No posts, may be because win95 is dead

Marco A Achury P · External Since: May 26, 2009 Posts: 1

Win95 is dead, even deeper dead than DOS

At least exist the freedos project to keep alive DOS and the reactos
project to keep alive WinNT, but appear that nobody cares about Win9x

--
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Marco A. Achury P.

Tim Meddick · External Since: Mar 30, 2009 Posts: 9

Well, at least this group DOES exist!
Plus...
I am keeping Win95 (and DOS) alive, even if I am alone in doing so...

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. Smile

"Marco A Achury P" wrote in message

>
> Win95 is dead, even deeper dead than DOS
>
> At least exist the freedos project to keep alive DOS and the reactos
> project to keep alive WinNT, but appear that nobody cares about Win9x
>
> --
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> Marco A. Achury P.

Bob · External Since: Apr 04, 2009 Posts: 3

Less malware/spyware registry viruses, that infects other systems.

System upgrades like Flash Macro flv/YouTube/Real
Media/Adobe/Codecs, etc, that don't read down, are usually spyware in the
doublclick/avenue A, category or at best just a cripple ware so you have to
upgrade to other messes.....

Bob

On Thu, 28 May 2009 16:01:01 +0100, "Tim Meddick"
wrote:

|>Well, at least this group DOES exist!
|>Plus...
|>I am keeping Win95 (and DOS) alive, even if I am alone in doing so...
|>
|>==
|>
|>Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. Smile

|>
|>
|>
|>"Marco A Achury P" wrote in message
|>
|>>
|>> Win95 is dead, even deeper dead than DOS
|>>
|>> At least exist the freedos project to keep alive DOS and the reactos
|>> project to keep alive WinNT, but appear that nobody cares about Win9x
|>>
|>> --
|>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|>> Marco A. Achury P.
|>

Tim Meddick · External Since: Mar 30, 2009 Posts: 9

I suspect that English isn't your first language, is it?

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. Smile

"Bob" wrote in message

>
> Less malware/spyware registry viruses, that infects other systems.
>
> System upgrades like Flash Macro flv/YouTube/Real
> Media/Adobe/Codecs, etc, that don't read down, are usually spyware in the
> doublclick/avenue A, category or at best just a cripple ware so you have
> to
> upgrade to other messes.....
>
> Bob
>
>
> On Thu, 28 May 2009 16:01:01 +0100, "Tim Meddick"
> wrote:
>
> |>Well, at least this group DOES exist!
> |>Plus...
> |>I am keeping Win95 (and DOS) alive, even if I am alone in doing so...
> |>
> |>==
> |>
> |>Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. Smile

> |>
> |>
> |>
> |>"Marco A Achury P" wrote in message
> |>
> |>>
> |>> Win95 is dead, even deeper dead than DOS
> |>>
> |>> At least exist the freedos project to keep alive DOS and the reactos
> |>> project to keep alive WinNT, but appear that nobody cares about Win9x
> |>>
> |>> --
> |>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |>> Marco A. Achury P.
> |>
>

teebo · External Since: Sep 11, 2006 Posts: 20

>> Win95 is dead, even deeper dead than DOS

yes Win95 is perhaps not much used now, but Win98 is alive and kicking
with all news-discussions about win98 in microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
you could probably ask dosapps in win95 -related questions there too.

I'm not sure how much difference there are in win95's and win98's
support of dos-applications, perhaps someone can fill me in in this area?

>> At least exist the freedos project to keep alive DOS

yes that is cool. both freedos and dr-dos have lots
of activity. if you have some free time, consider help
with the release of FreeDOS1.1

>> and the reactos project to keep alive WinNT,

yes, I just wish there was an opensource-win9x project somewhere
but I guess there is too few win9x-loving dudes that are good programmers
with lot of free time. Of course there are the win9x updates and
enhancing projects at msfn.org, and they do a real good work!,
but to create a whole opensource version of win9x takes lots of
time or lots of people.

> but appear that nobody cares about Win9x

well they do, but perhaps not so much about win95, even though
there are new updates for 95 too. Most people run 98 or
a cross between 98 and ME it seems.

> Well, at least this group DOES exist!
> Plus...
> I am keeping Win95 (and DOS) alive, even if I am alone in doing so...

yes as long as win95 works for what you do, there is no real reason
to change operatingsystem. I allso run win95 on my old for-old-games-
computer and it works fine. Win95 is allso slightly faster than
win98 (even with MSIE removed with 98lite), right?

The lack of posts here can allso be because all win95 systems running
is working perfectly without need for support Very Happy

computerrelated news-groups have unfortunately been degraded to
be only support-forums, with all the serious discussions being elsewhere.

Tim Meddick · External Since: Mar 30, 2009 Posts: 9

At last, an intelligent comment from someone!

Another had made up the title of this thread to be deliberately
provocative, but it is just so obviously untrue.

DOS is most certainly *not* dead, for starters, I know many IT
professionals who carry a DOS 6.22 bootdisk, in order to prep
hard-drives before installing the operating system.

I must admit, I can hardly remember what '95 looked like as I spent most
of my formative years on '98 SE (...and yes, I have tried '98 Light' -
it's a very neat tool - cutting in half the Win '98 footprint).
However, I was hoping to use this group to discuss techniques with DOS
6.22; DOS 7 & DOS 7.1. rather than the '95 interface.

I have to say though, I am not into the FreeDOS Project or Dr DOS, I'm a
purist and, although undoubtedly more versatile, I feel more at home
with M$-DOS.

I also like batch-file programming, ever attempting to create a more
efficient way of performing routine tasks, on my computer, with the aid
of [clever] batch-files.

On the subject of batch-files, I have found a brilliant small program
that actually compiles batch-scripts into executables, very similar to
writing in a programming language and sending through a compiler. It's
brilliant, by far and away the best single DOS program I've had (in
fact, there are two! One is BAT2EXEC (Douglas Boling - PC Magazine) and
the other, BATLITE (Pieter A. Hintjens))

I never learned a programming language, but find the batch-file language
suits my needs without having to become too involved as a programmer.

For similar reasons, I like using the XP 'Command Processor' DOS
emulation under Windows, (the batch-compilers work under CMD.EXE as
well) and have a smaller collection of command-line tools for use here
as well.

But my first interest will always be pure DOS, and (with the exception
of FreeDOS and Dr DOS and Floppy Linux) it is just about the only OS to
start a PC from that you can get onto a single floppy disk.

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. Smile

"teebo" wrote in message
>>> Win95 is dead, even deeper dead than DOS
>
> yes Win95 is perhaps not much used now, but Win98 is alive and kicking
> with all news-discussions about win98 in
> microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
> you could probably ask dosapps in win95 -related questions there too.
>
> I'm not sure how much difference there are in win95's and win98's
> support of dos-applications, perhaps someone can fill me in in this
> area?
>
>>> At least exist the freedos project to keep alive DOS
>
> yes that is cool. both freedos and dr-dos have lots
> of activity. if you have some free time, consider help
> with the release of FreeDOS1.1
>
>>> and the reactos project to keep alive WinNT,
>
> yes, I just wish there was an opensource-win9x project somewhere
> but I guess there is too few win9x-loving dudes that are good
> programmers
> with lot of free time. Of course there are the win9x updates and
> enhancing projects at msfn.org, and they do a real good work!,
> but to create a whole opensource version of win9x takes lots of
> time or lots of people.
>
>> but appear that nobody cares about Win9x
>
> well they do, but perhaps not so much about win95, even though
> there are new updates for 95 too. Most people run 98 or
> a cross between 98 and ME it seems.
>
>> Well, at least this group DOES exist!
>> Plus...
>> I am keeping Win95 (and DOS) alive, even if I am alone in doing so...
>
> yes as long as win95 works for what you do, there is no real reason
> to change operatingsystem. I allso run win95 on my old for-old-games-
> computer and it works fine. Win95 is allso slightly faster than
> win98 (even with MSIE removed with 98lite), right?
>
>
> The lack of posts here can allso be because all win95 systems running
> is working perfectly without need for support Very Happy

> computerrelated news-groups have unfortunately been degraded to
> be only support-forums, with all the serious discussions being
> elsewhere.

teebo · External Since: Sep 11, 2006 Posts: 20

> I also like batch-file programming, ever attempting to create a more
> efficient way of performing routine tasks, on my computer, with the aid
> of [clever] batch-files.

for batchprogramming things though there is the very active
newsgroup alt.msdos.batch that focus on that. you should
check it out

> I have to say though, I am not into the FreeDOS Project or Dr DOS, I'm a
> purist and, although undoubtedly more versatile, I feel more at home
> with M$-DOS.

hehe, someone should make a freedos 'distribution' that
looks and feels like ms-dos5 Smile

> But my first interest will always be pure DOS, and (with the exception
> of FreeDOS and Dr DOS and Floppy Linux) it is just about the only OS to
> start a PC from that you can get onto a single floppy disk.

Yup. the only other that small I can think of is KolibriOS.

Tim Meddick · External Since: Mar 30, 2009 Posts: 9

teebo,
you mention "alt.msdos.batch " and I have heard quite allot
of good stuff about that group.

However, many people seem to think it's a breeze getting the information
you want off the internet. I don't mind admitting that, try as I might,
I could not find what server I should enter into my OE news-group-setup
to access and subscribe to this group.

I don't even know if it's a group that I *can* access via my Outlook
Express.

I don't know whether I'd actually use it if I could not use it through
OE, I'm really into it. I think it's really fast and simple to use -
I'm a total fan of Outlook Express.

If you can access this group via OE and you know what server name I
should plough into the little box marked :

"Type the name of the Internet news (NNTP) server your Internet service
provider has given you."

....then I would be very grateful.

Thanks allot.

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. Smile

"teebo" wrote in message
>
>> I also like batch-file programming, ever attempting to create a more
>> efficient way of performing routine tasks, on my computer, with the
>> aid
>> of [clever] batch-files.
>
> for batchprogramming things though there is the very active
> newsgroup alt.msdos.batch that focus on that. you should
> check it out
>
>> I have to say though, I am not into the FreeDOS Project or Dr DOS,
>> I'm a
>> purist and, although undoubtedly more versatile, I feel more at home
>> with M$-DOS.
>
> hehe, someone should make a freedos 'distribution' that
> looks and feels like ms-dos5 Smile

>
>> But my first interest will always be pure DOS, and (with the
>> exception
>> of FreeDOS and Dr DOS and Floppy Linux) it is just about the only OS
>> to
>> start a PC from that you can get onto a single floppy disk.
>
> Yup. the only other that small I can think of is KolibriOS.

Tim Slattery · External Since: Jun 14, 2004 Posts: 256

"Tim Meddick" wrote:

>teebo,
> you mention "alt.msdos.batch " and I have heard quite allot
>of good stuff about that group.
>
>However, many people seem to think it's a breeze getting the information
>you want off the internet. I don't mind admitting that, try as I might,
>I could not find what server I should enter into my OE news-group-setup
>to access and subscribe to this group.

It would be the usenet server provided by your ISP. You'll have to get
the address from them. Most ISPs allow only their own subscribers to
use their Usenet server.

>I don't even know if it's a group that I *can* access via my Outlook
>Express.

Of course, as long as you supply a valid Usenet server. There are even
some that are free, usually those are read-only. Google for it.

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(Shell/User)
Slattery_T DeleteThis @bls.gov
http://members.cox.net/slatteryt

RobertVA · External Since: Jan 10, 2007 Posts: 20

Tim Slattery wrote:
> "Tim Meddick" wrote:
>
>> teebo,
>> you mention "alt.msdos.batch " and I have heard quite allot
>> of good stuff about that group.
>>
>> However, many people seem to think it's a breeze getting the information
>> you want off the internet. I don't mind admitting that, try as I might,
>> I could not find what server I should enter into my OE news-group-setup
>> to access and subscribe to this group.
>
> It would be the usenet server provided by your ISP. You'll have to get
> the address from them. Most ISPs allow only their own subscribers to
> use their Usenet server.

Unnecessary. You can set the news account's server name to
msnews.microsoft.com and port to the default 119 and access the news
groups directly. No password required.

>
>> I don't even know if it's a group that I *can* access via my Outlook
>> Express.
>
> Of course, as long as you supply a valid Usenet server. There are even
> some that are free, usually those are read-only. Google for it.
>

Tim Meddick · External Since: Mar 30, 2009 Posts: 9

You are to quick by half to attempt answering a question that you may
not have fully understood.

I want the name of the newsserver that the "alt.msdos.batch " group is
on.

Not the name of the server *this* group is on.

It's pretty obvious that, since I'm using OE and posting to this group
that, I already have the name of the microsoft news server to have been
able to configure Outlook Express.

The news group "alt.msdos.batch" is not on the "msnews.microsoft.com"
server!

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. Smile

"RobertVA" wrote in message

> Tim Slattery wrote:
>> "Tim Meddick" wrote:
>>
>>> teebo,
>>> you mention "alt.msdos.batch " and I have heard quite
>>> allot of good stuff about that group.
>>>
>>> However, many people seem to think it's a breeze getting the
>>> information you want off the internet. I don't mind admitting that,
>>> try as I might, I could not find what server I should enter into my
>>> OE news-group-setup to access and subscribe to this group.
>>
>> It would be the usenet server provided by your ISP. You'll have to
>> get
>> the address from them. Most ISPs allow only their own subscribers to
>> use their Usenet server.
>
> Unnecessary. You can set the news account's server name to
> msnews.microsoft.com and port to the default 119 and access the news
> groups directly. No password required.
>
>>
>>> I don't even know if it's a group that I *can* access via my Outlook
>>> Express.
>>
>> Of course, as long as you supply a valid Usenet server. There are
>> even
>> some that are free, usually those are read-only. Google for it.
>>