Maurice discusses reasons for Microsoft extension of support for 98 and Millennium on Microsoft News Group
From: "MEB"
Newsgroups:
microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,alt.windows98
References: <eapfhlhXGHA.1228@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>
<443DB634.DD7E44D1@guy.com>
<8A79993A-CF2E-4AB6-B884-8B14E0C59D5F@microsoft.com>
<egzIy3lcGHA.5116@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>
<erqNeqncGHA.3952@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>
<44615EC4.6AE38021@Guy.com>
<uYgl5w#cGHA.4072@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>
<#cHrH7#cGHA.3344@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>
<uoN$JK$cGHA.4148@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>
<4461FD6E.9F0CC025@Guy.com>
<0de46257roqe0gfui22gijp06jvgisiass@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition,
and WindowsMe
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 02:23:42 -0400
Lines: 110
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
MEB> Excuse me, or not..
The reason Microsoft supplied extended support for 98, Millennium, and IE 6 is purely commercial.. though originally due to the class action lawsuits Microsoft lost [see: http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ref/gen/MS_ruling.pdf for one of those rulings].
Those who continue to claim it was for customer satisfaction
are either blind or ignorant of the economics involved.
IE 6 came with the default search engine as Microsoft at a time
when Microsoft wasn't even considered a player in that market..
through that default setting, users were and are directed to
Microsoft and MSN whereupon Microsoft products, advertising, and
other paid advertising can be displayed. Moreover, companies
wishing to advertise, noting the rising search engine market
share gained by Microsoft, increased their advertising on
Microsoft, thereby increasing Microsoft's revenue.
Microsoft isn't stupid nor will it pass up any opportunity to
make a buck,, look at the game machines, OS for the hand helds,
and their own versions of other gizmos and gimmicks now on the
market. ADVERTISING revenue can be massive income, but market
dominance is a sure winner..
Through the IE 6 browser, which was never ported to 98 or
Millennium, but "shoe horned in", and extended support for 98 and
Millennium, Microsoft could:
1. appear to comply with the rulings against it regarding the
Sherman Act [anti-trust];
2. appear to be concerned with it's users affected by it's
unlawful activities;
3. appear to produce a cross-platform browser, at a time when
Netscape, Opera, and others were increasing in usage;
4. appear to be opening it's OSs to outside/second and third
party programmers and software producers;
4. and direct these users and new users to it's newer OSs, while
continuing to "suggest" it's OS be installed on consumer/home
units for sale by manufacturers.
Appearances can, and generally are deceiving. All this produced
several billion dollars in revenue... Microsoft neither spent or
lost anything by the extensions, when compared to the revenue
produced by those extensions..
Just as the new "live" MSN will be the "pipe" directly into users computers,, with exactly and only what MSN/Microsoft wishes to be there.. kind of like AOL has always done, Google and Yahoo now do; all making up the minds of their users, leading them to the "Kool-Aid"..
Moreover, all the supposed new "glitter" being used on the Internet is neither necessary or condusive to "safe" usage.. ALL produce inherent exploitable security holes. For the advertiser and marketer, however, they are the "eye candy", the not so subliminal ploy of future marketing..
As for the browser being a necessary integral part of the OS as in XP,, ah yeah, sure, I'm brain-dead..
"cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)"
<cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org> wrote in message
news:0de46257roqe0gfui22gijp06jvgisiass@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 10 May 2006 10:49:18 -0400, 98 Guy
<98@Guy.com> wrote:
> >Dan wrote:
>
> >> I wonder if current users of Windows 98, 98SE and
Me will
> >> decide it is time to switch to Linux or Apple after
July 11,
> >> 2006 or after another critical security update hits
98,
> >> 98SE and Me after the expiration date.
>
> The latter is a non-sequiter. No more support, therefore no
more
> critical updates after expiration date. More to the point,
Win9x
> doesn't get attacked as much; it was designed as a
stand-alone OS,
> whereas NT was designed to be a "network client" and thus
has far more
> risk surfaces exposed to the "it's just another network"
Internet.
>
> >Much more likely is not a vulnerability discovered in
any core files
> >of 98/ME but instead something pertaining directly to
IE6.
>
> >In which case, when a patch is issued for 2K/XP, would
not the same
> >patch be applicable to 98/ME ?
>
> Probably not, for reasons I'll go into below.
>
> >Isin't IE6 an example of an application program
>
> ...it should be, but no...
>
> >that is both OLD and COMMON to basically all flavors of
Windoze?
>
> IE6 ships with XP only, cannot be installed on any Win95xx,
and has
> significant and pervasive flaws when installed on Win9x as
per...
>
> http://cquirke.mvps.org/bexp1.htm
>
> The problem is that whereas something as edge-facing as a
web browser
> (now mutated into generic online content browser) *should*
be isolated
> and amputate-able as a separate application, it is welded
into the OS.
>
> It became increasingly difficult maintaining one IE to run
on both
> Win9x and XP, and the attempt was abandoned with XP SP2 (IE
6 SP2 does
> not exist as a separate IE download, and will never run on
any OS
> other than XP as a result).
>
> Future IE versions are certain not to run on Win9x either
;-)
>
> >As such, how much of its basic code is common to Win9x
and
> >the various versions of NT ?
>
> As of XP SP2, the question no longer arises, given the
above.
>
>
> >-- Risk Management is the clue that asks:
> "Why do I keep open buckets of petrol next to all the
> ashtrays in the lounge, when I don't even have a car?"
> >----------------------- ------ ---- --- -- - - - -