Avira discontinuing support

[fred128]

I received an email from Avira that they are discontinuing support for Windows 98 on June 30. It's getting more and more difficult to find anything that will work with that operating system.

[bigc73542]

since Win 98 is osolete it will only get worse in the software compatability

[TonyW]

Haven't Microsoft stopped support for that OS anyway? If that's right, it means there are no updates for it so they're hoping those still using it will switch to another OS. No wonder vendors like Avira are dropping support.

[Stefan Kurtzhals]

Even the malware authors stopped supporting that OS. ;D

[Blackcat]

{QUOTE-> Even the malware authors stopped supporting that OS. ;D <-QUOTE}
;D ;D

[HiTech_boy]

{QUOTE-> ;D ;D <-QUOTE}
I'll second that : ;D ;D

[Firecat]

{QUOTE-> I received an email from Avira that they are discontinuing support for Windows 98 on June 30. It's getting more and more difficult to find anything that will work with that operating system. <-QUOTE}
Only Win98 or also WinME? ???

[Mr2cents]

{QUOTE-> I received an email from Avira that they are discontinuing support for Windows 98 on June 30. It's getting more and more difficult to find anything that will work with that operating system. <-QUOTE}
Hi Fred. I just got a new computer with xp media center. I had been running windows me since about 2001. I noticed certain antivirus companies stopped supporting 98, and me about as soon as microsoft did last july.

I made a list of every antivirus company that did this. They bailed out, and no longer offered support for 98, or windows me. I'm looking at all the names on this list right now. To make a long story short. I will never purchase any of their products again.

As stated previously. I'm now running windows xp. The antivirus companies that stopped supporting 98 and windows me. Will Never be on this computer. I don't care how good their detection rates are, or how great they are. The companies on my black list will no longer be considered for future purchases. They won't even be tested on this computer. This post isn't aimed toward avira. Avira is one of the companies that have stayed with us. At a certain point, their will be no antivirus companies supporting 98.

The best thing to do is not repurchase their products when you go to xp. It's all about the money. Kav has offered excellent support. I'm going to be running linux 100% of the time very shortly. However, I'm going to renew my subscription to kav. Why? Because of the great support they have provided.

I will be only using windows to play a volleyball game I like. This game is played offline. I won't even have to access the the internet with windows. Will I need Kav? NO. Then why would I purchase their product? Because of the great support that they have provided me over the last 2 years. That's how much support means to me.

8)

[herbalist]

Most of the AVs that do work with 98 are getting too heavy to run on it well. If a manual scanner will suffice, F-Prot for DOS makes a good on demand and integrated scanner. AVZ Anti-viral toolkit works with 98. Version 6 of AntiVir works well with 98, but you have to update it manually. The definition files still work with it.
{QUOTE-> Even the malware authors stopped supporting that OS. <-QUOTE}
Very true. Much of todays malware uses rootkits, which don't affect 98. With the advances in malware, running an OS that isn't targeted much isn't such a bad thing.
If you want to continue running 98, you might consider moving to a security strategy that doesn't rely on identifying specific malware in order to protect you from it. The system policy editor for 98 can really limit how much damage malware can do. SSM supports 98 and is much lighter than most all AVs. Properly configured, and with informed responses to it's prompts, SSM can protect you as well or better than an AV. Different 3rd parties are still working with 98 to improve it and fix vulnerabilities that are found. Don't underestimate how much DOS can do to protect windows.
98 can be secured quite well, if you take the time to really learn your system. To a large degree, you're replacing vendor support with your own understanding of how your system works, what belongs there, and learning what the different apps and system components do. There's several good rule based apps that can keep you secure, if you're willing to put in the time it takes to learn them, and practice reasonably safe internet practices.
Rick

[StevieO]

What ! Must be all those pirated copies of XP floating around in all corners of the world. If it wern't i think even more people would still be using 98. And it might surprise some that, more people than what they might think are happily and very securely still running it. I know i am, and a good number of friends and family also. Unless you're a gamer etc, you don't really need XP, never mind Vista.

I'm sorry to hear that support will end in June, maybe they'll reconsider ? The good thing is i presume, is that we will still be able to use it and get daily definition updates.


StevieO

[Perman]

Hi, folks: I feel very sorry for those users whose O/S are no longer supported by certain security apps. But just stay back one step and recollect your thoughts. Who has abandoned your O/S first? Was that mighty giant MS ? If the parent would dare to sever ties w/ his/her own child, that legally-orphaned kid will be in nobody's care except children aids. There is no such an agency in cyberspace. Therefore, survival is your own business. To blame whom? AV vendors? NO! Blame the creator! Microsoft. Do not use its products, including XP and Vista, just because you will be abandoned eventually. :P Of course, only if this thinking is in fact logical. ;D

[C.S.J]

i agree with dropping such support, 98, ME ?

get with the times, we are in 2007 now, 2007.....

dropping that support will give more resources to XP / vista users, im all for that ;D

[fred128]

I have XP machines so I'm not crying about the loss but I am angry about contracting for licenses that are supposed to last one year and then get cut off midyear. That's not the right thing to do.

[rayoflight]

{QUOTE-> It's getting more and more difficult to find anything that will work with that operating system. <-QUOTE}
AVG Free/Paid supports Windows 98 and Windows ME.
Avast Free/Paid supports even Windows 95.
F-Prot 3...

{QUOTE-> but I am angry about contracting for licenses that are supposed to last one year and then get cut off midyear. That's not the right thing to do.
<-QUOTE}
Got it and agree.

[farmerlee]

{QUOTE-> I received an email from Avira that they are discontinuing support for Windows 98 on June 30. It's getting more and more difficult to find anything that will work with that operating system. <-QUOTE}
AVG still works with win98 so you're not all alone yet :)

[EliteKiller]

{QUOTE-> I received an email from Avira that they are discontinuing support for Windows 98 on June 30. It's getting more and more difficult to find anything that will work with that operating system. <-QUOTE}

NOD32, Kaspersky, Bitdefender, and several other reputable AV's still work in 98SE.

[Mr2cents]

Here's a couple of more antiviruses that still support 98.
Kav (http://usa.kaspersky.com/products/anti-virus.php) and Nod32 (http://www.eset.com/products/win9x.php). Woops. EliteKiller beat me to it.
drweb (http://solutions.drweb.com/home/win/) also supports 98.

[pilotart]

My understanding is that Program Build Updates (for Win98/ME will cease from AVIRA after 1 July, but Signature and Engine Updates will continue through the end of 2007. NT program Support ends 1 April.

"...updates for these versions (incl. VXD) will still be available till 31.12.2007. Your system will be protected properly till the end of the year."
(http://forum.antivir-pe.de/thread.php?threadid=17256)

[EASTER.2010]

Personally i am very disappointed with Microsoft's lack of interest (as if they ever care) in going back at least one more time to completely re-write and restablize Me/98SE as well as improve (The Dog Ugly GUI :ouch: ) as well as add some other new features before running away from it like it was some plague.

Come On Microsoft Developers, wheres your guts? How about a revisit and name it WINDOWS 98.6 as in "Normal".

[herbalist]

{QUOTE-> i agree with dropping such support, 98, ME ?
get with the times, we are in 2007 now, 2007.....
dropping that support will give more resources to XP / vista users, im all for that <-QUOTE}
Whenever I see an article about a new type of rootkit or read about how easily they're defeating rootkit detectors, it makes me so glad that I chose not to "get with the times." Vendors supporting 98/ME doesn't take away anything from their support of XP. Looking at the latest crop of malware, XP users are going to need all the support they can get.

The availability of an AV is not a sufficient reason to drop an operating system. Signature based AVs are a technology that's even more obsolete than Win98. Even with hourly updates, they miss a lot of the malicious code. AntiVir's present Virus definition files are 11.6mb. Checking each accessed file against a database of this size is a very inefficient and wasteful use of system resources, especially on the older system that don't have a lot to waste.
{QUOTE-> It's getting more and more difficult to find anything that will work with that operating system. <-QUOTE}
Software is available for 98/ME that will more than adequately secure it, providing the user is willing to learn to configure and use it properly. My security package is based around Kerio 2.1.5, SSM free, and Proxomitron, all free rule based apps that are light, yet very effective. My AV is used only for manual scanning, not as a resident guard or shield. With no resident AV, my system is much faster. Combined with the system policy editor and "default-deny" usage, you can safely use 98/ME for all normal uses.
Rick

[FRug]

I'm not trying to bitch, but sticking to windows 98/ME seems pretty masochistic to me. Let me say this outright: that system sucks, it always did and it always will continue to be one of the worst products MS has ever unleashed unto mankind. The lousy kernel design severely cripples anything related to performance for security programs, much more than anything (in this context) Vista will ever be able to do.

Yes there are still a few AVs that continue their support for this OS atm, however you would be VERY disappointed to see either which features/detections they have deactivated on-access to provide bearable performance. Other features, like behaviour blocking, may simply not be available at all.

Diminishing hardware support, incompatible tools and games, system instability and in many cases broken drivers that will probably remain broken forever are not what I'd like to deal with on my home system (VIA 4in1 anyone?). When I ditched 98SE for W2K back then, I never looked back. Not once.

If you don't want to pay for a new system (if required) or OS, you could still migrate to Linux. IMHO if all you do is do a bit of chatting, surfing, writing letters and stuff, Linux is probably the best thing for you anyway.

Continuing support for an OS that has been dropped by the vendor is a losing battle, it binds ressources because the system bases are so utterly different, and it prevents you from integrating new technologies because its simply impossible/unfeasible to implement them for both OSes. From a company point of view, investing money in an evolutionary dead end such as 9x based systems may simply not be profitable, because the user base keeps diminishing quickly. The few remaining paying users (I'm not talking about the total userbase of 9x, but the share an AV vendor has of them) will continue to switch to other systems, and the investment will simply prove to have been wasted. This is especially true if companies that offer free versions of their software.

What Stefan Kurtzhals said is true in a certain funny way, yep. Some of nowadays malware isn't able to run on 9x anymore. However a large part of it still does, and 9x is easy prey since major security issues have remained unfixed for YEARS. 9x is as open and vulnerable as it can get.

If you like shooting yourself in the leg, i can't help it. But in your own interest you should consider the alternatives. Even if they have funny names ending with ...ix.

[Stefan Kurtzhals]

Actually I was not really joking. I recently visited two friends who are still using Win9X. They didn't have a firewall (DSL modem, not router), didn't patch Win98, used IE 5/6 (totally unpatched) and Outlook.

Basically the ideal target for malware you would expect. I was assuming that both computers were crawling with malware, booted from a Bart PE CD and was very surprised that there was not a single malware or adware active on these systems. The same systems with the same setup and XP instead would be infected in 30-60 seconds after being connected to the internet.

BTW, so you guys are suggesting we shouldn't improve the detection of Avira or add new features but instead spend the time with backporting things to Win9x?!?! Vista is out, so we are forced to support that one and Microsoft already announced that in 2009, they will put out their next "masterpiece". :wacko:

[pykko]

well, Win98 is already 9 years old... you could switch to other OS. But, if I have the current version for Win98 and I let it install and update normally, wouldn't it work even after support is gone? ;D

[Inspector Clouseau]

Win 9x is not sold anymore. That said as a company it's impossible to gain new customers with (whatever type of application) for this operating system. Nobody who buys a new machine installs 9x anymore. That you still have people running 9x is however another story. BUT even this number is going down every day. If you buy (or use) a 10+ years old car, would you expect that your local car dealer offers the latest navigation system including DVD entertainment system for your car? Of course not, they are focusing on the new cars, since nobody is going to buy a 10+ years old car for a SERIOUS reason. And if you do so, you're well aware that it might not have all nice equipment maybe not even airbags. That said: use/buy it on your own risk, you don't get any warranty on it.

And if we would not draw somewhere a line, we would still sell/support Windows 3.x AV Software. Because there might be 512 users worldwide who still using this. 250 users going with symantec, 125 users McAfee, 75 users Trend Micro and the remaining licenses would be shared between all other companies, makes around 1-2 customers for every other av company. WOW ::) Now that's what i call a deal. You have to pay aprox. 12 people in your company for maintaining device drivers/TSR, for building/compiling old database formats which are much more limited than the new version of your product, you have to provide support for those turkeys who still use 3.x, you have to make QA, and if you are completely nuts then you have to employ 2 or 3 sales guys to try selling it, since it produces fixed costs for the company every month so you must gain somehow a turnover.

Edit: I've forgot ofc the most important fact: You could use your existing resources for more important things: Focusing on current problems. Protecting the majority of users from current threads. That somebody with a 9x system gets infected is less likely since you don't have them running that often as the new operating systems. That said who cannot afford XP should go with linux, there is and there will be AV scanners. I have a Vista License but i'm not using it yet, because i think it's crap. (seriously) But at least i'm using XP since this is much more stable (and still supported by MS). If this gets dropped i switch completely to OSX 64Bit or Linux. We'll see...

[Firecat]

Well, I don't find the issue of Windows 9x support being dropped very shocking, *but* I noticed that some vendors (Microsoft, Symantec) are now supporting only Windows XP and upwards with the latest version of their software. Windows 2000 is left out there like a baby in the cold. Win2k is as vulnerable as XP is to the latest malware, and it is much of the same technology as what is there in XP. Then why do people drop support for Windows 2000? IMO, dropping support for Windows 2000 at this time is unacceptable. Vendors who do this should not be supported in any way.

[Inspector Clouseau]

{QUOTE-> Vendors who do this should not be supported in any way. <-QUOTE}

Vendors do decide themself what they support and what not. That is the result of that people having intelligence as well there. So why should you block a vendor just because he's not offering a os system version which you don't even use? That's something like let's boykott all apple vendors because my preference is oranges. Can you tell me a SERIOUS reason why you would do that with a software vendor? If he offers the things you need and they work for you then buy it. But encouraging people to block such vendors is just very very silly and unprofessional.

[DaveD]

{QUOTE-> Well, I don't find the issue of Windows 9x support being dropped very shocking, *but* I noticed that some vendors (Microsoft, Symantec) are now supporting only Windows XP and upwards with the latest version of their software. Windows 2000 is left out there like a baby in the cold. Win2k is as vulnerable as XP is to the latest malware, and it is much of the same technology as what is there in XP. Then why do people drop support for Windows 2000? IMO, dropping support for Windows 2000 at this time is unacceptable. Vendors who do this should not be supported in any way. <-QUOTE}

In my opinion, Windows 2000 is still the best operating system that Microsoft has made thus far. However, most of this decline in support for Windows 2000 is actually Microsoft's own fault. Windows 2000 and XP were very much the same underneath it all. But Service Pack 2 for XP changed things so much that for software companies it ended up being twice the work to make things compatible with 2000. Even Microsoft made it so Windows Defender, IE7 and the latest WMP would not install on 2000, despite the fact that they WOULD actually work on the system if it weren't for the intentional blocks. I wish MS would do another service pack for 2000, but it wont happen. So if this is continuing to go more off topic then it already was.

[lodore]

i belive windows 2k was the best microsoft Os ever made as well.
i just which they shipped that to the home users instead of the worst operating system they made at the same time called windows me.
home users always get less.
i mean the same time business users get the best OS from ms
and home users got the worst os from ms
lodore

[dw2108]

Ok, Inspector and Stefan, get this stat from DoH&HS! Over 83% of Americans ages 28 and older, would rather put their PCs in the closet or in the garbage or go dailup rather than be victims of costly upgrades. If married, they said, they needed to spend more time with wife and kids, who are failing in school. If single, they said, the were now in trouble with credit cards from BIG SCREEN TV + PREMIUM HI DEF CABLE + DIGITAL PHONE, etc.

BUT DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT: WHEN YOU FIND YOUR CORPORATION IN TROUBLE FROM LACK OF CUSTOMERS, I TOLD YOU SO!

BTW, I HAVE had MANY elderly people come to me to have XP WIPED for an OS which they CAN understand! This is NOT abnormal.

BUT, don't take my word for jack! NOD32, Avast, AVG, Dr.Web and many more shall be taking what would have been YOUR subscription money!

Dave/HAL

P.S.: Inspector, while your having fun at posting boards, we cannot update our F-Prot! Your servers time out.

[HiTech_boy]

I fully agree there is no need to support such an old OS .

But are you sure with the following :

{QUOTE-> Win 9x is not sold anymore. That said as a company it's impossible to gain new customers with (whatever type of application) for this operating system. Nobody who buys a new machine installs 9x anymore <-QUOTE}

{QUOTE-> Very true. Much of todays malware uses rootkits, which don't affect 98. With the advances in malware, running an OS that isn't targeted much isn't such a bad thing. <-QUOTE}

A friend of mine bought a new computer which came with XP . After using it some months , her father decided to remove XP and change it with Win 98 . New computer -> Win 98 . I was shocked to understand he thinks Win98 is more secure than XP because his personal experience shows XP gets more viruses than 98 ;D ;D It will turn out to be true ;D ;D ;D

[dw2108]

If you request, IBM, Gateway and Dell will sell 9x machines with the latest hardware drivers.

Dave/HAL

[Miyagi]

{QUOTE-> Win 9x is not sold anymore. That said as a company it's impossible to gain new customers with (whatever type of application) for this operating system. Nobody who buys a new machine installs 9x anymore. That you still have people running 9x is however another story. BUT even this number is going down every day. If you buy (or use) a 10+ years old car, would you expect that your local car dealer offers the latest navigation system including DVD entertainment system for your car? Of course not, they are focusing on the new cars, since nobody is going to buy a 10+ years old car for a SERIOUS reason. And if you do so, you're well aware that it might not have all nice equipment maybe not even airbags. That said: use/buy it on your own risk, you don't get any warranty on it. <-QUOTE}
I enjoy your car and car mechanic explanation. :)

AV companies are more aware of their offering and marketing. We, end-users, need to understand in open-mind fashion about their approach. I definitely will hate to see AV vendors using off-shore support to remedy this. Better keep the good supportive staff than using someone who has no clue about the AV itself and broken English. :'(

[StevieO]

FRug

I've installed the VIA 4in1 drivers many times on new 98SE PC builds, and don't see any problems with them. Can you elaborate as to what yours where please ?

Inspector Clouseau

Ever heard of classic cars ? Anyway someone could have any vehicle of any age and install the most fantastic sound/video system, or satnav etc, that would be better than in most brand new vehicles of any cost. They could also install lots of things that would dramatically improve it, like changing the suspension, brakes, wheels, etc etc.

The same goes for 98SE as there are plenty of applications, security and otherwise, available that work just fine on it. All that's apart from being able to disable lots of things in it that are or could be a security risk, and very easily too. The same goes for XP by the way.

Even with XP that was supposedly the most secure OS ever from MS, look at all the patches and fixes it's needed, and still will. Also plenty of people still wouldn't run it without lots of extra security applications in place. And as for Vista, well it's early days of course, but i'm not holding my breath. See this for example, Vista Security Model A Big Joke? http://theinvisiblethings.blogspot.com/2007/02/vista-security-model-big-joke.html

I agree what you say about 3.x but i wouldn't be surprised to learn that millions of people are still using 98 around the world. I understand that for some vendors their customers using 98 will be less than other vendors.

If 98SE was really crap and i couldn't make it secure as i have, and wasn't able to do all the things i can on it, i wouldn't use it. I've built numerous brand new PC's, and i've installed 98SE on every one of them, and it runs perfectly well, unlike lots of other people i know with XP. Oh and i don't get infected as many of them do, well only on purpose sometimes lol.


StevieO

[pilotart]

{QUOTE-> If you request, IBM, Gateway and Dell will sell 9x machines with the latest hardware drivers.

Dave/HAL <-QUOTE}

Don't know about IBM or Gateway, but do know Dell:

Dell Driver Download site (http://support.dell.com/support/downloads/index.aspx?)

Look at the above site and specify Win98 and you will see a total of four Drivers,
including Diagnostics and Upgrade tool, System BIOS and one Printer Driver.

Select WinXP and you will see seventy-one Drivers offered.

The above was for a Latitude D820 which has been out for a year.

The above system would be extremely limited to unusable on Win98.

The Dell User site has had requests about "My Corporation specifies Win98..."
and answers of impossible to use on much older systems due to hardware limitations.

I only stay with Win98 on my old Latitude LM because of hardware limitations, Win2k would be too much of a stretch for it.

[lodore]

{QUOTE-> If you request, IBM, Gateway and Dell will sell 9x machines with the latest hardware drivers.

Dave/HAL <-QUOTE}

reallly?
can they sell it with windows 2k pro and disc on any pc if asked?
because this is very interesting...
lodore

[ccsito]

Not surprised at the announcement since Microsoft abandoned support for Windows 98 earlier. Software development always goes to the newer programs since the user base for the older versions shrink. Eventually, all of my systems will be unsupported, but that is not big deal to me. Since I don't invest much $$$ into hardware and software, I don't "waste" paying money into products that will become obsolete. Maybe Microsoft will eventually develop the "perfect" operating system that will be the final product to end all products (or as they reported that PCs will be obsolete very soon in the future), but I will not follow the "herd mentality" with their constant announcements to upgrade over and over and over again. ::)

[LowWaterMark]

{QUOTE-> AV companies are more aware of their offering and marketing. <-QUOTE}That is the key point in all of this. Anti Virus companies are businesses, and businesses make decisions based upon financial justifications.

Businesses aren't emotional or passionate about OS versions. They don't care whether some group of people just love their Windows 98 (or whatever OS they are on). It doesn't matter if some in that group have the most secured PCs on the Internet, (i.e. true classic cars), while others simply have an old clunker they don't maintain. Businesses care about how their sales figures look.

Those companies that have made a decision to drop support for certain OS, did so because they couldn't justify the costs being invested in ongoing support, against the new purchases and renewals from that same customer base.

If a company is making large profits from selling their software to the remaining Windows 98 customer base, then they'll most likely continue producing software for that market. If they aren't, then they have to stop or risk running their business into the ground.

You can't say that those companies are wrong about their decisions unless you know their sales figures and the cost ratio required to market their product to that segment of that OS' user base. If it isn't a viable market for them, then it simply isn't.

[C.S.J]

yep and its probably OS fault why some av companys dont have vista compatible av's at the moment, probably not releasing certain information.

lets all blame bill gates, its just easier that way :D hehe

[Firecat]

{QUOTE-> Vendors do decide themself what they support and what not. That is the result of that people having intelligence as well there. So why should you block a vendor just because he's not offering a os system version which you don't even use? That's something like let's boykott all apple vendors because my preference is oranges. Can you tell me a SERIOUS reason why you would do that with a software vendor? If he offers the things you need and they work for you then buy it. But encouraging people to block such vendors is just very very silly and unprofessional. <-QUOTE}
Well, OK, I guess it was silly of me to say that. Sorry. I was just a bit annoyed at the lack of Win2k support, even if I don't use it. I find Win2k to be a great OS, and it is still supported by Microsoft (well, extended support, but anyway). So I felt it should still be given support by software. Though I myself use XP, I can imagine how Win2k users would feel being left out in the cold for no real reason, considering that it wouldn't require too much work to make an XP compatible software work with 2000 :)

[trjam]

Sooner or later, the Yugo haD to die. Why go after thE best protection but yet to fail the basic function of updating your OS.::)

[herbalist]

It's hard not to laugh when I hear people comment about how old 98 is when XP is only a couple years newer. It's really a pointless discussion when the entire obsolescense issue is artificial, a M$ tactic to try and separate users from their wallets. How did this thread shift to boycotting vendors who don't support older systems? Software vendors have to support what's being used, simple as that. If a vendor chooses not to support 98, there's no point in boycotting them. For all practical purposes, the vendor boycotted that section of the market themselves, however small it may be.
Those of us who choose to run an older or classic system like 98 or 2K are in a similar position to a classic car owner. You don't just run to the local department store for parts (or software). They're harder to find, but if it's important to the user, it's worth the effort.
Regarding
{QUOTE-> 9x is easy prey since major security issues have remained unfixed for YEARS. 9x is as open and vulnerable as it can get. <-QUOTE}
Show me the code! There's lots of code available for use against XP that's almost impossible to detect and remove, several of which are being actively discussed in this forum. Show me the equivalent for 98, equal in severity or an equal quantity.
98 might be vulnerable "out of the box", but XP doesn't fare any better. With the advances in rootkits, that statement doesn't hold true anymore. Microsoft has been trying to convince users that every older system is hopelessly vulnerable when compared to the recent version. Pure hype and marketing noise. 98 didn't need a weekly patch day and patches weren't released 10 at a time for it. If it weren't for 3rd party security-ware, XP wouldn't have a chance of staying clean. If Microsoft really thought their newer operating systems were so secure, why would they be entering the security-ware market? It's not to secure or support the older systems.

You almost have to split the users of older systems into 2 separate groups.

Users that stay with an OS because they prefer it and intend to keep running it.
Users who can't afford a newer system and aren't technically minded enough to tackle Linux.

The first group will do fine, whether individual vendors support them or not. Like classic car owners, they know their systems and know how to take care of them. The 2nd group, those "driving the old clunkers" because they have to, they have a problem. Without a working knowlege of how to maintain and defend their older system, they are very vulnerable. By the same token, the typical user of XP isn't much safer. XP is just a slightly newer "clunker". Windows as installed is insecure, period, regardless of which version it is. That includes Vista. If it weren't for 3rd party security apps, most Windows PCs would be hopelessly infected, all of the versions. Fortunately, the opposite is also true. With user knowlege and a few good security apps, all versions can be secured well enough to be used safely. While we 98 users might have to do without a resident AV eventually, 98 can be well secured without one. It's not the OS or the security-ware that truly secures a PC. It's user knowlege. That works on all versions.
Rick

[herbalist]

{QUOTE-> P.S.: Inspector, while your having fun at posting boards, we cannot update our F-Prot! Your servers time out. <-QUOTE}
Since this was brought up, I had links for the update files for F-Prot for DOS in my download manger, which were launched regularly by my scheduler and unzipped automatically. Was using ftp://ftp.f-prot.com/pub/fp-def.zip and ftp://ftp.f-prot.com/pub/macrdef2.zip. Those links don't work anymore. The way it's set up now, I have to go to the update page and get the files manually. Can't save the new links in the download manager as the link changes to one like this, with the colored part always changing. http://us-3.updates.f-prot.net/files/defs/v.3/20070208181761b00ea78c156375a0738c6d888e58b438eaeeae/fp-def.zip
Why make it harder to stay updated?
Rick

[ccsito]

{QUOTE-> Sooner or later, the Yugo haD to die. Why go after thE best protection but yet to fail the basic function of updating your OS.::) <-QUOTE}


BTW, I took a course on Operating Systems back in college before the PC revolution. Operating Systems, in and of themselves, do not need to be updated unless you wish to add new functionality or bug fixes. A third ulterior motive would be to force your users to fork over more money in order to stay current. :shifty:

[trjam]

I understand all ofthis, but this is the reality of commerce. I cant fault Microsoft for this, nor can you. That would be like saying that Ford should still warranty the Model T. It is just the way things are in life and you can holler all you want, but it is the truth.

[ellison64]

{QUOTE-> I received an email from Avira that they are discontinuing support for Windows 98 on June 30. It's getting more and more difficult to find anything that will work with that operating system. <-QUOTE}

I was under the impression that its just new program builds that you wont be able to get on 98SE,and that you would continue to get virus/malware definitions.Personally i wish theyd kept version 6 just for 98 (with a disclaimer of course) ,and provided sig updates for it.
ellison

[Mr2cents]

{QUOTE-> Well, I don't find the issue of Windows 9x support being dropped very shocking, *but* I noticed that some vendors (Microsoft, Symantec) are now supporting only Windows XP and upwards with the latest version of their software. Windows 2000 is left out there like a baby in the cold. Win2k is as vulnerable as XP is to the latest malware, and it is much of the same technology as what is there in XP. Then why do people drop support for Windows 2000? IMO, dropping support for Windows 2000 at this time is unacceptable. Vendors who do this should not be supported in any way. <-QUOTE}
Hi Firecat. Symantec or Norton still supports windows 2000, 98, and Me. However, you have to purchase the 2005 version which is still avalible on their website. Click Here (http://www.symantecstore.com/v2.0-img/operations/symantus/site/promo/pd/sidebysideus.htm) Then scroll down the page and click on Click here if you have an older version of windows. 2000, Me, and 98 users can purchase their product there.

You're correct, that 2007 version only supports xp. I have no idea why they stopped supporting windows 2000 in their 2007 version. If I'm not mistaken, Microsoft will continue to support windows 2000 for 2 more years. My guess is their probably having to use all their avalable resources to try and become compatible with vistaMe.

[ellison64]

{QUOTE-> I understand all ofthis, but this is the reality of commerce. I cant fault Microsoft for this, nor can you. That would be like saying that Ford should still warranty the Model T. It is just the way things are in life and you can holler all you want, but it is the truth. <-QUOTE}

I would imagine that there are millions of users worldwide still using pe XP OS.Is it that hard to just provide virus/malware sigs updates for those program's that worked happily on 98 through to XP?.If avira handnt made it so hard to stay with version 6 (auto updates etc) id still be using it.I wont be changing my OS to XP or vista because im happy with 98se.I may be odd but i find a great sense of satisfaction getting the right programs with the least resources,that works well.I still smile when the gfs sony vaio dual cpu 1gig ram takes longer to boot up and open folders than my humble p3 733.It does become like a well tuned machine .all that is asked for is a minimalists AV gui with up to date av defs.Is it really that hard to support?
ellison

[Don Pelotas]

{QUOTE-> Is it really that hard to support?
ellison <-QUOTE}
Not hard to support, but hard to justify keeping developer/supportteams etc on to develop for a smaller & smaller userpool, you will find it more and more difficult to find an effective AV supporting this OS (W98 ).

You can of course rant about it, but in the end anti-virus makers are busineses that need to see a profit from their investments.

I can guarantee you one thing, as long as there is a large enough profit to be made, the AV makers will continue to make software available for W98, however the end is near!............1-2 years perhaps if we are talking about top anti-viruses. :)

[ellison64]

{QUOTE-> Not hard to support, but hard to justify keeping developer/supportteams etc on to develop for a smaller & smaller userpool, you will find it more and more difficult to find an effective AV supporting this OS (W98 ).

You can of course rant about it, but in the end anti-virus makers are busineses that need to see a profit from their investments.

I can guarantee you one thing, as long as there is a large enough profit to be made, the AV makers will continue to make software available for W98, however the end is near!............1-2 years perhaps if we are talking about top anti-viruses. :) <-QUOTE}

Why is it any harder to provide sig updates for previous versions of an AV than for current versions?.Im not suggesting that vendors continually upgrade the engine(that would be silly to suggest),only that they could still provide signatures.Didnt kaspersky 4.5 still have sig updates provided (not sure if it still does?).If sigs can still be manually downloaded and used in avira version 6 ,then i really cant see why they still couldnt be auto updated using the v6 updater.Of course AV vendors are in the buisness of making money ,and if avira still provided autoupdates for version 6 ,theyd still be taking my money for yearly sig updates .
ellisn

[Don Pelotas]

{QUOTE-> Why is it any harder to provide sig updates for previous versions of an AV than for current versions?.Im not suggesting that vendors continually upgrade the engine(that would be silly to suggest),only that they could still provide signatures.Didnt kaspersky 4.5 still have sig updates provided (not sure if it still does?).If sigs can still be manually downloaded and used in avira version 6 ,then i really cant see why they still couldnt be auto updated using the v6 updater.Of course AV vendors are in the buisness of making money ,and if avira still provided autoupdates for version 6 ,theyd still be taking my money for yearly sig updates .
ellisn <-QUOTE}
Yes, i believe you, they would be making money out of you....................but would they make money out of enough users to sustain the support and believe me having 3-4-5 programms to support is more work than having just the 2 latest.

You can't just keep on releasing signatures to an old aging version because signatures are not just signatures which can be fetched by any version on the same server, there is simply more work in preparing this and with less and less W98 users...................

Btw. I absolutely hated Windows until XP arrived and only after 8-12 months when it had been developed a bit, W98 i hated, it constantly made me aware of it and it's many limitations in daily computing. Just my opinion of course.

P.s. Yes, there are still Kav 4.5 users with a key, but you can't actually buy a key for it anymore and it's being fased out as keys expire and there won't be any left in 08, it's the same for version 5.0 and i think they will make the same business decision like the rest of the AV vendors in the next year to discontinue support for W98, perhaps already in version 7.0 which is not that far away (this year), which will leave version 6.0 for W98....but for how long? :)

[ccsito]

A similar situation occurred with McAfee VirusScan on a windows98 PC. Their signature updates no longer worked on an earlier version of the programs. Their new development is now only targeted on Windows XP versions. So I was forced to stop using the program or update the OS. Since OS update was a non-feasible option economically on the old machine, I guess I will use whatever can run with Windows 98.

[dw2108]

I still say, if you're an avid 9x enthusiast using a Gateway, Dell or IBM PC, phone a supervisor of one of these PC manufacturers to get the right AV and antispyware software and most recent drivers. Like it or not, 9x shall be around for a VERY, VERY LONG TIME, making these OSs thorns in the flesh to many; there are a number of antibloatware advocate groups who have seen to this by beating Bill Gates in federal court several years running. He supplies critical 9x patches on CD to these groups via US Postal Service at his own expense.

Dave