Fredledingue

Download Express!

miko, That's a dll that developers need to refer to and to include in their installation package to make their software w98 compatible. It's not an upgrade for w98 to be XP-only-software compliant. (as I understand it)

There is no language so far that use unicode and if one did, it wouldn't change anything because exe files are compiled in binary. And as I said before binary language is the same for every computer available on the market (there might be some non binary system in some lab or museum, I don't know). What you get is always a pack of 000101010011100 that goes through a processor and output another pack of 001110101001011. And this process is the same in XP and w98. XP is slower because the packs of binary datas going through the processor all the time is bigger than those on w98. That's why also small softwares often run faster than large ones (when they are properly written). A program that run on XP and not on w98, does so because it calls other softwares elements (dll, ocx etc) that are not installed on w98. Some of these elements are easily installable on w98, others are not because they are themselves calling others elements that would need to be replaced and so on. But theoricaly, if you install everything from XP on w98, all XP-only softwares should work. Unless they realy need a NTSF to work which is still possible by partitioning the HD... At least in the limit of my knowledge.

Yeah, it's been a long time I stopped listing all the freewares I sue. I just made a compilation of all the softwares I collected in the last 4 years (with updates) and I needed to create a second CD because they won't hold on a single one.... I make list of freeware sites instead... http://www.nonags.com/ http://www.pricelessware.org/thelist/index.htm http://www.geocities.com/drdole/ http://www.snapfiles.com/Freeware/ http://www.techsupportalert.com/best_46_free_utilities.htm http://www.wv-be.com/Download.asp http://www.all4you.dk/FreewareWorld/links....alculator&la=en http://www.webattack.com/freeware/freeware.html Download sites where you will find also freewares among paywares http://www.winsite.com/ws_search.html http://www.majorgeeks.com/ http://www.softpedia.com/ http://www.softnews.ro/ http://www.theabsolute.net/sware/index.html http://www.geocities.com/somak_de/

Bad luck for you, Link21: EVERYTHING in windows2000/XP is based on w98 (except the kernel and the file system). What struck me most when I tried XP for the first time, was the similarities with w98. "But......, it's the same!" I recall saying. Then I discovered that in XP there were more annoying stuffs added, more hd waste, more slowlyness, more security gaps etc etc etc What do you want? they sacrificed everything on the altar of "stability"... But I agree that to the extent that 98 looks like XP, it's a "bad" OS.

Me too!

Yep, But all the w98 fans here, only want to run this OS on the most recent hardwares and for the most advanced use and applications. XP-only apps are the classical bloated noobwares that we will never use anyway...

The more you have ram, the less you need to worry about it. I remember when I moved from 32 to 96 Mb, It was like a new life! Today with the same OS but a much faster computer and 512 Mb of ram, I even stopped thinking about it. Ram freer grew old because they take ages to unload the memory. I prefer not losing time. W98 work better on new hardware. The type of software is also important: Sometimes I ran with 1% of ram and the os kept running fine...because all the softwares I use are safe, tested and well-designed. If developer were smart, even w95 could run for weeks without a crash.

Superlevel, Maybe I won't recommand w98se on a laptop, for driver reasons. Unless you are will willing to spend some times to test it. Often laptop come with specific drivers, or even an adapted windows version optimized and therfore faster, for these laptop. So if you try w98se+sp2, make sure to test your system in full (data transfer, program speed, internet speed etc). I mean, on a PC you can easily downloead the driver for each device, while on a laptop you have it under a apackage. But the best OS is the one that YOU think is the best. Siim04 wrote I don't agree. XP is too much pre-configured and much more difficult to have it behaving "as you want it". Especialy with multimedia. (just try to NOT have Windows media Player preselected everytime you insert a CD-r in the CD drive...) In one word if your hardware is compatible with w98se, this OS with sp2 and the other packs is the best choice for individual users.

Maybe it's because I have "Copy Path" installed... but I don't have time to test now and I will be far from my computer the next three weeks. And I won't uninstall "Copy Path" anyway. Only over my death body.

There should be something with my system then... Thanks for your help. Nice color settings BTW! Look, on lnk files I have something like this:

eidenk Very frustrating! I tried again yesterday: I have a "More Act" menu but it stay stubbornly empty whatever I do What do you mean by you "registered". In MAStart I have only "ok" "cancel" "apply" buttons, some chackbox with display options and a checkbox "enable". What do you do with this? Also you told me to register the dll. I tried but I got a "...there is no entry point in the dll..." error. ???

Eidenk, I lost 3 hours trying to have moreact to work (I even registered to registry). It only had the effect of deleting some menu I previousely had for some file types... Menus created by FastExplorer and cmext121 always launch a single instance of the program in the menu shortcut, for each selected file. For example if I select 6 files, and clic a menu that link to a batch file, I will have 6 command windows appearing listing each one of the selected file. I have a script to test that: it gives me the number of arguments (the number of file paths sent to the scripts). It will give me 6 message box with 1. If I do "send to" and choose the same bat file, I will have one command windows listing all the 6 files. Same with my vbs: it will give me one message box with the number 6. There were no way to configurate FastExplorer or cmext121 to do otherwise...

eidenk I tried these softwares: moreact056 is the only one that does what I'm looking for....except that it doesn't work (on w98 while it's w95 software) Context Aware Installation impossible even manualy, very difficult manual, crash etc. Doesn't work at all. FastExplorer and cmext121 Work but with a new instance of the launched program for each selected file. I need one instance of the launched program for all the selected file, like with a drag and drop. Because with vbscripts, the file paths are arguments, and the scripts need to process all the arguments at once, not launching the script for each argument.

Is it possible (maybe trough registry hacks) to create a second "Send To" folder in the right-click menu in Explorer? And if possible to assign adapted "Sent To" folders for specific file types? The goal is to create a menu for launching scripts and maybe do other things, taking in account all the selected files. The only seamless way to do that is to locate the script in the "Send To" folder. (I found a solution to do it outside the "Send To" folder but that's not as fast nor as reliable.) Problems with using the "Send To" folder are: -Overpacked submenu, difficulty to find quickely the good target -Same submenus for all the files, irrelevant for some files most of the time -Menu name "send to" not fit for the kind of operation etc

Hi! Thanks a Gb, dman, that's what I was looking for! I realised that for launching a script-created webpage it's better to embed the script into the page and even that, was not obvious. But the code you gave me will be very useful for launching scripts that have nothing to do with htm page viewing, ironicaly... (I'm one of the very rare scripter who use scripts for other use than server or ntwork.) Because codes are long (more than 100 lines) I prefer to create a separate htm file with one script in it. I then came with this solution: <script LANGUAGE="VBScript"> <!-- sub window_onLoad() '-----script that generates an htm page source------- NewHtm = NewHtm & "<p>Hello World! " & Date & "</p>" '-----end of script---- Document.Body.InnerHTML = NewHtm end sub --> </SCRIPT>

VBscript is much easier than batch (BAT, DOS), but it's true that DOS is the must-known language for any self-respecting geek. I almost completely learned VBS by googling stuffs like "open web page vbs vb script"... and I almost found how to's. Autoit is also very good, but require installing programs, while VBS don't at least in modern windows versions. But autoIt is very similar to vbscript. You can also use autoitX in vbs, if you feel need it. http://visualbasicscript.com/

Come on, there are plenty of dual boot solution, aren't there? Now I don't know how you gonna write an OS if you don't even know how to dual boot... FYI: 2000 experienced programmers are working for years to develop the next Windows version... but I don't want to discourage you, maybe you will do better than them alone and in less time... Seriousely: look at free OS prjects, Linux is one but look rather at Free OS, OS2 etc Search for poject already in developement, they do welcome poeple like you willing to change things and try and stuff.

LOL. It's like saying w98 is stable once you install the uSP2! Which is true while XP remain slightly slower even after its wheight losing cure. XP is not a quality OS. It's a bad OS with a qulaity kernel and maybe a quality file system (thought the fat32 is also a quality file system IMO). Bloat is not the only thing, as kernell not being the only thing neither. When I will have to upgrade my hardware to a point where it can't support w98, I will of course drop it. But then I will have to fight against all the annoyances, bloats and useless services that cripple XP and will most probably cripple Vista and Longhorn64. M$ is reluctant to make a simple OS that simply is a base for running programs with the highest performance. Instead it wants to make flashy interface that always require the latest up-to-date hardware to hardly function, that multiply the level of servicing and management complexity, that integrate multi-hundred-MB apps such as windows media player, IE and others, that oblige running multiple level of protections against viruses because it's a network-open OS, that has no reliable driver installation etc. And that couldn't even fix the annoying interface problems I had with w98! Just adding some more. Sh*t! I only need a PROGRA~1 folder to put my freeware standalones in it. F*ck with their 3d cyan rounded window skins and their media edition!

VBS on client side. I'm trying to simply run a vbs file that I created myself and that is on the my computer, by clicking a link on the htm page that I also creted mysel and that is also in my computer, in the same directory as the vbs. The reasons why I don't want to include the script in the page are that it's more convenient for me to edit scripts and htm pages separately, and that scripts are quiet long, that in the page there are other links that are simple and other that may require other scripts etc.. I would like also running the same script alone, from the vbs file, not in the htm file.

And me who thought XP was a monster bloat...

Yes, P4 3.4Ghz + 1Gb memory+ 2x120Gb HD + GF4 is perfect for w98se-uSP2. A good wide 19' LCD display of the lastest generation is also recommanded for w98 OS. It would ba a waste to use such computer with XP. Link21 XP is not aquality OS. IMO. That's why driver support for w98 should go on. Unfortunately economics sometimes are against that and we, w98 users suffer from the obligation to install low-performance XP-based drivers because everybody knows that XP mean low-performance. Yes XP is stable but not a quality OS. No. Also one more reason why your point is not valid: Every processor use binary data and these binary datas are the same in w98 and XP.

Thanks, but that doesn't answer to my question at all. Thanks for the link anyway, I'll look at it.

Albator Do you mean Fat32 is faster on large hard drives than ntfs?

Hi, I DON'T ASK how to insert a script in a webpage (I already moreless figured that out). What I would like to know is how to run a script that is not in the webpage but in a separate file (inthis case a .vbs file), by clicking on a link or a button. Then how to open the htm file eventualy created by this script... Thanks