Operating System

Discussion in 'Asus' started by R, May 6, 2004.

  1. R

    R Guest

    I built my Asus P3F with 700 pentium about 4 years ago, rock solid and
    on win98se, but it's time for an upgrade.
    I've put together three systems with Asus boards and all worked
    perfect!!

    I'm leaning for the new system to include:

    Asus P4C800-E DELUXE
    Intel Pentium 4/ 3.0E GHz (Hyper Threading)
    (2) Western Digital Raptor

    Seems like every other day I read about a new virus out attaching Win
    XP. I plan to get into Unix operating system on one hard
    drive, but not sure if the second hard drive (portable) should keep the
    Win 98se or go with Win XP? Would Win98se even work with
    hyper thread? I already know Win98 would limit the new programs coming
    out and the new software architecture would be
    better with the newer processors, I just wondered if anyone is
    successfully running Win98 on a newer processor.


    Oh yeah, another quick question. Would the Antec 380 True Power be an
    adequate power supply?



    Thanks!!
     
    R, May 6, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. R

    Canus_Lupis Guest

    Win 98SE has trouble with anything over 256Mb of ram and doesn`t fully
    understand DDR ram.
    XPee likes 512Mb of DDR ram and you would be silly to go the cost of a new
    system and then start cutting it back just so you could run 98SE.
    Use a good firewall, a decent spyware remover and a top anti virus programme
    and you will be fine with XP Pro on your new machine.
     
    Canus_Lupis, May 6, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. R

    Lil' Dave Guest

    Am running a tri-boot 98SE/98SE/XP. 2.4 GHz / 512MB DDR. Nothig modified
    in 98SE to make use of memory.
    Another 98 OS Urban legend. Problem you're referring to, I guess, usually
    begins when exceeding 512MB of physical memory. A couple of system.ini
    entries will allow up to1GB.
    Same goes for 98SE.

    98SE does not understand hyper-thread technology.
     
    Lil' Dave, May 6, 2004
    #3
  4. R

    Tim Guest

    Hi,

    Go with XP and as the others say good firewall, AV and spyware + healthy
    computing habits.

    Others have recommended the 2.4 / 2.6 / 2.8c chips in preference to the new
    E chips in terms of bang for your buck, and reduced heat dissipation.

    If you want a silent system start with quiet parts. The raptors are OK - not
    much worse than most HDD's, so if this is a factor, then choose your PSU,
    graphics and HSF with this in mind.

    XP SP2 will be out soon, so don't fork out any dosh for a firewall - make do
    with one of the free ones which will probably be about as effective.

    - Tim
     
    Tim, May 6, 2004
    #4
  5. R

    rstlne Guest

    Dont know about the PSU (maybee)
    98se Would be okay but the HT support wouldnt be there as you say.
    There are "unofficial" sites that do serice packs for windows.. and things
    like the .NET framework HAVE BEEN ported to work on systems like 98 so in
    many ways you can indeed run some of the latest software. I am not saying
    that its going to be as easy as just installing a current OS in to your
    system BUT if you "enjoy" modding your software settings then I would say
    stick with 98se..
    One other note if you DO stay with 98se then you can disable the swap file
    (it's not as simple as turning it off) but you can force 98 to swap to ram
    (sounds weird doesnt it) and it makes 98se BLAZING FAST..
     
    rstlne, May 6, 2004
    #5
  6. R

    Leythos Guest

    This is utter poppy-cock, Windows 98SE can handle 1GB of ram without
    problem: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=304943
    The OS doesn't understand anything about RAM, it's the job of the
    chipset on the motherboards to make memory work, it has nothing to do
    with the OS. Memory, other than limitations, is a product/function of
    the chipsets used by the MB vendors.

    If you've got a new board and 1GB of ram then Windows XP Professional is
    the OS to use for a home user, it's fast, easy to use, and it will
    detect almost all the hardware you already have without any problems. XP
    Prof is the most stable OS that MS has pushed out to home users ever.
     
    Leythos, May 6, 2004
    #6
  7. R

    Ken Marsh Guest

    Hi,

    #Seems like every other day I read about a new virus out attaching Win
    #XP. I plan to get into Unix operating system on one hard
    #drive, but not sure if the second hard drive (portable) should keep the
    #Win 98se or go with Win XP?

    Don't run Unix on x86, unless you have a specific customer or work
    requirement for it. Run Linux. I also suggest you keep whatever Windoze
    you run on the primary ("C:") hard drive. This is by no means a
    necessity, but it can make things easier.

    If you do choose to run a commercial Unix like Solaris or <that other
    company>, buy the OS first, then buy only hardware on its compatibility
    list. Any other course of action is foolhardy, you'll end up running in
    unaccelerated 640x480x16 with half your peripherals unrecogized. Or,
    just run Linux, it has MUCH better h/w support.

    I wouldn't install 98SE on a MB made after 2002. Again, it's not that it
    can't be done, but you'll find the board was tested and optimized for XP
    or Win2K. The best debugged drivers will be for XP or Win2K. You'll also
    find very little interest from vendors in working on driver bugs for an
    obsolete operating system.

    #Oh yeah, another quick question. Would the Antec 380 True Power be an
    #adequate power supply?

    Probably, unless you have a really huge video card in a loaded system,
    and/or you want to overclock. Personally, I'm not buying anything under
    400W now, not because I need it, but because I don't know what is coming
    down the road in 6 months. Some people have had problems with them, but
    I consider Antec several steps above the generic 90-day-life chinese
    power supply.

    Ken.
     
    Ken Marsh, May 6, 2004
    #7
  8. R

    billh Guest

    Putting 98SE on a modern board is a waste of a good board since the boards
    tend to be optomized for XP and have features that only work if W2000 or XP
    are installed. New HW and SW are going to require later than W98 so you
    might as well get into it now and that includes dealing with viruses and
    other annoyances.

    The short answer to W98 and the memory is some boards work up to a GB and
    others don't regardless of the mods to the ini file and other patches.

    Billh
     
    billh, May 6, 2004
    #8
  9. R

    R Guest

    Lots of good viewpoints, I appreciate the comments!! Sounds like
    it would be best and easiest to just stay with Windows xp dispite many
    virus. I'll have to
    look into what XP SP2 is (as Tim suggested it will be out soon), but I
    gather it's
    a new xp version with additional software features inclusive.

    I thought the E series chips were better and faster (but hotter), but not
    sure if there is any reliability issues compaired to the C series pentium?

    Thanks again!!
     
    R, May 7, 2004
    #9
  10. R

    Ben Pope Guest

    It's a service pack for XP geared around security. The new firewall is
    supposed to be quite good. I have the SR release on my computer at work (I
    use W2K SP4 at home), and it seems ok.

    If you let Windows Update do it's thing, checking for critical updates and
    installing them, then you'll probably be ok. Of course, a virus scanner is
    almost essential these days, otherwise you just have to not run any programs
    or connect to any other machine to be sure of not getting one. Symantec
    Antivirus does a good job of looking after my machine.

    Win98 is not a particularly good OS in terms of memory management and
    multi-tasking. W2K and XP are MUCH better. Additionally driver support for
    Win9x is fading... it's the past - it's 9 years old now, we've come a long
    way.

    They'll be just as reliable... just harder to keep at sane temperatures,
    meaning you'll need louder fans. They're also a lot more expensive for not
    that much gain in performance.

    Ben
     
    Ben Pope, May 8, 2004
    #10
  11. [snip]

    No, don't. See my other f'up in this thread for the "why".
    [snip]

    NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!

    This is utterly *horrid* advice.

    First, which flavor of Windows one uses has *NO* bearing on the need for a
    proper outboard (commonly called "hardware") firewall which remains an
    absolute requirement in ALL cases.

    Secondly, in *NO* case is the "pseudo-firewall" supplied with WinXP even
    marginally close to adequate.

    Third, *NO* "firewall" program running on the same WinBox it is attempting to
    protect can *ever* be trusted. Here is just the tip of the iceberg:

    <http://www.pcmag.co.uk/News/1125025>
    <http://www.pcmag.co.uk/News/1129165>
    <http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.petch.html>
    <http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/>
    <http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/>
    <http://www.pcpitstop.com/news/nl-200403.asp#A4>
    <http://www.pestpatrol.com/PestInfo/z/zonekiller.asp>
    <http://www.pestpatrol.com/PestInfo/f/firekiller_2000.asp>
    <http://www.megasecurity.org/Firewalls/Firecracker.html>
    <http://www.megasecurity.org/Firewalls/Killer3.0.html>

    Or, to put it more eloquently:

    You can't block a port with software that runs on the same machine where
    the attacks are aimed. That's like trying to stop bullets by shoving
    Kevlar up your backside. By the time the bullet hits the Kevlar, the
    damage has been done.
    -- Morely 'Spam is theft' Dotes in NANAE, 13-AUG-2003


    --

    Jay T. Blocksom
    --------------------------------
    Appropriate Technology, Inc.
    usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net


    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly prohibited
    under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are subject to charge of up to
    $1,500 per incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
     
    Jay T. Blocksom, May 8, 2004
    #11
  12. R

    rstlne Guest

    This is utterly *horrid* advice.
    Explain yourself (to me it sounds like you dont have a full understanding of
    firewalls or software based firewalls)
    I think this backs up my first statement..
    It's best to look at it LIKE THIS.. (in VERRY simple terms)
    Say that someone is packetflooding port 80 on your pc.. so you block it
    locally.. HERE is what happens..
    Broadband -> Pc = Flooded PcPort (net is useless)
    now..
    Broadband -> Router -> PC = Flooded RouterPort (net is useless)

    Either way .. the net is .. useless

    ZoneAlarm/Symantic/(few others) Firewalls can do the job JUST AS GOOD as a
    hardware router (that has a firewall)..
    If you dont belive that's the case then You should get the tech docs to your
    routers (Linksys would be a good place to start, as their firmware is open
    source)
     
    rstlne, May 9, 2004
    #12
  13. R

    Ben Pope Guest

    fuckup? Oh, followup :p Don't see it, sorry.
    ALL cases? So you recommend that EVERYBODY purchases a hardware firewall?
    Are you in the industry?

    Seriously, for 99% of home users a software firewall is adequate. They are
    not trying to protect commercially sensitive data in most cases. They
    merely want to have some protection over which ports and services can be
    accessed from outside, and which programs can access other machines. A good
    software firewall is adequate in these cases.
    I don't think I'll bother reading them.

    Not sure how eloquent that is.

    If you were a company with sensitive data to protect, then I would certainly
    recommend a hardware router/firewall. But that is not the case for home
    users. Suggesting home users purchase, set up and use a hardware firewall
    is ridiculous and unnecessary in almost all cases.

    If you want to protect a machine running a webserver from being flooded,
    then there isn't a great deal you can do, depending on the type of attack.
    If somebody floods you, you get flooded. The path from you to the internet
    is going to be screwed until they give up, regardless of whether there is a
    firewall there or not. OK, so with a firewall the webserver doesn't fall
    over, but it's still not accessible by anybody. Oh, except that the
    firewall will forward all packets to the webserver anyway (unless they can
    be identified as non legitimate requests by the firewall) as thats exactly
    what you will want it to do.

    There are no completely infallible ways of protecting yourself from people
    who want to attack your machine. A software firewall is close enough.

    Ben
     
    Ben Pope, May 9, 2004
    #13
  14. [Hrmpf... I just noticed several different, and apparently unrelated,
    articles sitting in my Agent "Outbox", which for some unknown reason
    apparently never got posted. This is one of them. Re-posting. Apologies if
    duplicate.]

    [snip]

    The P3B-F was indeed a great board, for its era; nearly as much so as the
    legendary T2P4.
    [snip]

    I strongly prefer AMD CPUs, for several reasons; but that is an argument I'll
    [snip]

    I don't see this as a "make or break" item; but since you're looking for
    opinions...

    Are you (mostly) looking for speed, or size? Either way, the WD360GD model is
    (currently) hard to beat on the "bytes/buck" scale, while still maintaining
    "passable" performance. The WD740GD is still bigger, but disproportionately
    more expensive (today, anyway; wait an hour or two, and that will surely
    change -- life in the ultra-competitive HDD market). And both include a
    decent warranty (a relative rarity for WDC), as long as you buy it right. So
    I can't say this is a *bad* choice. But if speed is the ultimate goal,
    neither Raptor is a match for a good SCSI RAID array.

    Now, for the place I think you're making a *serious* mistake:
    [snip]

    Windows-specific worms/virii/etc. are by no means limited to XP. As a rule,
    they'll just as readily attack any other version of Windows more recent than
    WfWG (some are specifically aimed at Windows-based servers, as opposed to
    desktops; but that's another matter).

    HOWEVER... WinXP, specifically, should be avoided for several *other*
    reasons. Far too much to go into here; but see:

    <http://www.hevanet.com/peace/microsoft.htm>
    or <http://www.futurepower.net/microsoft.htm>

    and (read all three):
    <http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/03/14/11winman_1.html>
    <http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/03/21/12winman_1.html>
    <http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/03/28/13winman_1.html>

    and finally:
    <http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html>

    If you want to go with an NT-based (as opposed to DOS-based) version of
    Windows, then stick with Win2K/SP4; but be *SURE* to install it using
    [snip]

    Good move, BUT...

    Unless you have some very specific reason to favor a particular vendor's
    version of Unix, I *strongly* suggest that for your purposes, "Unix" should
    equal "Linux". Beyond that, everyone has their own pet Linux distro, and
    rarely will any two randomly chosen penguin-heads agree on which that should
    be. But the "bottom line" is that Red Hat is *generally* considered the most
    "compromised by commercial marketing concerns" -- which may or may not
    actually mean it's suitable to you. Personally, I have a soft spot for
    [snip]

    See above WRT WinXP. As for Win98SE, there's no reason you couldn't install
    that beside either Linux or an NT-based Windows (or both); and depending on
    what applications and peripherals you plan to use, it may be a very good idea,
    at least as a temporary "bridge" while you learn Linux. But if you do go this
    route, it is again an "absolute must" to install it via 98lite:
    [snip]

    Presuming that by "work with" you mean "take advantage of", no -- but that's
    rather a moot point AFAIAC. You certainly do *NOT* need "HyperThreading" to
    use and fully take advantage of Win98SE.
    [snip]

    This is at least mostly Urban Legend.

    The best fundamental lesson you can possibly learn, applicable in all sorts of
    contexts beyond just this one, is:

    "Newer" != "Better".
    [snip]

    Probably, depending on what else you're putting in the box. The main thing to
    keep in mind is that newer P4 systems can really load down the +12V rail, far
    beyond what used to be considered "normal". So if you insist on going the
    Intel route, look at that spec particularly close.

    --

    Jay T. Blocksom
    --------------------------------
    Appropriate Technology, Inc.
    usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net


    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly prohibited
    under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are subject to charge of up to
    $1,500 per incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
     
    Jay T. Blocksom, May 9, 2004
    #14
  15. R

    Ben Pope Guest

    Eh? It's 36GB for like £90, I can get a drive 4 times that size for less
    money.
    Passable? It's probably the second fastest ATA drive available.
    Not a hard task.
    Disproportionately? It's £160, less than twice the price of the WD360GD,
    and twice the capacity.
    No single drive is a match for a RAID array? Well, duh...

    Stick two Raptors in RAID and you HAVE a match for a SCSI RAID array - in
    terms of price/performance. It's probably a tad slower (depending on your
    usage patterns) for a tad less money.
    <snip over-zealous rantings about windows security>

    We all know Windows isn't great in terms of security, but keeping it up to
    date with Windows Update and a using an up to date virus checker is
    generally enough for most people.

    Ben
     
    Ben Pope, May 9, 2004
    #15
  16. R

    Leythos Guest

    Actually, considering that most people never run Windows Update, never
    run their AV updates, a NAT router (which is not a firewall) at the cost
    of $40 in most places around the US is about as safe as they can get
    considering all that they don't do.

    Most adults try and keep some banking information on their computers,
    so, I would call that as sensitive as company data.

    If most people were to just purchase a NAT router from a local computer
    place, or the the ISP enabled NAT on their routers/modems, there would
    be a heck of a lot less compromised systems around.
     
    Leythos, May 9, 2004
    #16
  17. R

    rstlne Guest

    Actually, considering that most people never run Windows Update, never
    How many of those 40$ routers have been exploted by back doors (serious
    question)
    I doubt that there is much ident theft in those cases (it's not worth the
    time and effort when you can pay 5$ to a postial offical for a GoldCC with a
    10,000$ limit)
    Yea, Highly possible that one..
    Granted.. NAT has a real downfall.. From gamers not being able to host
    games, to some SSL sites refusing connection (Is what I hear, never seen a
    explanation).. Webphones wouldnt work (unless they are going through a
    registration server) and TONS of other stuff..
    It would mean you cant host your family webpage, nor run your email server,
    or really run ANY server..

    But yea.. It would help..
     
    rstlne, May 10, 2004
    #17
  18. R

    Leythos Guest

    We have more than 100 of them across the country (the Linksys BEFSR41,
    and BEFSX41 and BEFVP41) and have never found any trace of anything
    getting past them that was not invited by the users. We log the in/out
    bound traffic and have scripts that detect unusual items, and we do a
    cursory scan by hand once a month.

    I used a BEFSR41 for about 3 years myself and never had any problems.
     
    Leythos, May 10, 2004
    #18
  19. R

    Leythos Guest

    But most ISP's TOS prohibit that function, so it's not an issue for
    most. An if the NAT function was on by default and could be requested to
    be disabled, then customers would lose nothing.
     
    Leythos, May 10, 2004
    #19
  20. R

    rstlne Guest

    MY Isp doesnt block any port (in or out).
    My only limitation is that I cant use it to make money or for illegal stuff
    (kiddieporn/warez/mp3z)

    I say that IF an isp blocks that stuff then they should do like CenturyTel
    do.. and block the port as soon as it's noticed on the network (isp
    firewall)
     
    rstlne, May 10, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.