LLXX

Don't run programs that have memory leaks in them. Most don't, but some badly-written ones will gradually consume more and more.

IBM recovery CDs do indeed have the Windows files on them. The recovery program must be detecting something left behind on your drives. Use an eraser program that completely erases the sectors on the hard drive by filling them with zeroes, especially the first few hundred sectors.

Make sure these entries in the Registry are correct. HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\.bat = "batfile" (or whatever it's named) HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\batfile (or whatever it's named) = "Batch File" HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\batfile\shell\ = "Open" HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\batfile\shell\open\command = ""%1" %*" (the %1 is itself quoted) HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\batfile\shell\edit\command = "C:\WINDOWS\NOTEPAD.EXE %1"

"Male merge"?? Tried reinstalling Outlook?

If it's a small program, just delete it's files and then search for and delete the program's registry entries normally under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software and HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software.

Interesting topic... Not too impossible... remember that most of the components of 98se were compiled and compilers back then weren't as efficient and produced code which was generated in fixed patterns and easily decompiled. With advanced technology in analysis and a team of experienced reversers it would be possible to eventually dissect the entire workings of Win98se and possibly write an enhanced version. It's not too far from reality.I've disassembled an entire DOS 3.20 kernel myself and modded it with my own code... it's now running on an old 386 being used as a print server. (Microsoft definitely isn't going to sue me for that!) In the Win9x area, I'm currently inspecting the IDE driver (ESDI_506.Pdr) and working on a version that will enable 98se to work with hdds up to 2 terabytes in size. It isn't very difficult. Gradually, little by little, components will be replaced with non-MS replacements and eventually we'll have an open-source extensible OS with only the architecture of 9x. I assume the final step would be a replacement kernel.

If your WinXP distro was indeed stored on the hard drive and got wiped when you erased it, then you're going to have to find an XP disc somewhere else... However some of the better recovery CDs include the XP files in which case you should have no problem, but it seems this is not the case here

That's strange... I've copied huge amounts of files right after a virgin install and no problems with corruption or anything like that... just the time displayed goes wierd but I consider that to be purely cosmetic. BTW I'm using the *original* unmodified install of a v4.10.2222A 98se distro. Could it be a hardware problem?

That app does not contain the usual Microsoft copyright string... nor does it contain the standard Runtime Library that is usually present. All it uses are the existing DLLs. However the code is definitely the output of a compiler.

Another tiny MSN client to try out: PixaMSN v0.6 (Google it). Very limited but tiny. It's open-source too

The ports that it requires may be closed by your ISP.

In the TCP/IP properties, there should be a sheet that contains the option "Obtain an IP address Automatically"/"Specify an IP address" with a place to enter the address. It's self-explanatory from there. I don't think that's the problem. DSL problems are usually related to noise on the line.

That is certainly a problem... it's not supposed to close automatically. Possible Virus??

It's a firewall implemented in a dedicated computer. Large companies usually use them. The "Disconnect" switches that physically disconnect don't count as hardware firewalls. Some might have antivirus features, but "hardware antivirus" probably isn't the term for it.

Or your floppy may be. Have you tried formatting some other floppies in the drive?

Just use a standalone downloader program e.g. FlashGet. The server seems to be unreliable and tends to disconnect frequently. In the first 10 seconds it had to reconnect 3 times. However I did get ~250KB/s.

I'm using the 5.00.2919.6304 version of the browseui.dll and it works perfectly fine. I've moved nearly 80Gb of data at once, with a single Paste, with no problems, although the Time Remaining did jump to some crazy value (I can disregard that, given the fact that on my system it always transfers at ~10Mb/s). Perhaps downgrading is a solution?

What about booting into safemode or command prompt and deleting it from there? It also looks like you might've been infected with a virus contained in that file. Do a virus scan.

Getting a BIOS update would most likely solve your problem. (Why do both images indicate the exact same time but the first one looks like the CPU line was edited?)

If you want the simplest, most efficient solution available, the batch file would be the way to go, since they are specifically designed to run commands that way. You will find that your VB "program" is now much larger than the batch file but performs the same function.

With maximum size optimisations enabled, of course. However, FYI highlevel languages are not usually that well adapted to producing the absolute smallest programs.

Centrino includes a Pentium M. See here for some details: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=63102

Search msfn for "MaxFileCache" and you'll find the solution. It's documented here: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?...b;EN-US;q253912

Do you know what splitters are? My PSU now actually has 10 Large, 4 Small, and 2 Satas.

ME support? Don't really care. Usually comes with 98SE support though. 98SE support? Definite Yes. It's called Backward Compatibility. It's the reason why I can put a 5.25" floppy manufactured in 1981 in my mid-2005 machine and read/write to it. It's the reason why I can still use a 20-year-old dot-matrix printer (still works amazingly well after all these years...) to print out something I created in MS Office XP. New should always be compatible with the old. I've used every Microsoft OS from DOS 3.20 to XP (might try Vista soon). The earlier Windows were bad: 95 was not very stable, 98 was better but still not that good, but 98se is as good as it gets. ME got worse, 2000 was alright but bloated. XP wasn't much better than 2000; if anything, it was a step backwards. Why newer OS require more computing resources and take up more space is very strange. The OS shouldn't be what's taking up so much requirements of your system, it should be the apps that do that. The OS should be just a small "supervisor" in the background, providing services to your apps. The 98se system is definitely *not* unstable. The base kernal is excellent and I've had uptimes of nearly 9 months so far on my 98se fileserver (total resources free is still at 87%!). It's the apps that you run that are causing the problem. All the NT series OS hide this fact that your apps are leaking memory so it appears that your system is very stable, but seriously, the problem is with your apps and not the OS. Take DOS for an example. It is extremely easy to crash but what causes those crash? You, running badly designed apps. Don't blame the OS for instability. It's all those badly designed programs you're running. Win98se runs great on the latest hardware, even better than XP. With all the development in the USP forum it is even more enhanced. It can actually considered to be forward compatible as well as being backward compatible. E.g. my hardware: 4.17GHz P4 HT 256M DDR400 (tested to be working with 2Gb DDR533) 2x 120Gb HDD There is absolutely no reason to drop 98se support. If anything, developing drivers for XP+ is more involved and expensive since those drivers should have to go through authentication and be digitally signed by Microsoft and certified etc. Most of us are just being forced to use XP because it comes with every new PC, or because Microsoft is so clever with their advertising that we submit to their commands. But look beyond the marketing claims, and you'll see what XP really is. While others e.g. Win 3.11/95/ME died out in only a few years, 98se still continues to be used by many. Expect the lifetimes of XP and Vista to be less than 98se. I estimate that by 2010 XP will have faded away, Vista will be nearing its end and Microsoft will have some even bloatier and uglier OS out by then, but 98se will probably still be in use by many I still boot into MS-DOS 7.10 to do small tasks that I can do in DOS without waiting for Windows 98 to load, and I still load Windows by running WIN at the console prompt. The poll results certainly show agreement to this!