This is one thing that made the PC platform such a good one -- we used to not need having the latest from Microsoft.

*sigh*

That's aggravating. They should, at least, be eligible for a discount for upgrades to more recent Microsoft operating systems.

I have WinME and Vista Beta 2 set-up on one system, because I have an old program that requires a dongle that won't work with later versions of Windows.

I don't get what the fuss is (was) over ME. It's just as stable as any other MS OS (no pun intended). Just lacks the capability to handle the latest hardware is all.

"However, the analyst adds that Microsoft's support policy is better than that of most Linux vendors, whom he claims generally stop supporting their distributions after one or two years."

Ubuntu. http://www.ubuntu.com/news/606released

Win98 has about 3% of the online users. Linux is at 1% and holding since 1999 or so ...

I used Win98SE until Service Pack 1 for Windows XP came out (and Win9x inability to effectively manage more than 256mb of RAM became apparent with Mechwarrior 4). It was the best of the 9x operating systems by far.

WinME needs to be taken to the back of the woods and shot.

Worst .... OS .... evah!

According to a Gartner analyst quoted by ZDNet, the end of Windows 98 and ME support may put consumer and school PCs at risk, which could trigger a move to Linux or Macs.

Not bloody likely. If a school is on a tight budget, they probably already moved to Windows 2000 and are staying there until available support ends. Active Directory, easy setup of user home folders, group policy support, and patches are still available. It's not quite as smooth as a Server 2003/XP domain setup, but it does the job, and really doesn't require extensive hardware. We're running 2003 for our AD servers, 2000 for some file-servers still, and XP clients on machines that are mostly 6 years old, and they still perform reasonably well (note: turn the eye-candy off, and you'll be fine), and we'll have them for one more year before new equipment comes in.

P.S. Macs are generally too expensive to mass-migrate to (Dell offers much better bulk deals and a 3-year warranty much cheaper than AppleCare), and OS X Server, while improving, isn't as flexible for user management. Linux requires an IT staff that knows how to manage it, plus (if you're using it as clients) teachers/admin that are willing to get to know it. I guarrantee you (regardless of the pros/cons of either) that in most cases that just isn't going to happen.

I ran WindowsME from 2000-2006, i.e. until a couple of weeks ago.

Now after you've picked yourself off the floor laughing... lol

I really didn't have any problems with it. I learned how to make it do what I wanted it to do, and I knew what not to do. I actually just scrounged up a legacy box to install it on so I could grab the updates while they were convient to get. I'll always keep WinME around for legacy gaming, though I still do wish I had 98SE from the getgo.

Coming to WinXP from WinME is a pain. Now I'm an IT-HelpDesk guy, so I know WinXP right well. I feel MS owns you when running WinXP. Seems like there are a 1000 and 1 services and they're all phoning home. I'm still configing Jetico on my WinXP install to lock down what can talk to whom and only when approperiate.

With WinME, there were only ~5 services, and I never had to talk with Microsoft. Not even for security updates as WinME was bascially discontinued long-ago. With a good software firewall, I could _totally_ own my machine with WinME. Now I'm on WinXP, I have to share it with Microsoft at least to some extent. :?

Seriously, I really do feel better in many ways running WinME than WinXP. Then again, I feel far better than when running either of them as I am posting from my best friend of distros VectorLinux. :)

DrCR

________________
May Slackware Live Forever

All you need for good linux support is to use a good package manager like debian's or ubuntu's. You will get updates for atleast 3-4 years if not more. Linux distros dont need vendor support, all you need is competent inhouse IT staff that every organization needs anyway. The analyst is a moron.

Dear Microsoft Windows Millenium Edition,

I hope you end up at #1 on everyone's list of worst technological products ever. I hold you in the same regards as Clippy & Bob and hope you enjoy your future in hell watching Who's the Boss? reruns and the Saved By The Bell episode where they sing "Friends Forever."

Burn,

5150

My HP PII-450 came with 128MB PC100 RAM. That was top of the line when I got it in 1998. I later added another 128MB stick.

I ran that computer with Win98 & Office 2000 until about one year ago when I built my current computer. If I kept the number of apps/windows open to a minimum it ran just fine and was a really stable machine (which is more than I can say for the Windows ME computer we have).

So I really don't see why Microsoft needs to do this. It would be different if their new OS would be priced more reasonably and have the option of minimal installs that would still run on those platforms

As much as I love my Mac, the article makes no sense. I don't see how it'd trigger a move to Linux or Macs; it's going to trigger a move to SOMETHING, as if the hardware came with Windows 98, it'll need upgraded no matter what OS it is destined to run...

Thank God. I hate it when people expect support for near antique stuff (ya'll knew that). It makes it easier to get them to upgrade if I can tell them microsoft has totally abandoned a product.
ONe thing that has me wondering; doesn't microsoft usually announce this pretty far in advance?