Multibooter

There is also a security patch for the Windows 98 Resource Kit: "Patch for Tools Management Console's TaskPad Scripting Vulnerability " description: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/ms99-007 downloads: ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/reskit/win98/taskpads/

When I downloaded with FileZilla I had the setting of 4 simultaneous transfers, maybe this caused the file date errors.FileZilla is my second choice as FTP software, and I will keep it installed, just like I keep several browsers. It's good to have a 2nd FTP client to repeat a download In case there are any issues.

You don't have to stick to version 2.5.3. Beyond Compare 3.x works under Windows 98SE. The minimum OS requirement for Beyond Compare 3.x is Windows 95 OSR2. http://www.scootersoftware.com/support.php?zz=kb_windows No idea how I assumed that v2.5.3 was the last version to run under Win98!! Thanks a lot for the information.

The most important part of this posting is the attached screen shot. I was referring to old Beyond Compare v2.5.3, the last version to run under Win98SE. I have downloaded Ok all 2382 files and 91 folders of ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/ with Beyond Compare v3.3.3 of 28-Oct-2011. Beyond Compare 3 reported during its initial download that 4 files were not downloaded because of a semaphore timeout error. 2 of these missing files were downloaded individually Ok by Beyond Compare v3 after 1 repeat, 1 file after 2 repeats, and 1 file (30MB) after 3 repeats.Beyond Compare v3.3.3 has an acceptable speed, it permits up to 10 simultaneous connections, old v2.5.3 permits only one download at a time. If the old FTP module in Beyond Compare v2.5.3 (sfFTPLib.dll v1.5.8.23 of 24-Aug-2006 by SmartFTP) can be replaced with a newer, Win98-compatible version, maybe the FTP of old v2.5.3 (of 14-Jul-2008) will perform under Win98 like the newer v3.3.3. under WinXP, except for the folder dates and the lower speed. 1 ) A true copy of my websites on my HDD My main use of FTP software is to update my websites. I keep copies of my websites on my HDD, and I also archive my websites with WinRAR whenever I make changes to them. I do want to have on my HDD and in my archive exactly what was on my server at a specific point in time, and folder dates tell me when I uploaded a folder. 2 ) Forensic accuracy. If I make a copy of something, it should BE a real copy, not LOOK like a real copy. Examples: A ) UltraISO v9.3.6.2750, when creating an iso image of a CD/DVD with bad sectors, fills the iso with zeroes where it encountered bad sectors on the CD/DVD, without giving any messages about it. B ) FileZilla v3.5.3, when it downloads files from this bad FTP site ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/ and gets a transmission error just in the file dates, but not in the content of the file, continues without a message - and these files are saved with the current date, not with the original date I have attached a screen shot of Beyond Compare v3.3.3. The left pane displays the set of 2382 files and 91 folders downloaded with FileZilla under WinXP, the right pane displays the same set downloaded with Beyond Compare v3.3.3 under WinXP. It is interesting to note that FileZilla substituted the current date for the 4 files marked red, without a message, while the other files in the folder \BATCH\ have the server date. Compare also the time (seconds) of the folder date and of these 4 red files. If I had not downloaded these 2382 files with Beyond Compare v3.3.3 and had not made this comparison, I would never have known that some of the files that FileZilla returned had incorrect file dates. BTW, the screen shot is the initial display by Beyond Compare, when it just compares file/folder dates and sizes. The displayed colors change again after Beyond Compare made a binary compare of the content of the files/folders. I am using Total Commander under Win98 and WinXP for changing dates. Beyond Compare is NOT a specialized program. It is among my 5 most used programs with many uses. I use it most for file manipulations instead of Windows Explorer, for file cleanup and deleting duplicates and as a hex viewer, but there are so many other uses. I recently used it to recover data from CDs/DVDs with bad sectors, and now it's my top FTP software, at least under WinXP.

I have just repeated an attempt to download the stuff from ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/ with Beyond Compare v2.5.3 under WinXP SP2 on my 11-year-old Inspiron 7500 laptop, using an old Belkin F5D5010 CardBus Card connected via Ethernet cable to an ancient Linksys Router BEFSR41. Beyond Compare transferred the folder structure and folder dates, and 2262 files in 91 folders, in 3 hours 41 minutes. The transfer of 39 files was terminated by Beyond Compare with the following messages: - Data channel timed out; or: - The semaphore timeout period has expired; or: - Connection closed. What these messages tell me, is that something didn't work . The agreed upon quantity is 2382 files and 91 folders. This still leaves 81 files (2382 - 2262 - 39) which were not transferred and for which Beyond Compare did apparently not display a message. Repeating the file transfer for several of the skipped files individually resulted in the same error messages, but no additional files on my hard drive. I then changed the settings in Beyond Compare: -> Tools -> Options -> FTP, and in the window "FTP Settings" I changed the Link Resolution from a default selection "Fast" to "Complete". Pressing F1 Help in Beyond Compare displayed the following for the "Complete" selection: "BC will use it's internal representation of the FTP structure to determine what the target is. This will detect broken links and can require fewer operations than "Simple", but can get caught by recursive links". After this change I exited Beyond Compare, restarted it and then was able to transfer more files individually. More files were now displayed on the source pane in Beyond Compare. So apparently what Beyond Compare sees on the server is determined by the options selected, not by what is actually there. I had also changed the default value for "Local Cache" from 4096 KB to "40960 KB". A further restart of Beyond Compare, with another changed setting in window "Advanced FTP Settings" (I had also selected under LIST Options: "Show hidden"), displayed even more files on the source/server pane, With these new FTP settings I was able to download individually all missing files (quite easy with Beyond Compare), except for the following: - NSSERVER.EXE, about 7MB - NSTOOLS.EXE, about 4MB - DRREN1MB.ASF, about 30 MB - STEM288.ASF, about 3MB - AFRICAT1_96K44100S.ASF, about 2MB Beyond Compare displayed for these 5 files the error message: "The semaphore timeout period has expired". More information about such an error message is here: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/itprovistanetworking/thread/c3fc9f5d-c073-4a9f-bb3d-b7bb8f893f78 , where someone posted: "Microsoft are no help at all, they know this problem exists yet ignore all requests of help to find a solution" So my problem with Beyond Compare seems to have been that I had wrong settings. But I am still not quite there, Beyond Compare got 2377 out of 2382 files, 5 more to go. Any suggestions? I have attached screenshots of my FTP Settings in Beyond Compare. Beyond Compare v2.5.3 [last version for Win98] uses sfFTPLib.dll v1.5.8.23 of 24-Aug-2006 by SmartFTP. Does Beyond Compare v3 (not compatible with Win98) have a better FTP? There were changes with SmartFTP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SmartFTP Here is a description of the various version of this DLL: https://www.smartftp.com/forums/index.php?/topic/8534-ftp-library-1x-change-log/

Hi cyberformer, I was referring to the utilities on the CD. The file on the CD containing the manual, Rk98book.chm , is a must-have for reference, for people who want to delve deeper into Win98. Appendix C "Windows 98 INF Files", for example, is an excellent documentation of the INF file layout.

Hi loblo,I love your screen shot , great. Your FTP client came back stoned with 7 entries for \reskit\, but if your FTP client got already stoned by just looking at all these goodies at MS, can you be sure that the files it brought back are good? We generally agree that \reskit\ contains 2382 files in 91 folders, but can one trust what a stoned FTP client brings back, i.e. is your downloaded stuff really good? Ultimate certainty would only provide a binary compare of the downloaded stuff against the probably underlying TechNet CD "Microsoft Plus! 98, Windows® 98 Resource Kit" (Part No. X05-34597, January 2000, Disc 6) "http://web.shinmin.tc.edu.tw/administrative/cc/data/msdn/cdtable(012000).htm" Maybe not just this index of CDs, but also the CD itself is on that university server in Taiwan, who knows, I didn't check. Unfortunately I don't have this TechNet CD, only for example the TechNet CDs "Windows 2000 Professional Resource Kit" (February 2000, X05-51766) and "Windows 2000 Server Resource Kit" (January 2000, X05-43228). Now a silly question: Are the utilities on the book CD still of any use, in 2012? Does anyone here in the forum actually use them? The index to the utilities can be downloaded here ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/HELP/WIN98RK.CHM

Hi bphlpt,Thanks a lot, I had never thought of making an upgrade install via Universal Extractor and file copy/Beyond Compare. Yesterday I did make the upgrade of licensed FlashGet v1.72 to licensed v1.73 in this way under Win98. I am attaching a screen shot of the About screen. This method of updating to a newer version, via Uniextract and file copy, is very interesting and probably useful for other programs, e.g. where just the installer is not compatible with Win98. Yesterday I used this version updated to v1.73 under Win98 to download ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/ and with this version I got twice the 2400+ files and corrupt directory structure when I selected the opened content of \Reskit\ for download. I will test this version for a while, it may be Ok. There may be many other potential culprits for this FTP download issue under my setup. To sum up, Flashget is great as a tool for downloading regularly a few individual files, with a nice log (filename, date, URL, folder where downloaded to) and an easy way to download a file again. But downloading whole FTP sites with 1000's of files just clutters up this great download log. It is probably better to download FTP folders and FTP sites under WinXP, because of the folder dates. FileZilla v3.5.3 under WinXP looks like a good choice, except for the folder dates. Beyond Compare v2.5.3 gets the folder dates right, but its FTP takes forever and a year. Any suggestions?

Hi bphlpt,Perhaps, perhaps not. It looks like we are in unknown territory, no idea what will come out of this discussion. Here 3 more thoughts: 1) Reading from this bad FTP server reminds me of reading from a bad damaged CD/DVD (see the postings in "Archiving software CDs under Win98" ): - different quantities of files and directories are recovered from the bad FTP server during various read attempts - different FTP programs recover different files, just like different burners/CD software have varying success reading CDs/DVDs with bad sectors - endless timeouts occur reading from the FTP server, just like from a burner reading bad sectors - on a CD/DVD the same files can be accessed under various systems like ISO9660 and Joliet, on the server with small and capital letters 2) My speculation about the cause of this FTP server corruption is the following: - \Reskit\ resides already 5 directory levels down from the server root. A file-copy of a CD was copied into \Reskit\.. The CD itself contains at least 6 sub-directory levels, so we have a nested structure with at least 11 levels. - I once created a similarly deeply nested directory structure under FAT32 by copying with Beyond Compare into a deeply nested directory the content of a deeply nested CD. The result was a file system corruption on the FAT32 partition: I could not erase the files under WinXP. Under Win98 I was not able to erase these files either, except in a DOS window where I deltreed the corrupt top-level folder - using its short DOS name. BTW, the System Commander 9 CD comes with similarly deeply nested folders, most likely intentionally to make the installation from a copied sub-folder unsuccessful, the people at V-Com were nifty and knew their stuff. If I remember right there are differences between CDFS and FAT32 regarding the number of permissible nested levels and the total name length including the path. It just occurred to me, maybe some of the problems copying from this MS FTP server may be caused by running Win98 and WinXP on FAT32 partitions, as I do. Perhaps there are no problems downloading from the MS Server if the FTP client is run under NTFS. 3) - Maybe the current people at Microsoft were not able to delete this particular bad section on the FTP server when they deleted their Win98 stuff. Or they did not want to risk potential collateral damage by making a file cleanup on their FTP server under Win98 or DOS, and just left the stuff. - The folder modification dates on the server are 29-Apr-2010, so perhaps MS tried to wipe out the corrupt files on 29-Apr-2010 by uploading again and overwriting the corrupt file entries. This could perhaps explain why there are folders with 2 different names. But again, everything here is pure speculation. To experiment with file system corruption on a FAT32 HDD/parition, one would just have to copy in Beyond Compare a deeply nested CD (root e.g. in right pane) to the lowest level of a deeply nested folder on the HDD (lowest level is the starting point on the right pane in Beyond Compare).

Hi rloew,This topic starts to get hot. With FileZilla v3.5.3 under WinXP I got once the generally agreed-upon quantity of 2382 files and 91 folders . Subsequent downloads with this FTP software and others got varying quantities, especially after the initial run, maybe there is some caching, or I just don't know how to use FTP software properly. To know the definite quantities involved, I would guess that someone would have to check the probably existing TechNet CD with the Win98 Resource Kit, which was perhaps the source of the upload to the MS Server. Maybe something happened when stuff from a CDFS was put on the MS server. With Flashget under Win98SE, when I tried to download, not by selecting the folder \Reskit\ in the top right window, but by first opening \Reskit\ and then selecting the content of \Reskit\ (25 folders and files) in the top right window, I got maybe 2400+ files, and the content of the target folder was very different from the content of the source folder, some files were copied flat from subfolders into \Reskit\ and the structure of the subfolders was very different. I repeated the experiment, the same thing happened, and then I stopped because I was afraid to corrupt my HDD. Nero InfoTool lists for another TechNet CD I have, Windows Millenium Beta 1 of December 1999, X05-36910 on the rim of the CD, as follows: ISO9660, Joliet, Date: 22 September 1999, Publisher: Microsoft Corporation, Application: CDIMAGE 2.39 (12/04/97), Data CD (Mode 1), Closed finalized. ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/ seems to be a marvelous site for learning about FTP. I am currently trying to download the site with Total Commander v7.57 under WinXP, but it has skipped already one file with the message "Post Command failed". BTW, Total Commander v8.0 came out on May 23. My speculation is that there is some kind of file system corruption on that MS server, maybe related to Unicode or to fine differences between the Win98 and WinXP file systems, and your Amiga sees the stuff on the FTP server a little different. Or there is actually some stuff on this server which is hidden, but visible to the Amiga ... Another possibility could be that downloading from that server causes some kind of crashes, so that sometimes there is a timeout at random files. Ancient Teleport Pro v1.29.1981 apparently doesn't work with FTP, it couldn't retrieve anything. Maybe a good FTP spider software could be helpful.

Well, there is always an older guy My first computer language was BASIC, the second ALGOL, and I was good at TABOL years before VisiCalc came on the market... And regarding file dates, CP/M had a nice feature for privacy: no file dates. Please stay with the discussion, your input is appreciated.

Hi submix8c, I do appreciate your comments. Please don't get impatient with my comments. Folder dates YES, if you user MS Windows Explorer, Flashget and most other tools. NO, if you use, for example, Beyond Compare or WinRAR under WinXP. I have attached 2 screen shots: 1) Beyond Compare under WinXP (not under Win98) can be used to transfer files and folders from an FTP server to a local HDD and maintain the server date. Beyond Compare under WinXP maintains the folder modification dates of the source, even if you copy to a different partition or HDD. When you extract folders from a .rar archive with WinRAR under WinXP (not under Win98), the folders will be created with the folder modification date of the rared up source. 2) The 2nd screen shot is that of the folder ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/ on the problematic MS server, after being copied from the server to the local HDD with Beyond Compare FTP. Please note the Date Modified, which is the server date, NOT the download date. One major reasons that I use WinXP, not Win98, for file copying, backup to external HDD and the creation of .rar archives, is that Beyond Compare and WinRAR under WinXP maintain the original folder modification dates. When i download stuff from the internet, I always look at the folder modifcation dates in the downloaded archives, or in .exe files (with Uniextract). Stuff which passes Kaspersky Ok and contains old file/folder modification dates is less likely to contain new, not-yet-detected malware.

2-digit years seem to be the default installation values of Win98SE, 4-digit years of WinXP, unless you change them. But I was only guessing whether you downloaded the MS site ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/services/technet/samples/ps/win98/Reskit/ under Win98 or under WinXP. The folders in the listing in your attachment Reskit_Index.zip have no dates, only the files, and that gave me no clue as to whether you downloaded under Win98 or under WinXP. If you had made the download with Flashget under WinXP, the folder date should have been 29-Apr-2010, under Win98 the current date (e.g. 27-May-2012) : Z:\WINwork\win98\Reskit_CDRom\SETUP\ [= no date] ACMSETUP.EXE EXE 331,776 7/11/1997 00:00 282F1C7F530FDC6CF405ED825B183976 61F6FEECE3F14350090A00D196D95FAF0D697D94 ACMSETUP.HLP HLP 19,066 7/10/1997 00:00 484B0499B482F8EFE5F7ADB3176C0856 20A1C382C54CCA54EA70715D943A043D7C9F23E7

Hi dencorso, I checked my installation log and I had followed the following sequence, here an excerpt:: - installed FlashGet v1.72 - uninstalled the Flashget v1.72 Add-on inside Firefox: -> Tools -> Add-ons -> Uninstall (Flashget 1.72 was displayed in window Add-ons as "Not compatible with Firefox 3.6.9") - installed Opera Plug-In for FlashGet v1.1 PROBLEM: Opera doesn't pass all clicks on .exe thru to FlashGet - solve later - installed FlashGot v1.2.2

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?