noguru

I use MPC to watch everything but DVD's. Not that it doesn't work, it works fine. I also prefer PowerDVD (6.0), much more features, better menu support, much better sound and faster. It cost $ for sure, it can't beat MPC on that, but I think it is the best DVD player. And I was so lucky to get a free copy together with a videocard. What made me not so happy was that it came together with a complete bloated DVD copy, write, edit, etc. etc. suite that takes over your system and wants to "call home" all the time. After registering my legal copy it still wants to do that. But after you have removed all that crap, ( by it's own uninstallers, no real problem but why force me to install it anyway?) then it's very good.

Good unicode support.

Irony or mistake?

Paranoid people dont need netbios You can disable it, see " Increased Netbios Security" overhere: http://www.mdgx.com/newtip19.htm

The patch didn't work for me either... I, too, went back to the last 5.5 SP2 versions of the brows*.dlls (placed in the System folder)... with the latest 6.0 SP1 versions of the brows*.dlls placed in my IE folder. Sorry to hear this. But I just did the 2500 text files test and it went fine. I even doubled the number of files by copying them to a second drive and deleting them all at the same time. Deleting took a while, offcourse, but the recyclebin didn't hang. Since installing this fix I notice a short delay ( 1sec) when the recyclebin is closed also when deleting small amount of files. But that's all.

Asfbin is very fast and free. webpage Also fixes broken wmv's.

Thanks for the link. I am a bit surprised in a positive way about Avira. In previous tests they did not score very good when it came to false positives. Now the score is good, not the best but decent. For me personally this large number of false positives was still a downside of this software. And you can have this for free too. FREE! I am becoming a big fan of this german product. And I'm dutch, supposed to hate anything german

In this case the most easy and fastest way could be to use another system with "normal" XP to take the files from the camera. Then transfer to your system through internet, network or burn them on CD. Whatever is possible in your situation. Perhaps a Linux live CD will work too but I doubt that it would recognize your camera. And yes, then I would make sure that my own XP would include this very basic functionality. I'm impressed by people who are able to modify their OS to their personal needs but I think you went a little bit to far .

I experienced this with HP printers and scanners. Just refuse to install on USB on Win98. However, when you force the USB install it works fine. And HP printers that don't have a parallel port install fine too. Very bad setup.exe if you ask me.

Why was I expecting someone to post this?I just turn off my monitor when I'm not using it... Yes, in fact a screensaver does not save anything. A long time ago you could use it on your CRT when those where still vulnerable for burning in. They are just for fun. And the bluescreen is indeed funny. However, for best fun experience it's best to install it on somebody else's system like a unaware co-worker

Mmmm, according to this poll 1 out of 4 voters uses Zonealarm. I can't imagine that they all have the same problem otherwise it would not be 26%. I use Zonealarm for many years and I like it because it does it work by itself without bothering me. Yes it eats about 30-40 Mb RAM, a lot. But I think it works ok and stable too. But when I renew my IP I also lose my internet connection. I have to quit and restart Zonealarm to restore the connection. Did you try that? Perhaps VMware and Zonealarm don't go together, I really don't know, but that's no reason to advise everybody to stay away from it. About the GUI, when made under XTC influence it would be beautifull right? And it's is certainly ugly, but there is no need to look at it. Zonealarm does it's work by itself.

bul*****. 64 MB of RAM is good enough to run Windows 98 SE. Especially if you rip out IE, which everyone should do anyway if the person wants a secure install. If it's enough to run your programs, that depends on the program, obviously. Indeed, I've had a P166 with 64MB RAM with Win98se wich ran fine. Even 32Mb will work ok, I have no clue where people get the idea that Win98 cannot start with this, they probably never tried. More on topic: Don't forget IE security updates, SP2.1a does not contain those. See this thread, very recommended for Win98 users: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=46581

Works ok now, thanks!

The IE922760 does not install on my win98se+IE 6.00.2800.1106IS, says that I don't have the correct IE version? The first version that you posted here installed fine. Should I uninstall this version first before installing your latest with the added reg. values?

He's talking about both I think. The version tested by AV comparatives is the premium version but the free version uses exactly the same engine and signatures. I use the classic (free) edition, it runs stable and is light. Imo worth trying

That's good to know, thanks!

Yes, the only way to make a decision on speakers is to listen to them. Good sound is very personal. Some people like good quality clear high frequencies. Others just want to be blown out of their chair by their subwoover.

That was not the point. (But there is a reason why AV comparatives is testing this!) Fact is that Kaspersky stays way behind the competition when it comes to polymorfic viruses. I was just wondering why.

All true, and I'am looking forward to your comparative. But I wonder about one thing. If Kaspersky has got such a sophisticated engine then why does it only catch 6 out of 10 polymorfic viruses ? AV comparatives state themselves that this test is a good measure for the ability to find difficult malware. Symantec an Avira are the only ones that fully pass this test. Thumbs up for Avira I would say, you can get that engine for free! (btw. AVG and Avast, the other free ones, don't come close to Avira in all tests)

@MDGx, Thanks for posting the latest security updates, they work fine on my system. As you perhaps read here, I installed the official xml update (did not have patience to wait for the unofficial...just wanted to try if it would work). Is there any difference in funcionality between the official patch and yours? I installed yours on top off the official one. Thanks in advance.

The official MSXML security update update KB927978 does officially not support Win98se but can be installed on Win98se: Vulnerability in Microsoft XML Core Services Could Allow Remote Code Execution (928088) link: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...Date=2006-11-14 I downloaded the installer, extracted the MSI inside with 7-zip and executed the MSI. It installed without a glitch. I always use the "Belarc Advisor" to check wich updates are installed on my system and it's listed correct. No problems yet!

Not if you are very carefull......just like you don't need seatbelts if you drive careful..... I mean, you really never know so if I where you I would at least instal critical security updates. There are others besides the ones for IE, like WMF and MDAC. You don't gain anything if you don't install these.

Well, not al unofficial updates have a fancy installer that tell's you what is happening What you describe is not unusual and the updates are probably installed correct. You could unpack the installers with 7-zip or something like it and check the fileversions. Btw, there is a sticky topic regarding Win98/Me updates patches and hotfixes.

Thanks!!

That's not how the font folder should look like. It seems that it is broken and turned into a normal folder. You have another option missing too, the similarity button. MS TweakUI has a option to repair the font folder, you can download TweakUI here if you don't have it yet. http://www.mdgx.com/toy.htm