pcalvert

Hi eidenk. Are you also aware of any reliable 'cloaking' method(s) that would foil any such malicious attempts to identify a system (specifically 9x systems in this context)? What about Proxomitron? In addition to filtering web content, you can use Proxomitron to make it appear that you are using IE7 and Windows Vista (just one example), even though you're actually using Opera and Windows 98 SE. Phil

Hi twig123, Thanks for the link. Looks like a useful site. Phil

Hi twig123, Unfortunately, there is no jumper on the motherboard that is similar to your description. There is the jumper I mentioned previously, and a pair of pins with no jumper that are close to the middle of the motherboard. There is no jumper near the CMOS battery, nor anywhere else for that matter (other than those I've already mentioned). Phil

This sounds similar to advice I got from a friend for a different computer, but which I haven't yet had a chance to try. Where would I find this jumper that you referred to? I could only find one jumper on the motherboard, which has "266 MHz" written next to it. There are six pairs of pins in that area, and only that pair has a jumper on it. Phil

Okay, I'll check the cables as soon as I get a chance. As for the BIOS defaults, I am a little reluctant to do so after reading this on the BIOS manufacturer's web site: Since that seems to imply that the computer could become inoperable after restoring the default values, I figured that I'd try that as a last resort. Phil

Hi, I had a CMOS battery in an old Dell desktop die recently. The battery was replaced, and now the floppy drive and CD-ROM drive no longer work. I went into and system set up and noticed that those drives weren't listed, so I went ahead and tried entering the correct setting for the floppy drive since the correct setting was self-evident. That did not work. When I rebooted the computer, there was an error message on the screen for a few seconds: The Dell is an OptiPlex GXa 266M, and it has a Phoenix ROM BIOS PLUS ver. 1.10 A09. Anyone have any suggestions on how to fix this? Phil

Instead of SpamCop (or in addition to it), you could use Complainterator. I've heard that it does a good job of getting the domain registrars to revoke the domains that are being used by spammers. Phil

Don't bounce spam, report it with SpamCop (http://spamcop.net/). I haven't used Mailwasher in a long time, but it may have a feature that will let you submit spam to SpamCop fairly easily. Phil

Yes. According to the requirements: See http://wpiw.net/doc.html Phil

Instead of a service pack construction kit, another possibility is to use software that makes updating a fresh install of Win98 and adding software much easier. Looking at the problem from that perspective, perhaps the Windows Post-Install Wizard (WPI) could be a good base to work from. Or maybe it could be used as is? BTW, the forum for WPI is here on MSFN: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showforum=93 What do you think? Does WPI look like a promising candidate? Phil

Instead of unofficial service packs and autopatchers, why hasn't someone created a framework that will let anyone create their own service pack? The Win2K/XP folks have HFSLIP and nLite to help them create customized ISOs that can be burned to CD-R/W. I realize that there are reasons why this can't be done with Win9x. But why not something similar? If creating a slipstreamed CD isn't possible, then how about something that can be used to patch Windows 98 SE and/or tweak it during installation, or soon afterward? Phil

Thanks for help. It figures that it would be something simple like that. The thought actually did cross my mind that I should try renaming my batch file, but for some reason I didn't do it. Phil

I am trying to write a batch file that will run netstat and send the output to a text file. Here is what I tried: netstat -an > "C:\My Documents\netstat-out.txt" pause I tried this on Windows 98 SE and it doesn't work. When I execute the batch file (netstat.bat), the command scrolls across the screen (inside the MS-DOS window) repeatedly, and I have to close the MS-DOS window instead of letting the batch file finish. And although the output file netstat-out.txt was created, it is a zero-byte file with nothing in it. Call anyone tell me why this doesn't work? Phil

In an earlier message in this thread I recommended Debian GNU/Linux as a good choice because of the flexibility one has in setting it up. However, it may not be the best choice for someone new to Linux. For people new to Linux, and especially those on this forum, I recommend Puppy Linux. That's because Puppy runs quite well on the older hardware that many of the people here may be using. In addition, one can use it without installing it and without repartitioning one's hard disk drive. For more info, see: http://www.puppylinux.org/ or http://www.puppylinux.com/ Puppy Linux is a "live CD," so it's meant to be run from a bootable CD-ROM drive. If you don't have a bootable CD-ROM drive, or you'd like to install Puppy to your hard drive and run it from there, the following web site will provide you with the instructions you'll need: Lin'N'WinNewB Project Have fun! Phil

As an alternative, there is utility that one can use to make the change. You can download it from here: http://www.intelliadmin.com/Downloads.htm Phil

I agree about Win2K. After several years of procrastination, I dropped Win98 and moved to Win2K a year ago. For the most part, I like it. One thing that surprised me is that it seems significantly snappier than Win98-- at least on this particular computer. I'm not sure why that is. As for malware, I don't think it's a big issue if you know what you're doing. There are a number of utilities you can use to harden the OS and, of course, there are the usual security programs like firewalls, antivirus programs, HIPS, etc. One of the ways that I help keep Win2K clean is by limiting its exposure to the Internet. If I don't need to use a particular Windows program and I am going to be making heavy use of the Internet (which is most of the time), then I will boot into Linux. If I do need to use the Net while I am in Windows, I only do so while logged in as a user with limited privileges. And for a web browser I use Firefox with the NoScript extension and run it in a sandbox (Sandboxie). Even though I plan to keep using Win2K, I think I will keep using Win98 for certain purposes. I might install a 98lited Win98 SE to use as a maintenance/backup OS, and I may also install and run it under QEMU so I can use Windows programs without leaving Linux. Phil

I think he might be talking about Mindows or 98lite. Phil

I have a suggestion. Instead of deleting obsolete entries from the list, cross off the obsolete entries and add a note (enclosed in parentheses) indicating what newer patch it is superseded by. That would make it much easier for us to keep track of the changes. For example: June 2005: 896358 - MS05-026: A vulnerability in HTML Help could allow remote code execution 896422 - MS05-027: Vulnerability in Server Message Block could allow remote code (Replaced by ?????? , released ??/200?) 890046 - MS05-032: A vulnerability in Microsoft Agent could allow spoofing (Replaced by 920213/MS06-068, released 11/2006) Phil P.S. Why was 896422 removed? I could not find an update that supersedes it.

When I was using Windows 98 SE my computer would lock up several times a week, seemingly at random. Eventually, I realized that IE was always open when it happened. So I disabled Active Desktop and stopped using IE. After that, my computer ran quite nicely. IMHO, IE deserves its "Internet Exploder" reputation. Phil

Choice is not a problem. Choice is good! Phil

Here's a hint: Debian. Install the base system and then install X-Windows and a light window manager like IceWM, fluxbox, or Xfce. There's no need to install a bloated OS (like the newer Windows versions and many Linux distros) and then have to rip out what you don't want. You can have a very lean and fast Linux system from the start. Phil

I just installed KB908519, and didn't get an alert box popping up afterward to inform me that the update was successful. That doesn't seem normal, and now I am wondering if the update was successful, got stuck, or whatever. Maybe the person who created the update goofed? Should I run it again? Phil P.S. I got the update via a link on this page: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=84886

After installing the unofficial SP 2.1a, I visited Windows Update and was told that I need to install this: Was this not included in the unofficial SP 2.1a? I tried to check, but I could not find a detailed and definitive listing of exactly what is included in the unofficial SP 2.1a anywhere. Since KB816093 is from 2003, I would've thought that it should have been included. Does anyone know if it was? Phil

Since these are both cumulative security updates for Internet Explorer 6 SP1, does that mean that the release of KB925454 has made the KB918899 update obsolete? Phil

Of course, there are also tweaking programs available that one can use. X-Setup, for example. Phil