BenoitRen

Try checking the option that makes it not restart but apply it immediately.

I don't understand this. An uninstall feature? You can already uninstall the thing from Add/Remove Programs. Isn't that good enough? Everything should be able to get uninstalled that way.

Awesome! Congratulations to the author. I hope he'll be able to provide a fix for Windows 95's files as well (both version 4.00.950, unless those got updates somewhere?). I have a question, though. It's my understanding that the parsing happens in user.exe, and that the way to fix the vulnerabilities is to check the size of what user32.dll returns. So why does user32.dll need patching? I don't mean to criticise, I just want to learn.

He is? That's nice of him (even though I personally don't use it). That scanner shouldn't be necessary. Use a good e-mail client, and only open attachments from people/entities you know. Even if you open a bad attachment, I think AVG should detect that it's a virus/worm/trojan horse. That's what the shield is for after all.

Maybe try turning off Active Desktop? It's a bad idea horribly executed anyway. Hah! MS-DOS IS installed! It's just hidden.

Objection! Not Win95 OSR 2 users that never installed the desktop update.!

This is neat! Works fine on Windows 95 with Pentium II 233 Mhz and 160 MB of RAM. Who's said you had to have a state-of-the-art PC for such effects?

No. Websites shouldn't be able to access your files. However, a program that would connect to a website to verify if you have all the updates is a good idea.

I didn't insult you at all.

What an intelligent and thought-provoking post, eidenk.

Yup, that's the driver I use for my USB stick! Nathan Lineback is the webmaster of that site.

Plain curiosity. Now get off my back.

Backed off? I haven't. The update still integrates IE, and solely for that, I wouldn't recommend it.

Obviously, I do.

OEM = OSR. So is it OSR1 or OSR2?

More like sued Connectix because of their PSX emulator.

Sure, but back in the day when I had *shudder* Win98 FE on my PC thanks to a lousy repair person, I didn't find it. Less space for my task buttons. Don't see what's wrong with the shortcuts being on the desktop instead, or even in the Start menu, where they can be organised. I don't like that. Before you know it, you have drag&dropped something in it. I like that if you misclick, you can hold the mouse button down when you realise it, and release it where you preferred to click.

No. A browser has no business being integrated to my desktop. Note that you didn't add IMHO to your claim that this desktop update must be installed either. Through hacking, yes. At least in Win98, but I have reason to believe that IE4's desktop update is the same stuff crammed into it. That would never have existed if IE wasn't integrated into the shell. Yes, you did. But that doesn't mean you didn't make the claim you made in the first paragraph. Try using the system for a while. You probably tweaked it too, or haven't installed all the drivers. A standard Win95B installation takes at least 20 MB of RAM when you're done. Another elitist hater. Doesn't make for much credibility.

Which version? Retail? OSR1? OSR2?

Are USB drivers of the WDM standard by default?

This is so wrong. Refreshes many files... for what? IE integration! Which makes Win95 run much slower and consume more memory. Better UI? What better UI?! Browsing your hard drive as a website? Having a web page as your background? Having an IE icon on each window? Having webby Go and Favorites menus? This webby interfrace is a NIGHTMARE!

Abandonware is not open-source software, true, but then they wouldn't care if we'd open-source it.

As a user of Windows 95, I wish it was abandonware... Then we could open-source it.

But Offler is still talking as if Windows 95 never supported WDM. It does, with the new kernel installed by the USB updates! So there's WDM v1 (Win95, early Win98), WDM v2 (Win98 SE, Win2K), and WDM v3 (Win2K, WinXP), essentially?

Windows 98 doesn't work on multi-core CPUs. SATA HDDs are more trouble than they're worth.