Wijono

In the saved theme of WinXP we can a.o. the following: [Control Panel\Desktop\WindowMetrics] [Metrics] IconMetrics=76 0 0 0 139 0 0 0 139 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 245 255 255 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 97 104 111 109 97 0 119 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 216 31 7 0 28 52 1 1 216 31 7 0 176 36 1 1 NonclientMetrics=84 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 245 255 255 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 97 104 111 109 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 245 255 255 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 97 104 111 109 97 0 0 80 37 11 0 0 0 0 0 140 221 6 0 227 115 247 119 2 40 11 0 7 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 245 255 255 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 97 104 111 109 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 222 6 0 50 71 252 119 120 1 7 0 76 73 252 119 8 6 7 0 245 255 255 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 97 104 111 109 97 0 119 0 0 7 0 120 1 7 0 120 1 7 0 40 37 11 0 120 1 7 0 120 1 7 0 245 255 255 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 97 104 111 109 97 0 0 92 1 0 0 136 4 0 0 40 37 1 1 0 0 7 0 184 221 6 0 46 75 232 119 Could someone enlighten me what all those figures (numbers) are all about? Or if not maybe show me the direction to find it out? Thanks a lot.

Thanks to SmaugyGrrr for the hint on this matter. I have taken a look at KB319827, and realized that WinXP does the sorting differently. Following is an example in that KB for the XP sorting behavior: Ie4_01 Ie4_128 Ie5 Ie6 Ie401sp2 Ie501sp2 We can see that the same group of IE4, i.e., Ie4_01, Ie4_128 and Ie401sp2 are separated, so is IE5 too. Whereas Win2K does it like this: Ie4_01 Ie4_128 Ie401sp2 Ie5 Ie501sp2 Ie6 Here all IE4 are grouped together. I personally prefer the Win2K sorting behavior. Luckily KB319827 also describes Registry patch that brings back the Win2K behavior. I did it right away.

I have just found a strange sorting behavior in the Windows Explorer of WinXP SP2 Home. The sorting is wrong when applied to filename starting with numerals, for example when sorting ascending 4 files in a folder, the result is as follows: 2test.txt 10test.txt stest.txt test.txt As you can see, the file <2test.txt> comes before <10test.txt>, simply because the filename length of <2test.txt> is shorter than the filename length of <10test.txt>, it should be the other way around. But when it comes to the filename starting with alphabets, it behaves correctly, in the example above even though the filename length of <stest.txt> is greater than <test.txt>, <stest.txt> still is displayed before <test.txt>, which is correct. Does someone know what is causing that? Is there a way to fix it? Thanks a lot.

There is apparently a bug in XP where if you switch from the Windows XP theme to a saved theme based on the Windows XP theme, the background of the Menus on the Menubar of some programs such as Notepad, Calculator, etc. will be in white boxes, different than the surrounding. Mentioned in many websites, Keith Miller has brilliantly found what is causing that behavior, i.e., when you apply a saved theme via the Display Properties dialog. XP incorrectly clears a bit in the UserPreferencesMask that should be set; as a result the Menubar will adopt the 3D instead of Flat Menu, as it should. And that seems to be the result of [Control Panel\Colors] and [Control Panel\Desktop\WindowMetrics] in the saved .theme file. He even came up with a solution script “Toggle 3D Menus.vbs” that can correct the problem. Great!! The drawback is that each time you switch to another saved theme, you will have to apply the script “Toggle 3D Menus.vbs” to correct the bug. It would have been ideal, if we could patch the .theme file that way, so that it will properly set the bit in the UserPreferencesMask. It is hence a challenge for those of you that know about theme file to overcome that problem. Who will start please?

I have the same problem with my Lenovo 3000 Q100 PC that has on board Realtek ALC 882 chip HD Audio system. Trying all new codec (driver) from Realtek did not solve the problem, cause the Advance Settings is grayed out, hence I could not turn on Mic (20 dB) boost. Finally I revert back to the old driver, the most recent that still enable me turning on Mic Boost, it is R1.25 (5.10.0.5172), with it I can do the Skype. One thing is still unsolved, the microphone is very sensitive to mechanical movement, if we move it just a little bit, it will generate annoying cracking noise. Realtek HD Audio is superb in playback, but very inferior in recording (microphone).

I really am sad that after more than one month no one does reply to my question below. To solve the compatibility problem with high DPI setting is really serious nowadays, where more and more LCD monitors are coming out with very high resolution. It must be similar to handle the compatibility problem with say to run a Win98 games under WinXP. I believe Microsoft should feel responsible to come up with a solution, don't they? Or perhaps not anymore as Windows has migrated to Vista? So sad ...

As the originator of this thread I feel obliged to comment. No, I did not manage to get back a single file that was lost!! Luckily some of the important files, like photos, were backed up in DVD, otherwise ... It was a dell box, and the partial system recovery is really disappointing!!

Nowadays, especially with wide screen LCD monitor, we are forced to use higher dpi settings, such as 120 dpi, so that the characters are nicely legible. Unfortunately there are some programs that are not compatible with the high dpi settings, especially the graphics part, some of the buttons are missing etc. Is there a tweak or trick that we can use with WinXP, to achieve “Disable display scaling on high DPI settings” to overcome that kind of problem?

Thank you all guys!! I have installed Version 2.0 only and it looks OK.

When trying to install [Catalyst Control Center] into a PC with WinXP Home an error message pops up that say .NET Framework is required. I know nothing about .NET Framework, I know though that there are different versions, 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0., the question is: must I install them all starting say from 1.0 etc., or is it sufficient to opt just one, e.g., version 2.0 alone? Your hint will be highly appreciated.

Thanks for the hint!! I have successfully installed Google Earth under Win98SE. I still have problem though. From time to time I experienced weird thing. When I search a place, Google Earth starts to navigate to that place, but then suddenly the whole picture become blur, even the streaming has reached 100%, but it were as if only maybe 1%. Clear memory cache and clear disk cache does not help. Is that a problem of Google Earth or Win98SE? Anything that I can do to fix that annoyance?

As I have mentioned, it has been quite a while, when I visited Microsoft Windows Update site I got following error message: "Network policy settings prevent you from using this website to get updates for your computer." and Error number: 0x8DDD0003. I believe my corporate proxy server must have blocked it somehow. Until recently I could use MBSA, but now as I said earlier it stuck at "Downloading security update information from Microsoft..." Meanwhile I have downloaded and installed Sockscap version 2.38, when I tried to start it I got following error massage though: "This version of SocksCap has expired. Please get a new version or download from http://www.socks.permeo.com/ or see the Permeo Application Security Platform at http://www.permeo.com/", I tried to get the software from those sites to no avail (not found). I tried also version 1.03, IE6 won't even go trough at all, error message said: "Connection to SOCKS server refused or timed out", maybe I need better settings...

No, the proxy server blocks me to get to the Windows Update site. But until recently I could always manage to use MBSA successfully instead. Not now though. Fortunately I still can get into Microsoft Office Update.

Yes I am behind a proxy server. Could it be that the proxy server changed its behavior? Any method to work around it? Or perhaps there is a way besides Windows Update and MBSA to find out what security update is missing in my system? Thanks a lot again.

Thanks nmX.Memnoch for the reply. I have then tried MBSA 2.01, MBSA 2.1 Beta, even the old one MBSA 1.2.1, all give the same result, they all stall now at “Downloading security update information from Microsoft…” I am so disappointed, any other hint please???

In my WinXP SP2 I use to do the Baseline Security Analysis using Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer Version 2.0, but since recently it won’t work at all, the “Downloading security update information from Microsoft…” seems to take forever. This happens in more than one PC, something must have changed in Microsoft site so that MBSA does not work anymore, at least not for WinXP SP2!! Any hint on how to solve that problem? Or any alternative methods to do the same thing? Thank you so much!!

I got my Powerpoint 2003 file back from a Korean friend with a few edited part, all the edition was done with known Western font, i.e., Arial, but somehow invisible Gulim font is embedded in it, so that when I wanted to save that file, a warning pops up that say: Some of your fonts cannot be saved with the presentation. Cannot be saved: Gulim Reason: Not installed I have Googled all the time and could not manage to get a hint to get rid of that Gulim font out of my presentation. Any help will be highly appreciated.

I was drawing conclusion too fast before. When I saw following in the System Information -> System Summary -> Hardware Resources -> Conflicts/Sharing: Memory Address 0xC0000-0xCBFFF System board Memory Address 0xC0000-0xCBFFF PCI bus Memory Address 0xF0000-0xFFFFF System board Memory Address 0xF0000-0xFFFFF PCI bus I assumed that there are still conflicts that may induce the BSOD for the Windows Update <WindowsXP-KB919007-x86-ENU.exe> and all other updates with file size smaller then 1MB as I experienced it before. I was wrong though, after the cleaning with Recovery Console, I can now run <WindowsXP-KB919007-x86-ENU.exe> and all other updates with file size smaller then 1MB with no BSOD anymore. With other words [http://support.microsoft.com/kb/903251/en-us] was successfully implemented in my case! I am forced now to believe, that those Memory Address pair above are not conflicts but rather sharing perhaps. Can someone help me to find out more about that?

Finally I have gone the Recovery Console way. A few Haxdoor Rootkits have been deleted according to the following MS KB: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/903251/en-us But in the Device Manager > System devices > System board Properties, under the Resource settings I still see two unwanted Memory Range (not there in the same type of good PC): - Memory Range: 000C0000 - Memory Range: 000F0000 As such the BSOD problem is not solved yet. How can I fix that problem other than reinstalling Windows XP? Any hint or help will be highly appreciated.

As recommended by eidenk, I have brought my problem to the following forum: http://forum.inmatrix.com/index.php?showtopic=5234 Until now I still have no luck to solve the problem with the Zoom Player Version 5.00 RC1. Does anybody else got a positive experience with it? Meanwhile I have tried GOM Player as recommended by nicke85. Thanks a lot!! It really is a good Media Player. Can someone help me to customize its Windows Size at startup? It would be nicer if we could start it a bit smaller. Also does someone know where to download additional skin?

I have just installed Zoom Player v5.00 Release Candidate 1 in my PC running Win98SE. When I try to click "Controls" > "Color Controls" I got following error message: "Access violation at address 1AF03121 in module 'ZPRESAMPLER.DLL'. Read of address 87CD6000" The "Color Controls" does not work then. That error does not happen under WinXP, it also does not happen with with Zoom Player v5.00 Beta Preview 8 under Win98SE. Has anyone else experienced the same error? Or is it my PC's fault?

No, the CPU is not overclocked. This is the PC with weird folder as I have described in following thread: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=84816 That means, it really is related to virus/trojan Haxdoor as I have suspected before. My suspicion is confirmed by this Microsoft Knowledge Base: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/903251/en-us I will try to fix the problem and post the result here. Hopefully I will not have to reinstall the operating system. Basically I am not comfortable using "Windows Recovery Console". Is there a way to delete running process by first "killing" it?

Thanks a lot LLXX, so far you are the only one that try to help. You may be right, the fault may be in the direction of memory. As I have mentioned in another thread on this problem, in the Device Manager > System devices > System board Properties, under the Resource settings I see two unwanted Memory Range (not there in the same type of good PC): - Memory Range: 000C0000 - Memory Range: 000F0000 Those might be left by trojan or virus? The size of that memory range is just enough for program that is less than 1MB, but as it is not existing Windows crashed when trying to use it. The problem now is how can I get rid of them. Thanks a lot again.

Additional information that may help solve this problem. In the Device Manager > System devices > System board Properties, under the Resource settings I see two unwanted Memory Range (not there in the same type of good PC): - Memory Range: 000C0000 - Memory Range: 000F0000 The first one looks in line with the STOP: error message I mentioned earlier. The problem is now that the “Change setting” button is greyed out, so how can I get rid of those unwanted Memory Range?

I have written about this problem in another thread, but piece by piece and up to now got no response, hence I try to start a new thread with the hope to get positive response. In a PC running WinXP SP2, whenever I tried the Windows Update with the file size of the installer less then 1MB, then as soon as I double-click the installer, the screen goes immediately black and the PC restart right away. Example of those Windows Updates are the following: - WindowsXP-KB919007-x86-ENU.exe -> 554KB - WindowsXP-KB922819-x86-ENU.exe -> 837KB - WindowsXP-KB923414-x86-ENU.exe -> 709KB - WindowsXP-KB925486-x86-ENU.exe -> 784KB Trying to find out more clue, I turned off the “Automatically restart” in the “Startup and Recovery” panel. When trying again to run those installer, I then got BSOD with following memory dump: STOP: 0x0000008E (0xC0000005, 0xEFEECBEF, 0xEEE02A20, 0x00000000) Those that are printed bold can change from time to time, but the rests are the same all the times. All other Windows Updates with the file size of the installer greater than 1MB run smoothly, no problem at all. In trying to isolate the problem, I did the extraction of the problem updater in a good PC by double-clicking the updater, then stop at the “Software Update Installation Wizard” popup, copy all the extracted files into the problematic PC, double-click the <update.exe>, the update is implemented flawlessly in the problem PC. That way I could do the KB919007, KB 923414, KB925486 and KB922819 (All less than 1MB) mentioned above. With other words, the offending part is the extraction part, not the updating part. One more point, the problem is only encountered with KB###### type of Windows Updates as mentioned above, dot NET update NDP20-KB917283-X86.exe which has less then 1MB (755KB) could run flawlessly. Checking deeper by opening this update with WinZip shows that it contains following 2 files: - manifest.ini - NDP20-KB917283-X86.msp Whereas opening those problem updater with Winzip reveals following contents: _sfx_0000_.p_; _sfx_0001_.p_; _sfx_0002_.p_; _sfx_0003_.p_; _sfx_0004_.p_; _sfx_0005_.p_; _sfx_0006_.p_; _sfx_0007_.p_; _sfx_0008_.p_; _sfx_0009_.p_; _sfx_0010_.p_; _sfx_0011_.p_; _sfx_0012_.p_; _sfx_0013_.p_; _sfx_0014_.p_; _sfx.dll; _sfx_manifest_; update.ver Only this package structure with less than 1MB that has the problem. KB updater with more than 1MB has similar structure but has no problem. Any clue or hint that will lead to the solution to this weird problem will be highly appreciated.