Nomen

> I want to build a powerful retro PC that will have dual boot, XP and 98SE. Look into the Asrock 4core DUAL-VSTA and DUAL-SATA2 motherboards. Based on VIA chipset, there are win-98 drivers for everything except HD-audio. Win-98 drivers for SATA controller means you can set large hard drives to native/sata mode and you won't see the 137gb drive-size limit. Those boards have PCIe *and* AGP card slots so it will take either type of video card, and will take DDR or DDR2 ram. These are socket-775 boards. You'll probably have to look on ebay for them. These boards were sold new about 9 or 10 years ago.

I can pick up a new ASRock G41C-GS R2.0 (Socket 775 Intel G41 + ICH7) for $85. It's an interesting board - it has 2 DIMM slots that will take either DDR2 or DDR3. I don't know where it ranks in terms of socket-775 performance (if near the top I might pick it up just to make a nice XP system with the many 775 CPU's I have). But I'm really interested if win-98 will run on this thing. On-board audio, ethernet and graphics I can do without if necessary, but SATA and USB and DMA and other chipset stuff I'm going to want working drivers. I haven't been paying attention to where Win-98 is at after ICH5 so I don't know what's possible and what isin't.

I'm not talking about KB's that do telemetry or win-10 preparation/downloading (those are "bad" for other reasons). Is there a list of KB's that have technical faults that MS would rather you not install? Of the over 700 MSU files that I have, I'd like to pull out the defective ones.

The Win-7 SP1 32-bit image that I created that had the largest number of KB's rolled in had 577 KB's. So for now I am comparing that list of 577 to your list. Your list has 456 KB's. Given that, it's somewhat surprising that there are only 167 KB's that are in common to both lists. There are 410 kb's in my list that are not in yours. There are 289 kb's in your list that are not in mine. My list of 577 includes 3125574 (the convienence roll-up). Your list does not - but I'm not sure the wmic command will show it. I also do not have any kb updates higher than 3173040 (which is approx. August 2016). You have 9 KB's higher than that, which probably became available since Sept. 2016. I have a separate list of 96 "bad" kb's that I will not install for one reason or another. You have 23 KB's that are on that list. Here they are: 976932 2505438 2506928 2545698 2592687 2660075 2670838 2726535 2840149 2882822 2923545 2970228 2994023 2999226 3078667 3086255 3092627 3093983 3102429 3107998 3118401 3124280 3167679 One more thing. What I consider to be my "standard" Win-7 install image was built using 279 KB's (not 577). It does not include any "bad" kb's. It is up-to-date as of Sept 1, 2016. I don't think there have been many new updates / fixes since then. Maybe a dozen. Your installation of 410 kb's seems high. I don't think you would have such a high number if you performed a new install today and accepted most "Important" and *some* optional KB's that Windows Update would offer you.

Open a command prompt (as administrator just to make sure this works) and enter this: wmic qfe list full /format:texttablewsys > "C:\hotfix.txt" This will dump a list of all kb's, updates, hotpatches and fixes to the file c:\hotfit.txt. You can change the path and file-name to somewhere else if you want - just make sure you can find the file. Upload the file here as an attachment. I'll compare your KB list to my own lists and see if I can spot any differences.

About 6 months ago I was working with RT7 Lite to incorporate all known KB updates into a base-level Win-7 Ultimate SP1 32-bit CD image. At one point I had about 550 KB's rolled into the image (far more than what would be offered by MS during WU update sessions at the time). When I began using finished/installed OS on a test system, I was seeing the above behavior (getting stupid message when renaming or creating new folders, and the issue with Libraries). So I began to back-track and created new installation images with fewer and fewer KB's rolled in until I finally narrowed it down to 958559. Just that one single KB, when rolled into a virgin Win-7 SP1 Ultimate 32-bit CD image, caused these issues.

I have found that kb 958559 causes this behavior on Win-7 SP1 Ultimate 32-bit: - not showing (not having) any Libraries - not being able to create new libraries, and - giving an "Item not found" message when creating new folders or renaming existing ones.

Just downloaded USB Device Tree Viewer 3.0.8 (http://www.downloadcrew.com/article/32197-usb_device_tree_viewer) and tried to run on my system with Kex 4.5.2015.11 and I get USBTreeview.exe is lined to missing export cm_get_devnode_status. Even tried setting it to Win-2k compatibility. Any ideas if this can be made to work under Win-98?

I guess in these situations when an ebay vendor is selling the same key over and over gain and MS sees these validation attempts from different IP's and black-lists the key, that the key sequence never finds it's way to the internet by way of discussion, etc. If the computer is OEM or brand-name then there's a good chance that you'd be able to create an installation ISO that is tied to some OEM codes in the BIOS that define what windows license the computer had when it left the factory.

>Well, bad news! > > I've been told by Microsoft that the product key that was used to activate Windows 7 over the phone was blocked Put part of your key into a google search and see if the entire key come up in the results. That should tell you if the key has been widely circulated.

RT7 Lite seems to work. I've used it to create win7-sp1 rollups with over 500 kb files and other stuff (like IE10 and .net). And by the way, there are some kb's inside the convenience roll-up that are "bad" by most measures - hence why I've manually rolled in only the good kb's and none of the bad ones.

> Perhaps mouse B itself is faulty? Could be a loose contact that just about makes a connection in the first port but doesn't in the second port? But I get the guitar-sound when mouse B is plugged into or out of either port. So Windows must be able to see it being plugged in and unplugged, so there must be some communication with mouse B in either port. I define "working" when I move the mouse and the arrow moves on-screen. The led or laser light is visible/on when mouse B is plugged into either port.

This laptop is a core i7 and dates to I think 2011 and I don't think it has USB3 - I think the only way to give it USB3 is through a docking station or slide out the CD drive and slide in a USB3 card. But none of that should matter because I have one mouse (mouse A) that works in both ports and another mouse (mouse B) that works in only one of them. Windows gives off that sound (like a guitar being plucked) when either mouse is plugged into or removed from either port.

Got a Dell laptop I use as a test system when I create new win-7 Ultimate SP1 32-bit install images using RT7. So it doesn't get a lot of use. There's a couple of corded USB mice that I use on the system depending where I happen to set it up and turn it on. I notice that one mouse works on either of 2 USB ports on the right side of the laptop, while the second mouse only works on one of the ports. The laptop gives the usual tone-chime sound when either mouse is plugged in and removed from either port. Any idea what's going on here? I thought that things "Just Worked (tm)" with Windoze 7?

In November 2015 I was messing around with a Lenovo M50 thinkcenter and I downloaded 2ajz51usa.exe and 2pjy25usa.exe which were supposed to be primarily bios updates. The only place I'm seeing dnemac.vxd on my system is in c:\windows\system and c:\2ajt51a.doc (yes that's a folder). I wouldn't have run those exe files on this system unless I couldn't unpack them with winrar, and I see that winrar indicates that it can unpack them. For the folder c:\2ajt51a.doc to have been created, it must have been done programatically because I normally wouldn't unpack new or temp stuff on my c drive. I also see that a few days later I downloaded lenovo-drivers-update-utility.zip which contains lenovo-drivers-update-utility.exe which doesn't unpack with winrar or 7zip so it's quite possible I ran that file on this system to get at the files. A search for "winproxy" turns up no files or folders containing that string. A search for ipsecdrv.vxd turns up only in my c:\windows\system folder, which again is unusual to not see it anywhere else. The file seems to be somewhat rare - there are about 600 search results for "ipsecdrv" (most of them seem to be ipsecdrv.sys) and only 30 search results for ipsecdrv.vxd (and only 2 results when ipsecdrv.vxd is put in quotes, one of those results being this thread). So beyond the mystery of why I have those 2 drivers installed and active on my system, there remains the question what this "Mac Shim / Enhancer Adapter" is doing on my system - what new or strange ability/capability does my system have because it's there? Regarding "ipsec" itself, I see that in 2013 I installed something called "Microsoft IPSec VPN" which the config utility lets me set either an automatic or a specific certificate for IPSec authentication (I have it set to Auto) or use a pre-shared key, and to enable IPSec logging (which is doing). Why I installed this, I don't know. Probably to see if it would help FF-2 browsing experience. As for whether or not Win-98 has (or doesn't have?) a driver specifically for IPSec (and if "ipsec" is part of the file name) it would seem the answer is no. This file I have - IPSecDrv.VXD, made by "SafeNet", seems to be win-98 compatible.

I was having problems with a usb thumb drive so I started my win-98 system in safe mode and went through device manager blowing away anything USB-related. I have a USB keyboard, USB mouse and a USB-attached multi-SD-card reader as my only USB devices (other than what-ever thumb drive I happen to plug in). In going through device manager I saw, under Network Adapters, my ethernet card (Davicom 9102/A) and something called "Deterministic Networks Mac Shim" (it was shown with the same mini-icon as the Davicom card). I don't recall seeing that before. I leave it alone for now. Maybe it's got something to do with the Win-98 Personal Web Server I installed a few months ago (which I'm not running any more and have disabled via msconfig). I reboot and run the nusb36 thing and maybe reboot a few more times and everything is back to normal (USB-wise). I can read the thumb drive now. But something's wrong - no internet. I check - yes, the cable is still plugged in. I want to bring up network properties - but Network Neighborhood has disappeared from my desktop. That "Mac Shim" thing is also gone from device manager. Turns out I have no installed network protocals. ? I add TCP/IP and do all the settings and re-boot. Upon restart, I get a message that "Deterministic Networks Enhancer has been re-installed because TCP/IP has been re-installed" and I have to re-boot. um, ok, I reboot, and I have network access again. I'm looking at what this Deterministic thing is, it's using DNEMAC.VXD (Deterministic Networks Enhancer Adapter, file date 8/15/2001) and IPSecDrv.VXD (Safenet IPsec plugin, Safenet VPN client, file-date 5/3/2002) and maybe a few other files. A web-search for this stuff seems to always point to Cisco and/or VPN stuff. I've never set up VPN software on this system. If this is for the Win-98 PWS, how can the files be dated after 1999? If this isin't for PWS, what could it be for?

Was wondering what was the last or best netbook-sized PC that had good to complete XP driver support.

These servers have been running on BX-440 chipsets with P2 or P3 800-850 mhz CPU since about '99. Gigabyte motherboards (with on-board SCSI that isin't used any more). 768 and 1 gb installed ram. Newer dlink pci ethernet cards (circa 2005 or 2006) - running 1000 mbps (yea, the cards had NT drivers out-of-the-box).

I'm looking for a low-power micro computer box (or even just a board) along the lines of a Zotac Zbox or Intel NUC that has win-2k or even (a long shot) NT4 drivers. Would like to take a pair of NT4 servers (based on desktop PC) and replicate them in a low-power format (15 - 25 watts). I think the installed software can run under 2K without much issue, but this might get problematic if I try running XP. If such hardware once did exist, it might still be available on ebay. I just need to know what to look for. Any ideas?

I'm still using FF2 as my primary browser, and use opera 12.02 when necessary (like for posting this). Under FF2 I have addons like Block Site 1.0.3, DOM inspector 1.8.1.20, FrameExt 1.0.0.4 (don't know if it's doing anything for me), Lightbeam 1.0.2 (same with that one), Nuke Anything Enhanced 1.0.2 (I like that one), Remember Mismached Domains 1.4.6 (doesn't seem to help much), RightToClick (don't use it much, doesn't always seem to work), and YesScript 1.7. Between adding hosts file entries, YesScript and Block Site, I'm still getting a lot of script-not-responding messages. I'm using DOM inspector to see where / what these scripts are, and add them to YesScript and/or to my hosts file and/or Block Site. What I'd really like is a way to know *WHAT* script is not responding - is there any add-on that will tell me that, or some other way to get that info? I set my script time-out value to 4 seconds (any script that takes longer than that - I don't want FF to run it). What I don't get is - for YesScript, if you enter the URL of a site you browse to, does YesScript block all scripts coded by the page you have browsed to, even when the script files point to other domains (which is typical)?

Does any nvidia video card above the 6200 have enhanced hardware for video (movie) rendering that reduces the main CPU load when playing back hi-rez movies? Does having 512 mb vs 256 mb video ram give you any movie-playing advantage whether or not any such enhanced hardware is present on the card? (this is, again, my way of asking if anything beyond a vanilla 6200 AGP card with 256 mb ram gives any benefit to win-98 users with P4 or Core2 systems who are not gamers but who may want to watch 1080p movies using mplayer classic or vlc).

Is it normal that on win-98se, when you ping 127.x.x.x (where x.x.x could be *anything*) that you always end up pinging yourself (ie - the local machine) ? I unplug my ethernet cable and I'm always able to ping 127.x.x.x. My hosts file defines localhost as 127.0.0.3, and ipconfig sez my netmask is 255.255.0.0 (that's intentional on my part). TCP/IP properties has my actual network IP hardcoded as 192.168.2.11. Reason I ask is that I'm looking at the Personal Web Server logs and I'm seeing hits from 127.0.0.84 and wondering where the hell that's coming from. I doubt that my LAN router is able to pass local traffic on anything other than 192.168.x.x. 127.0.0.84 must have originated from my own pc... ?

IHV kit issue was still kicking around in 2007: http://www.freelists.org/post/wdmaudiodev/UAA-Driver-Information,1 See also: http://www.firmlogix.com/whitepapers/MS_driver_ HDAudioDdi11.doc http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/0/5/f05a42ce-575b-4c60-82d6-208d3754b2d6/hdaudio11.ppt

Win-XP created a hash at install time based on about a dozen different hardware serial numbers or codes, and over time some of those hardware components could change and not trigger an on-line re-validation. Some of these hardware items were CPU type, amount of installed RAM, type of video card, CD-drive model, NIC mac address, hard drive type/model, volume serial number, etc. Each item got 1 "vote" (the mac address got 3 all by itself). If the total votes dropped below 5, XP would invalidate itself and force you to perform on-line re-validation. There was a program called "xpinfo.exe" that would display all the hardware items and show which of them were giving a "yes" vote. So that's how I understand the validation scheme for XP. How does it work with Windows 7? Is there a similar hash generated based on hardware components? Is there a program like "xpinfo" that will tell you the current state of which components agree with the original Windows install state?

Win98se with Kex. I know the thread is about win-95, but I thought I'd put in my 2 cents about flash/youtube on win-98. I don't know how close we are at this point in having flash/youtube stop working on win-98, and I don't know if what works for win-98 will work for win-95.