Multibooter

Hi submix8c,I have attached a screenshot of the window which pops up when I click inside of Firefox on a .exe download link, for example http://web.archive.org/web/20061125031043/http://down5.flashget.com/fgf173.exe . If "FlashGot" is selected and I click on the Save File button (only greyed out in the screen shot), the link will be passed to Flashget and the Flashget Download window will pop up. If "Save File" is selected and I click on the Save File button, the Firefox download manager will make the download. The file downloaded with Flashget will have usually as Date Modified the date the file was modified/uploaded onto the server. The link here to the wayback machine is an exception, it gets a file with the current date, maybe because the .exe link points to a web page, not to a .exe, with the message: "Welcome to Wayback...Loading...http://down5.flashget.com/fgf173.exe... as close to the date: 3:10:43 Nov 25, 2006 as is available...", but the Flashget window pops up immediately after that. The file downloaded with the Firefox download manager (i.e. by selecting "Save File") has as Date Modified the date the file was downloaded. I prefer to download via Flashget because of the more informative file date and because in Flashget the actual download location is indicated. Downloading for free from file sharing servers usually works Ok with the download manager built into Firefox, but not with Flashget. When I click on a .exe file in Opera, the link is passed to Flashget and the Flashget window pops up right away, no intermediate window like under Firefox. To download with the download manager built into Opera I right-click on the download link -> Save to Download Folder

... but I really can't see why this would be true, or why you believe it.... Hi bphlptI'll give it a try, but I have to back up my system first, so it may take a little while. But I am still a little sceptical, the step from v1.72 to v1.73 was not just a version change, but a change from registered shareware to freeware [i have in my notes about v1.73: "change to already registered freeware"], with possibly quite different registry entries, so installing v1.73 on top of v1.72 may give interesting results. I looked into my archive, and the only good-looking version of v1.73 I have is the version with 3,069,001 bytes, from oldapps, which I had test-installed and rejected nearly 2 years ago. I have to look for the version both you and submix8c referred to (3,224,463 bytes), I have a lot different versions of v1.73 in my archive, but they are already extracted in folders, and I don't know the size ot their original .exe containers. P.S. I just got this version, thanks to the download date 22-Nov-2006 indicated by submix8c in his posting #33. It can be downloaded from: http://web.archive.org/web/20061125031043/http://down5.flashget.com/fgf173.exe download page is http://web.archive.org/web/20061125031043/http://www.amazesoft.com/en/download.htm The MD 5 checksum of this version of fgf173.exe is AA87B7C2B72228D50368248ACCF4EA37 The most recent file inside of fgf173.exe, when extracted with Uniextract, is jc_link.htm of 27-Oct-2006, so I called this version "Flashget v1.73 (27Oct2006)"

Hi submix8c,Thanks for the upload. Am I right too assume that you made that listing under WinXP? The folder and file dates have as year 4 digits, e.g. : CDSETUP.EXE EXE 1,833,984 6/8/1998 00:00 while under Win98 the years are usually displayed as 2 digits only? Did you make the successful download with Flashget v1.73 under WinXP or under Win98SE? The hours and minutes on your listing are 00:00, but that's not that important. Thanks again. My setup of Flashget is integrated not just with Firefox, but also with Opera, so it's probably a project to change from Flashget v1.72 to v1.73. I am using for the integration of Flashget into Opera a really ancient Opera plug-in, "Opera Plug-In for FlashGet v1.1" by Amazesoft of 12-Dec-2001, which was never intended to work with Opera v9.64 of 26-Feb-2009. I hate to disturb my working setup. I am using under Win98 also K-Meleon, but I was not able to integrate Flashget into K-Meleon, which uses its built-in download manager. I have not installed this ancient Flashget plug-in on my dual-core desktop which has IE 5.5 under Win98SE, because the "Opera Plug-In for FlashGet v1.1" may cause problems with IE 5.5, but not with IE 6.0, which I have installed on my 11-year-old-laptop.For Firefox I am using FlashGOt v1.2.2, I never got around to update, and when the FlashGot window comes up, I have the choice to download with Flashget or FlashGot. Flashget saves files and folders with server dates, Flashget doesn't, so I am using most of the time Flashget via FlashGot in Firefox. Eventually I will test whether the ancient "Opera Plug-In for FlashGet v1.1" [=click-catcher] would work with FlashGet v1.73, Firefox via FlashGot and Opera, under Win98SE and WinXP. This plug-in is a really nice little tool and is a major reason why I still use Flashget. It can be downloaded from the web archive at http://web.archive.org/web/20070320180400/http://www.amazesoft.com/npfg11.exe but again, is a headache to install properly. Here some info: http://web.archive.org/web/20061231013432/http://www.flashget.com/en/browser.htm

Uninstalling Flashget v1.72 is a major undertaking for me, because possibly "Opera Plug-In for FlashGet v1.1" and FlashGot [passes downloads in my setup from Firefox to FlashGet} may not work anymore. Everything works for me like a champ under various browsers, except for this FTP issue. No thanks, I got all the files downloaded Ok with FileZilla v3.5.3 under WinXP, I just want to get the FTP issue cleared up. It can exclude a hardware problem, e.g. router, because FileZilla v3.5.3 under WinXP worked fine on the same hardware.

I rejected these AZO DVDs because my burners couldn't produce good quality burns with them, as measured by Nero Speed Disk.I wouldn't buy that many DVD spindles, they age (not the spindles, the DVDs) and eventually they will be legacy media. I had bought several hundred blank 1.44MB floppy disks maybe 10 years ago, because they were cheap, most of them are still sitting in a box, until the next big cleanup.

I would speculate that the good batches go to Europe and the inferior batches go to the USA, where one can usually return bought items within 14 days, but not after that; to get a longer warranty, you have to buy an additional service contract. So writable DVD media sold in the US should work reliably for at least 14 days

Could someone confirm that FileZilla v2.2.22 works Ok under Win98SE? Under Win98SE I don't have KernelEx installed, Internet Explorer v6.0.2600.0000 is installed and I have used Portable FileZilla v2.2.22 (as quoted/suggested by bphlpt in posting #46). Could it be that some of the FTP functionality is related to the DLLs of Internet Explorer? David Karp, in his book "Windows Me Annoyances" states: "Windows Me and Windows 2000 appear to be the first versions of Windows to offer a File Transfer Protocol (FTP) that is GUI-based, instead of text (command-line) based" (p.8), so there may be differences between how FTP software works under Win98SE and WinME.@loblo: Did you repeat the download, e.g. within 30 minutes? Want struck me was that the 1st download attempt went nearly Ok, subsequent download attempts immediately after the 1st download produced miserable results. BTW, Beyond Compare v2.5.3 under Win98SE has been working on the download for over 12 hours and is currently about 2/3s finished. I have a cable modem connection. I had changed the time-out setting to 20 minutes, Beyond Compare apparently does not resume partial downloads and does not support parallel download threads. I have received the following messages by Beyond Compare up to now: Error copying AUTO2.IW: Read Timeout Error copying PROGRAM.Z: Read Timeout Error copying TUTORIAL.Z: Read Timeout Error copying NSPLAY.EXE: Read Timeout Error copying DRREN100.ASF: Read Timeout Error copying DRREN1MB.ASF: Read Timeout Error copying DIRE288.ASF: Socket Error # 10054 Connection reset by peer. Error copying AFRICAT1_96K44100S.ASF: Read Timeout Error copying STEM288.ASF: Read Timeout Error copying LOV1248.ASF: Read Timeout Error copying GETSTART.GIF: Read Timeout Error copying NETS0045.HTM: Read Timeout Error copying NETS0167.HTM: Read Timeout Error copying NETS0589.HTM: Read Timeout Error copying NETS0590.HTM: Read Timeout Error copying NM20RK.EXE: Read Timeout Error copying MSVBVM50.DL_: Read Timeout

This should not be a problem. There is an option for this, along the top menu bar click "Transfer" "Preserve timestamps of transferred files". Why this is not enabled as default I don't know. This setting works Ok with files dates, but not with folders dates. Beyond Compare, as an example, with regular copying just from HDD to HDD (i.e. not from an FTP site) copies folder dates exactly as in the source under WinXP; under Win98, however, Beyond Compare sets the date of the target folders to the current date, not to the date of the source folders.

Hi bphlpt,Thanks for the link. If have downloaded, like you did, 2382 files in 91 folders, from ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/ with FileZilla v3.5.3 under WinXP, very smooth, no issues, except for the folder dates mention below under 3) When I tried to download the same site with Portable FileZilla v2.2.22 under WinSE, several issues were encountered: 1) 2 files (and their 2 folders) were not downloaded from the ftp site, without a message, or at least I didn't see the message, that I had an incomplete download 2) 1 file was downloaded incomplete, only 11MB out of 31MB, maybe because of timeout, but again no easily seen message 3) the folder dates were that of the download date, not the date on the server (same issue with v3.5.3 under WinXP) 4) because v2.2.22 has a central concept "the queue", instead of the download/upload, there is a little learning curve. For example, to download the 2382 files in 162MB, you had to right-click on "Reskit" -> Download 4 times, and wait a minute or two in between, until the queue fills up with entries, and until the download actually started. I initially had thought that FileZilla somehow wouldn't download at all. 5) then first attempt to download with FileZilla v2.2.22 under Win98SE produced 2380 files in 140MB, 2 files missing. 1 file truncated/incorrect, 2 folders missing. Subsequent download attempts obtained much less, may be 80MB. I had the same experience wwhen downloading with Flashget v1.72 under both Win98 and WinXP, that the first download attempt got a lot of files, subsequent download attempts much less. Maybe the MS server somehow blacklists or bumps off subsequent downloads after too many errors. I am currently making my last attempt to download the MS FTP site ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/ under Win98SE with Beyond Compare v2.5.3, which has an FTP capability, is more or less recent (14-Jul-2008) and can compare/copy,etc an FTP site and the local HDD or another FTP site. Unfortunately, Beyond Compare is very slow under FTP, only 1 thread is possible and I have set the timeout to 20 minutes for each file, so basically it's an overnight job with this unruly MS site. The MS FTP site ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/ can serve as a test case of FTP software under WIn98SE. I suspect that there exists no FTP software under Win98SE which can transfer correctly twice in a row this FTP site. Please try this test with your FTP software! Maybe a software can be found which can download properly under Win98SE. MS may have made their FTP server software incompatible with FTP client software run under Win98 (Unicode?).

The version of the Win98 Resource Kit tools on the TechNet server is a different version from the tools on the Book CD., as I stated in my posting #32 The missing files are those where the corresponding entry has also been deleted from RESKIT.INF. The main improvement of the TechNet version of the apps vs the Book CD version is probably: I would speculate that the newer version of WIN98TMC.DLL is a bugfix for the problem mentioned here: http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/t1030677085 Here a good link about the Tools Management Console (TMC): http://www.helpwithwindows.com/windows98/start-146.html The most comprehensive, updated unofficial compilation of the Win98 Resource Kit CD could be the Book CD version, with WIN98TMC.DLL from the TechNet server and RKWIN98.CHM + RKWIN98.CHI from the MSDN October 2001 CD. But first it would have to be cleared up why so much stuff was removed from the TechNet server version, maybe that stuff works under Win98FE but not under Win98SE. Could it be that the TechNet server version of the Resource Kit was intended for Win98SE, so that there are 2 different Windows 98 Resource Kits, one for Win98FE, the other for Win98SE? Are there any beta versions of the Win98 Resource Kit (apps + .chm), e.g. on TechNet CDs? The following lines are in RESKIT.INF on the Book CD, but NOT in RESKIT.INF of the TechNet server version: "filewise.exe"= 1, DIAGNOSE\filewise.exe,,,COPY,1998-04-15,,,,,,,,,SHARED,825917,SYSTEM,,,, "tmctkpad.dll"= 1, TMC\tmctkpad.dll,,,COPY,1998-04-11,,,,,,,,,SHARED,27648,SYSTEM,,,, "console.gif"= 1, TMC\console.gif,,,COPY,1997-09-08,,,,,,,,,SHARED,1028,SYSTEM,,,, "service.gif"= 1, TMC\service.gif,,,COPY,1997-09-08,,,,,,,,,SHARED,1131,SYSTEM,,,, "html.gif"= 1, TMC\html.gif,,,COPY,1997-09-08,,,,,,,,,SHARED,1081,SYSTEM,,,, "help.gif"= 1, TMC\help.gif,,,COPY,1997-09-08,,,,,,,,,SHARED,1126,SYSTEM,,,, "gui.gif"= 1, TMC\gui.gif,,,COPY,1997-09-08,,,,,,,,,SHARED,1082,SYSTEM,,,, "document.gif"= 1, TMC\document.gif,,,COPY,1997-09-08,,,,,,,,,SHARED,1149,SYSTEM,,,, "pc32.gif"= 1, TMC\pc32.gif,,,COPY,1997-06-03,,,,,,,,,SHARED,294,SYSTEM,,,, "NTdisk.gif"= 1, TMC\NTdisk.gif,,,COPY,1997-06-03,,,,,,,,,SHARED,4591,SYSTEM,,,, "NTtile.gif"= 1, TMC\NTtile.gif,,,COPY,1997-03-13,,,,,,,,,SHARED,3733,SYSTEM,,,, "HELPBOOK.GIF"= 1, TMC\HELPBOOK.GIF,,,COPY,1998-01-07,,,,,,,,,SHARED,156,SYSTEM,,,, "access.htm"= 1, TMC\access.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,2404,SYSTEM,,,, "config.htm"= 1, TMC\config.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,10952,SYSTEM,,,, "deploy.htm"= 1, TMC\deploy.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,9178,SYSTEM,,,, "desktop.htm"= 1, TMC\desktop.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,14678,SYSTEM,,,, "dxtshoot.htm"= 1, TMC\dxtshoot.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,20297,SYSTEM,,,, "filetool.htm"= 1, TMC\filetool.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,24351,SYSTEM,,,, "netadmin.htm"= 1, TMC\netadmin.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,11968,SYSTEM,,,, "perform.htm"= 1, TMC\perform.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,2385,SYSTEM,,,, "powertoy.htm"= 1, TMC\powertoy.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,3561,SYSTEM,,,, "regtool.htm"= 1, TMC\regtool.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,6640,SYSTEM,,,, "scriptol.htm"= 1, TMC\scriptol.htm,,,COPY,1998-04-30,,,,,,,,,SHARED,17468,SYSTEM,,,,

There is a List of Documentation Errors in Windows 98 Resource Kit at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/188307 I checked 2 of these corrections (for p.599, p.626) against the latest version of RK98BOOK.CHM (on the MSDN Library October 2001 CD), the errors were not corrected in the latest version of RK98BOOK.CHM. MS apparently did not update the content of RK98BOOK.CHM, only improved the handling in the MSDN version. I couldn't find the corresponding page numbers in the .chm file, so this kb188307 is of use only when used together with the printed book. I cannot print this article kb188307 properly, the only easy way to have a hard-copy of it may be to copy and paste the text from the browser window into another application. Any better suggestions?

No. I checked the folders \MSDN\ on "MSDN Library - Visual Studio 6.0a CD1 DN60AENU1.iso" and "MSDN Library - Visual Studio 6.0a CD2 DN60AENU2.iso", they do not contain RK98BOOK.CHM. I don't have the April 2001 CD, the link indicates that the April 2001 CD contains a 3rd version of RK98BOOK.CHM:File : RK98BOOK.CHM Path : %programfiles%\microsoft visual studio\msdn\2001apr\1033 MD5 : e1ccf4df50490415b1d3f724f7fb1f6d - (3223224 Bytes) RK98BOOK.CHM on the Book CD and from the TechNet server: 3,255,721 bytes, modification date: 30-Apr-1998, MD5: F456ECDE435F6324C8FF69D3630FB508 RK98BOOK.CHM from the MSDN Library October 2001 CD: 3,223,414 bytes, modification date: 28-Aug-2001, MD5: 67BC6DCFA957BAC9564569E53FA19E97 I like the version from the MSDN 2001 CD better, same info but better handling. Here an excerpt of my posting #31:

When the folder name with the capital "R" is entered into the Address field in Flashget Site Explorer, only 1 folder "Reskit" is displayed, not a 2nd folder "reskit". So the issue of the 2 folders may be an issue of Flashget. Unfortunately I couldn't upload the screen shot, the global upload quota was exceeded

Hi bphlpt,What is the last/best version of FileZilla for Win98SE? Most of the files not downloaded by Flashget v1.72 were .HTM, .GIF, .TXT and .DLL (see list in posting #32), maybe Flashget v1.72 has an issue. When selecting in the right-click menu of the FlashGet Site Explorer: "Open in Browser" ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/APPS/NETSHOW/HOWTO/CCAG/IMAGES/REDUCED.GIF , which is on the list above, is displayed Ok in Firefox, when selecting "Download" in the right-click menu of Flashget Site Explorer, nothing happens. The file ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/APPS/NETSHOW//GALLERY/NAME.HTM loads Ok into Firefox, but is not displayed by FlashGet v1.72, only a zero-length file with no prefix, just ".htm".

The download link displayed in posting #1 is very interesting. 1) The link is misspelled. There are apparently 2 folders on the MS server with this name, one with a CAPITAL R "Reskit" and the other with a SMALL r "reskit" 2) When downloading with Flashget from the folder with the small "r", a varying number of files gets downloaded, usually 9 files, but sometimes 22 files, until the download terminates. When downloading with Flashget from the folder with the capital "R", 2000+ files get downloaded. On the 1st download attempts from the folder with the Capital "R", 2375 files and 91 folders were downloaded, on the 2nd attempt 2362 files and 89 folders. Also the folder with the small "r" has a blank modification date. The 2 different folder names may be the cause for the download issues, and may be the reason why the stuff is still on the MS server, maybe it's hard to delete. I would speculate that this could explain the varying download results, and that other such instances could exist, and I fully trust that there are no security issues. I am attaching a screenshot of the 2 different folder names. Firefox or FTP Voyager, for example, display only one folder with a Capital "R".

Hi submix8c,Flashget I haven't given a thought to the black box until you mentioned it. Some old versions of Flashget install stuff to \Windows\System\Adcache\ , probably a leftover of Cydoor_CD.exe adware. I don't remember whether it was detected by Kaspersky, but I don't want to have any stuff on my computer which starts to communicate to who knows where, especially since I have opened my firewall to it. I have tried out many versions, but rejected all except that specific build 1.72.128 from oldapps.com. I have not tried out the specific build you have, but there are so many sub-builds, perhaps because the advertising content was changed frequently. I didn't trust the other builds I had tried out, and some time ago I was at the point of dumping Flashget altogether because of security concerns, but this build seems Ok. Registration should be no technical issue. I have attached a screenshot of Flashget v1.72.128 from oldapps.com with the black rectangle at the top right.

Very interesting link. Since it's a USB device, it may even work with Win98 under nusb. On the first glance it looks like an expensive Gilette shaver, with about $3.50 each blade http://www.esystor.com/page/PROD/SYSMD01.html http://esystor.com/page/category/M_Disc_Duplicators.html To store 1TB may cost $1000, plus a lot of time to burn 250 DVDs. Another question would be the quality of the M-Ready drive itself. Burners are consumables, and tend to die quite quickly, or the burn quality starts to deteriorate, perhaps after 100 burns. So this could raise the cost per long-lasting DVD to maybe $5 a piece, not counting coasters. Also: "This machine does not burn any copy protected DVDs or CDs"

I just checked what's available at the download link ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/reskit/ against what's on the book CD. I downloaded that stuff with Flashget v1.72; my settings were soft on their server with the maximum of simultaneous jobs set to 3: download time 1hr 13mins, 2373 files, 91 folders, 162MB. Here some interesting findings 1 ) The version on the server is the latest version of the MS Windows 98 Resource Kit apps, and differs from the version of the book CD NOTE: The latest version of the eBook files (rkbook.chm and rkbook.chi) is on the MSDN Library October 2001 CD (see the preceding posting). By combining the content of the server with the eBook version from the MSDN October 2001 CD, one could create an iso with the latest version of the MS Windows 98 Resource Kit. Some stuff was removed from the MS server, like MSDICTATION, MSVOICE and DIAGNOSE\FILEWISE.EXE. Here is a part of the report generated by Beyond Compare:of the differences between the book CD (mounted as V:) and the stuff downloaded from the MS server (in folder F:\Win98Reskit_24May2012): Binary Comparison of <V:\> to <F:\Win98Reskit_24May2012> 2409 files in 93 folders 2368 files match exactly ------------------------ 5 files don't match ------------------- HELP\WIN98RK.CHM [the CHM on the server has 308,133 bytes and a modification date of 9-Nov-1998, the CHM on the book CD has 311,429 bytes and a modification date of 30-Apr-1998. Both .chm files open Ok.] SETUP\CDSETUP.EXE SETUP\RESKIT.INF [reskit.inf was apparently fixed by MS for deleted files] SETUP\RESKIT.STF TMC\WIN98TMC.DLL [the DLL on the server is v1.1.02 of 14-Jan-1999, the DLL on the book CD is v1.0.0.1 of 29-Apr-1998] The version on the MS server is a later version than the CD which came with the printed book. I plan to make a 2nd download with Flashget, to make sure that everything is identical to the 1st download, and then put that stuff into an iso container, labeled "Windows 98 Resource Kit, final Technet Server version". I would speculate that the stuff on the server came from a TechNet CD. Unfortunately, I do not have such a Technet CD in my archive, only, for example, the Windows 2000 Server Resource Kit (TechNet CD, January 2000) or the Windows 2000 Professional Resource Kit (TechNet CD, February 2000). BTW, while I was looking at the old TechNet CDs, I came across the CDs "Windows codenamed Millenium Beta 1 [Dec.1999]", Beta 2 [Jan.2000] and Beta3 [June 2000]., which may contain DLLs possibly useful for Win98SE. 38 folders and files only on left [= not on TechNet server version] --------------------------------- APPS\IMAGINE_LE\QP\AUDIO\FRESK2_1.WAV APPS\MSDICTATION\ APPS\MSDICTATION\MSDCTX86.EXE APPS\MSDICTATION\README.TXT APPS\MSVOICE\ APPS\MSVOICE\README.TXT APPS\MSVOICE\SDK30S.EXE APPS\NETSHOW\GALLERY\MEYDENBAUER\BLANK.HTM APPS\NETSHOW\GALLERY\NAME.HTM APPS\NETSHOW\HOWTO\CCAG\IMAGES\AMPLITUDE.GIF APPS\NETSHOW\HOWTO\CCAG\IMAGES\REDUCED.GIF APPS\NETSHOW\HOWTO\CCAG\IMAGES\SAMPLE.GIF APPS\NETSHOW\IMAGES\NSFAMILYBTTM.GIF APPS\NETSHOW\IMAGES\NSFAMILYTOP.GIF APPS\NETSHOW\NSFAMILY.HTM DIAGNOSE\FILEWISE.EXE TMC\ACCESS.HTM TMC\CONFIG.HTM TMC\CONSOLE.GIF TMC\DEPLOY.HTM TMC\DESKTOP.HTM TMC\DOCUMENT.GIF TMC\DXTSHOOT.HTM TMC\FILETOOL.HTM TMC\GUI.GIF TMC\HELP.GIF TMC\HELPBOOK.GIF TMC\HTML.GIF TMC\NETADMIN.HTM TMC\NTDISK.GIF TMC\NTTILE.GIF TMC\PC32.GIF TMC\PERFORM.HTM TMC\POWERTOY.HTM TMC\REGTOOL.HTM TMC\SCRIPTOL.HTM TMC\SERVICE.GIF TMC\TMCTKPAD.DLL 2) Download issues of Flashget v1.72 2 files could not get downloaded initially by Flashget (red cross in Flashget window), a 2nd attempt to download these 2 files individually with Flashget was successful.

FlashgetThe earlier FlashGet v1.72 Build 128, which has to be registered, is the best version. v1.73 is freeware with a google toolbar or maybe advertising. I have come across 3 versions of v1.72.128, the good one is fgf172.exe, 2.709.895 bytes, 24-May-2006, from http://www.oldapps.com/flashget.php?old_flashget=19 , actual download location http://download.oldapps.com/Flashget/fgf172.exe This version of v1.72 contains the "FlashGet-replace.xpi", which does NOT work with Firefox v3.5.9. Files downloaded with Flashget have as file modification date the date of the upload to the server, not the date the file was downloaded. I got the "Opera Plug-In for FlashGet v1.1", Flashget v1.72 and FlashGot working together nicely with Firefox and Opera, it's a little tricky. Under Firefox I have the choice to save via Firefox/FlashGot or via FlashGet. MS Windows 98 Resource Kit The term "Windows 98 Resource Kit " has been used to refer to 2 different things: - the apps (a sampler is on the Win98SE CD, in folder \tools\reskit\, the real stuff is on the book CD) - the ebook file \tools\reskit\rkbook.chm, of the book with the same title with 1766 pages I know of 2 versions of the eBook file: - RK98BOOK.CHM, 3,255,721 bytes of 30-Apr-1998 (on the WIn98FE CD, on the Win98SE CDs and on the book CD of the book) - rk98book.chm, 3,223,414 bytes of 28-Aug-2001, together with another file rk98book.chi (24,732 bytes), on the MSDN Library October 2001 CD Both versions have an identical content, both versions are missing the 88-page index of the printed book. The version on the MSDN Library October 2001 CD, however, is preferrable, it contains 2 extra tabs (Index and Favorites), and several additional buttons. The Locate buttons displays in which chapter you are and the Print button has a better selection of what to print.

1) dvdisaster I had tried out dvdisaster v0.70.1 about 5 years ago, but I didn't put it into my tool box. At the time it looked too complicated, burning sets of 2 CDs/DVDs seemed to be easier. Bad DVD specimen #3 (DVD+RW, see my post #19 above ) would probably have been a challenge for dvdisaster. Only 1 out of 5 good readers was able to read from the DVD, and only 735MB out of 4.1GB burnt originally on the DVD (3 out of 17 files) were readable [wiithout dvdisaster], representing about 20% of the data, i.e. about 80% of the stuff on the DVD was unreadable, when read by file. "... a peak error correction load of 63%, meaning that this degree of damage is handled well by error correction data created with default settings. " http://dvdisaster.net/en/index10.html "Most drives will not recognize media when the lead-in area before the first sector (near the center hole) is damaged. In such cases, dvdisaster will not be able to recover any content from the media. It is not feasible to enhance the reliability of poor quality media by using dvdisaster. Cheap media can decay within a few days to an extent which will exceed the capabilities of the error correction code. " http://dvdisaster.net/en/qa31.html dvdisaster cannot archive copy-protected CDs/DVDs http://dvdisaster.net/en/qa10.html#media nor "BD-ROM (pressed BDs), DVD-ROM (pressed DVDs), CD-Audio and CD-Video", i.e. dvdisaster does not include tools to convert such plastic media into regular image files. The Q&A http://dvdisaster.net/en/qa.html contains very good explanations and ideas about how to back up stuff to plastic media and about recovering data from plastic media gone bad. The comment there "Loss of directory = loss of all files!" was very interesting, so probably the best way to save stuff on plastic media is in the root, without the use of subdirectories. The section "Advantages of image level recovery on optical media" explained to me why reading a bad CD/DVD by sector (i.e. with ImgBurn or UltraISO) produced an iso image with substantially more good files than obtained when reading a bad CD/DVD by file (e.g. Unstoppable Copier or Beyond Compare) The hints in "Some hints for effectively reading damaged media" http://dvdisaster.net/en/qa36.html are very useful. I can confirm that "Some drives read better while being cold.": one burner was able to recover a lot from a bad CD, which other burners couldn't, just on the first read after power-on. The same burner was not able to repeat this single good read. dvdisaster, together with the excellent explanations, is a very useful tool to learn about the limitations of plastic media. 2) Considerations for preparing CDs/DVDs that are easier to recover - creating sets of 2 CDs/DVDs has worked well for me - rather than saving stuff in a single large file, it may be better to save large files as .rar, split into many small volumes/parts. If a small part file on DVD1 is bad, there is a good chance that the corresponding small part file on DVD2 is still good, and that a good set of part files can be put together from 2 different CDs/DVDs. - use a 3% recovery record. Maybe a recovered damaged file, e.g. containing "holes" filled with zeroes when the CD/DVD was read by sector, can be repaired - I don't use 7-Zip to create .7z archives, I know of no software which can repair damaged 7z archives I also have several interesting SCSI CD drives. Any suggestion on how to build an external USB box, with a SCSI burner inside?The attached image displays what I think about the reliability of plastic media. I liked the text on the image: "For installation instructions, see your Quick Start Guide". The name of the company is coincidental, it's a good Japanese company. The image was produced with Virtual Painter v5.0.

I am using currently Netgear WPN511 PC-Cards with my old 11-year-old Inspiron 7500 laptops, and D-Link DWL-AG530 PCI cards with my dual-core desktops. The D-Link card has a connector for an external antenna. Both cards work fine under Win98SE and WinXP. A major problem will arise when I finally get Linux going on my computers, I will then need cards which work with/have drivers for all 3 operating systems. Ideally the card should have also drivers for Win7. Any suggestions?

Recovery specimen #4 - a perfectly readable DVD, but 1 file differs from the other backup DVD As I mentioned above, I always created 2 backup CDs/DVDs of each set of data to be backed up. But I have one pair of DVDs where 1 file differs. The file in question is a 691MB .ace archive file and contains inside a .ccd image (CloneCD) of a CD. On one DVD the 691MB .ace archive extracts fine, on the other DVD the .ace archive is broken and doesn't extract. A binary compare with Beyond Compare/Hex Viewer indicates that the two .ace files have different non-zero content in one contiguous block of 362 bytes. Here the history of the "bad" DVD containing the broken .ace archive: This DVD was burnt on 26-Aug-2006 as replacement of another backup DVD, burnt about a year earlier, because the disk quality of the initial DVD had deteriorated substantially. This replacement DVD, containing the corrupt .ace archive, was burnt with Nero v6.6.0.13, by first creating with Nero "Image Recorder" a temporary .iso of the deteriorating original backup DVD and then burning the replacement DVD from this .iso. I then made a binary compare of the burnt replacement DVD and the .iso, mounted with Alcohol, which was Ok, and I noted this on the DVD. This replacement DVD had a disk quality of 95/100 just after burning, measured with Nero CD-DVD Speed v4.7.7.15. I have just re-checked its disk quality with the same tool, it is currently, 6 years later, 48/100, still in Ok condition. So why did the "bad" DVD contain a broken archive? I checked my notes for 26-Aug-2006 and actually found 2 cryptical entries "Nero burns not-identical files, no msg" and another entry that I had rejected on that day a Targus 7-port USB hub Model PAUH212, "does NOT work with Belkins USB 2.0 PC-Card, problem with Nero when using Adaptec USB 2.0 PC-Card: large files on burnt DVD are incorrect, without a message (found out with binary compare)". I apparently had suspected a hardware problem to be the cause of the non-identical files. I remember vaguely to have repeated the burning of the DVD from the .iso, and that the binary compare against the .iso was Ok, but the binary compare against the other backup DVD showed a difference. I had no explanation for this difference, and couldn't decide which one of the 2 DVDs was better, so I kept both versions. After I stopped using the Targus hub, this burn problem didn't occur anymore. The real reason, however, that this problem didn't come up anymore was probably that I haven't burnt replacement DVDs after that experience, checking disk quality and re-burning CDs/DVDs was just too time-cvonsuming. Looking back, I probably made the wrong conclusions 6 years ago. Today I would rather speculate that Nero v6.6.0.13 "Image Recorder" had an issue reading the deteriorating original DVD and created somehow an iso with 362 contiguous wrong bytes. A binary compare of the DVD burnt from such an iso against the same mounted .iso would then be identical, and a binary compare against the other good backup DVD would show differences. But I have no idea why this area with bad data was only 362 bytes, not a whole 2kB sector, I suspect that the gradual decay of plastic media is a major cause of broken archives. At eMule maybe 5% of archive files (zip, rar) are broken. Maybe the great number of different versions of an mp3 at eMule, often between 10 and 30 different version for one original mp3, is brought about by the decay of plastic and the selection of the option "Ignore read errors" when CDs are copied. MP3Test, for example, is a very good tool to test mp3 files for corruption. I was able to repair with WinAce v2.6 the broken 691MB .ace archive on the "bad" replacement DVD. The .ccd image extracted from the repaired .ace was identical to the .ccd image contained on the other good backup DVD.

Thanks submix8c,this explanation and the sample files solved the question. I'll leave filelist.dat, created during the installation, in the installation source, so that there is no potential issue during the installation from a CD. When the installation source is located on the HDD, filelist.dat is not required in the installation source, the installer creates it there. If the installation is from a CD, as with the NSW 2004 CD, filelist.dat is probably required for the installation to proceed. I prefer this initial build v6.0.2600.0000, if I have to, it was made before Sept.11. Who knows what is contained in later versions and builds. I have installed IE 6 under Win98 only on my old laptop, not on my desktop. I don't use IE 6 often, maybe once every 2 weeks, mainly when I want to print a web page and the other browsers can't print it out properly, sometimes IE6 can print the page Ok, every browser prints differently. Installing IE v6.0.2600.0000 (and higher), instead of v5.5, for example, also causes the sluggish-file-delete-problem of Windows Explorer under Win98SE. IE 6 is required for the installation of some software versions, starting with Paint Shop Pro 8 or Photoshop 8. Thanks again.

Internet Explorer v6.00.2600 of 20-Aug-2001 (full source, with all the foreign language support modules) can be downloaded (76.7MB) from http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/browsers.evolt.org/browsers/ie/win32/6.0/ie60.exe Double-clicking on the downloaded ie60.exe creates the folder \IE 6.0 Full\, containing the installation source. ie60.exe is an "UnZipSFX 5.32 of 3 November 1997, by Info-ZIP (Zip-Bugslists.wku.edu)", wku.edu stands for "Western Kentucky University", so this is probably an unofficial repack. It extracts the identical stuff contained, for example, in the folder \SUPPORT\MSIE\ of the Norton SystemWorks Professional 2004 CD, minus filelist.dat [which is on the NSW 2004 CD], plus IEAK6.EXE, plus CDINST.INI. The timestamp of ie60.exe, as displayed by MiTeC EXE Explorer, is 12/3/2019. When you click on the extracted \IE 6.0 Full\Ie6setup.exe, the installation of Internet Explorer 6 starts. Before the installation there is no file "filelist.dat" in the installation source \IE 6.0 Full\, after the installation the file "filelist.dat" was added to the installation source \IE 6.0 Full\. filelist .dat is 22 bytes long, with the following content: [General] Version=1 The file modification date of filelist.dat is the respective installation date of Internet Explorer 6.0 What is the purpose of filelist.dat? I am very wary of software which modifies the installation source. In addition .dat files raise a red flag with me, like the index.dat files, which are pre-rootkit, "cloaked" log files by Microsoft. What would happen if Internet Explorer 6.0 were installed from a CD (read-only media), containing the folder \IE 6.0 Full\, with or without filelist.dat? Can Internet Explorer be installed from a CD without filelist.dat? Do any good things happen if Internet Explorer 6 is installed with a changed value of Version in filelist.dat, e.g. '0', maybe '1' means YES, '0' perhaps NO??

Recovery specimen #3 - a DVD+RW I just gave up on recovering a bad Memorex DVD+RW (re-writable), burnt in February 2004, 8 years ago. It contained 4.1GB of data, altogether 17 zipped up system backups. The DVD+RW was accessible in only 1 of my 5 excellent readers, an Asus blu-ray burner BW-12B1ST, which seems to be good at reading +media. 2 good readers capable of DVD+RW wouldn't even recognize that a DVD was inserted. The silver color of the front side of the DVD, where "Memorex - is it live or is it a Memorex?" was printed, had turned a little yellowish, aging plastic. The Asus blue-ray burner with Unstoppable Copier was able to recover 3 good zip files, altogether 735MB, so about 80% of the data on the bad DVD+RW was lost. I had a note on a piece of paper with this bad DVD, dated December 2006, indicating that the content of the DVD was still Ok (binary compare) 2 1/2 years after burning. It is interesting to note that adding a 3% recovery record with WinRAR to a .rar file is of little use if the file is stored on a CD/DVD and the whole file becomes unreadable. I had buffed the bad DVD+RW with the Aleratec, altogether 5 times, and each time the recovery got worse. I decided to give up on the recovery, the remainder of the data was probably unrecoverable, and I had a still good backup on a second DVD-R. When I burnt backup DVDs, about 5 to 8 years ago, I ALWAYS burnt 2 identical good copies, in case one goes bad. Usually I burnt more than 2 copies, on top-rated media with a burner which "liked" the particular media, until the burn quality with Nero Speed Disk was 95-98/100, and then discarded those DVDs with a lower burn quality. I have transferred the content of maybe 80 old DVDs, burnt between 2003 and 2007, onto external HDDs over the past 2 years. It was probably the last call, even if the DVDs were stored in slim cases in a cool place. The disk quality, as measured by Nero Speed Disk, had gone down to zero with most DVDs. Maybe 10 of these 2x80 DVDs had serious read issues and 5-10% of the archive would have been lost if I had not burnt 2 backup DVDs for each set of data backed up. I hope that the transfer from plastic media to HDDs will be complete by the end of this year, it's a quite time-consuming undertaking.