Nomen

I have read about one instance where a user performed the registry hack, downloaded what-ever updates were now being made available to his system, and upon a subsequent system restart got a "non Genuine Windows" notification or message. Is it possible that one of those WGA "updates" was presented to his "POS2009" system, and it didn't like what it found and put his system into a WGA failure state? Even if he had previously either downloaded/installed the same WGA update - or perhaps there is a WGA update specifically for POS2009 systems? I guess the take home message is, if you're using the POS2009 registry mod, you MUST select "Manual" mode when performing a WindowsUpdate session and look over every update being offered, and DE-SELECT anything related to WGA (and can anyone confirm or refute that any such WGA updates are actually being offered?)

Ok, so I need this explained to me. Why would I want to compress a program to run it? I can already run VLC, so what would compressing it with UPX do? And why UPX? Why not some other compression format?

I wouldn't mind seeing that 2mb limit increased. I just scanned my systems to see how big drvidx.bin is, and in one case it was 1.15 mb and another was 1.590 mb. But in terms of making an updated universal installation CD, I thought that just adding new inf's and drivers to one of the directories on the CD would accomplish the same thing in terms of Win-98 finding all required drivers during installation. No?

I thought the heartbleed bug was a mishandling of a variable (some sort of "heart-beat" function) having to do with SSL (or something that normally a server that handles SSL authentication). In other words, why would a client device be vulnerable to heart-bleed? How (or why) would a browser contain SSL-server functionality? (it's my understanding that the only time a consumer-operated client device would expose itself to a heart-bleed condition is if it were sharing files in an unsecured setting, like a public wifi situation - which is not a typical or common use-case).

I thought that any PCIe video card with TurboCache was definately not functional under win-98. Has this changed?TurboCache is a hardware feature that is only possible with PCIe (not AGP or PCI) cards - yes?

If I see differences in mshtm#.ini between mshtml.dll in my windows/system folder and this new mshtml.dll (after running both of them through import patcher), for example: --------------- current mshtml.dll (6.00.2800.1651): [Patches needed] appHelp.dll=Functions, Unbind UxTheme.dll=Functions, Unbind BROWSEUI.dll=DLLs SHDOCVW.dll=DLLs ----------------- new mshtml.dll (6.00.2900.6550 xpsp_sp3_qfe_escrow.140429-1337): [Patches needed] appHelp.dll=Functions, Unbind mshtml.dll=DLLs, Functions [sHLWAPI.dll] SHRegGetValueW= [msjava.dll] execute_java_dynamic_method= execute_java_dynamic_method64= javaStringLength= javaStringStart= convert_Java_Object_to_IUnknown= jcdwGetData= FindClass= convert_IUnknown_to_Java_Object= makeJavaStringW= execute_java_constructor= GCFramePop= is_instance_of= GCFramePush= [urlmon.dll] CoInternetSetFeatureEnabled= CoInternetIsFeatureZoneElevationEnabled= CoInternetIsFeatureEnabled= CoInternetIsFeatureEnabledForUrl= ------------- What would that indicate? Why so many references to java in the new file?

Is there any way to know if win-9x/IE6 is vulnerable to this exploit? Is anyone hosting a proof-of-concept test page, maybe something that opens calc.exe like used to be done by milw0rm? Does pastebin have anything like that? Edit: Ok, I've got the file. Now is there any way, on a win-98 system, to decode it and get mshtml.dll? All I get are a bunch of ._p files and an _sfx_.dll that I have no idea what to do with. Is there a tool or utility program that (I suppose) can generate the target file?

So what's the deal with this IE vulnerability that has existed for almost 10 years but has somehow, mysteriously, never been discovered until just days after XP goes EOL? Supposedly affects IE6 - but is that the same IE6 that win-9x/me and 2K uses, or the IE6 that only XP and higher can use? Has anyone downloaded WindowsXP-KB2964358-x86-custom-ENU.exe and unpacked it? I can't seem to find a direct download link for it. Does it function on win-9x? Or does it die when its exposed to a win-9x system - just like so many other windows and IE exploits?

Using WinMD5Free v1.20, I get an MD5 of 644bd3b6d12e3bf89c02316bb7ad9d3b - which is matched to yours. File size is 497,345 bytes. Winrar (version 3.71, Sept. 20/2007) is not able to unpack that file. Well, it unpacks it, but all files have size of zero bytes. Winzip (version 18.0, Aug 16/2004) does not recognize it as a format it can unpack. 7-Zip (7zG.exe, version 4.65, 2/3/2009) acts similar to Winrar (generates files of zero length). Universal Extractor (version 1.6.1, 5/12/2010) is a program that I installed a few months ago, and it also can't unpack that file - but trying just now on several other .zip and .rar files and it also can't unpack those either, so obviously either my version is broken or it's not compable with win-98/kex. edit: I just scanned my entire computer and I have a grand total of 12 (twelve) .7z files (and 6 of those are hacked versions of npswf32.dll). I know I have thousands of .zip and .rar files. I must conclude, as I stated previously, that .7z files are "odd-ball" in the windows world. It's my impression that they come from the unix or linux world (or maybe atari or something equally arcane). The largest of those 12 is mplayer_lite_r35250.7z (9.4 mb) - dated 10/21/2012, and winrar is able to unpack it without errors.

After downloading this: http://www.mediafire.com/download/2wx6fb9pscad3zl/RegUtils.7z Both Winrar and 7-zip are giving me errors while processing RegUtils.7z: --------------- WinRar is saying this: Unknown method in RegUtils\RegCon\REGCON!.TXT Unknown method in RegUtils\RegCon\REGCON.TXT Unknown method in RegUtils\RegiStrip\REGSTR!P.TXT Unknown method in RegUtils\RegCon\REGCON.EXE Unknown method in RegUtils\RegiStrip\REGSTRIP.EXE In addition to having problems with the above 5 files, 7-zip is also saying this: Unsupported compression method for RegUtils\Regcon\UNLHA32.DLL -------------- Uni-extract also has problems with this file. Can someone explain why an abscure compression method that is rarely used to compress files in the Windows world was used for this RegCon software?

I'll try RegCon - once I sort out and unravel which version I should be using based on the convoluted discussion happening about it here. Regarding Rloew's information regarding large system.dat files and having gigabit ethernet, here's another data point: Another win-98 system I have has a system.dat file with size 13,565kb and D-link DGE-530T Gigabit ethernet adapter. I don't know if the adapter has to be set to 1 gb (or be using jumbo frames, or both) for the "gigabit-ethernet" effect to kick in (in terms of causing problems with large registry files) but I believe the card is working at giga-speed (it is connected to a 24-port switch with giga-speed capability). Just out of curiosity - what is the registry size of a default install of Win-98, say on an i845 motherboard with nvidia agp graphics, directx 9c, all MS updates and patches applied?

Ok, I had a look at the CTH thread from 2012, and I obtained regcompact1.0 (file date 12/01/00) and I ran it. Results: System size 12676kb - Compacted 12652kb - Ratio 0% User size 1860kb - Compacted 1856kb - Ratio 0% I killed RegCompact (I use cctask) before it could make any changes. It doesn't seem to have done much to reduce the size. Should it have? I have on-board ethernet on this system (Davicom 9102/A PCI Fast Ethernet Adapter) it only does 10/100 speed. I have disabled that adapter on my other win-98 PC and have installed a 1000/100/10 PCI ethernet card on that system (offhand I don't know how big system.dat is on that system - I'll check tommorrow). So what's my next option to compact my registry - since RegCompact did squat? Should I try SmalReg4 (mentioned in the 2012 thread) ?

crap. posting to wrong thread...

A while back I posted about having a system.dat file that was 15 mb in size. Scanreg /fix /opt from DOS did nothing. I uninstalled about a dozen (maybe more) programs from control panel, and midway through that I noted that system.dat size did go down to 14 mb, but did not change even though I continued to uninstall more stuff. I ran regclean about 3 or 4 times in a row (until it no longer gave me the "fix" button to click) and I forgot exactly that scanreg (dos) did, but when using the /fix and/or /opt it either did nothing or it hung. None of those tools did anything to reduce the size of system.dat below 14 mb. I then fired up Norton SystemWorks 2002 and ran either Windoctor or Optimization wizard, but one of them spent a lot of time analyzing the registry, and had a bunch of entries that it wanted to fix (either a drive assignment was changed, or delete the entry). It was only after running the Norton programs that system.dat was reduced to 12.7 mb. The win-98 version of scanregw doesn't seem to detect anything wrong with the registry, but the win-2k version immediately says there's something wrong and replaces it with an older backup (15 mb version) which it doesn't seem to check before it replaces it. So is there a program that will run on win-98se that can correctly diagnose if there is a problem with a system.dat registry file (even a LARGE system.dat file)? Is there a program that can really fix and/or optimize a large system.dat file without hanging? What exactly is known about how large the system.dat file can be under win-98se without exceeding some limit or causing operational problems? PS: I have version 4.1a, build 7364.1 of microsoft regclean. It's dated as December 30, 1997. Does a more recent version exist?

The problems that my home win-98 system has are as follows. I've often wondered if they're inter-related: 1) If I use "my computer" to browse to the "c:\program files" directory, I don't get a listing of the Program Files directory. I get a listing of the c:\windows\fonts directory. The directory address shown in the Address bar is C:\Program Files. If I type in the address of a sub-directory inside c:\Program files, then I can navigate those sub-directories without issue. 2) I am unable to permenantly set the folder-view options to Detailed. Every time the system is started, the view-mode is set as large icons. If I change the mode to detailed, then set Folder-options - View - Like current folder, the system will open all file-browser windows in detail mode for the rest of that session until the computer is restarted. 3) In any version of firefox 2.0.0.2x that I install or run, when I open different sites in multiple tabs and switch between the tabs, the address bar does not change to reflect the URL of the site currently being viewed. What is shown is the first URL opened in the first tab. If I put the cursor in the address bar and hit ESC, then the address bar is changed to show the URL of the current page, and that URL will remain in the address bar even when I change to a different tab, until I again hit the ESC key. If I have multiple sites open and FF crashes, when I restart FF and it asks if I want to resume the previous session (open all the sites again) and I say Yes, FF will invoke the tabs but none of them will show a URL in the address bar, and they will all show the circulating round-arrow as if they are busy doing something. These phenomena do not happen when I bring up multiple tabs in Opera, Pale Moon 3.6.32, or Navigator 9.0.0.6. My system.dat and user.dat file are 14,993 kb and 3,525 kb in size, and I have no policy.pol file. I suspect there is a problem with my registry files - and I have to admit that I have pretty much never messed around with diagnosing and analysing registry files, nor do I know what the current situation is regarding the recommended way to go about measuring the health and/or optimizing the registry of a win-9x/me system using either Microsoft or third-party tools, expecially if the registry has grown to a large size.

I honestly don't know what points you're trying to make. I don't know why you keep mentioning javascript. I don't run noscript. I DO run yes-script. But I don't see how javascript has anything to do with iframes. I am now running FF 2.0.0.20 (I seem to be able to type a reply in this text-editor box, don't know why it works now). It does not show the iframe box on the quirksmode page. But the same version of FF, running on my win-98se system at work, DOES show the iframe box.

Submix: I'm going to use notepad to compose a reply to your reply, since I find it easier to do this rather than struggle with the needlessly complex editor that this site uses. submix8c said: > Points of interest > (...) > Going to this - http:(...) gives me "Iframe - NO" > "Temporarily allow ALL this page" (Noscript Option) gives me > "Iframe - YES" If you read what I've posted above, I turned off all add-ons, and I also get "Iframe - Yes". > This text is displayed in a "box" above the said > messages in both cases - Test page in iframe And Firefox (Bon Echo) and Pale Moon ->DO NOT SHOW THAT BOX<- > I REPEAT! It's all in the CODE of any given website/page > and not something "necessarily unique" to a given > Web Browser which may/may not support such a feature. The iframe code on that page is very simple. Do we know that FF 2.0.0.23 does not support that iFrame code? Why does Netscape Navigator version 9.0.0.6 render that iFrame box correctly? Isin't NN-9 and FF-2 based on the same part of the Mozilla "tree" ? > Did you even read said Topics? (A: Nope, right?) I can't follow every link you post. If you know of any relavent or key nugget of information that can be applied to this thread, then why don't you cut and paste it here? > I assume you have looked here (instructions on that page)? > > Firefox - Go to about:config -> search for “frames” > -> click on browser.frames.enabled > Mine is set to "true". From the very first post in this thread, I said: "For some reason, FF and Palemoon do not render these at all, but NN does. For all of them, the setting "browser.frames.enabled" is set to True (about:config)."

No, this is not a youtube issue. Here - focus on this: ------------- If I go to this page using FF: http://www.quirksmod...iframetest.html the word "Yes" is displayed in the small text-entry "Iframe:" box. But if I visit the same page using NN, there is a large box above the small "Yes" box, containing the words "Test page in iFrame" in a large mono-spaced font. Looking at the source code on that page, my bon-echo version of FF is not displaying or handling this element: <iframe src="iframetest2.html"></iframe> --------------

I found a couple of hostperm.1 files (one each for FF and NN) and they were not marked as read-only. I edited them in notepad and removed these lines: ======== host popup 2 hausaufgaben–referate.de host install 2 hausaufgaben–referate.de host image 2 hausaufgaben–referate.de ========= When I restarted FF, the "hausaufgaben" entries were gone. Strange. Perhaps there was a parsing error when FF encounters a dash (-) in the domain name. Any idea why FF and PM are not displaying iframe content (such as youtube video's) ? If I go to this page using FF: http://www.quirksmode.org/iframetest.html the word "Yes" is displayed in the small text-entry "Iframe:" box. But if I visit the same page using NN, there is a large box above the small "Yes" box, containing the words "Test page in iFrame" in a large mono-spaced font. Looking at the source code on that page, my bon-echo version of FF is not displaying or handling this element: <iframe src="iframetest2.html"></iframe>

So I have Firefox 2.0.0.23pre (bon echo) and Netscape Navigator 9.0.0.6 installed on this win-98se system (and a couple other browsers, like Opera 12.02 and PaleMoon 3.6.32). For both FF and NN, under Tools - Options - Content, the list of exceptions for "Block pop-up windows" and "load images automatically" both have an entry named "hausaufgaben" configured as "blocked". Regardless how many times I clear those lists, that entry always comes back. According to google translate, hausaufgaben is German for "homework". I've searched the registry for hausaufgaben - nothing found. Any idea what's going on with that? Also this question: A lot of media sites have embedded videos coded as iframes. For some reason, FF and Palemoon do not render these at all, but NN does. For all of them, the setting "browser.frames.enabled" is set to True (about:config). I've disabled all add-ons in FF, but still can't get it to render the iframe content. Lastly, will any version of Opera higher than 12.02 run on win-98se with kex?

I have about 10 different files going by the name js3250.dll, but they all say version 4.0 in file properties (but a few of them don't have a version tab in file properties). File dates range from 2/19/2008 to 7/19/2012. File size ranges from 443 kb to 1016 kb. They are associated with FF 2.0.0.2x, Navigator 9.0, and a couple different versions of Palemoon. Are they interchangeable? Is there a "best" version (in terms of stability, performance) to be running on a win-98 system for FF 2.0.0.2x ?

This page has some interesting information about fireshot: http://alshedupur.com/fireshot-pro-for-free/

===== I also use Windows 98SE as my primary OS on most of my machines. The remaining ones runs AmigaDOS. Kex is fine for general users, but I would not describe it as suitable for a default. It is not 100% compatable with all Software and can cause problems for a Developer like me. ===== (sorry - the quote attributions got messed up in this overly complex editor window that this site uses as I use Opera 12 to post this) Correct me if I'm wrong, but if a given exe or dll is not compatible with Kex, then would setting the Kex properties for those files to "Disable KernelEx Extensions" not be a sufficient remedy? Can you (or anyone else) give an example of an application that can't run if a system has Kex installed (and Disable Kex extensions has been set) but runs just fine if the system doesn't have Kex? I mentioned that you (and the other 4 developers in the world that code on win-98 platforms) are not included in the blanket statement that "Kex should be part of a default install of win-98". But if the code that you develop for win-98 users ultimately can't function in the presence of Kex, then you're forcing users to decide which is more important - your code or Kex.

I agree. I've been running Kex for more than 3 years, and unlike probably most people here I run win-98se as my primary computing platform both at home and at $dayjob. And I'm not talking about as a virtual machine. I think that anyone that is not a developer or does not run a dual-boot NT/98 platform but instead runs pure win-98se, there's no question that Kex should be default for such a system. Now if systems with pre-2003 hardware (486, Pentium 2 or 3, AMD equivalent, etc) if there are issues with Kex and ancient hardware like that, then you have self-imposed hardware issues that are more important.

http://wincountry.com/ There's something about the call sign that is just so - familiar.