ZortMcGort11

thanks for the reply, Charlotte. well, I'm on dialup... do I need a router for that? Dial-up is never really mentioned when it comes to security, like it's forgotten or something. What should I do in my case? Right now, I just have Tiny Firewall installed. It's the only firewall that doesn't slow down my already slow internet. I just deleted ClamWin because to me it' s nothing more than a drain on resources. Good suggestion. I do have a second Windows ME computer, and a Windows 2000 computer (no modem, so I don't go online with it) that I hardly use. Swapping hard drives wouldn't be hard. But still, I haven't had any problems before with any of my 3 computers.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/30/AR2006063001587.html Washington Post article published in 2006 which says, So, if that was said 7 years ago, then we're in the clear, right?

I'm willing to keep using F-Prot 3.16f for DOS which was released in 2009... (see the DOS Programs thread) but is there any need to keep an up-to-date, bloated Anti-virus program on Win9x? Clamwin is about as small and light as you can get, but I've been using ClamWin for like 4 years and it's never once detected a single virus... So, I'm thinking either ClamWin is worthless, or else Win9x is just too old for viruses to infect? I stopped having problems when I stopped using peer-2-peer file sharing networks and Internet Explorer. And that was like back in the days of Kazaa and IE 5. Since then, nothing. No more homepage getting hijacked to porn websites, no more blue screens of death, or freezes. In fact, as soon as I started using Netscape 9 I never had another problem. I've gone from using Netscape 9 to K-Meleon and Seamonkey and Opera. Never had any problems. Does anybody get viruses anymore while using Win9x? What kind of virus was it? How did you get it? etc. Which types of viruses are more able to infect Win9x in 2013? -master boot record viruses -exe/com file infectors -trojans / malware -worms -macro viruses ? Links to articles or websites, pro or con regarding the relevance of Win9x viruses, and the need (?) for Anti-Virus would be appreciated... and anybody's opinion or experiences. Basically, is there any point at all to bother using Anti-Virus on Win9x systems? Would it be like worrying about viruses on Windows 3.1 at this point? All of the viruses for Windows 3.1 are basically "not in the wild" anymore. Only way you'd get them, is by finding an old floppy disk that's twenty years old and was never scanned. I'm at the point where I believe there is 99% NO reason to scan for viruses anymore on Win9x. The only possibility I can think of is you might stumble upon an old floppy disk that might have an infected word document or DOS game that was infected.... possibly a floppy disk might also have an old MBR infector virus. That's it. Most programs don't run on Win9x nowadays, so I don't think the chance of virues being spread around are anything to worry about. You can't open new "word" documents anymore either, so there's little sense of worrying about that either. Am I missing anything here? Is there any possibility of getting virues from USB flash drives? My windows ME computer is incapable of booting from USB anyway... seems to be a feature of newer computers.

Those white lines appear for me as well. And I'm using version 4.5.1.

if you use a 56k dialup modem like me.... I use Firefox 3.5.19 with javascript turned off. This is my preferred KernelEx browser. ....believe it or not, Firefox 3.5 still works pretty good. It's a good browser for the "lower end" Win9x machines with under 256 MB ram.

You're trying to an install an operating system which is ten years older than what your computer is designed for. Thats you problem. I googled "HP Compaq dc7800 " and downloaded the specs which are in PDF format. The first line at the top of the page says, "HP Recommends Windows Vista Business." In other words, you're never going to get that thing to work properly. If you want to run Windows 98, find a computer that is in the range of Pentium II or Pentium III, probably no more than 1 GHz processor and less than 512 MB Ram.

ONGD - FREE - Trout Audio Player 1.0.6 build 67 http://skwire.dcmembers.com/fp/?page=trout

^ true, I see what you're saying, but is the Windows 2000 patch as user friendly as KernelEx for Windows 9x? I'd be interested in trying this Windows 2000 "kernelex" for the fun of it. also, would you care to elaborate on the topic, do you have a preference for a certain OS? Just curious :-) Honestly, I've never looked into the Win2000 "KernelEx" because I never knew where to find a simple introduction to it. Whereas you can type "KernelEx" into Google and you come up with Xeno's homepage with the ready-made installer. My knowledge only goes as far as "unmodified" Windows 2000 SP1.... which I have installed on one my machines right now.

Big question... I prefer Windows ME over Windows 2000 and 98. You'll probably get about the same internet mileage out of all three of them. Last version of Internet Explorer is version 6.0. Last version of Firefox for Win2000 is like 12.00. When using KernelEx on Win9x, the last version of Firefox is like 10.00 Similarly, Opera 12.02 is the final version for Windows 2000 and Windows 9x (assuming you use KernelEx). So either way it's pretty close, internet-wise. But on the matter of being easy to use and maintain, not to mention repair. I'd go with Windows ME or 98, instead of 2000. Windows 2000 is the bloated version of the compact, sleek, fast performing Windows ME and 98. In my opinion. More older programs (like DOS games) seemed to work better on Win9x. It all depends on what you need the computer for. I still use Windows ME (it's my favorite OS of all time besides DOS) for my daily needs. It has USB mass storage drivers... it automatically detects flash drives and card readers. Windows 98 doesn't I think. In my opinion... Windows ME was the zenith of DOS based, simpler computer systems. I enjoy it. I'm familiar with it. It's comfortable. I think it's easier to use and navigate then the later versions of Windows which are suppose to be easier to use in theory, but are just more convoluted and annoying. Again, just my opinion. Here's a link to an interesting article about how to get Windows ME online in the year 2012. This gentlemen goes through all the steps required in order to get his ancient computer back online. (He isn't aware though of KernelEx, which is the only flaw of this article.... so please read and enjoy) http://planetbotch.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/online-with-windows-me-in-2012.html

When I run 2.8.6 it comes up with this error: A required file, MSVCP90.DLL, is required to run this program. So I downloaded that dll to my system folder and the abiword folder, and it sill didn't work. I don't know why it still doesn't work.... but oh well no big deal. I downloaded it from Dll-Files.com Well, I'm happy with version 2.6.8 :-) It's faster and more responsive, not to mention doesn't crash as much as 2.4.6

According to KernelEx wiki, AbiWord 2.8.6 is compatible. I haven't found this to be the case however. I set it for Windows Vista mode, which I think is the default for Abiword... but nothing happened, wouldn't open. On the other hand, I did manage to run 2.6.8. It worked fine, except for poorly rendered toolbar buttons. Anyways, I was just wondering if this was a typo on the KernelEx wiki or If I was doing it wrong. But I believe it should be changed to 2.6.8 so as not to confuse people and for the sake of accuracy. Anybody get 2.8.6 to work? *Edit* According to Abiword homepage, under system requirements, version 2.4.6 is last to work under Win9x. This is the one I've been using for years. Still good and handy. But I was looking to upgrade when I noticed this error(?) on the wiki.

try looking on Ebay for the setup disc? http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trksid=m570.l3201&_nkw=Canon+MP250+printer&_sacat=0 only thing I can think of

The newest browsers that work on Windows 98 or ME without KernelEx: Opera 10.63 (Octoboer 12 2010) *requires Microsoft Installer version 2.0. This is the only system file you need to install, to my knowledge. Usually KernelEx will connect with the Microsoft website automatically. It used to be available for free, but in the last few months they've been removing older stuff like that. The actual file name is "InstMsiA.exe" and is 1.62 MB in size. Probably a good file to keep for posterity, as I'm sure Microsoft will eventually remove it. Opera on Win9x won't install without it.) SeaMonkey 1.1.19 (March 16, 2010) K-Meleon 1.5.4 (March 5, 2010) Firefox 2.0.0.20 (December 18 2008) Netscape Navigator 9.0.0.6 (February 20 2008) Internet Explorer 6.0 service pack 1 (2000-2001 ??) IMO, SeaMonkey and K-Meleon are the last good browsers for Win9x without Kernelex. ................ With KernelEx you can use newer browsers, but on dial-up internet connection they're practically worthless and actually slower than the older browsers. I speak from personal experience. I occasionally will use Opera 11.x because it has turbo mode for slower connections. When using Kernelex, anything past Firefox 3.5 and you run into printing and bookmarking problems... and who knows what else. I also recommend turning Javascript off in whatever browser you use, since even the KernelEx browsers are out of date now. Hope this helps

PhotoFiltre also has an excellent, underrated batch converter. I used to use the bloated XnView and IrfanView programs... but PhotoFiltre is more efficient, easier, and simpler. IrfanView and XnView have gotten carried away with "doing it all." Too many options now. PhotoFiltre and FastStone Image Viewer are all I need... especially for Win9x... there's nothing better. **I use versions 2.4 or 2.30 of FastStone, as it only requires 128 MB memory on older machines - according to the system requirements section in the help section.

PaintStar 2.70 https://sites.google.com/site/wangzhenzhou/ Unfreez 2.1 (gif animator) http://www.whitsoftdev.com/unfreez/

I've been using ClamWin for awhile and it hasn't detected anything on my Windows ME computer. I also installed AVG Anti-Virus 7.5.524 (minus the resident shield) and it hasn't detected anything either. Bear in mind, AVG is from 2008, whereas ClamWin is up-to-date. I've also got F-prot for DOS (from 2009). None of them has detected anything. So, between the three of them (and my firewall), I feel pretty secure. I always turn javascript off when I'm surfing the web too. People out in the real world think I'm crazy for sticking with Windows ME. But their computers are usually slower than mine... programs start way slower because everything is bogged down by Microsoft Security Essentials or whatever resident virus scanner they use. It's pathetic. Only thing is, I can't watch stupid youtube videos, gosh, how sad! Amen, brother. And now with Windows 8 and tablets and whatever, eventually I don't think people will have many options about what they install. They want everyone to have the same dumbed-down, similar computers. It's like how before Myspace and Facebook came along, if you wanted a webpage, you had to make it yourself. But at least it was unique. I equate Facebook to like some office cubicle. Everybody has their own little generic office cubicle.

my recommendation (1) Buy Windows ME off ebay for $25. (2) download the following programs: Internet Explorer 6 Windows Media Player 9 Directx 9.0c redistributable (there is a date cut-off for Windows 9x computers, you'd need an older build of 9.0c from a few years ago*) Microsoft Installer 2.0 (just recently removed from Microsoft's Webpage) ImgBurn 2.x (3) use ImgBurn to make an ISO file of the Windows ME disk (4) proceed to copy Windows ME .iso file to as many blank CD's as needed -- I'm currently up to six back-up copies. Just for the heck of it... who knows, I may have to give one to somebody. The more the merrier. (5) Copy the Original Installation files of all your other programs and games to USB drives (sorry, only possible with Windows ME) or to data CD's. repeat step 5 as many times as needed. I know, it's not as pretty as making one huge, gigantic, ready-made, ready-to-go, all-in-one, copy of your Windows 98 dream machine. But since you're dealing with Windows 98..... well. Coolman said: ^And this doesn't bother you? Any time I get an error while installing Windows I promptly abort the installation, quickly reformat the computer and begin again. I figure once the installation has an error, I'm not going to waste more time, I'm going to start fresh again. That's why I don't like these Norton Ghost things. I can backup files by myself, a little more work and time, but you know that old saying, "the bigger they are, the harder they fall." Well, it should be "the harder they fail." The more they overtake the plumbing, the easier it is to stop-up the drain. I think it's a better idea to create backups in smaller, more managable chunks. That way if anything goes wrong, you can at least trouble shoot and narrow down the problems. One chunk can be the Windows CD itself, unmodified, clean, not tampered with. The next chunk could be a data CD of just your games, perhaps in the original zip files. Zip files can be tested for errors individually, this way you can be certain your files are intact, or where the error is. The next "managable chunk" could be a data CD just of your software programs or drivers. Again, the original installation files will help to ensure that your programs aren't corrupted and if they are, you'll at least have a backup. Thanks, but no thanks, Norton. Duffy98 said: Windows ME solved this problem with "System File Protection." Windows 98 on the other hand, you really are at the mercy of any poorly written software program screwing up your entire computer.

CharlotteTheHarlot said: Wrong. The original poster never stated whether or not the 4 drives he purchased were new or second-hand. It is very possible to buy used drives off ebay (or any computer store that sells re-used parts) that are listed in "working" condition, only to have them arrive at your house, and after installing them find out they dont' work. Because it happened to me numerous times, not just with CD-Roms, but with modems as well. I don't think the odds are anywhere remotely close to "microscopic." If you factor in the following variables: damage from the post office, not marked as "fragile", the person selling the item didn't test the drive, it was dropped by the mail workers, it was too cold outside, too much moisture/humidity in the mailbox, etc etc etc. It's not a microscopic possibility of getting 4 consecutive broken CD-Roms....if.... they are used, that is. Until we have ALL the facts, especially concerning the "newness" of his CD-Roms, and how much human error it takes to become "Radical," we don't know how microscopic the odds are. Period. Anything can happen. Maybe he DID get 4 broken drives in a row. Not trying to be a jerk about this, just trying to be methodical.

Just install Windows 95. It requires less disks, it's easier to find Win95 on floppy than Win98. Only requires 15 floppy disks, instead of 39 :-) Check this out. $25 for a mint copy of Win95 on floppy disk http://www.ebay.com/itm/Microsoft-Windows-95-Operating-System-on-3-5-Floppy-Disks-New-and-Unopened-/221169305874?pt=US_Operating_Systems_Software&hash=item337eb7c912

I went through 2 used drives before I finally got one that worked. I wanted to replace it with the exact same model that was previously installed. 3rd time was the charm. Did you make sure that the jumper pin was in the correct position on the back of the CD-Rom? CD-Rom trouble shooting guide http://www.techadvice.com/tech/c/cdrom_ts.htm Jumper Pin settings http://tips4pc.com/articles/computer%20troubleshooting/how_to_set_jumper_pin_settings_o.htm

I used to use floppies a lot back in the nineties... seems like every other week they ended up getting corrupted or bad sectors. So, as soon as just one disk gets one error, and one lousy kilobyte of data is corrupted, then the whole shebang will be useless. I don't recommend using floppies for anything more than DOS Boot disks. The first time I had to replace a CD-Rom was like two years ago, on my Windows ME machine. It lasted for like ten years, but then one day just died. I figured, well, that it's my computer is toast. Nope. I was wrong. It's really simple. All I had to do was (1) open up the computer case, (2) unscrew the 2-4 screws holding the CD-Rom in place, (3) remove the two cables from the back of the CDROM, (4) slide/pull out the defective CD-Rom drive. To install a new or used one, you just reverse that process. I didn't have to install any software, change anything in the BIOS, or do anything in Windows... the computer detected it all by itself and it was like nothing was different. Once you take out the drive, just write down the model number and brand on a piece of paper. Go to ebay and buy the exact same model if you're paranoid about compatibility issues. It really only takes like 5 minutes max. What are you going to do when you floppy disk drives breaks? You're gonna have to replace it.

MP3 Players ONGD - FREE - XMPlay 3.7 --- http://www.un4seen.com/xmplay.html (new version released yesterday, still Win9x compatible)

Oh... Okay. LOL. I've never understood the hate for Windows ME either.... :-) But yeah, Windows 2000 is way good.

Windows ME -- last supported version of Internet Explorer = 6 Windows 2000 -- last supported version of Internet Explorer = 6 Windows ME -- last supported version of Opera = 10.63 (12.0x using Kernel Ex) Windows 2000 -- last supported version of Opera = 12.10 *** Windows ME -- last supported version of Firefox = 2.0.0.20 (Firefox 8* using KernelEx) *This number could be higher, since I haven't test it myself... only going by the KernelEx homepage Windows 2000 -- last supported version of Firefox = 12 Windows ME -- last supported verison of K-Meleon = 1.5.4 (1.7.0 alpha 2 using KernelEx) Windows 2000 -- last supported version of K-Meleon = 1.7.0 alpha 2 ***according to here: http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2012/07/19/12-50-marlin-html5-dnd-hwa-improvements So, I'm getting crucified for saying what? P.S.. I can't tell if your post is supposed to be "joking", "sarcastic" or whatnot. ?? Are you agreeing with me, that WinMe and 2000 browser support is "practically the same" or not agreeing with me?

Windows 2000 is nice... I had it installed on another computer for a while. The fact that it doesn't require activation is good!! The only drawback to Windows 2000 is the lack of web browser support it. It's only slightly better than Windows ME in that regard, especially if you have Kernel-Ex installed on Windows ME, then they're practically the same. I'm not a Linux fan... so I won't be ditching my Windows ME computer for awhile... I'm waiting to see what Microsoft does about XP activation after April 2014, when support officially ends. If they release a patch for it, sure, I'll "upgrade" to XP. (I'm trying to put off cloud computing, tablets, smart phones, and Windows 8 as long as possible)