HDD) for $125 including an excellent
22" monitor, now networked wireless with my 2.8 GHz
WinXP PC (new 2004.)

Appropriate hardware and software meets all my current
functional needs. Functionalism is prima facie not the
way the market works, but we can leave to philosophers
market directions (pop music and role-playing games)
and market prices (willingly paid by office IT purchasers,
i.e. spending other peoples' money.) Yes, I sometimes
buy toys too, if they seem to be functional as well, so
have an eye on the irresistibly cute Eee, perhaps for
Christmas . . .

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

 

[Dan]

There are still quite a few 98 users out there but many may not be hooked up
to the Internet or hook up only to get drivers. I say this with pride while
posting in Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition. I also use XP Professional
Service Pack 3 with this dual-boot computer, briefly dabbled with Ubuntu
Linux and plan to work with it more in the future and have a generic run of
the mill Toshiba Windows Vista Laptop that is now being repaired by Toshiba
because of hardware issues including faulty biometrics that kept messing up.
The Real or should I say Reel <movies -- grin> Deal is this -- do you want
to use Windows 9x consumer source code, Windows NT business source code,
Unix/Linux, etc. and what is the flavor of os's you prefer and why. In
addition, how will you protect and safeguard 9x through use of 3rd party
software like Mozilla Firefox and SpywareBlaster. BTW, Chris Quirke, mvp
from Africa understands the internal safety of 9x and the external security
of NT. You can just "Google" his name for Chris's Blog and other interesting
stuff.

"Smith" wrote:

> This presents a legitimate question for software developers
> updating their programs.
>
> To my recollection, the last 98 computer was sold in 2001. That
> would make the last sold computer seven years old. You would
> think that the number of such systems still around would be near
> zero.
>
> Yet, anecdotally, lots of 98 users seem to be around. They speak
> up on newsgroups and forums. They still seem to like their
> systems and boast of not changing their operating systems. Still
> having a ten year old operating system does reflect some
> sophistication of computer skills.
>
> I have long wondered if there is any reliable quantitative
> measure of continuing 98 users. Various measures surface from
> time to time most all of which seem to raise doubts of the
> accuracy of the numbers and the interests of who is publishing
> them. The question of what portion of the universe the numbers
> reflect always seems problematic.
>
> I recently came across a measure, that while hardly perfect,
> appears to be objective, not subject to anyone's special
> influence, and relevant to the issue.
>
> I found on the Guliverkli2 site counts of downloads of win98
> files and winxp versions at
> https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=205650&pac
> kage_id=246121&release_id=541232 and
> https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=205650&pac
> kage_id=245753&release_id=540363
>
> While the absolute numbers might be problematic, the proportion
> of win 98 to win xp users would seem to be significant as an
> approximate measure of a continuing 98 user base for purposes of
> software developers of similar programs.
>
> The first program was Media Player Classic 6.4.9.1. This is an
> excellent program that puts its developers in the software hall
> of fame. It plays lots of files well. The download counts are
>
> 98 15,417 (12%)
> xp 100,239 (88%)
>
> There is nothing special about this program for 98. Other
> similar programs, zoom player and vlc player, too run on 98.
>
>
>
> The other page was for directvobsub. The numbers were
>
> 98 2,053 (24%)
> xp 6,568 (76%)
>
>
> The fact that 12% of the persons downloading the win 98 version
> of the program, a OS version not sold commercially in seven
> years, would indicate a still significant base of sophisticated
> users keeping their software current consistent with the number
> of 98 users raising their voice on news groups and forums.
>
> This would contradict the claim heard from the Pacific Northwest
> that no one uses 98 any more.
>

 

[thanatoid]

Smith <smith@no-spam.com> wrote in
news:#3K#KUDBJHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:

> This presents a legitimate question for software
> developers updating their programs.
>
> To my recollection, the last 98 computer was sold in 2001.
> That would make the last sold computer seven years old.
> You would think that the number of such systems still
> around would be near zero.

<SNIP>

I am doing this on a 166MHz / 96MB RAM made in Sept. 97 running
Win95B. With a 33.6 modem. I am certain that it is faster than
any Vista machine at basic computing tasks, although it
obviously can not do video editing, and a music format
conversion takes about 5 hrs for a 4 minute song, nor can it
play games at 1600x1200 150 fps, but aside from that, it works
perfectly and never crashes.

Not to mention I NEVER have to upgrade or patch ANYTHING.

Because I do a lot of music stuff, I bought a 2002 (2003?) used
2GHz/256MB RAM Compaq EVO D510 which originally had XP pro on it
(still has the license sticker) but came with a wiped HD which
checked out "factory new". I put 98SELite on it. It is not
connected to the internet. It does everything I could possibly
want to do. I have been lucky in that it is working perfectly so
far as well. But it is apparently a pretty good Compaq, good
components and was quite expensive when new.


--
[from a recent conversation]
thanatoid: So why did you decide you needed broadband?
Neighbor: I wanted to read my e-mail faster.

 

[thanatoid]

"gibson" <guitar@fretwork.com> wrote in
news:e#yqG5DBJHA.2032@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:

>
>> There is nothing special about this program for 98. Other
>> similar programs, zoom player and vlc player, too run on
>> 98.
>>
>
> that may be so smithy,, but i d/loaded vlc player using
> 98se and Still cant get it to work! something about an
> 'error' and 'file missing' blah blah... if you got any tips
> on how to make it work, i'm all fingers and toes... (ears)
>
> 5strings (one short)

I don't get the 5 strings thing. If you broke a guitar string,
you replace it!

Anyway...

There is a file called unicows.dll. I believe it is an exe
(IIRC, contains a second file, unicows.pdb), and the installer
puts them somewhere. If it doesn't put them in the VLC
directory, move them there.

It has to be downloaded separately, it does not (to my
recollection) come with the VLC package, but it is avail. on the
same site (and presumably many driver sites).

I installed VLC a couple of years ago, but I imagine this is the
same problem - which I was able to resolve by reading the info
-)

Let me know if this helped.



--
[from a recent conversation]
thanatoid: So why did you decide you needed broadband?
Neighbor: I wanted to read my e-mail faster.

 

[Dan]

Thanks Don and I see that as part of the problem nowadays because solutions
are built into software rather than hardware. The issue is that software is
easier to manipulate and break than hardware.
For example, in a cell phone, a hacker may send the user's phone a baddie to
annihilate the user's cell phone. I am not pleased that current phones
unlike let us say older Motorola cell phones allow you to reprogram the cell
phone using let us say *228 and then default the user back to the default
<duh> password thus allowing the hacking of the cell phone to proceed if the
remote hacker knows the default <not to hard to guess usually--- many times
the last 4 digits of the cell phone> password.
Security and Safety with wireless really is a big joke to me and makes me
laugh and not just with cell phones but also wireless corded phones. It just
takes the proper equipment monitoring the proper frequency to jam, disrupt
and cause issues for the end user. Nowadays, even with a corded phone, I
suggest to users to use a DSL filter to filter out interference in the phone
lines and potential problems.
The entire industry at least here in the U.S.A. has gotten away from the
internal safety model and are relying on external security much to the
stupidity of the entire industry in the States. I will not go into any more
proof of concept code but let it be known that it is being done know and the
only reason I am writing this is to hopefully wake up the industry so that
the electronics industry gets a new clue as to the problem facing users and
itself. BTW, this was bound to happen and I am so thankful to Dan K. and his
research with DNS Pollution so hopefully now Apple, AT&T, Verizon Wireless,
Verizon, etc. can Wake Up and Smell the Coffee shall we say and get with the
program of not tying software as one and keeping it seperate. The important
part about history is to learn from it and use what works in the past in the
present. Let us hopefully not be so dumb as a nation, in the States and also
the world that we just have an open door policy to hackers with their strong
computers and bot networks. <this could be posted in
microsoft.public.security but is not since I have no desire for a 40+ debate
this time around>

Finally, the responsiblity must fall on everyone:

1. The End User
2. The Software Maker
3. The Hardware Maker
4. Everyone Else

"Don Phillipson" wrote:

> "Smith" <smith@no-spam.com> wrote in message
> news:%233K%23KUDBJHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
> > To my recollection, the last 98 computer was sold in 2001. That
> > would make the last sold computer seven years old. You would
> > think that the number of such systems still around would be near
> > zero.
>
> The last Win98 PC I bought new was custom-built to my
> specifications in July 2004. Reasons for this included hardware
> and software e.g. my WP is Borland Sprint, an MS-DOS
> implementation of Emacs, that requires a DOS-capable
> printer. (Some manufacturers e.g. Brother still offer DOS-capable
> printers.)
>
> The PC hardware and software markets were focussed a
> decade ago on security (firewalls, antivirus screens etc.)
> and secondarily multiple functions in office applications.
> (E.g. office word processors now are configured
> for fancy printing, watermarks etc., and to borrow tabular
> data from related software this makes the software
> bulky and slow although, when writing a legal brief or a
> student essay, we do not need fancy printing etc.)
>
> The market has changed in two respects. It now
> emphasizes security less (because security apps are
> now built into the Operating System and processing
> power maintains operating speed) and instead
> offers multimedia entertainment (TV and music via
> Internet.) Entertainment software has improved
> enormously in the last decade (and is supported
> by hardware improvements) but changes in office
> software are largely cosmetic.
>
> Planned obsolence appears to characterize the
> market in the 21st century in ways not done in the
> 20th, probably because of collapsing prices. My
> first three PCs, 1983 to about 1993, each cost new
> close too $2500. (This generated a useful rule when
> planning to upgrade: first design a dream machine,
> then watch component prices so as to buy when the
> total cost fell to $2500.) But my fourth and fifth cost
> less than $1000 each. Most recently I bought (used)
> one year ago a complete WinXP PC (1.5 GHz, 512 Mb
> RAM, 40 Gb HDD) for $125 including an excellent
> 22" monitor, now networked wireless with my 2.8 GHz
> WinXP PC (new 2004.)
>
> Appropriate hardware and software meets all my current
> functional needs. Functionalism is prima facie not the
> way the market works, but we can leave to philosophers
> market directions (pop music and role-playing games)
> and market prices (willingly paid by office IT purchasers,
> i.e. spending other peoples' money.) Yes, I sometimes
> buy toys too, if they seem to be functional as well, so
> have an eye on the irresistibly cute Eee, perhaps for
> Christmas . . .
>
> --
> Don Phillipson
> Carlsbad Springs
> (Ottawa, Canada)
>
>
>
>

 

[philo]

"thanatoid" <waiting@the.exit.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9B027D8C77636thanexit@66.250.146.158...
> "gibson" <guitar@fretwork.com> wrote in
> news:e#yqG5DBJHA.2032@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:
>
> >
> >> There is nothing special about this program for 98. Other
> >> similar programs, zoom player and vlc player, too run on
> >> 98.
> >>
> >
> > that may be so smithy,, but i d/loaded vlc player using
> > 98se and Still cant get it to work! something about an
> > 'error' and 'file missing' blah blah... if you got any tips
> > on how to make it work, i'm all fingers and toes... (ears)
> >
> > 5strings (one short)
>
> I don't get the 5 strings thing. If you broke a guitar string,
> you replace it!
>


I'm going to see John Pizzarelli in a few weeks

he plays a 7 string guitar~

Not too many of those


maybe he can spare one



> Anyway...
>
> There is a file called unicows.dll. I believe it is an exe
> (IIRC, contains a second file, unicows.pdb), and the installer
> puts them somewhere. If it doesn't put them in the VLC
> directory, move them there.
>
> It has to be downloaded separately, it does not (to my
> recollection) come with the VLC package, but it is avail. on the
> same site (and presumably many driver sites).
>
> I installed VLC a couple of years ago, but I imagine this is the
> same problem - which I was able to resolve by reading the info
> -)
>
> Let me know if this helped.
>
>
>
> --
> [from a recent conversation]
> thanatoid: So why did you decide you needed broadband?
> Neighbor: I wanted to read my e-mail faster.

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Show me where those statistics are publicly displayed, please.

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

"Smith" <smith@no-spam.com> wrote in message
news:%233K%23KUDBJHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> This presents a legitimate question for software developers
> updating their programs.
>
> To my recollection, the last 98 computer was sold in 2001. That
> would make the last sold computer seven years old. You would
> think that the number of such systems still around would be near
> zero.
>
> Yet, anecdotally, lots of 98 users seem to be around. They speak
> up on newsgroups and forums. They still seem to like their
> systems and boast of not changing their operating systems. Still
> having a ten year old operating system does reflect some
> sophistication of computer skills.
>
> I have long wondered if there is any reliable quantitative
> measure of continuing 98 users. Various measures surface from
> time to time most all of which seem to raise doubts of the
> accuracy of the numbers and the interests of who is publishing
> them. The question of what portion of the universe the numbers
> reflect always seems problematic.
>
> I recently came across a measure, that while hardly perfect,
> appears to be objective, not subject to anyone's special
> influence, and relevant to the issue.
>
> I found on the Guliverkli2 site counts of downloads of win98
> files and winxp versions at
> https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=205650&pac
> kage_id=246121&release_id=541232 and
> https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=205650&pac
> kage_id=245753&release_id=540363
>
> While the absolute numbers might be problematic, the proportion
> of win 98 to win xp users would seem to be significant as an
> approximate measure of a continuing 98 user base for purposes of
> software developers of similar programs.
>
> The first program was Media Player Classic 6.4.9.1. This is an
> excellent program that puts its developers in the software hall
> of fame. It plays lots of files well. The download counts are
>
> 98 15,417 (12%)
> xp 100,239 (88%)
>
> There is nothing special about this program for 98. Other
> similar programs, zoom player and vlc player, too run on 98.
>
>
>
> The other page was for directvobsub. The numbers were
>
> 98 2,053 (24%)
> xp 6,568 (76%)
>
>
> The fact that 12% of the persons downloading the win 98 version
> of the program, a OS version not sold commercially in seven
> years, would indicate a still significant base of sophisticated
> users keeping their software current consistent with the number
> of 98 users raising their voice on news groups and forums.
>
> This would contradict the claim heard from the Pacific Northwest
> that no one uses 98 any more.

 

[thanatoid]

"philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote in
news:MJ-dnaRw1L7VjTLVnZ2dnUVZ_uidnZ2d@ntd.net:

>
> "thanatoid" <waiting@the.exit.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns9B027D8C77636thanexit@66.250.146.158...
>> "gibson" <guitar@fretwork.com> wrote in
>> news:e#yqG5DBJHA.2032@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:
>>
>> >
>> >> There is nothing special about this program for 98.
>> >> Other similar programs, zoom player and vlc player, too
>> >> run on 98.
>> >>
>> >
>> > that may be so smithy,, but i d/loaded vlc player
>> > using 98se and Still cant get it to work! something
>> > about an 'error' and 'file missing' blah blah... if you
>> > got any tips on how to make it work, i'm all fingers and
>> > toes... (ears)
>> >
>> > 5strings (one short)
>>
>> I don't get the 5 strings thing. If you broke a guitar
>> string, you replace it!
>>
>
>
> I'm going to see John Pizzarelli in a few weeks
>
> he plays a 7 string guitar~
>
> Not too many of those
>
>
> maybe he can spare one

Hey Philo,

you probably will not believe this, but I /was/ actually going
to say that "of course, there ARE some guitars that have 7
strings..."

Honest!

t.

--
[from a recent conversation]
thanatoid: So why did you decide you needed broadband?
Neighbor: I wanted to read my e-mail faster.

 

[Roger Fink]

Microsoft has two other post-Win98, pre-XP operating systems you neglected
to mention, yet your tallies add up to 100%
Is this a creative writing exercise?

Smith wrote:
> This presents a legitimate question for software developers
> updating their programs.
>
> To my recollection, the last 98 computer was sold in 2001. That
> would make the last sold computer seven years old. You would
> think that the number of such systems still around would be near
> zero.
>
> Yet, anecdotally, lots of 98 users seem to be around. They speak
> up on newsgroups and forums. They still seem to like their
> systems and boast of not changing their operating systems. Still
> having a ten year old operating system does reflect some
> sophistication of computer skills.
>
> I have long wondered if there is any reliable quantitative
> measure of continuing 98 users. Various measures surface from
> time to time most all of which seem to raise doubts of the
> accuracy of the numbers and the interests of who is publishing
> them. The question of what portion of the universe the numbers
> reflect always seems problematic.
>
> I recently came across a measure, that while hardly perfect,
> appears to be objective, not subject to anyone's special
> influence, and relevant to the issue.
>
> I found on the Guliverkli2 site counts of downloads of win98
> files and winxp versions at
> https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=205650&pac
> kage_id=246121&release_id=541232 and
> https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=205650&pac
> kage_id=245753&release_id=540363
>
> While the absolute numbers might be problematic, the proportion
> of win 98 to win xp users would seem to be significant as an
> approximate measure of a continuing 98 user base for purposes of
> software developers of similar programs.
>
> The first program was Media Player Classic 6.4.9.1. This is an
> excellent program that puts its developers in the software hall
> of fame. It plays lots of files well. The download counts are
>
> 98 15,417 (12%)
> xp 100,239 (88%)
>
> There is nothing special about this program for 98. Other
> similar programs, zoom player and vlc player, too run on 98.
>
>
>
> The other page was for directvobsub. The numbers were
>
> 98 2,053 (24%)
> xp 6,568 (76%)
>
>
> The fact that 12% of the persons downloading the win 98 version
> of the program, a OS version not sold commercially in seven
> years, would indicate a still significant base of sophisticated
> users keeping their software current consistent with the number
> of 98 users raising their voice on news groups and forums.
>
> This would contradict the claim heard from the Pacific Northwest
> that no one uses 98 any more.

 

[Shadow]

On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 19:37:08 +0930, "gibson" <guitar@fretwork.com>
wrote:

>
>> There is nothing special about this program for 98. Other
>> similar programs, zoom player and vlc player, too run on 98.
>>
>
>that may be so smithy,, but i d/loaded vlc player using 98se and Still cant get it to work!
>something about an 'error' and 'file missing' blah blah...
>if you got any tips on how to make it work, i'm all fingers and toes... (ears)
>
>5strings (one short)
Last vlc for win98 was 0.8.6.a
Later ones crash. There is a work-around, but it crashes every
time you update. (It did for me , anyway)
Good Luck
>

 

[98 Guy]

Smith wrote:

> This presents a legitimate question for software developers
> updating their programs.

http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php

1 Windows XP 77.16%
2 Windows Vista 8.88%
3 Mac OS X 4.58%
4 Windows 2000 2.86%
5 Linux 1.91%
6 Windows 98 0.86%
7 Windows 2003 0.73%
8 Windows ME 0.32%
9 SymbianOS 0.05%
10 Windows NT 0.04%

Records seem to go back only to May 2007. Win-98 fell below 1% usage in
April 2008.

This page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_desktop_operating_systems

lists several sources and puts current 98 usage at anywhere from 0.4% to
0.9% (as above).

This page:

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp

is putting 98 share at 0.2%, which I doubt is that low. Historically
for the last few years, win-98 useage seems to be about 1/3 of win-2k
usage (which is currently about 2.8%).

A big deal was made (by some) when Linux usage had tied with Win-98 at
1.34%, which seemed to happen last September.

 

[thanatoid]

98 Guy <98@Guy.com> wrote in news:48AF8757.1F5A0830@Guy.com:

> Smith wrote:
>
>> This presents a legitimate question for software
>> developers updating their programs.
>
> http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php
>
> 1 Windows XP 77.16%
> 2 Windows Vista 8.88%
> 3 Mac OS X 4.58%
> 4 Windows 2000 2.86%
> 5 Linux 1.91%
> 6 Windows 98 0.86%
> 7 Windows 2003 0.73%
> 8 Windows ME 0.32%
> 9 SymbianOS 0.05%
> 10 Windows NT 0.04%
>
> Records seem to go back only to May 2007. Win-98 fell
> below 1% usage in April 2008.
>
> This page:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_desktop_operatin
> g_systems
>
> lists several sources and puts current 98 usage at anywhere
> from 0.4% to 0.9% (as above).
>
> This page:
>
> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
>
> is putting 98 share at 0.2%, which I doubt is that low.
> Historically for the last few years, win-98 useage seems to
> be about 1/3 of win-2k usage (which is currently about
> 2.8%).
>
> A big deal was made (by some) when Linux usage had tied
> with Win-98 at 1.34%, which seemed to happen last
> September.
>

HEY! I am using 95B goddamit! Iknow there's only about 30 of us,
but don't we rate even a .003%?

--
[from a recent conversation]
thanatoid: So why did you decide you needed broadband?
Neighbor: I wanted to read my e-mail faster.

 

[Smith]

98 Guy <98@Guy.com> wrote in news:48AF8757.1F5A0830@Guy.com:

> TSmith wrote:
>
>> This presents a legitimate question for software
>> developers updating their programs.
>
> http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php
>
> 1 Windows XP 77.16%
> 2 Windows Vista 8.88%
> 3 Mac OS X 4.58%
> 4 Windows 2000 2.86%
> 5 Linux 1.91%
> 6 Windows 98 0.86%
> 7 Windows 2003 0.73%
> 8 Windows ME 0.32%
> 9 SymbianOS 0.05%
> 10 Windows NT 0.04%
>
> Records seem to go back only to May 2007. Win-98 fell
> below 1% usage in April 2008.
>
> This page:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_desktop_operatin
> g_systems
>
> lists several sources and puts current 98 usage at anywhere
> from 0.4% to 0.9% (as above).
>
> This page:
>
> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
>
> is putting 98 share at 0.2%, which I doubt is that low.
> Historically for the last few years, win-98 useage seems to
> be about 1/3 of win-2k usage (which is currently about
> 2.8%).
>
> A big deal was made (by some) when Linux usage had tied
> with Win-98 at 1.34%, which seemed to happen last
> September.

The data look contradictory to me.

All of the general win 98 numbers raise questions of where their
numbers came from and what universe are they including in the
numbers, exactly how did they are determining the operating
system, and did they validate their procedures for so
determining.

They also raise the question of for what purpose were they making
their measurement.

Some independent software developers, such as those of Media
Player Classic and other such programs. are asking if they should
continue to include win 98 support in their programs. For that
determination the relevant universe is people who use or might
use their software, which is a small subset of all users one
might find in internet logs.

 

[98 Guy]

Full-Quoter Smith wrote:

> > Windows 98 0.86%

> > ... current 98 usage at anywhere from 0.4% to 0.9% (as above).
> > ... is putting 98 share at 0.2%, which I doubt is that low.
>
> The data look contradictory to me.

I don't think it looks contradictory at all.

A range of .2% to .9% is not contradictory.

It just reflects that measurement variability will increase as the
population goes down.

> All of the general win 98 numbers raise questions of where
> their numbers came from and ...

These numbers come from various web-metrics companies who have their
counters linked in from a few thousand web pages. The numbers will be
highly dependent on the nature of those web pages and the viewership
they attract.

> what universe are they including in the numbers,

They are including the metrics of the web-pages that reference their
counter mechanisms.

> exactly how did they are determining the operating system,

It's part of the browser referer line that's sent to the web server as
part of retrieving the desired web page.

> and did they validate their procedures for so determining.

Since they usually charge a website owner for their metrics measurement
services, I would presume that they can show the client an example of
their validation proceedure. Also note that this is not rocket science
and these metrics are very easy to obtain.

> They also raise the question of for what purpose were they
> making their measurement.

As I said above, these companies offer web-traffic measurement services
to website and domain owners so that the owners can gauge the popularity
of their site, to know where (geographically, based in IP address) their
viewers come from, and to know more mundane details like what browser
and OS the viewers are using. This information can be used to determine
advertizing rates on the websites in question.

Since it's usually not that important for a website or domain owner to
know the browser and OS of their viewers, those metrics have little
value hence they tend to be made availble for free by the companies
performing the measurements.

Presumably the best source of data would be from domains such as
google.com, yahoo.com, msn.com, etc. Seeing the referrer stats from
those domains would be very accurate as far as knowing the true numbers
of the various OS's and browsers currently in use. Unquestionably the
owners of those domains know full well the distribution of OS's
currently in use.

> Some independent software developers, such as those of Media
> Player Classic and other such programs. are asking if they
> should continue to include win 98 support in their programs.

I think the fault with win-98 compatibility lies with the installation
software. InstallShield doesn't necessarily make it easy to maintain
backward compatibility with older OS's, or developers don't configure
installshield properly for their software to install on older platforms.

I didn't think that Media Player Classic was still available (or being
developed) due to pressure from the DVD consortium.

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Man, you do have the talent, <g>.

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

"Smith" <smith@smith.com> wrote in message
news:%23KyT%23$QBJHA.4316@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> 98 Guy <98@Guy.com> wrote in news:48AF8757.1F5A0830@Guy.com:
>
>> TSmith wrote:
>>
>>> This presents a legitimate question for software
>>> developers updating their programs.
>>
>> http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php
>>
>> 1 Windows XP 77.16%
>> 2 Windows Vista 8.88%
>> 3 Mac OS X 4.58%
>> 4 Windows 2000 2.86%
>> 5 Linux 1.91%
>> 6 Windows 98 0.86%
>> 7 Windows 2003 0.73%
>> 8 Windows ME 0.32%
>> 9 SymbianOS 0.05%
>> 10 Windows NT 0.04%
>>
>> Records seem to go back only to May 2007. Win-98 fell
>> below 1% usage in April 2008.
>>
>> This page:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_desktop_operatin
>> g_systems
>>
>> lists several sources and puts current 98 usage at anywhere
>> from 0.4% to 0.9% (as above).
>>
>> This page:
>>
>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
>>
>> is putting 98 share at 0.2%, which I doubt is that low.
>> Historically for the last few years, win-98 useage seems to
>> be about 1/3 of win-2k usage (which is currently about
>> 2.8%).
>>
>> A big deal was made (by some) when Linux usage had tied
>> with Win-98 at 1.34%, which seemed to happen last
>> September.
>
> The data look contradictory to me.
>
> All of the general win 98 numbers raise questions of where their
> numbers came from and what universe are they including in the
> numbers, exactly how did they are determining the operating
> system, and did they validate their procedures for so
> determining.
>
> They also raise the question of for what purpose were they making
> their measurement.
>
> Some independent software developers, such as those of Media
> Player Classic and other such programs. are asking if they should
> continue to include win 98 support in their programs. For that
> determination the relevant universe is people who use or might
> use their software, which is a small subset of all users one
> might find in internet logs.

 

[rebel]

On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 23:43:19 -0400, 98 Guy <98@Guy.com> wrote:

>Smith wrote:
>
>> This presents a legitimate question for software developers
>> updating their programs.
>
>http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php
>
>1 Windows XP 77.16%
>2 Windows Vista 8.88%
>3 Mac OS X 4.58%
>4 Windows 2000 2.86%
>5 Linux 1.91%
>6 Windows 98 0.86%
>7 Windows 2003 0.73%
>8 Windows ME 0.32%
>9 SymbianOS 0.05%
>10 Windows NT 0.04%

There are THAT MANY people using ME? Crikey, I'd never have believed that.

 

[98 user]

rebel <me@privacy.net> wrote in
newshb1b4palgdvdhcrgnkt3nbg8k8t4jhph6@4ax.com:

> On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 23:43:19 -0400, 98 Guy <98@Guy.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Smith wrote:
>>
>>> This presents a legitimate question for software
>>> developers updating their programs.
>>
>>http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php
>>
>>1 Windows XP 77.16%
>>2 Windows Vista 8.88%
>>3 Mac OS X 4.58%
>>4 Windows 2000 2.86%
>>5 Linux 1.91%
>>6 Windows 98 0.86%
>>7 Windows 2003 0.73%
>>8 Windows ME 0.32%
>>9 SymbianOS 0.05%
>>10 Windows NT 0.04%
>
> There are THAT MANY people using ME? Crikey, I'd never
> have believed that.
>

I have difficulty with the ratio of 2.6 98 users to one ME
user. I don't recall hearing anyone say they will never switch
from ME, as I have from 98. The people I knew who used ME all
switched back to 98 before XP.


Who uses windows server 2003 to browse the internet? The survey
shows nearly as many 2003 users as 98 users. Maybe these are
crawlers.

The low end numbers look suspect.

 

[gibson]

Yes, I sometimes
> buy toys too, if they seem to be functional as well, so
> have an eye on the irresistibly cute Eee, perhaps for
> Christmas . . .

Define: "Christ-mas" plz?
you seem smart re: worldly things, now show your smarts re: Christmas.

> --
> Don Phillipson