eidenk

Mmmh I thought I had hacked it but I didn't in fact. Did the install a few days ago. Here it apparently works with the unhacked file because of KernelEx that is installed on my machine. Sorry about that guys. I have hexed that function now and reuploaded again a package. Hope it will work on your machines now. http://rapidshare.com/files/43381739/Googl...n98-ME.zip.html

Oops I forgot to include the hacked GoogleEarth.dll in the zip. I'll reupload a package in a few minutes. Edit : Allright, I have updated the download link in the original post with a package which also contains the hacked googleearth.dll. Let me know if everything is OK now.

So what are precisely those threats when having a 9x box simply connected to the network on a broadband connection ?

FWIW I can open and navigate this kmz file without problems with both GE 4.0 and 4.1 on Windows ME. I must say though that I have installed GE 4.1. It's an MSI installer now in the exe. It has been quite easy to hack it with Orca so that it does install under ME. Edit : OK I have uploaded a working msi installer for Google Earth 4.1.7087.5048 for Windows 9x. The ANSI version of atl71.dll and the hacked base.dll and googleearth.dll are included in the zip. http://rapidshare.com/files/43381739/Googl...n98-ME.zip.html

I found this, some might find it usefull : http://www.minasi.com/ex98files/

It does not need to be regsvr32ed AFAIK. It just needs to be in the "path".

You should have posted this topic in the service pack subforum I think. I am not saying it is impossible but it's probably very hard. I am not sure hacked drivers for NT systems would do but I am not knowledgeable enough to say so. I would guess from the little I know about the 9x architecture that vxds will be required but I am not sure either. Interesting topic anyway especially for the next generation of multicore chips which I have heard (can someone confirm that ?) will allow to use multiple cores as it were one, which means that any old or new number-crunching applocation should be able to benefit from the power of several cores.

The list of malware that has ended on my system through casual browsing with IE is quite huge. I wonder why I still use it actually. I well want to believe that ditching IE (and also Outlook) for a gecko browser or, better even, Opera, will make a 9x system nearly 100% safe for browsing the net. I don't use a resident virus scanner because it is too much of a hog to my taste and does not protect from zero days anyway but I use a firewall with outbond filtering and I would carry on using one even if I would ditch IE entirely because I download and install lots of software and because the IE vulns can be exploited in chm files for which there is, to my knowledge, no alternative to hh.exe (which uses the IE runtime) for displaying them.

Yes indeed, I have just tried that after unregistering wvc1dmod.dll and making sure Graphedit would not build a graph out of the video.

I wanted to play that WMV video but I couldn't because of missing WVC1 codec. Wikipedia says it is Windows Media Video 9 Advanced Profile and that it requires Windows Media Format 11 Runtime or Windows Media Player 11. Instead of trying to update files from those packages I found out that MS distributed last year a wvc1dmo.exe package, a copy of which I have been able to find here. It contains the WVC1 encoder and the decoder in separate files. The encoder does not work as it has missing functions in dependencies but the decoder works OK and allows to play the above file. It is wvc1dmod.dll and it just need to be copied somewhere and regsvr32ed. It is possible that more recent versions of wmvdmod.dll than the one I have installed (from WMP10 or 11) also allows videos using this codec to be played on 98SE/ME but I am not sure as I haven't tried that.

Just curious, why do you want to underclock your CPU ?

Do you get those missing dependencies when just opening the app with Dependency Walker or only when profiling it in it ? When profiling all that comes missing is not necessarly needed for the software to run without problems. It might just be checking for non-essential dependencies.

This chap as you say did not give an opinion. He made again a totally wrong "expert" assessment. Shall I change the first sentence of my post to : "As usual Andromeda does not seem to know what he speaks about despite his repeated claims of expertise" so that it says the same thing while looking less agressive ? Last time, his previous post , he expertly and seriously claimed being able to exchange data at 1.5GB/s between two IDE drives he plugged on a SATA adapter card, which is nonsense. I answered that without attacking him but he never came back to discuss the point. So this time, I decided to be a bit agressive as to try to trigger an answer from him. The point is that I am reading this 9x forum regularly and I got very fed up with Andromeda's posts in general. For me he is a typical compulsory bluffer, constantly inflating and distording the value of what he's got in his hand. Now see what he writes in answer : Maybe there is a valid reason for it, isnt'it ? And why does he even bother posting on MSFN anymore if all he encounters is as****** flaming him and admins not giving a s*** about it ? I'll tell you something, we've got the same type of bluffers at the White House and at Downing Street and they also share with Andromeda the fact that they constantly project themselves as benevolent fatherly figures while pushing forward their wrong or distorded data as hard facts. I am pretty sure that andromeda's customers, if he actually has any, are ending up very sorry after a few years in his hands. Fortunately he has not the ability, unlike the above two, to force "fixes" in other people's systems. And both Andromeda and the above quoted politicians bluff while projecting themselves as benevolent fatherly figures solely to to feed a Power Trip they are in IMO. Amazing isnt'it ? I think you should have your brain examined as I have never discussed or even read stuff about signed/unsigned integers on here as far as I can remember, nor have I ever predicted the end of this OS. But maybe you refer to a row I had with LLXX some time before she got banned. If she would have listened, then maybe she'll be still on here instead of getting herself banned for certainly doing the same type of things in other parts of the forum I do not read regularly. If you refer to something else, please be more precise so that I might eventually remember an episode I have forgotten and eventually accept blame for it if it is well founded. Weren't the last two thirds of my post constructive ? Yes or No ?

One of those tools will tell you were your explorer hogs when opening folders or launching apps so I'd insist a bit with them if I was you. Most likely it will be either because of a shell extension or a BHO.

Try to profile your app with Dependency Walker and see where it fails

Then you should normally be able to play those files with any media player that is a front end for direct show, which means most of them. Which players have you problems with ?

You certainly mean boot.ini, the config file used by ntldr when booting 2K or XP or a multiboot system with any of those two OSes. It's got nothing to do with autoexec.bat AFAIK. Unless I am wrong, boot.ini just tells ntldr to which partition's boot sector it must jump to, ie, which OS it must boot. Anyway your post is very difficult to decipher, could you clarify what you exactly mean / want to do ?

That burner appears to come bundled with drivers. I don't think it is a mass storage device like a USB pen drive, external hard drive, Mp3 Player, etc...

Have you installed drivers for it ?

Those files aren't good for 9x OSes AFAIK.

I recommend Jetico but it is very weird to configure, especially if you've used ZA before. Not really supported anymore either. http://www.jetico.com/jpfwall.exe

Pure madness.

As a rule of thumb, you may want to ignore Andromeda's posts as they most often appear to be pure drivel coated by affirmations of his own expertise. ME defrag is reputedly faster than the 98SE one but it it still very slow IMO. Certainly it is not 10 times faster. And if it's faster by some amount, it is certainly because it's code has been optimized. If you want something that defrags fast, get Diskeeper Lite from a download site. It is much faster than the ME one and by very much. It also has the big advantage of letting you defrag drives on which write operations are carried out by the OS or applications, so it never needs to restart because something has changed on the drive and you never need to go in safe mode to defrag a drive such as the one on which the OS is installed.

Is there any truth in that ?

Just a guess : wrong version of oleaut32.dll.