Monroe

Rick ... Yes, that's what I also remember seeing after KernelEX is installed ... something about "compatibility" so I figured early on that might be my problem. I am going to go put the Ghost backup on and try Virtual PC 5.1.0.370 again. Will post information after I'm finished. I just hope I never had KernelEX installed on that machine as an earlier version. Then I will ask about KernelEX leftovers in the KernelEX thread. I may think twice about installing it on my computers from now on ... it does make a Win 98SE machine much nicer for additional software but it may have some drawbacks also. I just always assumed if you uninstalled it, it was gone ... maybe not the case. thanks ...

jaclaz, No, I have Win 98SE installed only on my machines ... I was using my oldest laptop, which I use as a testing machine for everything before I put something on my newer Win 98SE notebooks. I am going to read your links for any help. Rick, OK, when I first installed Virtual PC 5.1.0.370 on my test notebook I did have KernelEX installed. As I was trying to figure something out about that pop-up window, I thought about having KernelEX also installed on the notebook ... So I uninstalled KernelEX and also Virtual PC and ran every cleanup tool I have on the computer and deleted the Virtual PC folder and cleaned the registry. Then I reinstalled Virtual PC 5.1.0370 again and got the pop-up window about Win Application Compatability Mode Detected. I then uninstalled Virtual PC 5.1.0.370 and ran all the cleanup tools again and cleaned the registry. I then installed version 4.3.2 and still got the pop-up window. Do you think after removing KernelEX that there is something there somewhere? I have a Ghost backup that never had KernelEX installed so later today I may redo this computer with that backup. I will wait to see if you, jaclaz or anyone has any ideas. If there are some KernelEX leftovers around where would they be? ** I would like to add, that I Googled that "Win App Comp Mode" term along with "Windows 98SE" and could find nothing ... everything seem to deal with XP only. thanks ...

In another thread I was reading about Connectix Virtual PC v5.1.0.370. It is supposed to be the last version to work with Windows 98SE. I was able to find a trial version download using Google. It installed OK but when I went to run Virtual PC this window popped up: Windows Application Compatibility Mode Detected. Virtual PC cannot be run under Windows Application Compatibility Mode settings. Please turn off these settings before running Virtual PC again. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I then deleted that version and installed the trial version 4.3.2. I get the same pop-up window and can go no further. What exactly does that mean and how do I turn it off in Windows 98SE? ... or any ideas or suggestions? thanks ...

rainyd ... Yeah, I had all that in there but was not getting something right. I had the K-Lite Codec Pack with MP Classic also included. Well, maybe one day I'll fool around with it all again on my Win 98SE test computer. I'd like to know what I was messing up on. thanks ...

I was using Media Player Classic 6.4.9.1 for quite some time with Win 98SE and never had the problem that you are experiencing. I'm sure there has to be a setting there somewhere. I won't be much help for that, but in case you can't get it figured out then maybe this will be of some help. As I mentioned earlier, I was using MP Classic for several years for everything until I discovered XMPlay for audio cds and mp3 music. It played music 100% better than MPC. So I only used MPC for DVDs and flash videos until I came across VLC Media Player v0.8.6 .... I needed a player for mp4 videos and could never get MPC to play these ... never could figure out the settings. VLC Media Player played the mp4s right from the start and then I discovered it seem to play DVDs and flash video better than MPC ... at least I thought the video was better after doing a comparison. It might just be my imagination but I thought the picture was just a little sharper with the VLC Media Player. XMPlay gave me better sound and VLC MP gave me a better picture. So if you can't figure out the MPC problem you might want to check out the others that I have mentioned. ** Note: As I was typing this I just discovered that a newer version of XMPlay has come out ... Dec 22, 2009. I am not sure about it still working with Win 98SE. I will download it and check it out later today or if anyone has already done so, please let us know. I know the last version 3.4.2.1 does work. The new version is 3.5 and there may be a good chance it will still work with Win 98SE. *** The new version 3.5 works with Win 98SE and may sound even better when all the settings (equalizer and such) are finalized. VLC Media Player 0.8.6 for Windows 98SE http://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-windows.html Windows 95/98/Me VLC 0.8.6 is the latest release with support for this operating system. Please note that these versions of Windows are not officially supported. No VideoLAN developer uses any of these systems, which makes them hard to support. VLC should mostly work with them, but some incompatibilities might appear. You might need to download The Microsoft Layer for Unicode on Windows 95/98/Me Systems. The two MSLU files need to be put in the C:\Windows\System\ folder. Warning: The following package is not up-to-date with the latest official version of the software. When using an out-of-date version, you may encounter important bugs or security holes. Windows self-extracting package (9MB) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- XMPlay 3.4.2.1 (old) ... New (3.5) http://www.un4seen.com/ HTH ...

CharlotteTheHarlot ... thanks for the info on just where to look for the extra Find entries. I located and deleted the "people" and "viruses" entry in the registry. [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\FindExtensions\Static\ In the Static area I found "avg7find" which was the "viruses" entry on the one computer. I deleted it along with the "people" entry. Everything is OK and clean on all computers ... thanks again. ** Some additional info on removing two other items from the Start Menu - Settings key. I also wanted to remove the "Windows Update" and "Active Desktop" items from within the Settings key. If anyone else also would like to do that here are the directions to do so. I found these instructions on the internet and can say they do work ... on some of my computers there was no "Explorer" folder so I had to create one. ------------------------------------------- Removing the Windows Update Utility To remove the Windows Update from the Start menu, simply right-click the utility and select delete. This file is just a shortcut, so you can replace it if necessary. Removing the other occurrences is not so easy. It requires a change in the registry. Obviously, whenever you’re going to make any changes within the registry, it’s always a good idea to back up the registry before you begin. If you’ve just turned your system on for the first time that day, the registry has already been backed up automatically. If you’re unsure of the last backup and you want to get a recent copy of the registry, go to the Run command under the Start menu and type ScanRegw/Backup. This action will make a backup of the registry, and that copy will replace the oldest backup file in the Sysbckup folder under the Windows directory. To remove the Windows Update utility shortcut from the Settings folder under the Start menu, you’ll need to access the registry. In the Run command box under the Start menu, type Regedit. When the registry opens, follow this path: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Policies\Explorer. Once you are in the Explorer folder, you’ll need to add a DWORD value. Click on the edit menu at the top of the window, highlight New, and choose DWORD value at the bottom. Now, type the following into the highlighted area: NoWindowsUpdate Press [Enter] and double-click the DWORD value. Set the data value to 1. You can leave the base setting at Hex for the numerical value. Now, you should reboot the PC so that the change can take effect. When Windows 98 comes back up, the Windows Update utility will no longer exist in the Settings folder. To remove the check box for the Windows Update Wizard from the Update Device Driver Wizard, you must use the same path as above in your registry. This time, however, the DWORD value needs to be: NoDevMgrUpdate You should set the value to 1 for this solution, too, but you can leave the base as Hex. This change will take effect immediately, without a reboot of the system. If you ever want to reset the Windows Update utility back to its original locations in the Settings folder and the Update Device Driver Wizard, you can change the value of the DWORD from 1 back to 0. You also can return the Windows Update to your Start menu by creating a new shortcut to the Wupdmgr.exe file that’s located in the Windows folder. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Remove Active Desktop From Settings in the Start Menu Windows 98/Me To remove the Active Desktop utility shortcut from the Settings folder under the Start menu, you’ll need to access the registry. In the Run command box under the Start menu, type Regedit. When the registry opens, follow this path: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Policies\Explorer Once you are in the Explorer folder, you’ll need to add a DWORD value. Click on the edit menu at the top of the window, highlight New and choose DWORD value at the bottom. Now, type the following into the highlighted area: NoSetActiveDesktop Press [Enter] and double-click the DWORD value. Set the data value to 1. You can leave the base setting at Hex for the numerical value. Now, you should reboot the PC so that the change can take effect. When Windows 98 comes back up, the Active Desktop utility will no longer exist in the Settings folder.

CharlotteTheHarlot ... thanks for the info on a fresh Windows 98SE install and what everything should look like, since the two computers match up. I only have the "viruses" thing showing up on one computer. The "people" thing shows up on three computers so that seems like it must be normal on a fresh install. Why it didn't show up on one computer, a mystery ... but I have some nice information to work with, thanks. I will be a little busy but will try to get on this over the next week. I forget which computer has the "viruses" thing on it. Like I mentioned earlier, I try to keep all the computers pretty much the same, all updates and basic software programs ... some software I only put on maybe two computers ... the ones that I use every day, I don't need to have every program on every computer. So they should all be very similar from the start but something seems to have changed along the way.

Fredledingue , CharlotteTheHarlot .... thanks for the info. I was just looking for some input as to where to start looking to investigate those couple entries. I looked in the registry, using your guide but didn't find anything on one computer but I will look on another computer later today. I am wondering if others with their Win 98SE setup have anything similar concerning those extra entries. I'd like to know exactly what entries should be there when you click on the "Find" button after doing a fresh install. If anyone has just done a fresh install of Windows 98SE or knows for sure what items should be there when clicking on the "Find" button, I'd appreciate that info. I will look some more in the registry for that "viruses" and "people" entry. thanks.

I have four notebook computers with Windows 98SE installed and I just noticed a few days ago that several are different in this one area. I can't figure out why they are all different since I installed, update and keep them all pretty much the same. In the Start Menu when I click on "Find" I have these choices on one computer: Find: Files or Folder Computer on the Internet viruses people On another computer I have the same listing except for "viruses", on another computer I have just the first three listings, no "viruses" and "people" listing. How has this happened and how can I fix (delete) the "on the Internet", "viruses" and "people" listings? I only use the "Find" button to locate Files or Folders anyway. Just would like to "tidy" this Find button thing up, if I can. ... "on the Internet" could stay I guess, that may come from the "original" install but where did that "viruses" and "people" listing come from? thanks ...

jaclaz ... thanks for all the info and links in your message. I will read each one today. I have never heard of "offline defragmentation" so I will also check that out.

Like most everybody today I have come to rely on quick backups of various programs using several USB Flash Drives. I have various sizes ... 4 GB, 2 GB and smaller. The smaller sizes are older and as the prices dropped on larger flash drives I bought the 2 and 4 GB size. I haven't gone any higher in size since I didn't want to get "lazy" and just have so much GB space available that I totally rely on the flash drive never failing. As it is now, I load so many things on a flash drive and then take time every so often to burn most everything to a CD for a permanent save. Then I delete what was burned from the flash drive and start all over again till the flash drive fills up again. I was curious about whether a flash drive should ever be defragged and hit the Google search trail today. I came across this article indicating that flash drives should never be defragged and a related article, Can a USB thumbdrive "wear out"? ... I am wondering what others from this forum have to say on the subject or are you pretty much in agreement with the "never defrag a flash drive" statement? I do remember there was talk that computers in the future would probably have flash memory instead of a spinning hard drive. Not sure if that is happening yet ... the small Net Books may have the flash memory since they are so small but I'm not sure about that. I guess we all expect a flash drive to die some day but I would hate to have a really large flash drive loaded with hard to replace files. Just curious for any input from you guys who understand all this better than myself. Having older computers with Windows 98SE and smaller hard drives (40 GB) compared to the large hard drives of today, I really like the speed and convenience of a flash drive and being able to transfer things between computers. thanks ... From the first article: You've hit one nail squarely on the head: flash devices (or any "solid state" devices) don't gain a performance benefit from being defragmented. But in reality things get worse. Much, much worse. You should never defragment a flash drive. If you're regularly defragging a flash drive, you're adding thousands upon thousands of write operations each time you do so. Whatever the expected lifespan of the device, you could easily be cutting it in half or worse. Should I defragment my USB Flash drive? http://ask-leo.com/should_i_defragment_my_...lash_drive.html Can a USB thumbdrive "wear out"? http://ask-leo.com/can_a_usb_thumbdrive_wear_out.html

wsxedcrfv ... on the Acid2 Test, I pretty much see the same thing you see. The face just doesn't quite come together. That's with the K-Meleon browser. If I use IE6, it's all jumbled and bright colors. ... Acid2 Browser Test link: http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/#content-main

Thanks cluberti ... no, not too much information at all, thanks for taking the time to explain things. The browser information is a little more clear to me now, maybe others also. I am currently using K-Meleon 1.5.3 and I did get up to a 37/100 reading just now. It was 32/100 earlier today. I am not overly concerned with the low figures, the KM browser does everything I need a browser to do. I'm satisfied with it at this time. It was just an article that I came across this morning and I didn't completely understand some of it. It was all new stuff to me.

Thanks for the input ... I still have IE 6 on my computers, in case it's needed somewhere ... but I am now using K-Meleon as my main browser, I only get a 31-32 out of 100 on the Acid3 Test site. Does the fact that I am using Win 98SE as my OS helping to give me a lower reading on the test? I am certainly no where near 100% as the other browsers are reporting. ... I also use Proxomitron and I did the test with it active and then with it "by-passed", pretty much the same figures either way. thanks ...

Just came across this article dealing with browsers in yesterday's The Washington Post (12/02/2009) .... It talks about a test called The Acid3 Test that browsers should pass but all IE browsers fail. I will post a link here to the article ... would be nice for some input from you guys who might understand all this a lot better than myself ... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?nav=hcmodule and The Acid3 Test site ..... http://acid3.acidtests.org/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As Google Backs Away From A Plug-in, Microsoft Rushes Towards One MG Siegler TechCrunch.com Wednesday, December 2, 2009; 1:16 PM Today at their Bing Fall Release event, Microsoft showed off some nice updates to their search engine, including further information about how the much anticipated Twitter and Facebook data integration will work. But by far the most interesting thing they showed was the new beta version of Bing Maps. While it looked very nice, the real reason why it was so interesting is what it requires: Silverlight. This news comes just days after Google's revelation (thanks, in part, to our story on the upcoming Chrome for Mac beta) that they were backing away from supporting Gears in the future, in favor of HTML5. Gears is the software that Google created to allow users to use their applications while not connected to the web. But it's also a plug-in (for all browsers except Google's own Chrome for the PC). This is a big barrier to entry for many users. And it's something that creates problems developing apps around it if say, a user doesn't have Gears installed. So it's good to see Google step away from a plug-in even if it's no longer proprietary (originally called "Google Gears," they have since open-sourced it). And it makes what Microsoft is doing even more frustrating. With Silverlight, Microsoft continues to make it clear that they intend to use this web application framework, which they developed, to power much of what they are doing on the web going forward. Again, the problem here is that not only does Microsoft control this, but it requires a plug-in to use. Sure, they've made the plug-in available to most browsers, including the ones by rivals Google and Apple, but it's still a plug-in. It's something that's going to stop everyone from seeing the same web no matter which browser they use. This has of course long been an issue with Microsoft. Despite a clear shift within the rest of the industry toward web standards, Microsoft long played difficult with its Internet Explorer browser. They could afford to, and maybe you could even argue that it was in their interest to, because they were so dominant. It was only when a standards-based browser, Mozilla's Firefox, started biting off significant chunks of IE's market share that Microsoft shifted their position to play more nicely with standards. But even today, they still don't play that nicely. As you can see in this video about IE9, they are still nowhere near passing the Acid3 browser test. Safari, Opera, and Chrome have all now achieved 100/100 scores on the test. Firefox has gotten a 96/100. IE? Well IE8 (the current version) gets a 20/100. And IE9, which isn't out yet, only gets a 32/100. You can try to argue (which Microsoft does) that much of the test is meaningless to everyday browsing, but the fact remains that all its major competitors are able to pass it or are on the verge of passing it. A humorous aside about the video linked to above is that while it's a talk about Microsoft's commitments to standards and interoperability with IE9, you need Silverlight to play it. When asked about Microsoft's shift towards requiring Silverlight for applications such as the new Bing Maps, officials from the company basically stated that they're doing it because they had to. AJAX, the technology that powers many of the other web apps in existance today, simply isn't powerful enough to do what they want, they reason ? continuing on that it's not about using a proprietary technology, but using the best technology out there. The problem with this once again goes back to the idea of a unified web. If some web apps require plug-ins, the web is not going to be as seamless as it should be. And that's why HTML5 is potentially so interesting. Because advanced components such as web video, which is now mainly powered by Adobe's Flash plug-in, could be handled natively within the browser. (Here's an example of a YouTube video rendered only with HTML5.) Can Silverlight allow for more powerful web applications than standard web technology? Probably. Does the new Bing Maps look cool with seamless transitions between a map view and on-the-street city view? Yes. But another issue is: Do we really need that? How often are you doing to need (or want) to zoom around a city with 3D buildings when you really just want to look up an address? It's a neat feature, just as it is within Google Street View or Google Earth, but it's not really all that practical. The majority of location searches I do are on my phone where I simply want to get an address as fast as possible. I actually just had to double check if the iPhone has Street View built-in (it does) because I never, ever use that feature. Nor do I ever really use it on the desktop. It's useful for some select cases, like maybe if you're buying a house and want to get a look at the neighborhood. But otherwise, it's just a nifty feature to demo ? which Microsoft did extensively today. Again, I'm not saying it's not cool. It is. But I'm not sure it's worth trading the possibility of a unified web for. In fact, I know it's not. Sadly, with Microsoft, the problem is only going to get worse, and not better. They've made that very clear.

I found a post (02/16/2009) from MDGx in the "WPI Classic For Legacy OS'es" topic in the Windows 98SE board. He gives some thoughts on .NET Framework v2 in the form of a rant dealing with some software ... a little insight on .NET Framework. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [rant] Paint.NET is just another project by a programmer who wants really bad to be noticed and get a job with M$, showing off the features of NET framework. This kind of graphics editor/viewer program can very well be programmed in C++, MFC or even VB or Borland [depending on what features you want], there is no need for any1 to install 20+ MB of NET APIs [and a load of bug-fixes afterwards] just to run Paint.NET and eventually a handful of other NET programs. One can even use Sun's Java [free, open source] to program platform independent complex software, take for example OpenOffice and Vuze [formerly known as Azureus], also free(ware). As far as graphics editors/viewers are concerned, please compare with Irfan View, the best one around [among free(ware) anyway]. This only happens because M$ chose NET as *the* solution for the "better" programming of tomorrow, at the expense of loading more unnecessary "bloat" upon users' computers. BTW: Did you notice how long it takes to install NET 2.0 on Win98 SE [1.4 GHz P3 CPU]? At least 5 minutes... and guess why? because of bazillion of redundant checks, folders, files [and temporary install folders + files] and registry entries. [/rant] About Nero: I'm using Nero 7 [in XP SP3 = came with a DVD burner I bought], and as far as I'm concerned, it is the best CD/DVD burning tool around [commercial sad.gif]. Haven't tried newer builds. And you're right, no need to spend money on another burner program, there are so many free(ware) out there. Best wishes. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I really don't know about .NET Framework v1.1 ... I decided to install v1.1 only and forget about v2 ... unless I actually heard something later on that v2 should also be installed. As I said before, I've only had a couple of software programs actually requiring v2 to be installed ... but I was able to search and find other programs that were just as good. Maybe someone who really knows the workings of Win 98SE can clear all this up, once and for all. Is .NET Framework v2 ( or .NET Framework v1.1, for that matter) really needed on Win 98SE?

You are asking an interesting question that I have wondered about for some time ... should .Net Framework v2 be installed on a Windows 98SE machine? I have .Net Framework v1.1 installed on my machines but I didn't see the need for installing v2. I have only run into software, maybe twice, that required .Net Framework v2 to be installed. I would just look around for another software program that was close or even better, that didn't require the v2 of .Net Framework. Like you said, the file is really large and I just wasn't crazy about the idea of putting those files on my 98SE machine. I have the download saved on a CD, just in case one day I might need it for something or would want to fool around with it. I have a Ghost backup of all my machines so I could easily return to just having .Net Framework v1.1 installed, if I decided v2 wasn't working right or not really necessary. I wanted to start a separate thread about whether v2 really needs to be installed on a Windows 98SE ... maybe with your question we can get some good answers and facts to both.

Well, a simple solution was found and my computer now says I have Windows 98 with IE 6 at the test web sites or if I need it to say Windows 98 for some reason. I have Proxomitron on my computer for web filtering ... I use the Sidki Filter Set and just go with whatever he has in the set. After a lot of help from dencorso and the User Agent downloads he has provided ... I was ready to call it a night and then I thought about Proxomitron and maybe checking the "Bypass" mode and then test at those web sites. There it was .... Windows 98 and IE 6 ... Site 01 .... Browser IE 6.0 ->Detail run on Windows 98 Compare to other services: UA profiler IE 6.0 Browser Capabilities Project IE 6.0 run on Win98 UserAgentString.com Browser: Internet Explorer 6.0 run on Windows 98 WURFL Palm run on Palm OS Site 02 ... Browser Identification This is the identification string sent by the browser to the server: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; FDM) From this string the following informations were extracted: browser_name_regex: ^mozilla/4\.0 (compatible; msie 6\.0; .*windows 98.*).*$ browser_name_pattern: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; *Windows 98*)* parent: IE 6.0 platform: Win98 browser: IE version: 6.0 majorver: 6 win32: YES frames: YES iframes: YES So the very first User Agent download set supplied by dencorso in July 2009 should work for everything. I have tried it today ... just have to remember to check Bypass in Proxomitron if you might be using the Sidki Filter Set. I have no idea if the "default" set by Scott Lemon would also change the OS id at a web site. We got a real good Super Moderator here, dencorso, for helping forum people out. He went more than an extra mile! *** dencorso has since informed me that the 2nd User Agent update in Post # 148 is the better one to use. thanks, duffy98

dencorso, Well, I just tried the 98-IE6 download and I am still getting XP as my OS. It does show IE6 ... that always changes between IE6 and IE7, just not the OS. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) Browser IE 6.0 ->Detail run on Windows XP ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I replied to your pm ... thanks.

dencorso, CharlesF, anyone ... those registry settings that you (CharlesF) supplied in your last post ... the ones that will make a browser show Win 98SE or Win 98 with IE 6 ... I am not exactly sure what to do with them. Do they need to be manually changed each time I might want to show Win 98Se - IE 6 ... that will take forever, it seems, to switch back to Win 98. dencorso, did you read the top part of the last post from CharlesF, in reference to you. I was wondering if you came up with any new ideas why the 98 - IE 6 registry fix isn't working. Is it possible to put the registry fix that CharlesF supplied in his last post into one of those registry fixes that you make. I do not know how you make those little quick registry change files. thanks ....

CharlesF ... Thanks for the information ... I will try to work with it later today. I am able to see that IE 6 and IE 7 will change but the OS is always XP when I go to those web sites. thanks

BSPlayer v2.43 can be found at File Hippo .... several versions are there on the right side of the page. http://www.filehippo.com/download_bsplayer/

dencorso, From your last post ... "Check, please, what values does you registry have under HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion (there should be none, but for the inevitable "Default", and this should be empty)." Yes, I have everything showing just as you say it should be ... current version "default" says: (value not set). Ok, thanks for the help and all the good posts ... duffy98

dencorso, Thanks for explaining how your default user agent works. However, when I go to certain sites that tell you what OS and browser you are using, I keep getting XP as my OS. I am not sure why this is happening ... before I posted my last message I did research on Google what a Win 98 - IE 6 user agent should be and how to install it manually with regedit. Site 01 : http://www.mg55.net/browser Site 02 : http://tdb.rpc1.org/ ...... go all the way to the very bottom of the web page and there is a box telling you what OS is on your machine. Site 03 : http://www.richmcgrew.com/id.html Site 04 : http://www.labinacell.ac.uk/people/dan/browser.php Site 05 : http://kluge.in-chemnitz.de/tools/browser.php I downloaded and installed the Win 98 user agent in your new User Agent Update package and I am still getting XP as my OS when I go to the first 2 sites. I am not sure about KernelEX. I just installed it on one of my computers in the last 2 weeks, not sure if it was this one or not. However, I was working with a manual Win 98 - IE 6 User Agent before that and still getting XP as my OS. The IE 7 does change back to IE 6 but the OS stays at XP. I have two other computers that I will try your download out on. Thanks again for the download and the addition of the Win 98 User Agent string. Maybe some others could see what those first two sites read as their OS. If you have 98 or 98SE and they tell you that then I'd like to know. *** I just used the test page in your last message ... I also get XP there as my OS ... with IE 6. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) Browser IE 6.0 ->Detail run on Windows XP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- thanks, duffy98