Fredledingue

It's funny... I don't have user32.dll in my system.

The only way AFAIK, to automaticaly back up your system files in W98 (without external application) is to set a command in scanreg.ini so that scanreg back up some system files. But I'v never heard of anyone using it.

From what I have read above the problem is with the wininit.ini file. Either wininit.ini is not executed at all Either wininit.ini execute at a later stage when user.exe is already needed by the system Either wininit.ini wasn't written correctly by the installer. Eidenk It's not because a code is written, as simple as it can be, that it will always be executed as intended. There is only a relatevely high probability that the code will be executed and this probability is never 100%. Not because of the coder but because of computer imprecision, unpredictability and unknowns. The only reason why you think that it's impossible that it's not executed properly as verified in your test, is that you ignore these concepts. I didn't mean to offend the anonimous. I imagine that he has tested his patch before and didn't see any possible error. Now the goal is find out the unkown and the unpredictable in order to fix it. noguru Thanks for sharing your experience with us. My version is english. So I don't think it's language version issue. RetroOs, I also had an issue with OLEUP in the past but thanks to MDGx's infos, I could solve the problem. The effect of the wrong install with OLEUP was not even remotely as scary as with *891711.

Here is the link of the file in question: - USER32.DLL + USER.EXE Fix [419 KB, English]: http://www.mdgx.com/files/Q891711.EXE Here are MDGx's comment on this patch: A few months ago MDGx wrote about previous versions of this patch: ===> But this was not my case: I launched the patch only once.

Nor do I. But it did: user.exe was absent from my system at the time I rebooted with the floppy disk and user.dll probably too. Amd the computer turned itself the power off as i described above. I didn't dream it (pinching myself to check ).

dencorso, First I must say that backing up your entire system every time you apply a patch is silly: Just see how many there are. I have counted 26 only after uSP3-alpha was released or that were not included in it! Maybe my system is special, maybe I did something wrong, maybe the moon wasn't in the right phase, I don't know and I don't want to know because installer for essential system files like these should be 100% safe whatever is the case. I think it's the installer because when I checked after the crash, user.exe had disapeared. Extracting in DOS user.exe from the original cab files didn't solve the problem maybe because I didn't know I had to extract user.dll too. see also my reply here on the MDGx thread About EXPLOR98.EXE and KB918547.exe, I didn't have problem with them but MDGx comments make clear they are dangerous in some cases. What I intended to do was not bashing the anonymous guy, but to list patches which have caused problems or could potentialy cause some, and list those who are wellknown to be safe.

RetroOs, I guarantee you that I installed the last september version because I remeber having read the "removed the ",,4" + ",,,4" strings " stuff before installing it: I always save all the notes posted by MDGx and save them in text files with the same name as that of the updates. Then I read each note before applying each update. It has nothing to do with Revolution Pack because I never installed this pack on my computer. There is a problem obviousely not related with RP. Anyway, I don't want to hear about "explanation" or "cause that might be": What I see is that my PC crashed and destroyed my system twice already. I have applied dozens of patches and upgrade packs, yet this is the only one which I have got troubles with. I couldn't compare 100 computers on this patch, but I have compared 100 patches on this computer. And this patch has something realy scary in it. If it was a "very special boot up configuration", I would have had this problem more often than only when applying this patch, isn't it? Given the seriouseness of the computer crash, it's safe to quarantine this update to the Dangerous category. Despite the fact that others have installed it without problem. It's not like you get a temporary BSDO and then you go in safe mode:No, You just can't turn your computer on! Can you imagine that? Clack! Suddenly the machine is off as if someone pulled the power cable off the case. I NEVER have seen this effect on a PC ever. Without a bootable floppy and some DOS knowledge I was toast. Imagine it's a newbie... IMVHO, it should be removed from the list until it's packed into a decent installer.

K891711 (or Q891711) IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS: DO NOT USE IT For the second time (same problem as with the previous version 2 months ago) my computer was unable to restart and I had to reinstall windows. It said "unable to load user.exe" then shut down in 1/10th of a second. Clack! (You know, the sound when the PC power is turned off). I didn't have the possibility to restart it! ===> Boot Floppy time! MDCx: Please remove it from your list!!

May I suggest a new section: Update(er)s to avoid at any cost. DANGEROUS UPDATES Not because of the updated files themselves but basicaly because the installer is not working and the author (who wants to remain anonymous) doesn't understand the risks of playing with system files (and would better not to). U891711.EXE Q891711.EXE Q891711F.EXE EXPLOR98.EXE KB918547.exe Especialy Q891711 (and all the *891711 flavors) For the second time (same problem as with the previous version 2 months ago) my computer was unable to restart and I had to reinstall windows. It said "unable to load user.exe" then shut down in 1/10th of a second. Clack! (You know, the sound when the PC power is turned off). I didn't have the possibility to restart it! ===> Boot Floppy! Q891711 IS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS UPDATE: DO NOT USE IT

These updates/packages are not included into uSP3-01-alpha2 (Either because they were released after uSP3 or because Gape never included them.) KB838751.EXE COPY2GB.EXE TOOLS9X.EXE 249973USA8.exe CRYPT9X.EXE DCOM98UP.EXE PNGFIX.EXE Q222930.EXE Q250876.EXE Q909363.EXE TRIEDIT.EXE WINFIL98.EXE Q920213.EXE SCANFRAG.EXE HELPHLP.EXE vcredist_x86.exe These ones are included (not a complete list but some of the most recent updates) HHUPD.EXE 237493usa8.exe rootsupd.exe FDSKFRMT.EXE Q931836.EXE Q926247.exe Q929120.EXE RUNHELP.EXE SHELL98.EXE Q918547.EXE KB917344-x86.Exe SHELL98b.EXE These ones are not included in uSP and will never be (I think) JavaRuntime-1_5_0_12-i586-p.exe DirectX TTFPAK.EXE Flash9-0-74_W98.exe ------- HTH

Two great stuffs in this release: 1/ Now you can add a comment (for example "After installation of uSP3-beta") and see a list of the reports in Reports_Comment_Index.htm. This is extremely useful! 2/ IFC works on non-updated W98, at least if it includes WSH 5.1. Only the installation verificator upon the "About" button doesn't work but that's not important. However it's much faster with WSH 5.6 installed. Yet, that's great news because you can track your system changes practicaly since day-one of installation, before all the packs and unofficial updaters. ... and a new webpage! (download here) B) 4.3 -Optimized: For Windows Script Host 5.1 and possibly below for work on non-updated w98. ATTENTION: WSH 5.6 still strongly recommanded (faster). -Added: Personal comment on the reportss -Added: Indexing in a Html page the repport file names and the comments for easier re-viewing -Fixed: Configuration interface not lauunching the application -Improved: Other minor details

Ben, What it has to do with interent browsing? My cache was even not on the C: drive + I defragged frequently.

DO NOT INSTALL THIS UPDATE! For the second time (same problem as with the previous version 2 months ago) my computer was unable to restart and I had to reinstall windows. It said "unable to load user.exe" then shut down. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS UPDATE: DO NOT USE IT MDGx: Please remove this PoS from your list.

Gape I'v got the same 'IDE in "DOS compatible mode"' problem as after installing Unofficial Service Pack 2.1a. These files shouldn't be replaced (at least on my PC): C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\IOSUBSYS\ESDI_506.PDR C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VMM32\IOS.VXD

No, my comp is realy faster on the internet, on other websites now. I did many repairs andupdates with the old install, but it's the 1st time I completely erased my HD since 2004. I certainly had something messing up in the system.

I'm back online with a fresh install (w98SE+++updates) and... wow! Internet surfing is much faster than before!

Ok, thanks. The funny part of it is that I do have some updates with my XP version, which amount to SP1 but are not SP1 and for that reason it will not install SP2. But i guess I should ask why in the XP forum.

Clearing cookies didn't help.

No I didn't try clearing cookies. I'll try in one minute, With Maxthon, I'v got this info if it's of any help: Fault address: 7491471A01:0010371A C:\windows\system32\mshtml.dll

HELP! I post my problem here because I'm not able to reply or open a new thread other than using "fast reply". "Intenret explorer encountered an error and must close, sorry" etc everytime I try to open a new thread or post a reply with advanced options (full editor). For example I'm not able to post here: http://www.msfn.org/board/98_SE_SP_30_ALPHA_2_t61749.html because there is no "fast reply". Second problem: I couldn't write to the site administrator because the "code didn't match" (the image containing letters and numbers) and never matched, finaly, et the 4th try he told me I was banned... ???! Thanks for your help (windows XP)

Nice to read that Ben! I also have a couple of new toys: -KVM switcher -Offline Power unit (600W) Both w98/95 compatible! With the KVM switcher I can switch from one computer to another from a hot keyboard combination. Very cool. I can swith from the "XP" computer to and from the "W98" computer. That's my way to "dual-boot". It works well but behave wierd when you are not used to it. For example the diplay shut off if no keyboard is connected to the switch. Also my computer was set up to switch on by pressing any key on the keyboard, but the toggle key combination would switch it on. That's a rare stuff which I realy recommand. The offline power unit (or whatever you call that) gives me 13 min to turn off my computer normaly incase of power outage (which happens sometimes here). I'm not sure if my computer feels good with it thought since I notice some boot failures (freezing at the middle of autoexec.bat) but I can't say the boot where the boot failure come from yet. I'll see later.

My computer dates from 2002 and is almost on par with 2005~2007 machines as soon as performance is concerned. The reason is that my 2002 PC runs on w98se and the new PCs runs on XP or even worse, Vista. IMO you realy need to have your brain examined if you believe Vista is an enjoying experience or has a technical advantage over XP or w98. I would even say that the technical regression we are withnessing with Vista gives me one more reason to stick even longer with w98 or at least, to think in the future about an alternative OS. The main issue with W98++ is hardware compatibility (more than software compatibility IMO) but that's relatively new: one and half year old or so. As long as compatibility runs fine, w98 is superior to XP and of course Vista for every task (except internet browsing in my case, I don't know why). Last month I bought two DVD drives: runs fine on w98. My w98se PC is now converted into a double-decked DVD copying machine with the most recent DVD burning devices. So w98 is still relevant today. If only manufactureres would let us install their drivers on it, it would be limitless. Softwares which are realy uncompatible with a w98SE fully updated are rarer than you think. It seems that most of recent softwres are not running on w98 because the big names (Adobe, DivX etc) have disabled installation on w98 but most of the software community have not put this limitation on their installers and often their programs install and works fine on w98 eventhought they sated it wouldn't. Most of the freewares still install and run perfectly on w98. 99% of the softwares I use are either W98 era or freeware. And believe me the reason is not money.

Who would bother to do that?

You can move the temporary internet files to another location on the internet explorer options. No need to hack the registry for that. Apps which store data in their installation folder can be safely (re)installed on another partition. If you erase your boot partition after that, and have some issues because of that: Make a back up of the files containing the datas (mails etc), then reinstall the apps in the same folders, and if the datas has been erased, bring the backed up datas back there. You can even back up and later copy-paste entire folders of installed programs. That way you will save settings which are not in the registry. That works surprisingly well.

I agree. M$ can't control all the websites and html is a worldwide standard which hasn't changed since IE4.0. My opinion is that the only reason to require XP is to introduce a virus in your machine. I mean the only intentional reason because it can be simply poor prorgaming in some script. That's why I recommand to write to the webmaster about that. He may be unaware of this bug.