erpdude8

Here this. If you Vista users hate to use Windows Explorer and want to use the File Manager program from NT4 for browsing files and folders, it will not run because of the changes with certain DLL files in Vista, especially the shell32.dll file. There is a way to make the NT4 File Manager app (winfile.exe) to run under Vista. Follow the steps here to make it run under Vista: http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~davidsch/vistafm/ enjoy using File Manager under Vista! -erpdude

drat! "TargetFileVersion=@FileSectionList" doesn't work anymore. Anytime I try to create a package with this in the SED file with IEXPRESS it either crashes or generates an error message "SED Syntax Error in TargetFileVersion= Line" when I click the Next button and I can't continue on with creating a self extracting package. what gives?

Outdated link. New link to the MS Hotfix Request Web Submission form: https://support.microsoft.com/contactus2/em...2&WS=hotfix and the Bink.nu article here: http://bink.nu/news/cool-get-a-hotfix-with...-microsoft.aspx

You may want to tell MDGx about this and email him so that he can revise the KERNELUP and EXPLOR98 patches to display the "you must reboot now" dialog box. Not a huge problem since he can do this easily.

I should have made more noise about this ... the above update in question is the first hotfix from MDGx i decided not to touch whatsoever. I tried it out, it broke something, i ditched it. All in the space of about 1 hour. For me it was breaking the method to determine the Program Files folder on a Win98 machine ... the code used vb script. MDGx is human after all. Whew! oh come on guys, give MDGx a break. we didn't know the MSE 5.7 files didn't quite work out right under Win98/ME; we tried out the MSE 5.7 files under Win98/ME but was not tested thoroughly enough to determine if they work properly. should we tell him to remove the unofficial MSE 5.7 patch for Win98/ME from his site? Note to PROBLEMCHYLD: delete the WSCRIPT.EXE file from \WINDOWS\SYSTEM\ folder. Keep the one stored in the \WINDOWS\ folder. wshcon.dll was for NT-based OSes only such as WinNT4/2000/XP/2003/Vista, Fredledingue. This file does not work under Win9x/ME. I think it's best to revert back to using MSE 5.6 (and ditch MSE 5.7) since that worked great under Win98 & ME.

Ah, that explains why has always been updated shortly after installation without me knowing what did it. indeed. though DCOM95 version 1.2 (bundled with IE5 and its setup files) had secur32.dll v4.10.1999 while the Q266772 hotfixes for Win95/98fe had secur32.dll v4.10.2000. The Q266772 hotfixes are available from MS KB article 267972.

done! Other Win95 hotfixes that are no longer mentioned in the MS KB articles are Q142254 vtdi.386 4.00.951, Q170325 sysdm.cpl 4.00.1112, Q174733 pcimp.pci 4.00.1113 and Q181087. Updated dfs.vxd, vnetsup.vxd and vredir.vxd files for Q181087 are version 4.10.1691 noted here: ftp://ftp.chello.pl/pub/chello/Microsoft/KB/Q181/0/87.TXT The Unidrv.dll 4.00.951 file is included in Win95 OSR2. And DCOM95 version 1.3 includes secur32.dll version 4.10.2177. Q162052 is for OSR2 only and does not work correctly under pre-osr2 releases of Win95. Those using Win95 original or OSR1 should get Q162211 which has vpowerd.vxd version 4.00.952.

Go with Win2k since the next generation of Firefox (3.0) and SeaMonkey (2.0) browsers will only work with a minimum of Win2000 and not Win98. These browsers won't be officially available until sometime next year. I've upgraded my cousin's eMachine PC from Win98se to Win2000 in the late spring and he loves it. Win2k is less bloated than WinXP.

ONLY value to modify for broadband connections under Win9xME is RWIN or DefaultRcvWindow. changing MTU does NOTHING to improve speed on broadband connections. REMOVE any MTU and TTL registry tweaks if you use cable or DSL. See the Navas Cable Modem/DSL Tuning Guide: http://cable-dsl.home.att.net/

yup. note that you did NOT mention the version of Firefox you had those memory hogging problems in your first post in this thread. do you even know what version of FF you have on your machine? At least I'm using Firefox 2.0.0.9 on an XP SP2 computer and I do NOT have any memory hog problems and I have 512mb of RAM installed with a Pentium 3 (1.2ghz) cpu. Take a look at the tips here on resolving your memory problems: http://cybernetnews.com/2006/03/26/this-ma...ox-memory-leak/ and you too, underdone. you also have not specified what version of Firefox you are using. gee, FoxHound and underdone, have you installed the latest version of Firefox available? most of the memory hogging problems seemed to be fixed in Firefox 2.0.x and the upcoming Firefox 3. you folks should stop b^tching about your FF memory problems and start taking action in solving your problems.

Never mind. Continue using the patched explorer.exe 4.00.950 for Dutch Win95 systems. I was told by an MS support rep that the Q172648 explorer.exe v4.00.952 hotfix is not available for Dutch Windows 95.

FoxHound, consider deleting your existing Firefox profile entirely and run Firefox to create a new one. Find the \Application Data\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\ folder, delete it and launch Firefox to create a new user profile. also, un-install some unnecessary Firefox extensions and restart Firefox. some FF extensions can cause FF to hog a lot of RAM. try the tips here. see if those tips help. if not, you may as well ditch Firefox and install SeaMonkey, Opera or Kmeleon.

I can do a "lite" install of Win95b and Win95c w/out IE3 or IE4. Snoopy81 had instructions of installing OSR2.x lite here. That way, I can cut down on OSR2 setup time. But back to the original topic, I'm making an attempt to obtain Q172648 hotfix for Dutch Win95 from MS which has explorer.exe v4.00.952 and once I get it, I'll try to patch it up to fix the 256+ colors trayicons problem.

I'm in the process of requesting Q172648 explorer.exe version 4.00.952 hotfix for Win95 (if it's still available). After I get it, I'll have to patch it up to implement the 256+ colors fix. Microsoft only partially fixed the problem in WinME for Color Depths of 16-bit high color [65536 colors] and 32-bit real color modes, but NOT for 24-bit true color mode. If a video card (such as Intel 810/815 graphics chips) support up to 24bit color mode and you use 24bit color mode in WinME, the 256+ color trayicon test will FAIL and will display a FEW colors. If you switch it from 24bit color to 16bit color mode in WinME and run the 256+ color test, it will display the colors correctly. I've done numerous test on this on a WinME machine to prove my point. Dr. Hoiby is only HALF right on his assessment and did not test the problem thoroughly enough on Windows ME computers with different video cards. It is in Windows XP that Microsoft completely fixed the 256+ colors trayicons problem for ALL color depths (16bit, 24bit, 32bit & higher)

So it looks like KB891711 and U891711 are not compatible with older versions of the ZoneAlarm firewall software and that Zonealarm should be upgraded to work correctly with KB891711/U891711. Good find, KevinR. If you also have antivirus software installed, upgrade that one as well. I never had Zonealarm installed on my former WinME machine installed. I had Trend Micro PC-Cillin Internet security 2004 suite which was an antivirus & firewall package and didn't mess with KB891711v2 and U891711.

Nice work Petr. I've recently obtained these updated files for Win95: vmm.vxd v4.00.1113 for OSR2.0 & vmm.vxd v4.03.1216 for OSR2.1/OSR2.5 [Q179897] ftp://ftp.chello.pl/pub/chello/Microsoft/KB/Q179/8/97.TXT tapi32.dll v4.10.1688 for TAPI 2.1 addon for Win95 [Q180906] ftp://ftp.chello.pl/pub/chello/Microsoft/KB/Q180/9/06.TXT I will try to get Q172648 explorer.exe v4.00.952, Q153461 pscript.drv v4.00.952 and Q162052 vpowerd.vxd v4.00.1112 hotfixes on the weekend. -erpdude

true. Firefox 3.0 beta 1 is now available. Topic discussed here: http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=22714 Release Notes of Firefox 3.0 Beta 1 posted here: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/3.0b1/releasenotes/ FF 3.0 beta requires at least Win2000 to run. Soon the next generation of SeaMonkey (2.0) will be in beta and will require a minimum of Win2k.

What CONTROL.EXE v4.10.2000 fix??? If you mean v4.10.1999 have care, because it is problematic. Both fastlanephil and myself have had system lock-ups due to it. It's reported here. Keep on the great work! fixed the typo. control.exe v4.10.1999 doesn't seem to cause lockups under Win98 FE since I do not use 98SE2ME and 98se2me is not compatible with 98FE. A little off topic but regarding my recent problems with requesting Q301453 for WinME, I now got them for both English and Italian editions and MS gave me the right links for them. Big Monstro may want to ask for the French edition of Q301453 for Win98 whenever he's not busy.

You should have installed WMP9UPR9X first and then 98MP10, RetroOS. OR UN-install 98MP10 and reinstall WMP9 and WMP9URP9X. Next time, remember that. anyways, re-installing 98MP10 solved your problem. WMP9URP9X was designed to update the original release of WMP9 under Win98se & WinME, meaning without any unofficial addons like 98MP10. 98MP10 was created by MDGx while WMP9URP9X is my creation. I may release an updated version of WMP9URP9X that will NOT install under Win98se with 98MP10 installed. WMP9URP9X does NOT really support 98MP10 and vice-versa. having both WMP9URP9X and 98MP10 addons installed may cause other problems that I don't know of and I have not really tested 98MP10 on any Win98se machine with WMP9 installed. no probs, dencorso. I've already sent the english and italian Q301453 patches for Win98 to MDGx. Thanks again for the Q301453 patch for WinME.

the_guy has taken care of getting the Q301453 hotfix for WinME, dencorso. It would be better off if Microsoft mentioned the updated ndis.vxd, pppmac.vxd & vip.386 files for Win98/ME in MS article 301453 instead of having to write them in a separate article and be told that they're not available and get confused. I'm currently in the process of getting Q301453 hotfix for Italian language editions of Win98 since I already got the English Q301453 patch for Win98. It's incredible that the updated files from Q329128 have been packaged in the most unlikely place! Please note that the Q301453 hotfix for Win98 requires the Dialup Networking 1.4 Q285189 security update. If you try to install Q301453 without the DUN 1.4 update for Win98, the patch will refuse to install the updated ndis.vxd, pppmac.vxd & vip.386 files and will be told to install the DUN 1.4 update. if you view the file properties of the latest PPPMAC.VXD files and click on the Version tab and select the "Internal Name" property, it will say "PPPMAC (128 Bit)". the pppmac.vxd files from Q301453 for Win98 contain 128bit security for Dialup Networking but you'll need the DUN 1.4 update for Win98 to take advantage of 128bit security.

I recall that right after Microsoft released the Q329128 hotfiix, they got so many angry W98 ME user problem/system-lockup trouble reports that they quickly recalled it. Q329128 was pulled from MS, however, Q301453 for Win98 IS still available. Maybe Q301453 is available for WinME too. I've just received Q301453 for Win98 and it is the same as Q329128.

Well, dencorso, read this. BREAKING NEWS about the latest NDIS.VXD, PPPMAC.VXD & VIP.386 files for BOTH Win98 FE and Win98 SE: I have obtained the actual Q301453 hotfix for Win98 from MS support! Unbelievable!!! The files from the Q301453 Win98 hotfix are the same versions as the ones listed in Q329128. Q329128 is not available from MS BUT Q301453 for Win98 IS available as I've just emailed MS for it. yay!

the Q316638 patch listed in MS article 316638 has the following files: The one MDGx has on his site is the original Q316638 with version 4.90.3001 of the Portcls.sys file. MS article 316638 has been removed from the Microsoft Support site and perhaps the Q316638 hotfix for WinME is no longer available. As a last resort, one can try calling Microsoft support for a hotfix if you can't use the email method. Follow the steps here: http://jasonpearce.com/blog/2006/06/26/how...crosoft-hotfix/

If remains previous version of Gecko 1.9 between downloads could be great. On their little forum there is a certain number of people using win9x. Or you could still use Firefox 2.0.0.? You can only use Firefox 2.0.0.x under Win98/ME/NT4, gpatrick. FF 2.0x doesn't run under Win95 as it crashes under that OS. Win95 users may want to try out the latest FF 1.5.x nightly build here since no more official FF 1.5 releases are being produced.

firefox 3.0 beta 1 isn't quite ready yet. it looks like the Digg.com web site leaked out the info too soon as noted in this Mozilla Developer article here: http://developer.mozilla.org/devnews/index...ou-digg-us-but/