If you’ve ever seen Monty Python and the Holy Grail, you’ve probably seen the
“Bring Out Your Dead” skit. Sometimes, life does indeed imitate art. As much as
Microsoft would love for you to toss out your old copies of Windows 98 like the
old man in that sketch, if you listen closely enough you can probably hear
Windows 98 saying “But I’m not dead yet!”
Microsoft may be phasing out support for Windows 98, but it doesn’t mean that you necessarily are going to, as well. Here are some of the reasons why Windows 98 isn't dead yet and some of my opinions on why you may not want to run out and upgrade right away.
What about Windows 95 and Windows Me?
For the purposes of this discussion, I'm focusing on Windows 98—primarily my favorite version, Second Edition. Although Windows 95 was an extremely popular business operating system, especially Windows 95b, many new applications won't work with it. Likewise, Windows Me was primarily a home-user operating system ill-equipped and too bloated to be an effective business operating system.
Why would I use an operating system that's several versions old?
By definition, Windows 98 is over five years old. In the computer world that's downright ancient. It's been superseded by Windows Me, Windows 2000 Professional, and Windows XP. Longhorn, XP's successor, is already on the horizon.
For obvious financial reasons, Microsoft would love for you to upgrade all of your workstations to Windows XP Professional. Technology publications, TechRepublic included, sometimes have a tendency to embrace the newness of a solution such as Windows XP. (See Greg Shultz's article "Top five reasons to leave Windows 9x behind".). However, there are several good reasons why you should stick with Windows 98. Some of them include:
- Software upgrade costs
- Hardware upgrade costs
- Application compatibility
- Hardware compatibility
- Training issues
- General support issues
Software upgrade costs
Software upgrade cost probably is the first thing that comes to mind as a reason to stick with Windows 98 rather than upgrade. Bill Gates is no LinusTorvalds, so naturally you're going to have to pay to upgrade Windows 98.
Upgrade costs will vary. If you don't have a licensing agreement with Microsoft such as OpenLicense, you'll have to upgrade workstations one at a time. A quick look at CNET Shopper.com will show that you'll spend about $175 per machine to upgrade to Windows XP Professional from Windows 98. At a time when IT budgets are increasingly getting squeezed, you can probably use that money for other things in your organization.
Hardware upgrade costs
Beyond the mere cost of the software, leaving Windows 98 behind will probably force you to make some hefty hardware investments. Microsoft's minimum requirements for Windows XP Professional are a 233-MHz Pentium II PC with 64 MB of RAM and 1.5 GB of free hard drive space. As you probably know, even though XP will boot under such a configuration, it won't be very useful. You need at least a 450-MHz processor with 256 MB of RAM to get much work done. Although such a practical minimum seems puny compared to what's inside today's newest machines, chances are most of your existing workstations are closer to XP's practical minimum.
At the same time, consider the Windows 98 minimum recommendations: A 486 processor with 24 MB of RAM and 400 MB of free hard drive space. Therefore, a workstation that will barely boot Windows XP Professional will run Windows 98 nicely. Even at XP's practical minimum, Windows 98 will scream.
Prices for hardware upgrades such as hard drives and RAM may be falling, but as with software upgrade costs, every little bit adds up. Factor in the time it takes to install the hardware upgrades and the number of workstations in your organization, and you're talking real money after a while—for not much of a performance improvement over your existing hardware and Windows 98.
Play video
There are currently no comments for this post.