Ron - Kodak guy

pjp wrote:
> Just bought a C743 and got it home before noticing box says Windows 2000 SP4
> & XP. NO 98SE etc.
>
> Is that correct?
>
> If so then I guess I have to decide if spending the money on XP to upgrade
> my daughter's pc (PIII-733Mz-256Ram) is worth it given my inclination is to
> just return the camera instead and buy another product that does support
> 98SE still. Geez, XP will cost more than the camera!!!
>
> Truthful Yes/No answer please appreciated.
>
>
You don't need any particular version of OS to use the camera. ONLY to
use the current version of EasyShare Photo Software (which isn't
necessary, or particularly good).
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

Roy G wrote:
> "pjp" <pjpoirier_is_located_at_.DeleteThis@_hotmail_._com> wrote in message
> news:MIEih.35961$cz.530665@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>> Just bought a C743 and got it home before noticing box says Windows 2000
>> SP4
>> & XP. NO 98SE etc.
>>
>> Is that correct?
>>
>> If so then I guess I have to decide if spending the money on XP to upgrade
>> my daughter's pc (PIII-733Mz-256Ram) is worth it given my inclination is
>> to
>> just return the camera instead and buy another product that does support
>> 98SE still. Geez, XP will cost more than the camera!!!
>>
>> Truthful Yes/No answer please appreciated.
>>
>>
>
> Update your operating system to XP.
>
> Windows 98 is obsolete and is a total pain in the arse to work with compared
> to XP.
>
> It is almost impossible to buy any hardware which you can be sure will work
> with 98.
>
> You might just be able to find a card reader which can be persuaded to work
> with 98, and that will be almost the only way you will be able to download
> photos from any Camera to your computer system.
>
> Get into the 21st Century, it is now almost 6 years old.
>
> Roy G
>
>
>
While I agree that Win98 is far past its use life, it is NOT necessary
(or advisable) to upgrade such an old, and underpowered machine to
WinXP. It would be throwing good money after bad. In either case, it
has NOTHING to do with the camera, which will work just find with Win98
and a card reader (should he be able to find a Win98 compatible one).
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

pjp wrote:
> "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl RemoveThis @gol.com> wrote in message
> news:emf7nv$4tn$1@nnrp.gol.com...
>> "pjp" <pjpoirier_is_located_at_ RemoveThis @_hotmail_._com> wrote:
>>
>>> Just bought a C743 and got it home before noticing box says Windows 2000
>>> SP4
>>> & XP. NO 98SE etc.
>>>
>>> Is that correct?
>>>
>>> If so then I guess I have to decide if spending the money on XP to
> upgrade
>>> my daughter's pc (PIII-733Mz-256Ram) is worth it given my inclination is
>>> to
>>> just return the camera instead and buy another product that does support
>>> 98SE still. Geez, XP will cost more than the camera!!!
>>>
>>> Truthful Yes/No answer please appreciated.
>> You should say thank you to Kodak. The Windows 95 series of OSes are as
> bad
>> as everything the Mac crazies say about them, and the NT series are as
> good
>> as everything the Mac crazies say about Unix. Same ugly Windows face, but
>> under the hood, completely different.
>>
>> Friends don't let friends use Windows 95/98/ME/SE
>>
>> David J. Littleboy
>> Tokyo, Japan
>>
>
> I'll say thanks to Kodak when they decide to throw in the OS for free that
> they demand be used.
>
> BS - I have all told 7 pc's networked in house. All can run XP but I only
> have it installed on one of them AND it's not the one that anyone uses to
> connect to the net. XP's as much if not more of a pain in the ass as any MS
> OS. BTW - and there's nothing I can do under XP I can't also do under 98SE
> that I've found to date (except not run products that basically demand XP).
>

OH? Recover from a locked up user where a program has seized 100% of
CPU time? How about running most of the current crop of software? How
about maintaining security? XP is a vastly improved OS over the earlier
ones from MS. It has its problems, but compared to Win9x version, it is
heaven.


> My attitude is 'bunch of moronic robots, we should be demanding MS fix their
> damn buggy software by redesigning it and providing it gratis to those of us
> suckers enough to believe their hype in the first place. Instead the add
> patch onto patch onto patch to mask/hide the flaws in their basic design
> then at some point call it a new version so they can do it all again'
>
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

ASAAR wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:23:19 GMT, pjp wrote:
>
>> I'll say thanks to Kodak when they decide to throw in the OS for free that
>> they demand be used.
>>
>> BS - I have all told 7 pc's networked in house. All can run XP but I only
>> have it installed on one of them AND it's not the one that anyone uses to
>> connect to the net. XP's as much if not more of a pain in the ass as any MS
>> OS. BTW - and there's nothing I can do under XP I can't also do under 98SE
>> that I've found to date (except not run products that basically demand XP).
>
> I'm now using XP but before that used Win95 while using several
> Canon and Fuji cameras. The photo software provided by both
> companies was installed and quickly forgotten. I suspect that
> Kodak's software is no better, and if so, there's absolutely no
> reason to worry about using the C743 with your daughter's PIII
> because it's not needed as long as her computer can accommodate a
> card reader. Win98SE has long been the "minimum requirement" for
> adding USB support to older computers. My Win95 computer didn't
> have USB ports but it had two working card readers. A slow
> parallel port based reader and a very fast SCSI based reader. While
> it's possible that some facet of Kodak's photo software might be
> needed, it's highly unlikely. If you keep the C743 and eventually
> find that the included software won't install or operate properly,
> I'm sure that the C743 will still work just as well without it.
>
I am sure everyone knows that I am a strong proponent of the Kodak line
of cameras for 'average users', but I a NOT a fan of their software,
which I find slow, cumbersome, and resource greedy. I would recommend a
card reader be used to transfer photos to the computer, and whatever
software the user likes best for further manipulation after the images
are on HD.
In short, the C743 (I have bought one for my wife), will work just as
well without a computer at all, as it will with the latest XP models.
If all else fails, you could take your cards to Sam's Club and get
prints for about $.11 each, or transfer the images to a CD one someone
else's XP machine.
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

Mike Russell wrote:
> "pjp" <pjpoirier_is_located_at_.TakeThisOut@_hotmail_._com> wrote in message
> news:MIEih.35961$cz.530665@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>> Just bought a C743 and got it home before noticing box says Windows 2000
>> SP4
>> & XP. NO 98SE etc.
>>
>> Is that correct?
>>
>> If so then I guess I have to decide if spending the money on XP to upgrade
>> my daughter's pc (PIII-733Mz-256Ram) is worth it given my inclination is
>> to
>> just return the camera instead and buy another product that does support
>> 98SE still. Geez, XP will cost more than the camera!!!
>>
>> Truthful Yes/No answer please appreciated.
>
> XP is not necessary. Get a USB card reader the supports Windows 98 and
> forget about the camera drivers. Possibly you may be able to use the other
> applications for editing images, etc, provided by Kodak.
>
> While applications that run on Windows XP can generally also run on Windows
> 98, drivers are another matter. Windows 98 (and 95) use a VxD based driver
> structure, while Windows 2000 and XP use NT-style DLL based drivers. There
> are also certain graphics operations, including direct support for ICC color
> profiles, new DirectX features, and other features that are absent in
> Windows 98. As more features like this begin to be used in applications,
> they will no longer work in Windows 98.
>
> Kodak, like many others, decided that the user base for 98 was too small to
> justify a separate code line. My guess is you'll find most camera vendors
> are shedding support for Windows 98. Heck, even Windows 2000 is seven years
> old.
>
> For now, get a USB card reader and you're golden.
Your information is out of date.
MANY new software programs will NOT run on Win9x machines as they use
support provided in the XP software family (NT/2000/XP) to avoid writing
the same routines in their software. Kodak EasyShare software (current
version) requires XP. However, this software has NOTHING to do with the
operation of the camera, or interpretation of the images made by it.
The camera firmware expects 'Pictbridge' protocol to transfer images to
the computer, which is probably not available on a Win9X machine, but a
card reader can read the flash cards (SD) used by the camera. Some of
the automatic email and album functions will be lost this way, but
nothing that impairs the satisfactory operation of the camera for making
pictures.
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

David J. Littleboy <davidjl.DeleteThis@gol.com> wrote:

> "Louise Bremner" <trap_for_junk_mail.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > David J. Littleboy <davidjl.DeleteThis@gol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Friends don't let friends use Windows 95/98/ME/SE
> >
> > Unfortunately, clients forced me to buy it, as the only way I could find
> > to produce files that their computers could read....
>
> What are you doing that requires Windows 95/98/ME/SE that can't be done on
> XP???

Converting files so that the clients using Win98J on NECs could read
them. And reading the floppies they were giving me.

After various experiments with various different software bits on my
Mac, I eventually decided the only way I could do that was to buy as
close to their setup as possible (for as cheaply as possible, of
course).

But since I haven't received work from them for a while, that box is
just another bit of junk now.

________________________________________________________________________
Louise Bremner (log at gol dot com)
If you want a reply by e-mail, don't write to my Yahoo address!
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

"pjp" <pjpoirier_is_located_at_ DeleteThis @_hotmail_._com> wrote in message
news:MIEih.35961$cz.530665@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> Just bought a C743 and got it home before noticing box says Windows 2000
> SP4
> & XP. NO 98SE etc.
>
> Is that correct?
>
> If so then I guess I have to decide if spending the money on XP to upgrade
> my daughter's pc (PIII-733Mz-256Ram) is worth it given my inclination is
> to
> just return the camera instead and buy another product that does support
> 98SE still. Geez, XP will cost more than the camera!!!
>
> Truthful Yes/No answer please appreciated.
>
>

I'll answer this as a person who has 98se computers at work and home, and as
someone who's used Kodak cameras.

Don't use the Kodak software. Use a card reader.

Consider using XP. Really I hated it, for many reasons and many of the same
reasons you do. But it handles pictures so much better than 98se that all
my picture work is done on an XP box now. There really is a difference.
Good programs for offloading and managing pictures like Adobe Photoshop
Album or Picasa probably only run on XP.

I was forced into XP. My old laptop was a win95, and it finally needed
replacing, and all that was available was XP. Then I got a miniDV
camcorder, then a DVD burner. Had a lot of fun, then got a "real" digital
camera a couple of years later. I use 98se as my main computer at work, and
still use my 98se at home for DTP and many other things, but not
photography.

Cameras that support 98se will haunt you in other ways. These are likely
older models. In digital photography older means slower, slower startup
speeds, longer shutter lag, longer waits between shots. Better to get or
keep a newer camera and just use the card reader.

Check the Sunday papers. Practically every week you can find an XP computer
with built-in card readers in front for $399 or less. Think of it as a
photography workstation. The pictures download so much faster, there really
is a difference. Get a KVM switch and you can switch between your regular
computer and your XP computer using the same keyboard, video monitor, and
mouse. KVM switches are under $20 on ebay. An if you're ever going to do
video, forget 98se.

Good Luck!
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

"David J. Littleboy" <davidjl.TakeThisOut@gol.com> wrote in message
news:emfceu$63v$1@nnrp.gol.com...
>
> "Louise Bremner" <trap_for_junk_mail.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > David J. Littleboy <davidjl.TakeThisOut@gol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Friends don't let friends use Windows 95/98/ME/SE
> >
> > Unfortunately, clients forced me to buy it, as the only way I could find
> > to produce files that their computers could read....
>
> What are you doing that requires Windows 95/98/ME/SE that can't be done on
> XP???
>

Any "older" software that accesses various IO ports comes to mind, e.g. even
old comm programs like Procomm will work in a window under 9X but won't
under NT/XP.

> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

There is still a bunch of military hardware that is stuck in the DOS win9x
configuration hardware era. Seems that the Mil spec processors were the
first problem, then special purpose ISA I/O cards that require drivers that
have no available source code (military didn't buy source), and, under the
new rules, cannot reverse engineer it.
So, the hardware is sort of stuck in the 386/486 era, untill funds are
available to redesign from the "ground up". Since almost all the funds are
expended on keeping things going in the mideast, there isn't a lot of money
to go around, so what is there is going for long term development of
politically "important" big dollar things.


"pjp" <pjpoirier_is_located_at_.TakeThisOut@_hotmail_._com> wrote in message
news:erMih.36127$cz.532552@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>
> "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl.TakeThisOut@gol.com> wrote in message
> news:emfceu$63v$1@nnrp.gol.com...
> >
> > "Louise Bremner" <trap_for_junk_mail.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > David J. Littleboy <davidjl.TakeThisOut@gol.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Friends don't let friends use Windows 95/98/ME/SE
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, clients forced me to buy it, as the only way I could
find
> > > to produce files that their computers could read....
> >
> > What are you doing that requires Windows 95/98/ME/SE that can't be done
on
> > XP???
> >
>
> Any "older" software that accesses various IO ports comes to mind, e.g.
even
> old comm programs like Procomm will work in a window under 9X but won't
> under NT/XP.
>
> > David J. Littleboy
> > Tokyo, Japan
> >
> >
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

pjp wrote:
> "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl.RemoveThis@gol.com> wrote in message
> news:emfceu$63v$1@nnrp.gol.com...
>> "Louise Bremner" <trap_for_junk_mail.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> David J. Littleboy <davidjl.RemoveThis@gol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Friends don't let friends use Windows 95/98/ME/SE
>>> Unfortunately, clients forced me to buy it, as the only way I could find
>>> to produce files that their computers could read....
>> What are you doing that requires Windows 95/98/ME/SE that can't be done on
>> XP???
>>
>
> Any "older" software that accesses various IO ports comes to mind, e.g. even
> old comm programs like Procomm will work in a window under 9X but won't
> under NT/XP.
>
>> David J. Littleboy
>> Tokyo, Japan
>>
>>
>
>
And there is nothing that will serve the same purpose? Such complaints
usually revolve around a person's unwillingness to learn to use new
software (or OS features). I used an old Windows program until recently
when the MCE stuff seemed to render it unable to access my scanner
software. I was comfortable using it, and hated to have to learn to use
a modern program, but now that I have, I find vastly more powerful features.
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

Current Linuxes run on that hardware although 512 MB RAM would be better.
Novell/SuSe 10 supports Kodak Digicams. Several photo editing tools
including The Gimp are included in both the download version
http://en.opensuse.org/Welcome_to_openSUSE.org and the commercial Novell
version. A new hard disk might make sense for dual operating systems.

"pjp" <pjpoirier_is_located_at_.RemoveThis@_hotmail_._com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:MIEih.35961$cz.530665@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> Just bought a C743 and got it home before noticing box says Windows 2000
> SP4
> & XP. NO 98SE etc.
>
> Is that correct?
>
> If so then I guess I have to decide if spending the money on XP to upgrade
> my daughter's pc (PIII-733Mz-256Ram) is worth it given my inclination is
> to
> just return the camera instead and buy another product that does support
> 98SE still. Geez, XP will cost more than the camera!!!
>
> Truthful Yes/No answer please appreciated.
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 01:00:32 GMT, trap_for_junk_mail DeleteThis @yahoo.com (Louise
Bremner) wrote:

>David J. Littleboy <davidjl DeleteThis @gol.com> wrote:
>
>> Friends don't let friends use Windows 95/98/ME/SE
>
>Unfortunately, clients forced me to buy it, as the only way I could find
>to produce files that their computers could read....

I learned that clients should never, ever, be friends. Friendship
clouds the client relationship, makes you want to treat your friends
differently from clients.
And experience shows that's never good.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy 

pjp wrote:
> I'll say thanks to Kodak when they decide to throw in the OS for free that
> they demand be used.

I'm with you there. No sense thanking them for making what money
they can, however honestly. Still, I'll thank them for Linux and
*BSD support. It's not as easy as it looks.

> BS - I have all told 7 pc's networked in house.

Hey, me too. And I live alone in a "Jr. One-bedroom" apartment.

> All can run XP but I only
> have it installed on one of them AND it's not the one that anyone uses to
> connect to the net.

That's not clear. Is that "one of them" the only one that can
connect to Internet sites, such as Google? Or do you mean that it
makes connections more directly, but others among your seven can
still reach the connected Internet?

> XP's as much if not more of a pain in the ass as any MS
> OS. BTW - and there's nothing I can do under XP I can't also do under 98SE
> that I've found to date (except not run products that basically demand XP).

XP does some things -- really important things -- than 98SE cannot.
I'm not a Microsoft fan. There's just no question that 98* is a relic.

> My attitude is 'bunch of moronic robots, we should be demanding MS fix their
> damn buggy software by redesigning it and providing it gratis to those of us
> suckers enough to believe their hype in the first place. Instead the add
> patch onto patch onto patch to mask/hide the flaws in their basic design
> then at some point call it a new version so they can do it all again'

I agree that Microsoft should fix those errors. Now let's face the
real world where your attitude and my agreement count for bupkis.

Linux rocks. BSD kicks ass. Ubuntu exemplifies how much the "free"
in "free software" can mean. Microsoft has bucks, and spends them
in some key areas to give its operating systems important advantages.


--
--Bryan
 >> Stay informed about: Ron - Kodak guy