Does this mean that when your car gets over 5 years old you'll be sticking in a new (expensive)'super-duper' engine in it as well? Or will the one that's in it now 'do the job'?
Some of us on the forum are using 98 for various reasons, 'If it ain't broke don't fix it' or 'It's done me fine for 6 years why give M$ more cash for what appears to be only a new desktop. (I know it's more than that of course).
I'm sure we would all like to be in the position to submit a post along the lines of "I've £1000 to spend on a PC......". (Cue the violins...)If I had £1000 to spend, the money would go on other things than replacing a PC that's working OK (if a little slowly).
Luckily we don't all belong to the "My processor's bigger than yours" club.
Am I missing something? The 'video' that is accessed via VoG™'s link displays a still screen listing 4 unsupported generalisations about XP's alleged superiority over 98SE.
In my experience (and I use both 98SE and XP), the alleged advantages are not evident to me -- in fact, neither my dial-up nor BB modem will work with XP, so for 'connectivity' I have to use 98SE.
I installed XP because I needed it for a particular program development reasons, and I thought I would end up using it for everything. But I now only use it with that particular program. For me there seems to be no benefit in upgrading the OS on a relatively old PC so long as the original OS is still working.