Destro

North-Korea-South-Korea-hotline

I tired it and I don't trust it cuz I ran a VM and said i was vulnerable. The Meltdown attack cannot be used to break out of a virtual machine. You can break out of a container, sandbox, or a paravirtualized system, but performing the Meltdown attack in a fully-virtualized system just gets you access to that VM's kernel memory, not the host's kernel memory. Spectre can break out of VMs but my host machine is AMD. So all of these detection methods seem jacked to me.

Iv'e never installed a firefox addon through a EXE file so i couldn't tell you.

Problem with Specucheck and the like, is they only tell you if you are patched, but that has nothing to do if your CPU is architecturally vulnerable or not. Theres been a lot of hysteria more hysteria than facts. Hopefully in the furture we can obtain real live samples of exploit code, but to date there actually is none? So no code yet mass hysteria over vulnerabilities. We have yet to see any examples of how this vulnerability could practically be used to steal any encrypted passwords. Or passwords entered over SSL. If we are talking about vulnerabilities to steal clear text passwords sitting in memory thats just stupid. And even if there was an exploit would it run on XP and not just bluescreen the computer becasue it will only run on 10? No body knows the answer to any of these questions. The vulnerabilites may effect all CPUs so some people say, But there are suttle differences in the way prefetching is implemented across CPUs. So a variant that may run on like a I7 wouldn't necessarily run on ARM.

how do you get MSFN to display correctly with this?

Yea IE is evil. Unfortunately the newer explorer is needed for new API calls. Some programs will not install or work with 95 shell. Thats the problem. Kernel EX will also not work properly or at all with shell swap. I suggest to you if you really want to go down this rout that you use this file. As its going to add some missing API hooks that you might need. It will also allow you to use kernel EX with 95 shell as well I am not certain on Kernel EX version any more its been a long time http://www.geocities.ws/liuwoonyung/SH95UPD/index.html 1. So use 98lite Micro 2. SP 2.1A 3. SH95UPD ( read page carefully) There is mentions of needing to hexedit desk.cpl 4. Older version of Kernel EX (not sure on version) 5. Mostly working 98 with shell swap that isn't buggy or broken.

It's been awhile since I used shell swap. I used to have a few slow machines and that was mandatory. Since then I no longer have/use those and my slowest 98 rig is 800mhz. I mainly choose chubby. If I remember correctly you need to use the old version of the service pack. Its service pack 2.1a. There is also a newer version of the 95 shell that is not in the service pack. Also if you do a shell swap you cannot install IE6 or pretty much IE updates. Some of them are going to want to change your explorer.

Yea were just assuming that Intel is telling us the truth. Google said they didn't test the vulnerability on any CPU older than 2011 but made blanket statements. In any case I don't think that there is a immediate threat for average users. As far as I have read this is actually a pretty difficult attack to pull off in the 1st place. Harder to pull off than like the average malware that joe smo gets from click baiting. Personally I have said other times that I don't run AV and never get viruses so I personally dont feel threatened at this time. The researchers who discovered the vulnerabilities, dubbed "Meltdown" and "Spectre," said that "almost every system," since 1995, including computers and phones, is affected by the bug. The researchers verified their findings on Intel chips dating back to 2011, and released their own proof-of-concept code to allow users to test their machines. Thats a pretty bold statement to say it affects CPUs back to 1995 but never testing or proving that,

It's not quite a full list but it is a good enough list of intel parts I posted on page 134. Best advice I have is to download CPUz if you don't know what cpu have. Cross reference it with the list I posted. The list I posted is all encompassing so if the list says 3rd generation core and your cpu falls in that category than yes,. If that doesn't make sense than I would say research wiki. There is most likely a page on wiki that has your cpu and it will tell you what gen it is. But I think for an average intelegent person you don't need my list and just take what I said. If it has a integrated memory controller its effected and move on if it doesn't it isnt. if you don't know the difference between integrated memory controller and FSB than I suggest to research that some. But also I think if at this point in time you are very worried about this issue you have some kinda god complex. Nobody is gonna target average joe right now. Any one looking to exploit this that has figured it out is gonna go after the big players they can extort some money or steal some trade secrets or somthing from. Not that there is even a attack in the wild yet becasue there have been zero reports of this being exploited in the wild yet chances that it will happen to you are pretty much zero. Right now.

Thats correct. Assuming that list released by Intel is 100% accurate. A Pentium M PGA479 is not affected. It is not part of any of the listed intel architectures. I have a T43 laying around somwhere its pretty good for how old it is. What I am curious is if this new patch adversely affects CPUs that are not vulnerable in the 1st place. Need to run benchmarks and do a lot of testing to see. If it does It could be somthing to avoid and block on a case by case basis.

a lot can be achieved but there seems to be little interest in trying to get modern standards web browser working.

why don't you just back up your image and clean install 98se and drivers and see if that changes anything then copy back whatever you need.

OP isn't responding to the thread anyways.

no

nope dibya they can't. youtube only is html 5 video now. So need pretty modern browser for that. No one is willing to try.

only if you are running a Intel CPU that is based on integrated memory control you are vulnerable. That means anything that uses a FSB is safe. A lot of people don't understand that. 1st Gen Core means basically FSB cpus like Core 2 Duo. After that intel re branded their new architecture that used a integrated memory controller as 2nd generation core. I see a lot of people freaking out for zero reason. It irritates me so I am trying to educate. https://www.tweaktown.com/news/60411/heres-list-intel-cpus-affected-spectre-meltdown/index.html Intel® Core™ i3 processor (45nm and 32nm) Intel® Core™ i5 processor (45nm and 32nm) Intel® Core™ i7 processor (45nm and 32nm) Intel® Core™ M processor family (45nm and 32nm) 2nd generation Intel® Core™ processors 3rd generation Intel® Core™ processors 4th generation Intel® Core™ processors 5th generation Intel® Core™ processors 6th generation Intel® Core™ processors 7th generation Intel® Core™ processors 8th generation Intel® Core™ processors Intel® Core™ X-series Processor Family for Intel® X99 platforms Intel® Core™ X-series Processor Family for Intel® X299 platforms intel® Xeon® processor 3400 series Intel® Xeon® processor 3600 series Intel® Xeon® processor 5500 series Intel® Xeon® processor 5600 series Intel® Xeon® processor 6500 series Intel® Xeon® processor 7500 series Intel® Xeon® Processor E3 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E3 v2 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E3 v3 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E3 v4 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E3 v5 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E3 v6 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E5 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E5 v2 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E5 v3 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E5 v4 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E7 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E7 v2 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E7 v3 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor E7 v4 Family Intel® Xeon® Processor Scalable Family Intel® Xeon Phi™ Processor 3200, 5200, 7200 Series Intel® Atom™ Processor C Series Intel® Atom™ Processor E Series Intel® Atom™ Processor A Series Intel® Atom™ Processor x3 Series Intel® Atom™ Processor Z Series Intel® Celeron® Processor J Series Intel® Celeron® Processor N Series Intel® Pentium® Processor J Series Intel® Pentium® Processor N Series You are wasting your time even running tests. Cuz u dont get the bug. I plan on not even installing the patch on older systems,

Reinstall kernel EX. During installation uncheck the box. I don't remember what it was something about global settings. uncheck that. Uninstall kernel ex then. Try to play the game again.

https://wccftech.com/intel-affected-by-critical-kernel-bug-amd-hit/

AMD is officially not affected, but because they may implement a blanket fix there is speculation that the fix may slow down amd cpus as well even though they do not contain the bug.

If I wanted to build a new 98 computer I would go for a 440bx chipet or a 810. I would go for Piii CPU 733-1ghz. I would need at least 1 isa slot. I am personally biased because I have always felt like Pentium 4s were junk. It was a bad architecture design. Intel just wanted to ramp up clock speed numbers to sell CPUs but they were actually pretty slow due to long pipe line and branch prediction. p4s were also vere energy inefficient. read all about it here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4

That may be true jaklaz. I'm a bit of a stickler like people refering to pci express as pci-x, or pci when theyre totally different.

Like i said it was a perfect card for 98se, but games that require more system ram or memory or even more CPU run alot better on 2k/xp. In this scenario 98 is inferior to NT. If you want to build a XP gaming rig just make one so that it doesn't struggle in games. If you want a 98se rig and a XP rig at the same time to play games. If every game you want to play runs fine on 2k/XP than You are basically lowering your FPS for the sake of OS compatibility. The only reason I think to play games on 98se are as follows. 1. game runs too fast on modern hardware. 2. game wont run properly on newer os. 3, game wont run at all without real mode dos. (theres always dos box) 4. game will only run with 3dfx glide. (theres always nglide wrappers) 5. Game is only going to run good with specific sound cards. and specific graphics cards Like Final Fantasy 7, or Resident Evil 1-2 So out of all of those specific scenarios I dont see how a P4 with 512 ram and a geforce 4 fits that category. This is only my opinion.

Before you buy it you should ask the seller for the service tag number and do a search on Google and bing images for a picture of the motherboard. There were several different scus and motherboard layouts I think. You should make sure it has the expansion slots you want. AC97 sound is really lacking so you should plan on adding a sound card as well. I think for 98 the PC would be fine for XP it really lacking in my opinion. XP is more Core 2 duo of things in my opinion or pentium M. and usually 2gbs of ram on a XP 512 is no good for XP. But 512 is perfect for 98. I personally fell like 98 is more of a Pentium 3 thing but Pentium 4 is good too. For retro gaming I fell like ISA slots are needed which very few P4 boards have, usually only boards from like supermicro, itox or like tyan would have them on p4s if any. Most the games that would run good on a TI4400 would run just fine or better on 2000/XP not that its not a perfect card for 98 becasue it is. Just my perspective is the hardware gaming requirments of 90s era games is very low. Once you step into 2000/XP more powerful hardware theres no advantage 98 brings. VRAM is bad. Don't get cards that have Vram. Vram means Virtual ram. That means it is using system memory instead of on board memory. Vram does not mean video ram.

Without knowing what motherboard you have than I don't want to waste your time. because without that we have no idea what your upgrade paths could be. best is subjective. Matrox is decent but you dont give us a model number and just tell us that its matrox. Thats not helpful in determining what is better or worst than what you have and why. Would like to help you but I can't. Anyone else giving you an opnion based off what little info here would be just that.

well the most common resolution I used to see and use back in the CRT days was 1152x864. That was a really good res on CRTs back then. Again its 4x3 now no one uses that.