Operating System

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!!

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.



"R" wrote in message ...
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!!

"Canus_Lupis" wrote in message
...
Win 98SE has trouble with anything over 256Mb of ram and doesn`t fully
understand DDR ram.

Am running a tri-boot 98SE/98SE/XP. 2.4 GHz / 512MB DDR. Nothig modified
in 98SE to make use of memory.

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.

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.

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.

Same goes for 98SE.





98SE does not understand hyper-thread technology.

"R" wrote in message ...
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!!

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





"R" wrote in message ...
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!!

On Thu, 6 May 2004 19:39:13 +1200, in alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus, "Tim"
wrote:

Hi,

Go with XP
[snip]

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

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.

[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://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.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

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:

Explain yourself (to me it sounds like you dont have a full understanding of
firewalls or software based firewalls)

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

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)

On Sun, 9 May 2004 02:54:26 +0100, in alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus,
"rstlne" wrote:

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:

Explain yourself (to me it sounds like you dont have a full understanding
of firewalls or software based firewalls)

[snip]

On the contrary, when you make statements like this:

ZoneAlarm/Symantic/(few others) Firewalls can do the job JUST AS GOOD as a
hardware router (that has a firewall)..
[snip]

you belie your own serious misunderstanding of the situation.

In the simplest possible terms... The whole point of a "firewall" -- even the
etymology of the term -- is to form an impenetrable barrier standing *between*
the threat and whatever it is you're trying to protect. The so-called
"software firewalls" you mention *cannot* do that, because (at least some
parts of) the target system is left directly facing (i.e., exposed to) the
threat.

Read the articles I cited earlier. In each case, they document methodologies
by which and incidents where these software pseudo-firewalls have been *shown*
to be about as robust as a tissue-paper screen. And of course, that list is
by no means exhaustive.

But beyond all of this, "Tim" had recommended going without *any* firewall,
which is just too silly for words.

--

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 wrote:
On Thu, 6 May 2004 19:39:13 +1200, in alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus,
"Tim" wrote:

Hi,

Go with XP
[snip]

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

****up? Oh, followup :-p Don't see it, sorry.

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.
[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.

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.

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://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

I don't think I'll bother reading them.

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


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
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

On Sun, 9 May 2004 12:36:07 +0100, in alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus, "Ben
Pope" wrote:

Jay T. Blocksom wrote:
On Thu, 6 May 2004 19:39:13 +1200, in alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus,
"Tim" wrote:

Hi,

Go with XP
[snip]

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

****up? Oh, followup :-p Don't see it, sorry.

[snip]

For some at-this-point-unknown reason, a semi-random handful of my articles
written over the past day or two didn't get posted when I thought they did.
Fixed now. The one I referred to above (Message-ID:
) was a direct f'up to the
OP's article which started this thread, and should be available well before
you see this.

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.

ALL cases? So you recommend that EVERYBODY purchases a hardware firewall?
[snip]

Yes, actually, I do (although it may be *somewhat* less pressing for dial-up
users, presuming they have their house in order in all other ways).

Are you in the industry?

[snip]

What industry? Computer industry? Yes. Firewall industry? No.

Seriously, for 99% of home users a software firewall is adequate.
[snip]

No way. Not even close.

They are
not trying to protect commercially sensitive data in most cases.
[snip]

That's not the point, nor is it the primary or most serious threat.

By *far*, the biggest current issue is spammers planting proxy trojans on
unprotected WinBoxes hung off "residential broadband" connections, then using
these compromised systems to spew their crap (including DDoS attacks, and
still more trojans/virii/worms) to the rest of the world. Several of the
currently widely circulating WinWorms were written by/for spammers for this
precise purpose.

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://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

I don't think I'll bother reading them.

[snip]

In which case, two clichés, taken together, seem startlingly on-point:

"Ignorance is curable with Education. Stupidity is forever."
- Thomas B. Barker

"Willful ignorance is indistinguishable from stupidity."
- Unknown

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.
[snip]

As I said above, that's not the point. And in point of fact, home users are
at *more* risk than most corporate/commercial users, these days.

Suggesting home users purchase, set up and use a hardware
firewall is ridiculous and unnecessary in almost all cases.

[snip]

Not at all. In fact, it should be considered S.O.P. Suitable (if, in some
cases, less than ideal) models are widely available for under $200, often less
than $100 -- certainly a modest investment compared to either the cost of the
system as a whole, or the permanent loss of one's 'net connection when you get
TOSed.

--

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.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"R" wrote in message ...
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!!


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..