Fredledingue

We don't! That's why msfn moderators gave you five stars! The last w95 user deserves that. Seriousely do you know other w95 users than you? Imagine being the last one. What an incredible feeling it must be... A living legend...

...or being recognised as the out-of-the-disc w98SE while your platform has many new files installed. If the program thinks it's running under w98se, it won't expect to meet Kernelex, dll's from windows 2000 sp4, 1Gb of memory and stuffs like that. Just my 2ct.

Yes it's a lot. I don't care how many poeple use w9x worldwide as long as as many poeple as before are still on this forum. We can be the 50 users left on a w9x machine (and for certain, one day there will be 50 poeple left only, then 49 ,48 ,47 etc until zero) if we are still 50 on this forum. I'll feel fine. I only wonder who among us will be the very last w98 user??? The last nr_1?! IMO there will still be a lot of activity here and a lot of w9x users long after the internet statistics have declared the total disapearance of this OS family.

Do these dll's work properly on w9x? Because everytime I add a missing dll after the "dll no found" error, I then get the "a function attached to the system is not funcioning" and "error linked to missing export..." errors instead. Or a crash.

C B) B) L Note that if SCR579X contains VBSCRIPT.DLL 5.6.0.8835, you should write include: VBScript (VBS) 5.6, and not 7.

Prozactive I maintain a list of all the updates not included in uSP 3.0 BETA 4. 98 SE SP 3.0 BETA 4 - last page (check pre-last pages if you don't find it) This list is based on MDGx's list of updates and compared to what is in uSP. I hope this helps reduce the confusion. There are no links in this list, because I did it quickely. If there s some demand, I'll do a list with the links, infos and all. Maybe on my wensite etc.... I don't maintian a list of missing update from MDCU update pack because of lack of time and because I use the uSP. But it's interresting to note that some updates un the MDCU are never mentioned in MDGx's list nor in the uSP include list and vice versa. Perhaps because they have different versions of wear another name, or simply because 2 or 3 updates slipped through the fishing net. HTH

Yes it is. However where I'm confused is when MD mention both updates in his pack. KB925051 - Update for Jet 4.0sp8 KB924191 - Update for MSXML 3.0sp7 KB954430 - Update for MSXML 4.0sp2 KB950749 - Update for Jet 4.0sp8

PLease replace *908519 by Q961371:

MDIE6CU 2.9 English Direct download (no spam, no nag, no wait, no enter-the-code non sens) http://www.hageart.com/vbs/MDIE6CU29E.EXE From my website, so please download with moderation.

After the update is installed right click context menu for .vbs files is reset. Not very important for those who don't work with vbs files, but now you know it. Still got the "This update will only install on an existing VM version" warning (OSOTE). Besides these everything works fine.

Great! That's a big update, isn't it. (w9x support not dead! ) I'm going to mirror the file soon on my website...

Great bunch of update MDGX! Coming back from the deaths...?

MDIE6CU 2.8a English Direct download (no spam, no nag, no wait, no enter-the-code non sens) http://www.hageart.com/vbs/MDIE6CU28AE.EXE From my website, so please download with moderation.

These updates/packages are not included in uSP3-0-beta4 BHDD31.ZIP CNTROL98.EXE COPY2GB.EXE CRYPT9X.EXE DX90C.EXE DX9CPL.EXE DXM9X.EXE flash_player_active_x.exe GRPHFLTS.EXE HELPHLP.EXE IE938464.EXE IE958215.EXE IOSYS98.EXE jre-6u7-windows-i586-p.exe MDDACU.EXE MDIE6CU.EXE MSXML4.MSI NUSB.EXE OE951066.EXE PNGFIX.EXE Q216204.EXE Q271277.EXE Q272991.EXE Q304708.EXE Q311561.exe Q955839.EXE RICHED9X.EXE rootsupd.exe rpclrtyp.zip SCANFRAG.EXE Scr579x.exe shell32.zip Shockwave_Installer_Full.exe TTFPAK.EXE USBFDD98.EXE VS6SP6U.EXE WIA10.EXE WIA11.EXE WINFIL98.EXE These ones are included (not a complete list, only some of the most recent updates) 237493usa8.exe GDI_PLUS.EXE FDSKFRMT.EXE HHUPD.EXE KB917344-x86.Exe OLEUP.EXE Q265854.exe Q329048.exe Q918547.EXE Q923618.EXE Q926247.exe Q929120.EXE Q931836.EXE RUNHELP.EXE SHELL98.EXE SHELL98b.EXE TRIEDIT.EXE VBVM60.EXE

I'm using Audacity. It has large colored buttons like on a real tape recorder. Your n00bs shouldn't be scared by this.

Hi, I got the "device attached to the system is not functioning" and "periscope.exe expects a new version of windows" errors with the exe version on w98se. Also "You must upgrade Windows" LOL! Now what are the advantages of Periscope over other file managers?

KernelX doesn't fix drivers. The software runs or don't run with KernelX on a random basis. Unfortunately.

I forgot Python is a scripting language, but it needs to be installed on windows. Does it? How does the interface looks like? (sorry I'm not ready to install Python now, perhpas in a remote future only, question of time and set of mind )

Yes, of course copy *.* is not the kind of stuff to be used light-handedly. I would recommand studying the DOS language and the copy and xcopy function at least for one or two hours before starting. Now let's say your DVD drive where your on-DVD back up is inserted is E and the directory structure on it is identical to that on drive C, the following code should be relatively safe to run: xcopy E:\windows\*.* C:\windows\*.* /e /h /r /k Most of files in windows are 8.3 named. On my pc I have only a andful of rfx and dat files with long names. From what I'v read they can be deleted. Only .swp file(s) cannot be copied or restored. I started to write a vbscript a few years ago to do just that (system restore and back up), but there was not interrest here for that so I gave up. Here is the link. At the moment it only does a backup. I have developped a restore script to use with that backup but it has never been tested so it's not available online. If I have to restart the project I think I'll give up the arj file compression or making it optionable since DVD back up and large HDD became so common.

Please bear in mind that KernelEX is only adding some APIs (in other words sort of commands used in programs calling functions in dll's.), and only from kernel32.dll. There are about 700 commonly used API's, perhaps thousands in all, and Xeno86 can only do one at a time. Drivers should be written from scratch and can't rely on random work arounds. However drivers are not so much API dependent but more dependant on hardware architecture, the way the driver interract with the OS. etc About multi cpu, it has been established that it's almost irrealisable. These two issues are way beyond the control of kernelEX.

I didn't say they dictate the standards. I wanted to say that they are de facto setting the standards. (well, if it was me the king of the internet I would dictate - LOL)

Can you make an executable?

Once in a while I make a copy of Windows and Porgam Files on a DVD. Earlier it all fit on a CD-R but programs rgew bigger (not windows). Yet I still have room on the DVD for my non-media documents. To restore, use preferably a DOS command in Dos mode.

I don't agreee with you about codes: Ok, codes can be beautiful when, for example it does a lot in a few lines and doesn't waste resources. Save for scripts, this rarely applies to html. Bad codes are simply codes that don't work properly or waste resources. But they are not bad just because there is a supertition that says it's bad. About the W3C, everybody thinks what it wants. It's a big, important and influencial organisation but it's still compoced of just about anyone who wishes to take part and that means a lot of poeple from the active FF community. The W3C is not formulating their recommandations out of the blue.

I refered to ether some code to make a webpage IE6- compliant was ugly hack or brillant workaround[sic].You were making a moral evaluation on a piece of code. There not ugly or beautiful codes, nor good or bad. Only codes that work and other that don't. True the W3C didn't bend but more exactely it was M$ finaly getting a look at the largely FireFox-based W3C recommandations as their browser market share shrank rapidly.