erpdude8

Not really. I've recently asked MS for the Q274175 patch for Windows ME and they sent it to me. You just have to follow what sybesma said earlier on this page. Looks like sybesma and I are the only ones brave enough to actually ask MS for any patch for any version of Windows and succeed. Like that old saying 'Ask and you shall receive.'

Goback is actually better than system restore. Goback used to be owned by Roxio but looks like it's now owned by Symantec/Norton. I wouldn't dare to un-install/remove SR under XP. bad idea. Ok to turn it off from the System Restore tab of the System Properties control panel app. NOT OK to remove the XP system restore files. that can make things worse. Turn off SR and use Goback instead. Note that before upgrading from a 9x version of Windows to XP, you MUST disable or remove Goback or any system recovery program. Otherwise you may encounter a blue screen error during XP setup as I looked up this problem mentioned in MS article 330134: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/330134 Goback can restore a complete hard disk, including document files and can save you from major PC crashes, unlike system restore.

Actually nil, the Copy To and Move To context menus are slightly better than the SendTo AnyFolder powertoy. You have to go through an extra menu to access the SendTo AnyFolder, whereas the Copy To and Move To context menus are already available by just right-clicking on a file. Also the Copy To and Move To dialog boxes allow creating a New Folder from those dialog boxes and the SendTo AnyFolder dialog box does not have the option to create a new folder from there. I'd like to see the Copy To and Move To context menus added in future SPs.

More accurately, Win98 can run ok on older/slower computers such as those ancient Pentium 1 PCs [133 Mhz or slower] with 32 megs of memory. WinME works best on faster PCs such as Pentium 2 [233 Mhz or faster] with 64 megs of memory or more. Win98 SE (2nd edition) can run just fine on newer PCs as long as the appropriate patches are installed. It can have the same benefits as running WinME on newer PCs. Win98 FE (1st edition) may have problems running on newer/faster PCs made in the 21st century.

But sometimes more speed may come at the price of lost stability, soldier1st. Stability [less to no Windows crashes] is my very first priority on the PCs I use, then speed. If a 'speed boost' cause more problems for Windows, I don't use it. If you really want to improve performance of Windows, buy some memory chips & install them onto your computers. At least RAM chips are affordable and you can run software that requires big chunks of memory. Be sure to match the kind of memory chips your computers use before buying.

I know about the 'Thumbnails' folder view capability in 98, zoem. The Thumbnails view option in Win2000, ME, XP & 2003 is already available for ALL folders in those versions of Windows.

Why not ask & email MS yourself, CLASYS? I've requested MS for some WinME patches that I really need from them for several days now and they sent them to me. Please note that hotfixes are only designed to resolve specific problems and they may cause some unforeseen problems on certain systems. Be aware of the risks involved in asking MS for any hotfixes for Windows.

I agree with thundernetbr on customizing installation of WinME. It ran better that way than with the default install options. Also Windows ME is best suited for HOME usage, not for business usage. ME was built for the consumer & home user while NT/2000 was built for small & large businesses. I even installed some old hardware such as this Star NX2460c dot matrix color printer from the mid-90s and used it on my HP computer with pre-installed WinME and it ran fine. So SOME old hardware can work with ME, but not all of them; you just need to install the LATEST drivers for the old hardware. If you want to use hardware from the Win3.x days, use Win98 first or second edition instead of ME. 98 is also best suited for home/consumer users. Note that removing system file protection will prevent WinME users from uninstalling IE from Add/Remove programs as the uninstaller will fail if SFP is not running or disabled. FAT chance of an "Enhancement Pack" being made.

Hmm, WinME an unstable OS, huh? If you install the right updates for ME, adjust a few settings and preventing some stuff from loading such as 'Pchschd.exe -s' WinME will run a little faster and be a little more stable. The Pchschd thingy is barely worthless and can easily be disabled from the Msconfig tool. Note that Windows ME patches work a little differently than Windows 95 & 98 patches. Read MS article 295413 on how Windows ME updates work: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/295413 It'll be a little harder to make a service pack for WinME because you can't just install updated files. Note that WinME's system file protection [sFP] feature will reject files that are older than the ones included in ME AND ones that are not approved by the WinME OS such as updated system files greater than ME but do not come with a digital signature file [a .cat file] that tells SFP to accept the updated files. Only .CAT files are made by MS.

Forget about the Q330994 Outlook Express update, CLASYS. It has been superseded or replaced by the latest OE update, the Q823353 update from Microsoft security bulletin MS04-018. The Q823353 update also replaces the Q837009 [MS04-013] update. Install the Q823353 update which includes the fixes from the Q837009 and Q330994 patches. The original & SP1/OSR1 versions of Win95 are CRAP because they can't access FAT32 formatted drives and are slower than the OSR2 versions. 95b and 95c are faster and allow using FAT32 on HDs. Just use the 95b files if you're not comfortable using the 95c files. So Gape, when will the final release of 2.0 be ready?

Ah, no wonder. You were trying to use that vmm32.vxd file Tarun suggested which was the WinME version on a Win98se system. BAD IDEA! The vmm32 file is OS specific. That means the WinME version of vmm32 can only work under WinME and not any other Windows version. Well, now you know what happened. You CAN however, replace the user.exe and user32.dll files with the WinME version as MDGx told me it can slightly improve performance & has better memory management than the Win98se version. See Axcel216's Win98 Tricks + Secrets part 5 page on how to do it: http://www.mdgx.com/98-5.htm And using the WinME user.exe & user32.dll files on a Win98 system won't have the side effects of using that WinME vmm32 file under Win98.

Never mind. Gape sent me the Q237493 patch. The updated timedate.cpl file for Win98se fix the problem but the file version is a little different from the one from the MS KB article. It's not version 4.10.223 or more accurately 4.10.2223. It is version 4.10.2225 for Windows 98 SE and version 4.10.2006 for Windows 98 FE (1st edition). So the file version info of the updated timedate.cpl file in MS article 237493 is incorrect for Windows 98. Notice in MS article 275873 the Win98se version of the updated acpi.sys file is listed as version 4.90.3002. I believe MS is wrong on that one. That updated acpi.sys file is for Windows ME only. The updated acpi.sys file for Win98se might really be version 4.10.2230 or higher. The updated acpi.sys file in the Win98se Service Pack is version 4.10.2229, the same one from MS article 263891. So Gape or sybesma, ask for the Q275873 patch for Win98se. I bet using the tips here can also work when requesting hotfixes for other versions of Windows such as Win95, Win98 1st edition & WinME. Ditto for NT-based versions. Gape does have the Q274175 cdfs.vxd patch for Win98. Now you just need to obtain the WinME version of the Q274175 patch if there will be an upcoming WinME service pack being made next year.

To force the Q249973 update for Win95 or Win98 to register in Qfecheck you will have to extract the files inside and install them manually. I've done this in the past and QFEcheck displayed the info, no matter if you have IE5 or IE6. Open the 249973usa5.exe or 249973usa8.exe file in Winzip or any archiving tool and extract the ver1200.exe file. Now open the ver1200.exe file in Winzip and extract all those files onto a temporary folder like 'c:\temp\249973'. If you just double-click on the ver1200.exe file to run it, it will NOT work. This is why I have to extract the files inside the EXE file and install them manually. Go to the temp folder, right-click on the 1200.inf file and choose the Install command to install the files and voila, Qfecheck lists the Q249973 update and lists the riched20.dll file as version 5.30.23.1200 instead of version 5.0.153.0. The ver153.exe file contained inside the Q249973 updates has the riched20.dll file v5.0.153.0 which is outdated and NOT compatible with Windows Installer. I know Windows Installer 2.0 installs riched20.dll version 5.30.23.1200. About the hang/lockup problem when deleting large number of files. It occurs in Win98 & ME systems with IE6 or IE6 SP1. Not sure if it happens under NT4 with SP6a. Replacing the browselc.dll & browseui.dll files with the IE 5.5 versions may solve the problem BUT the drawback is that it can prevent Win98/ME users from installing certain IE patches. Even if the tip does not prevent users from installing IE updates, it can cause unforseen problems when certain IE updates get installed. So Gape, do NOT include the fix for the hang/lockup problem for deletion of large files in the Win98se Service Pack. I would only recommend replacing the browselc.dll & browseui.dll files ONLY if Win98/ME + IE6 users do NOT install ANY IE security updates.

Follow up on the problem on deleting a large number of files and causing Windows Explorer to hang. I've done some tests on this on two of my computers at home. One using WinME & IE6 SP1 and the other using WinXP SP2. I copied a lot of files totaling almost 600 Mb from a CD on both systems onto a temp folder in Windows Explorer. I reboot and reload Windows Explorer. Then I deleted the temp folder where I copied all those files. The problem happened on my WinME computer but not on my WinXP machine. Guess the problem was fixed in WinXP SP2. Note that at the www.frankprovo.com site he does NOT mention Windows XP. Not sure if the problem happens with XP SP1 or the original release of XP.

Read MS article 206071 on how Win98 hotfixes work: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/206071/EN-US/ I get what your saying, CLASYS but you may as well delete the old registry qfecheck entries after installing the most recent update. Remember that updates for Windows 9x & ME systems ARE cumulative. Version 4.10.2226 of the vip.386 file contains its new fix plus the older ones from versions 4.10.2225, 4.10.2224 and 4.10.2223. When I install a newer vip.386 fix like the Q259728 update, I run Regedit and delete the older qfecheck entries such as the Q242962, Q238453 & Q238329 qfecheck entries from the 'HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Setup\Updates' branch. That way the Qfecheck program doesn't list the older vip.386 updates and there is less confusion.

Actually, sybesma. MS has just emailed me as I requested the q237493 timedate.cpl fix for Win98 almost 2 weeks ago. They may send it to me if I can now provide them with my full name & telephone number [yeah, like they might call me or something]. That's how it is.

What file did you put, soldier1st? You're NOT SUPPOSED TO DO THAT! It can break your system. You may as well reformat the HD and start over from scratch. What version of Windows are you actually using? Just forget about DOS 8 as it is a part of WinME and can never be used under Win95 or Win98.

You're still wrong soldier1st. Even if you use non-IE apps that does NOT mean you're out of the woods with security problems. Even non-Microsoft software can have potential security flaws. But at least they're harder to exploit than with IE. Tarun, try using IEradicator to remove IE6. Get it here: http://www.litepc.com/ieradicator.html I use this tool to uninstall IE when IE's uninstaller doesn't work. The IE uninstaller in WinME won't work if WinME's system file protection feature is disabled. I found that out several months ago when I prevented 'Statemgr' from running by disabling it from the MSConfig tool and restarting WinME, I couldn't remove IE. When I re-enabled Statemgr and run the IE uninstall tool, it worked. Forget about the Q249973 update, CLASYS. It's CRAP! Go to Axcel216's addons page: http://www.mdgx.com/add.htm And click on the links to download newer riched20.dll, riched32.dll & usp10.dll files. They're better than the ones found in the Q249973 patches.

NO, soldier1st. Only time if the vmm32.vxd file causes problems is if it is corrupted by a computer virus, PC crash or a hard drive malfunction or when trying to fix the HD problems & the vmm32.vxd file with Scandisk in DOS mode when Windows is not running.

Never mind Tarun. I may have misunderstood your point. Bottom line is MSDOS 8 was written specifically for Windows ME and attempting to use the MSDOS 8 files under a non-WinME system like Win98 can cause more problems. MS-DOS included in all versions of Win98 is 7.1 and runs well. Like I said before, I never had any problems with the vmm32.vxd file and if that file goes bad just re-install Windows.

Um sybesma. What should I put in the Subject line? I followed your post when emailing Microsoft last Friday and I have NOT received a response from them. How long does it take for MS to respond?

I have also encountered the problem when deleting a large number of files in Explorer and it hangs when running WinME. Or it stalls for a few minutes and then recovers & I can continue on normally. Workaround is to delete the files in good old-fashioned File Manager tool. Go to the Windows folder and double-click on the winfile.exe file to run File Manager. Even though File Manager doesn't handle long filenames, it deletes files faster than Windows Explorer and doesn't lock up Windows. You can even change the 'System' attribute to a file which cannot be possible under Explorer.

Sorry to disappoint you soldier1st & Tarun but MS-DOS 8.0 is not available as a standalone download. Attempting to use the MSDOS 8 files from WinME under a Win98 or Win98se system can actually make things worse. Mentioned at Axcel216's Windows 98/98 SE ©Tricks + Secrets - Part 5 page: http://www.mdgx.com/98-5.htm In the 'KILLER REPLACEMENTS: ME -> 98 SE' section he mentions NOT to replace the COMMAND.COM & IO.SYS files. And I haven't experienced any problems whatsoever with the vmm32.vxd file under my old PC using Win98se. If there are problems with the vmm32.vxd file in Win98 it's usually a corrupted or damaged vmm32.vxd file in which can only be fixed by re-installing Win98. Tarun says it's better to have an empty or non-existent vmm32? I don't agree with that. Read the posts by HSI and Gape here about vmm32: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=32526&st=0