buyerninety
-
Posts
153 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Donations
0.00 USD
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by buyerninety
-
-
Gee, you really like those WD drives... like the EARS.
I wonder if you're aware of the Head Parking issues e.g. mentioned this webpage;
0 -
In Post#1, PROBLEMCHYLD said; "Can you guys shed some light my way please?"
As this topic hasn't been closed, I assume OP is still seeking information. So...
http://www.reddit.com/r/ccna/comments/13gav1/for_those_who_purchased_the_it_university_online/
(Note, add at least a year onto age of comments of above...)
_
http://community.spiceworks.com/topic/268156-too-good-to-be-true?page=2
_
"Don Noble+++++++Title President, CEO
Demographic info++Greater New York City Area | E-Learning
Current:+++++++++President, CEO at IT University
Past:+++++++++++Sales Engineer at Diebold, Account Manager at MCI Group
Education:+++++++New York University, Stony Brook "
0 -
Perhaps the Dan Ryan Expressway? [ http://www.chicago-l.org/stations/images/DanRyan/69th03.jpg ]
'jaclaz said; "Meanwhile, in Canada..." [CN derailment]'
_
[No casualties on that one, so...]
No blame on the Polar Bears (who pay their fares);
Rather a repercussion of shipping too many Mooses In Cabooses!
0 -
Yeah, you'd think they would have recovered more than just 2 examples of code -
what about left impressions from the guys notepad/papers/book covers in his
residence?
They also COULD HAVE removed the recovered fingerprints that obscure the
lettering!, & give out basic information such as;
- left or right handed, can handwriting experts say if he was printing across from
left or right, and from up or down, do impressions show which of these notes
was filled out 1st (or one folded & concurrently overlaying the other -on this point
I mean that multiple straight definite folds in 1st paper would indicate that part of
each page was simultaneously referred to and concurrently transcribed by the guy
-to give a 'two part
' code i.e. part of both pages contain the encoded whole
of a single encoded message - if this is the case, would also explain why the 2nd
page is clearly divided by borders [?each border=one separate msg/note?] ).
To me most importantly where initially he started writing from!
If you had that start point, you could follow along the printing, trying to figure as
you go -after all, the guy had to be thinking hard as he wrote the code.
[Admittedly, it looks like it starts from left due to left justification of margin of paras
& writing is non justified on right side of lines.]
I think maybe one note is 'T' heavy?, so perhaps he was tossing in false lettering
(filler) as he went. (Handwriting experts should be able to form a view if certain
often repeated letters appear 'thinner', which could indicate (quicker?)writing as
'toss it in' filler, compared to thicker lettering, more carefully printed, maybe more
likely to be code. Thinner lettering you 'might' assume may be more easily
printed - & if its only a 'tossed in filler' character/symbol, you'd think he wouldn't
waste time making filler from more elaborate characters, not consistently anyway.)
-Also, note the 'close bracket' symbol [see printed on your 'zero' key on an english
physical keyboard] may actually be an integral part of the code - notice how the
guy takes the time to correct his outlined border on the 2nd page with a definite
straight down stroke, overwriting that bulge in the border that 'could' have been
misinterpreted by him on readback as an additional 'close bracket' symbol.
-A HIGHER base resolution pic can be viewed on the wiki page - unfortunately
still with the recovered fingerprinting marking still obscuring it partly.
Cheers
0 -
jaclaz asked; Why does the rooster cross the expressway??
Because neither train nor truck traversed, saving strollers, scooters and skippers!
_
Shakespeare? Nay, not thou; but thee, Shelley or Sassoon.
or mayhap...
_
-----------------------------------------------------------
' Stopping by Woods on a Sleety Full Moon '
-----------------------------------------------------------
_
My small stallion must deem it queer,
To tarry without a dwelling near,
Between the woods and freezing millpond,
In gloomy nighttime, with nary a cheer.
_
He allows his harness bells a shake,
Suggesting our stoppage a baffling mistake.
Still silence falls, barring the sweep,
Of whooshing breeze and chilling snowflake.
_
The woods are alluring, emerald dark and deep,
But possess I-immalleable-promises to keep,
And smoots to go till I may sleep,
And smoots to go till-I-may-sleep.
_
_
[apologies to Robert Frost]
0 -
Our pending questions for Nomen, then, are;
Using the XP MMC (GUI) defragger,
1.) are only the PST files appearing to not defragment,
2.) are only very large files appearing to not defragment,
3.) what , if any, other files appear to not defragment, and
4.) if there are any non-PST files which are larger than a PST file,
does that larger non-PST file defragment?
[Edit: 5.) Do the PST files defragment if only essential XP OS and XP
defragmenter processes are running before starting defragmentation,
as shown in XP task manager?
Sorry-couldn't resist slipping it in.]
We await his return!
Edit: 6.) What version of the XP Defragger is shown in
the Defraggers' About (or Action/About) menu?
0 -
In Post#1, Nomen said;
"I then copied the problem files back to the C volume (back to the directories where
they were cut from) and did a defrag "analyze" - and these files were showing up as being fragmented. (?!)"
_
In Post#3, Nomen said;
"These are Netscape Navigator email and Outlook 2000 post-office (PST) files."
"One more thing. I re-named one of the fragmented files as it sits on the FAT32
drive and copied another instance of that file from the NTFS drive to the same
directory where this file exists on the FAT32 volume. So the two files are sitting
side-by-side in the same directory on the FAT32 volume (but have different names).
Do you think that this second copy will also be fragmented like it's brother?
Answer: YES."
_
jaclaz said; "A defragmenter has no reason to treat a .pst file differently from
ANY other file"
Given that he has identified that the pst files are not being defragmented, & that
other files are being defragmented, ipso facto, these pst files are being treated
differently [either by the XP defragger or something else]. I'll discount sorcery.
PERHAPS we should be asking Nomen IF the above mentioned [exact same] "two
files sitting side-by-side" that appeared fragmented in Xp defragger, appeared to
be fragmented in Exactly-The-Same-Way, that is, the fragmentation gaps were in
exactly the SAME places, in each file, OR if the fragmentation gaps were in
DIFFERENT places in each file.
0 -
jaclaz Post#20 said;
"@buyerninety
The FAT32 partition we are talking about is the "system" partition used by the WIn9x system on a disk used in ANOTHER PC Nomen's has, which is temporarily connected as "slave" to an XP system."
_-Yes.
"If he has his Outlook 2000 .pst files (from the running XP) saved on that"[FAT32]" disk more than anything else he is a magician
."_-But jaclaz, he has not stated that the pst files were created originally by an Outlook 'from the running XP'. Indeed, given that he has stated (Post#3) "These are Netscape Navigator email and Outlook 2000 post-office (PST) files", would it not be more reasonable to have assumed that those pst files were created from an instance of OutLook on the drive (Win98 C: drive, FAT32)? (Additionally, because those 2 programs mentioned are from a time frame nearer to Win98 than Win XP?)
Why do you seem to be asserting the pst files originated from or resided originally on the XP drive?
0 -
1.) Nomen found some files giving the "will not defrag" behaviour by the XP
defragger were '.PST' files on the FAT32 drive. (He has previously mentioned
he has OutLook 2000, I assume used on or with the FAT32 drive.)
Will XP defragger act to defrag PST files?? I haven't seen an explicit yes/no
reference to answer that question. In the circumstance where PST file(s) are
being held open/in use, I suspect that they would not be acted upon.
I suggest checking in [task manager, etc.] the XP system that no processes
are running of MS Exchange, Windows Messaging, Outlook (any version),
any email programs [from web - "Make sure that any AddIns are closed - e.g.
the IncrediMail AddIn often remains running after Outlook is closed."], anything
that might make use of a PST file, e.g. Word/Excel/Access processes.
Optimately, retry with no XP processes running except essential OS ones &
the defragmenter (but first read below).
_
2.) I'm a bit surprized no-one has queried Nomen to confirm that he has
}before attempting to defrag his PST file(s){, carried out actions to
decrease their size i.e. open in OutLook 2000, delete unwanted data (e.g.
obviously you want to keep all important email/contacts/calender data,
maybe not 'Inbox' unnecessary attachments or 'Deleted items' folders' data
inside the PST file(s) internal Folders) & then competently use OutLooks'
'Compact' function.
_
3.) Nomen Post#18 said;
"The root problem is that there seems to be something about a "well
used" Win-98 volume that, over time, results in immovable files (seems
to be very small files) that prevents large contiguous blocks of clusters
from being created during defrag sessions."
You mean like the "Data that will not be moved" disk clusters that you see
when running the W98 defragger? I had the impression they were some
kind of marker structure laid down during FDisking or Formatting process,
or/also maybe Directory File Tables (which would explain why more of
them appear as you add more files to a drive). No?
0 -
Maybe search for the timeout 'types' mentioned in this [scrolldown, sect. 7.3.1];
0 -
Following on from what Jumper + submix8c suggested,
(video card only as remaining card...also disconnect data &
power cables from that unused 5¼ floppy drive..)
also try & determine if whilst pressing down on mobo,
if it now lays tooo close to metal or unused metal screw-posts
underneath the mobo (an electrical short)...
Also remove RAM DIMMs, aiming for ONLY a single RAM DIMM needed, of
not more than 128MB.
.
In the BIOS,
for DATE, tell us if date is current - cmos not cleared if date current - right?
(This not a reliable indication of battery voltage state, however...)
.
Then write down all bios screens settings, (so record of what you started with),
now
for PnP OS, tell us what setting is.
for POST ['quick'] try setting of 'disabled'
for IDE ULTRA DMA Mode try setting of 'disabled' [this should force both HD's
to use PIO4 (on this mobo only)...]
for USB IRQ try setting 'disabled' (can reenable later if everything
gets back to working)
after reboot & hang, listen if HD is seeking, or is doing nothing. Leave for
half an Hr anyway...maybe its seeking but taking a looonngg time to do it..
.
if still staying hung, then,
Referring to this webpage;
http://www.anandtech.com/show/113
In BIOS,
Place all the RAM timings to slowest (safe),(but don't
change 'PCI 2.1', or 'Memory Hole').
On next power on, press&hold F8, choose Logged, then if it eventually hangs,
leave it for a long time before restart.. then do F8 again, choose command prompt,
navigate to C:/WINDOWS/COMMAND/edit.com , and tell us by
opening edit.com & viewing C:/bootlog.txt , if it lists any problems...
.
If still hanging now ..well.. shouldn't be IRQ conflict (plenty of IRQ),
shouldn't be DMA conflict (virtually few used), maybe power problem
but EOL there (unless you substitute the PSU)...so time to replace with
more recent mobo/PSU/ & PCI SCSI Card, as current system is
simply borderline obsolescent...Maybe give it the heave-ho at next UK
riot/Range Rover motorcade/Starbucks protest ?
(with a grin) Cheers
0 -
"So there may have been a wrong driver (/selected?), or the driver may have
something like a wrongly coded device ID, or maybe they simply folded a wrong
icon into the right driver pack... so that weird icon seen may be an unrelated fault."
THAT above para referred only to the weird icon seen for the NEC USB 2.0 Enhanced
Host Controller... but I understand you're asserting that the bug is causing both...
Ahhh, OK both the two examples we've seen so far, acted to give an incorrect icon
for a USB "Host Controller" (example "Intel 82371AB/EB PCI to USB Universal Host
Controller" [a USB 1.1 Controller] and example "NEC USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller",
...mmm HEY, with the NEC Host Controller example, it had an 82371AB/EB sitting right
above it in the Device Manager display, but THAT 82371AB/EB DID show its correct icon!
{...Oh, it was a line of Latin, so I figured you would get it through
googling "EHGO latin"
...Haha, "Et Hoc Genus Omne", (colloquially) ..'and all that sort of thing'.}
0 -
In Post#76, Lone Crusader said;
"HOWEVER, ONLY devices installed AFTER updating SYSDM.CPL get
messed up Icons. If the devices were already installed while using the 98SE
version, their Icons remain correct.
But, NOT ALL devices installed after updating SYSDM.CPL get messed
up Icons. Only some."
I wonder if this isn't due to Microsoft in LATER file version changing the
intended 'target icon' to a different icon, while leaving the 'target icon
number(ing)' the same. So say they want to use an updated or different icon,
they do some minor recoding but leave the name 'icon number19' in the
updated file...but now that physical 'icon number 19' is a totally different
icon (fulfilling a different purpose). Makes sense if you figure what older
icons you'd want to get rid of...tape drives going the way of the Dodo, any
tape drive icon would be the first to be replaced with a different icon
(but bearing the same number) as newer functions/hardware types come along.
Only a limited number of (numbered) icons...and if those newer files are used
in the older OS file setup, you might get the type of behaviour Lone
Crusader noted. All conjecture of course, regarding that tape drive icon prob...
...now for something a bit more concrete.
In Post #53, Drugwash said;
"That's not the Tape Device icon. Where on earth did this one come from?
Gosh, weirdness!" ...specifically referring to;
OK, that weird icon bears a very close resemblance to this (look on right);
http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/chap3_0789733943/elementLinks/03fig16.jpg
A Cardbus (/ PC Card type) icon.
Looking into the NEC uPD720101 controller, from here;
(you're going to have to highlight & paste all this URL)
http://members.driverguide.com/matches.php?h=5bfe3431d90f8a2edc5011dfc0515ec4&ids[0]=226568&ids[1]=112648&ids[2]=80195&ids[3]=121609&ids[4]=505363&cid=716&model=CardBus+to+USB+2.0+Enhanced+Host+Controller
it appears THAT Controller gets used on e.g. NEC USB2 5-port PCI Card and
also PCI/Cardbus to USB 2.0 adapters. (Called on both a "USB 2.0 Enhanced
Host Controller". The download link also leads to a bit more file info). Pics:
.
So there may have been a wrong driver (/selected?), or the driver may have
something like a wrongly coded device ID, or maybe they simply folded a wrong
icon into the right driver pack... so that weird icon seen may be an unrelated fault.
.
(Ah, and for that help on that abbreviation elsewhere, Lone Crusader,)
gratias tibi ago Sapiens Forensis ... EHGO
0 -
In Post #254, ragnargd said;
"ASRock 775i65G R3.0 can now be bought:"
[german 'newegg' type site referenced] & also said;
"Unfortunately, no CPU-Compatibility-Entries, though..."
Actually, there is cpu support list through here;
http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/775i65G%20R3.0/
shows R3.0 version has added support for; 'WOLFDALE CPU: Core 2 Duo,
Pentium Dual Core & Celeron Dual Core'.
Core 2 Extreme, QX6800(G0) also added.
Other changes;
such as graphics max shared memory up to 96MB (R2.0 = 64MB),
supporting onboard D-Sub up to 2048x1536@75Hz, AMR port deleted,
LAN spec mentions 'PXE', several added LED indicators (e.g.
LAN 10 or 100), COM port 'connector' (instead of 'header') added,
USB charging (e.g. iPhone) in S1, S4 & S5,
Erp/Eup ready [=low pwr consumption in Off mode],
Possibly better VRM.
In BIOS; (Still PCI/AGP is selectable, but now also)
Internal Graphics Mode ('AUTO'- card{s} present=onboard off,
all card absent=onboard on, or 'ENABLED xxMB' - card ignored=onboard
always selected)->needs confirmation, anybody?,
[some of the Boot Settings Configuration may be missing?? for
HD's and CD/DVD's? unclear.]
No change to any w98 drivers-if something in previous Posts didn't have a
driver previously, it still doesn't now.
.
*Maybe AsRock (or a supplier) had a large amount of ICH5 remaining(?),
alternatively (or additionally);
*The addition of the COM connector suggests to me that some Vendor
of a commercial/industrial nature requested AsRock to reissue such a mobo,
possibly as an alternative to other more expensive? motherboards selling
currently that are intended for the industrial sector that use e.g. ICH7R.
[Ahh, describing those mobos is too much typing for this Post.]
*Is AsRock 775i65G R3.0 attractive for us?... not particularly...
as '98 Guy' [98Guy] notes;
http://www.win98banter.com/showthread.php?t=51931
[Edit; Perhaps 98Guy meant '5.1' instead of '7.1'....and for sure, the driver in
'C-MmediaAC97DrvUDA044Logo_Win98seme2kxp.zip' lists only CM9738,
not 9761a, in its INF files for W95/W98.]
0 -
In Post#4, Spock said;
"Samsung... SynchMaster 700IFT. Picure is ok, but every browswer page of any complexity
gets refreshed; i.e. screen blanks and then refreshes - just once. . Not an issue because
i don't intend using the monitor, but curious...."
That CRT monitor is from just before the turn of the century, so ageing componentry could
be responsible.
An alternate explanation presents itself upon examination of the user manual;
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/media/i3d/01/A/man-migrate/MANUAL000015483.pdf
shows that it has a menu adjustment for 0.7V or 1.0Volt. If you are using a GeForce 6200,
regardless of whether it is PCI, AGP, or PCI-E, GeForce 6200 will be using about 0.7V out
for (analog) VGA. If you have 1.0V selected in the monitor settings, this would mean the
monitor is receiving 'in' a video signal which the monitor 'regards' as about 30% less than
what it 'expects' to be useable. This conceivably could cause periodic "blanks' of the screen...
See;
for not too much background info...
_
In Post#14, Spock said;
"Seems a bit odd this 1366 figure. Wonder if it's a typo..."
1366 x 768 is a resolution, typically seen associated in use with later OSes, e.g. Vista, Win 7.
_
er,...Post #1, "TIA"? - 'transient ischaemic attack'??(mini/precursor stroke)
0 -
In Post #9 ramentaschen said;
"...poll other users to see what they are using and also what software programs"
For FF v2.0.0.20 the add-on AdBlock Plus V1.0.2 seems to cut down webpage
download time or display. (Or add-on AdBlockingFiltersetp V1.0 may be a simpler
way to achieve the same result).
_
It's also possible to run several different versions, or several of the same version,
of FF. I'm still not clear if these are separate 'processes' of FF; anyway the effect
is similar, and can be helpful in certain situations.
Example; 1st instance of FF with all it's different 'Windows/Tabs' is running
happily, 2nd instance is launched to say, download a PDF that you know/suspect
will freeze FF. If 2nd instance of FF does freeze, bring up the W98 Close Program
dialog (Ctrl+Alt+Del), see the 2nd instance of FF, click it 'Shut Down'. The 2nd
instance disappears, while your 1st instance of FF is unaffected (no need to
kill and then 'Restore Session' all your 1st instance 'Windows/Tabs'). Refs;
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Opening_a_new_instance_of_Firefox_with_another_profile
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Using_multiple_profiles_-_Firefox
http://www.sencha.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-4899.html
http://superuser.com/questions/72121/how-to-start-different-instances-processes-with-firefox-win32
http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/06/23/0123243/firefox-364-released-with-out-of-process-plugins
0 -
If it's the Small Form Factor [of the] Dell Optiplex GX270
don't be surprised if you get random freezes/crashes/reboots
- that model was infamous for failing/bulged capacitors on
the motherboard & inside its (SFF) PSU, e.g.;
http://www.badcaps.net/forum/showthread.php?t=450&highlight=gx270
-to-
http://www.badcaps.net/forum/showthread.php?t=450&highlight=gx270&page=6
http://www.badcaps.net/forum/showthread.php?t=20102&highlight=gx270
http://www.badcaps.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22348&highlight=gx270
http://www.badcaps.net/forum/showthread.php?t=23283&highlight=gx270
If you have problems with it, I'd think hardware would be more likely than software.
0 -
??
My googling skills are surely not more developed than other Members... nevertheless, may I put forth this information:
Upon any problem , especially hardware related, I GOOGLE (item), "model fault" or
"model problem" (without quotation marks). ...so "P3B-F fault", ¾ down page 2;
I initially thought this fellow;
http://discussions.virtualdr.com/showthread.php?214954-XP-PIII-upgrade-freezes-system-P3B-F
had started to get to the root cause, but no, merely more symptons of the problem.
OK, onwards, google, "P3B-F fault", (without quotation marks), bottom page 2;
http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~portnoi/asusreworkguide.html
About half way down THAT webpage... it looks promising. (& not previously ruled out by PhaytalError.) It's known informally as the 'Photoshop Problem'.
Cheers
[Edit; I am inputting into http://www.google.com.au/webhp?complete=0 , other google country zones may conceivably return differing google page results/differing google page result ordering.]
0 -
submix8c, Post #14
..."The best thing you could do for your setup (again, IMHO) is to
1 - Uninstall that part of Norton 2002
2 - Set Recycle Bins to "independent"
3 - Change that LARGE partition's bin to "Delete Immediately"
4 - BE CAREFUL when deleting files from it"
I have found that CAREFUL is not sufficient, as the menu choices when
right clicking, as standard show;
_______________
Create Shortcut
Delete
Rename
_______________
At some point you will have the intention of renaming a Folder, file, etc.,
move the cursor onto the vicinity of 'Rename', mistakenly click on the
adjacent 'Delete' and ->"Ouch!", Folder/file mistakely immediately deleted.
The odds of such a mistake occuring WILL be substantially decreased by
using the program Reshacker.exe to reorder the choices on the menu to read;
_____________
Delete
Create Shortcut
Rename
_____________
The file concerned is C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\shell32.dll , 'menu 210' of that file.
--------------
Also:
Nomen, Post #16:
"If it helps
, it is confirmed as a problem in Windows 98: http://support.micro...kb/187188/en-us"APPLIES TO
* Microsoft Windows 98 Standard Edition"
So it doesn't apply to Second Edition?...
Does it also apply to win-ME?"
jaclaz, Post #18
"WHO knows?"
On my kludged together, 'only for into Internet' system, for
Windows Me (4.90.3000) that particular Recycle Bin dialog correctly shows
19.0 GB for my C: drive.
0 -
->I don't know.
But there shouldn't be any need to dive so deep into the OS workings.
Later productions of Windows Powershell could count files in a
designated Folder, trigger an event upon certain number reached, &
create Folders & redirect output to a created Folder - therefore it seems
likely to me that earlier productions of that for W98 (->WSH) may be arranged
to carry out a similar function well BEFORE Max is reached... if you already know
know around about what the max files in Folder is going to be for your specific
downloads, given PATHS and such, like outlined above.
0 -
Probably the best VISUAL representation of FAT with references to Win98 is at;
(also mentioned as a link on webpage File Allocation Table Wiki ),
http://www.beginningtoseethelight.org/fat16/index.php
Originally published around March 2002, the information is believed to be
still correct. (Webpage Author; NullAck).
-------
In relation to the problem about running out of filename entries due to
}in a single Folder{ too many filesnames from whole downloaded Website
(although the topic originator doesn't explicitly specify it, as the
46 long LFN Filenames are all the same length it seems he may be
taking timed snapshots of one particular website),
parcelling the downloaded Website into a number of Folders is called for
e.g.
not
C:/DnLd/WebsiteFolder/ '->all website in single folder' i.e. [WebsiteFolder]
but rather
C:/DnLd/WebsiteFolderA001/ '->some website' [not more than 13106 entries]
C:/DnLd/WebsiteFolderA002/ '->more website' [ " ]
C:/DnLd/WebsiteFolderA003/ '->yet more website' [ " ]
and so on, thereby avoiding the posters current problem of his exceeding the
maximum possible number of filename entries within a single Folder for W98,
(13106 being applicable here only because of the originators specific filename
length).
0 -
Not so, jds,
"The Download Webpage Approx Dates;" refers to approximate dates upon
which the U98SESP webpage (at htasoft) had for download same named
and samed versioned ->but_different<- versions of U98SESP3.EXE.
Understand:
.The webpage as it existed on "4-1-12" had a 46MB 'same no. version'.
.The webpage as it existed on "01-23-12" also had a 46MB 'same no. version'.
These two 46MB versions were NOT the same file, and were NOT able to be
applied without, for instance, understanding that one '46MB' was only for
application to a IE5.5 system, while the other '46MB' file was only for
application to a IE6 system.
Therefore, the >Contention< that you can refer to or identify a U98SESP version
by simply referring to whatever 'nnMB' size it showed on (previous) htasoft
webpage(s) demonstrably did not hold true in the past.
To prevent such an occurance In The Future, a minimally better way to
identify the file(s) on future productions of that webpage was requested
(And for Additional Reasons put forward by myself and Drugwash).
PROBLEMCHYLD and Fredledingue deserve great kudos for continuing
excellent work on this software - its worth making the extra effort to improve,
especially where such improvement can head off users making simple
mistakes and incorrectly blaming the software.
0 -
Taken only as an easy example:
_
All cited files are Called -- "U98SESP3.EXE" --, & display same Version.
The Download Webpage Approx Dates;
----------"4-1-12"-(4 Jan 2012)---------------"01-23-12"-(23 Jan 2012)---
_____ / Size Stated / File Size________/ Size Stated / File Size
w_o IE already installed;
______"40MB"----(42,661,888 bytes)____"42MB"----(44,140,032 bytes)
w_IE5.5 sp2 core;
______"45MB"----(47,762,944 bytes)____"46MB"----(49,044,992 bytes)
w_IE6 sp1 core;
______"46MB"----(48,352,768 bytes)____"47MB"----(49,663,488 bytes)
-
Possible conversation;-
{'Hey joe blow, what version of U98sesp3 did you see that behaviour on?'
}'Err..the 46MB one!!'
{'Yeah!? I'll test that.'
_
Less sleepy heads may recognize that it has been entirely possible for
two people, believing that they are tracking a problem with the same
baseline EXE applied, to in fact have been mistakenly using different EXE's.
Suggestion is to display thusly on new versions webpage;
_
e.g__________U98SESPn.n ___(61,008,896 bytes)
_
The (61,008,896 bytes) is that size of the file, as displayed in that files
W98 or WinME files Properties Dialog (note for WinME=not 'size on disk').
The brackets merely act as a helpful hint which 'size' on the dialog is
being refered to.
While in no way <i>unique</i>, the size plus the file dates will do most as
sufficient to be comfortable. ( I don't think anyone who has tracked file dates
back through Device Manager, through dialogues, through INFs, would want
to rely only on displayed file dates. Biting tongue on dating conventions.)
In closing, also acts as signpost in case <i>something</i> adds itself into
the EXE; with the size plainly stated on the website, harder for black hats to
'play'. ...(Very close Tomasz86...even simpler. Drugwash more so. No attacks
intended or implied to anyone. Pass the marshmallows ...or a fire extinguisher.)
0 -
Happy enough for you to take as long as you like to bring out next Ver
of 98 SE SP X.x BUT; when the new Ver goes on your download page,
if you could state the exact Size of it in bytes (not Mb, Mib, kb, etc.,) next
to it as an extra method of ID of what ver it is (e.g.when files Details
pane view is active), promise, I Won't Even look or care if you do/don't
place the actual Version number also further to the right...
[i'm talking about the bare .exe size, not any compression container size]
0
."
, it is confirmed as a problem in Windows 98: 
It Works!
in Windows 9x/ME
Posted · Edited by buyerninety
Jaclaz said;
"Just for the record, you can normally use grub4dos and a floppy image to flash
the BIOS, and/or a plain "CD from floppy"."
Mmmm.., but is this }ASUS{ mobo, P4P800-MX , yes? and ASUS mobo
often have ... their own quirky software methods for flashing THEIR
BIOSes. Therefore, in case of ASUS, I would advise reading the
ASUS manual for their mobo? (ASUS P4P800-MX ,= e1696_p4p800-mx.pdf )
and proceed using the ASUS manuals instructions for flashing BIOS.
_
[and as other OP posts suggest he is not newbie, I would suggest OP
look for a second SAME BIOS chip, perhaps from a gutter 'dead' unwanted
mobo, to use as a 'backup/ready replacement' chip into which he could
flash another BIOS image for that mobo..
(e.g. P4P800-MX has removeable/replaceable BIOS chip)
(OP in Australia?, where it is not unusual to find computers 'kerbside')]