I can't access Windows Update v4

[Steven W]

I'm going to start uploading the files I have or point to links (This post will be edited a few times). I'm not going to include my BAT files, but will put a copy in here for anyone who wants them. As you can see for the list in post #65, most of these are USA English. I'm skipping the unofficial updates as links are provided in post #66 and, as discussed, some of those will be provided in PROBLEMCHYLD's update of Gape's service pack

1. IE6 SP1 (To install execute ie6setup.exe): MediaFire

2. This is all files listed in red text in post #65 (for a very safe method to install, run them in the order listed in that post): MediaFire

3. Microsoft Data Access Components (MDAC) 2.8 SP1

4. WMP 9

5. Everything in blue text from post #65 (note I've decided to leave out DirectX and the DotNet Framework, again for a safe-install, execute in the order of above post):

MediaFire

6. DirectX 9.0c

7. Here's everything in orange text from post #65 (to install the MSGames Update, extract the cab, right-click on the INF file and choose install): MediaFire

8. Everything thing here and below is stuff I'd want to have: Tweakui 1.33: majorgeeks.com

9. Adaptec ASPI Drivers: Download.com

10 http://www.mdgx.com/files/DXM9X.EXE - see post 66 - 70 above!

11. http://www.mdgx.com/spx/MDIE6CU.EXE (you can read about it here: )

12. Gape's Service Pack (With PROBLEMCHYLD's updates when finalized).

Below are the contents of the BAT files I used to install some of this stuff, as of now I'm not recommending them because I'm not absolutely certain that it will properly install the updates (read post 65). Hopefully we can get some feedback. For now if you want these updates I'd ran them in the order that they are installed in.

This first one goes with the files from #2 above.

Copy and paste lines between the two rows of 8 *

********

@echo off

@echo Installing Updates Please Restart PC when done

ctty nul

start /wait 811630USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 823559USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 323172USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 273991USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 259728USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 256015usa8.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 245729us8.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 238453US8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait q313829.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait Windows98-KB891711-ENU.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 323255USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 329115USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 888113USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait Windows98-KB896358-ENU.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait IE-KB891781-EN.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait Windows98-KB908519-ENU.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait Windows-KB913433-ENU.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait MSJav.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait OE6.0sp1-KB837009-x86-ENU.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait IE6.0sp1-KB916281-Windows-98-ME-ENU.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait IE6.0sp1-KB918439-Windows-98-ME-ENU.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait Windows98-KB918547-ENU.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait Windows9X-KB917344-enu.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait InstMsiA.exe /Q:A/R:N

ctty con

********

This one is meant to go with the file from #5 above

********

@echo off

@echo Installing Updates Please Restart PC when done

ctty nul

start /wait 242975USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 243450USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 260067USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 273017USA8.EXE /Q:A/R:N

start /wait 4756us8.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait euro.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait MSagent.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait Nm30.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait MDAC_Fix.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait WindowsMedia9-KB917734-Win9x-ENU.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait WM9Codecs9x.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait wmp6cdcs.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait vbrun60sp6.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait VisualBasic6-KB896559-v1-ENU.exe /Q:A/R:N

start /wait Jet40SP8_9xNT.exe /Q:A/R:N

COPY *.dll %windir%\System

COPY *.dll %windir%\System32

COPY *.pdb %windir%\System

COPY *.pdb %windir%\System32

COPY *.wav %windir%\Media

ctty con

********

Edited October 22, 2011 by Steven W

[JorgeA]

JorgeA, I agree an all-in-one update would be nice. That's kind of what that AutoPatcher is that someone's mentionting is, but it totally screwed my system in the past. I don't necessarily think it's the best approach to take. The stuff mentioned in my post (#65) above were what I downloaded around the time MS stopped supporting Windows 98 SE.

I should mention Gape's service Pack has always worked well for me, but it doesn't have *everything*.

Yeah, each time I've installed an OS fresh, I've taken a very cautious approach, doing every single update separately, even on different days or after rebooting so that the system would be stable before the next hit. Never felt real comfortable with doing a whole slew of updates (at least from different dates) all at once, as I suspected that the chances of modifications interfering with each other might rise exponentially with the number of simultaneous updates.

Thanks, by the way, to you and PROBLEMCHYLD for doing this work!

--JorgeA

[Steven W]

What PROBLEMCHYLD is doing is brain surgery compared to what I'm doing.

[bphlpt]

That's not the goal of the update.

...

The main objective of this SP3 is to have everything that is needed for future installations.

Therefore, you only have to check what is needed and have a fully updated system.

OK. I understand a little bit better now. As I see it, comparing this to the XP update pack creators, PROBLEMCHYLD is like user_hidden while Steven W is more like Onepiece. I'll confess that I probably lean more toward the Steven W approach, (I've always wanted at least the option to have it all as long as it doesn't cause problems/conflicts or slow things down too much), but I think both he and I see the tremendous value in PROBLEMCHYLD's pack as a base to be able to build a STABLE system on. I just hope we can figure out a way to minimize the number of steps required to be able to install it all quickly and safely. Maybe even resurrect the AutoPatcher project to include all of this and everything else we've learned in the last 4 years? JorgeA's needs could be met in this way as well. (It's nice to dream of an ideal solution!) Whichever approach ends up being used, I totally agree with PROBLEMCHYLD that the goals are:

1. Have everything that is needed for future installations.

2. Have a fully updated system.

But regardless of whether one chooses to go the route of Steven W or the more pure/basic one of PROBLEMCHYLD, I'm still not clear whether additional things such as 98SE2ME and Revolutions Pack would add any additional value, or if parts/all of what they offer are already included in one of those two approaches. If there is additional value, what is it?

I have seen that people have had different results in using KernelEX, but could someone summarize for me the pros and cons of using it? As I stated above, I like the idea of having the option to be able to install and run a wider variety of apps reliably and safely.

After deciding to go either the PROBLEMCHYLD or Steven W route, what are the system limits involved, ie CPU speed, amount of memory, and disk size? I am aware that decorso addresses some of this here - http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/129027-big-hdd-48-bit-lba-thread-index/ - not to mention that rloew has patches available on his web site to address some of these issues as well. Which, if any, of these various solutions have people found to be most helpful, and under what conditions?

This might be a sacrilegious question, and I'm not implying doing anything illegal or against board rules, but is there any method available, free or paid for, that allows Win98 to handle NTFS partitions? I mean Linux can do it, and it's free. Is there any way to install Win98 on an NTFS partition? If the answer to either or both questions is no, is FAT32 really able to handle today's drives efficiently? At what settings - partition size, cluster size. etc? I know it depends somewhat on what kind of data you want to store, but what are the general recommendations? With the sizes of todays drives these seem like appropriate questions.

@Steven W, for your list in post #76, I assume the install order of items 1 - 6 is what you have found to be reliable? But shouldn't 12, when finished, be done first? I always thought the first step was the SP. Why did you decide to not include .NET, or were you just going to look for the newest versions of the files? If .NET is desired, where in the install process should it go? For the additional items 7 - 11, where in the process should they be installed? I would be interested in seeing your .BAT files. Besides using them, or the remote possibility of the resurrection of AutoPatcher, do you see any other way to combine all those files into fewer reliable install steps? Based on the answers I get to the other questions I've asked in this post I'll probably have additional questions of where to best include things in the install order.

Sorry for broadening the scope of this thread with this barrage of questions, but this seemed as appropriate place for them as any. If a mod feels it is more appropriate elsewhere, by all means feel free to move this post.

Thanks for helping an old fart get back up to speed with the current state of this OS. Though I predate even DOS, it's been awhile since I've used any version of '98. Thanks again in advance.

Cheers and Regards

[Steven W]

bphlpt,

I'm not trying to pass myself off as some expert or anything, but what I'm going for is something that fills in for the now defunct WindowsUpdate website and maybe a bit more. I have some questions about all of this too. For instance, is it worthwhile to have the MSXML updates? Is Version 3 necessary if Version 4 is installed? You Probably wouldn't have seen those on the WindowsUpdate site, probably wouldn't have seen the the runtime libraries updates either. Speaking of the runtime libraries, an "unoffical runtime libraries update would be pretty cool, maybe a KernelEx starter or extension pack with the common ones needed for it too would be nice.

Part of my goal too is to open a discusssion about all of this, hoping a refined method for those wanting to install a system from scratch, who want the latest IE 6, DirectX, runtime libraries, WMP, necessary security patches and updates and how to accomplish it, ideally with as little pain as possible.

As for the install sequence, as of today, without any better info, If I had to install a system from scratch, I'd use the files above in that order. Restarting the system when they say to.

I'm going to post my BAT files too, but issue a stern warning that I'm not sure that I'd use them. As I said in post 65, I refined this at one point or another, so be warned.

As for the DotNETframework, if I knew I wanted some version of them I'd get them and any updates and install them I don't think it would really matter when, but personally, I'd install before Gape's/PROBLEMCHYLD's Service Pack. I decided not to upload them because they're not necessary unless you have something that requires them.

Edited October 22, 2011 by Steven W

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

Have you ever noticed Microsoft doesn't include things like IE, MDAC, DOTNET, JET etc...... in their Service Pack.

Some people need these updates and some don't. When you have multiple packs that pretty much does the same thing, its gonna cause some problems. Some people using old shell32.dll or old kernel32.dll files. Different version of files with unofficial packs

could be the main cause of an unstable system. IMHO, I think we need one service pack, doesn't matter who creates it as long as its stable.

Things like 98SE2ME requires you to have a WinME CD.

Revolutions Pack, not everybody want their Windows skinned. (This option doesn't really update your system) it just makes it look good. So this is not a necessity.

Everything added to the U98SESP3.EXE is needed someway form or fashion, whether its by you, me, or sombody else, and its all optional. And its only about 30 mb.

I did a clean install with all options last night and everything installed in about 3 mins.

750 mhz cpu

512 mb

30 gb hd

ati graphics card

Maestro-3i sound card.

Edited October 22, 2011 by PROBLEMCHYLD

[Steven W]

Everything added to the U98SESP3.EXE is needed someway form or fashion, whether its by you, me, or sombody else, and its all optional.

I don't mean to be offensive or to start an endless discussion over semantics, but that's a bit of a stretch. Take for example the ability to open JPEGs and GIFs in paint I was asking you about, that's a nicety, not an absolute necessity. Don't get me wrong I'm glad it's there, just pointing it out.

I take your point about things that MS doesn't include, however I think we could agree that in addition to your pack that folks using 98 SE on real hardware (especially those using it get online) should, at minimum, get vital system updates and patches for whatever version of Internet Explorer they have, even if they don't use IE.

A friend of mine says that opinions are like rear-ends (using a polite term here), everyone has one. Mine regarding JET, MDAC, VB and VC runtimes is that since they're already on the system, you may as well update them. As I stated I really think an unofficial update with all runtimes that work on 98 SE (without KernelEx) would be nice. I concede, that's only my opinion.

This post is really about Windows Update v4 being dead. As I stated before part I what I'm trying to provide here is what it would have said you needed. I guess it morphed into a bit more than that.

Edited October 22, 2011 by Steven W

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

I don't mean to be offensive or to start an endless discussion over semantics, but that's a bit of a stretch. Take for example the ability to open JPEGs and GIFs in paint I was asking you about, that's a nicety, not an absolute necessity. Don't get me wrong I'm glad it's there, just pointing it out.

None taken

But you also have to understand people who don't like 3rd party apps such as myself (I know I'm not alone on this one)

having a newer version or unofficial version is a necessity for the ones who don't use 3rd party apps. Maybe not for you, but for others. The same goes for Remote Desktop.

I have Windows XP Pro, so RDP is a necessity for me along with the other options I have added. Just some examples.

Edited October 22, 2011 by PROBLEMCHYLD

[Steven W]

I agree whole-heartedly! There are no one-size-fits-all solutions.

Edited October 22, 2011 by Steven W

[bphlpt]

Things like 98SE2ME requires you to have a WinME CD.

Which I have. So, are there any duplications/problems/benefits to using it with your pack?

I guess I'm also not clear on the difference to you using files from XP in your pack vs using files from ME? Why is one a problem and the other not? Or am I just confused?

Revolutions Pack, not everybody want their Windows skinned. (This option doesn't really update your system) it just makes it look good.

If that's ALL it does then I absolutely agree that it is not necessary.

I take your point about things that MS doesn't include, however I think we could agree that in addition to your pack that folks using 98 SE on real hardware (especially those using it get online) should, at minimum, get vital system updates and patches for whatever version of Internet Explorer they have, even if they don't use IE.

A friend of mine says that opinions are like rear-ends (using a polite term here), everyone has one. Mine regarding JET, MDAC, VB and VC runtimes is that since they're already on the system, you may as well update them. As I stated I really think an unofficial update with all runtimes that work on 98 SE (without KernelEx) would be nice.

I also agree with these two points. While I respect PROBLEMCHYLD's view and agree that a more minimalist pack such as his is important, (dare I say necessary?), I also think there are enough people who think the way that Steven W does to make a more comprehensive pack have value as well. Or we could keep PROBLEMCHYLD's pack separate, (I see the value in a single "standard" SP), along with another pack with all the "extras". I don't think of IE, JET, MDAC, VB and VC runtimes as 3rd party apps since they are MS programs usually included with the OS after all. Again I refer back to the XP world and the availability of user_hidden's and Onepiece's packs. Both are respected and both are kept up to date. Each pack has it's followers. Users could pick their preferred approach or build their own from pieces from MS and/or MGDX

Any info/comments/opinions regarding these other points?

I have seen that people have had different results in using KernelEX, but could someone summarize for me the pros and cons of using it? As I stated above, I like the idea of having the option to be able to install and run a wider variety of apps reliably and safely.

and

After deciding to go either the PROBLEMCHYLD or Steven W route, what are the system limits involved, ie CPU speed, amount of memory, and disk size? I am aware that decorso addresses some of this here - http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/129027-big-hdd-48-bit-lba-thread-index/ - not to mention that rloew has patches available on his web site to address some of these issues as well. Which, if any, of these various solutions have people found to be most helpful, and under what conditions?

and

This might be a sacrilegious question, and I'm not implying doing anything illegal or against board rules, but is there any method available, free or paid for, that allows Win98 to handle NTFS partitions? I mean Linux can do it, and it's free. Is there any way to install Win98 on an NTFS partition? If the answer to either or both questions is no, is FAT32 really able to handle today's drives efficiently? At what settings - partition size, cluster size. etc? I know it depends somewhat on what kind of data you want to store, but what are the general recommendations? With the sizes of todays drives these seem like appropriate questions.

Thanks for the continued conversation. I'm learning a lot.

Cheers and Regards

[Steven W]

As for KernelEx -- Look at this topic

Here's a quote, that I think is relavent:

Does it make your system less secure?

By allowing some XP programs to function, this could potentially allow some XP viruses to function where it would not have before. When you connect to the web, do you think about how you are opening up your computer to so many dangers? Is it risky to cross the street? Use common sense. Don't go to suspicious websites, don't open unknown emails, update virus definitions, look before crossing the street, etc.

At the same time it will allow you to run a much more modern browser that would include security fixes

As for what you'd be able to run check here:

and here:

http://kernelex.sourceforge.net/wiki/Category:Compatible_applications

As for decorso's and rloew's ideas and patches your just kind of going to have to figure out for yourself. If your setting up a new computer with Win98/SE/ME you should find out if it has a SATA hard drive/ More than 512 MB of RAM for instance. If you need some help I'd just start a new thread, gather as much info as I could and simply ask, folks here are nice they'll help if they can.

As for the NTFS stuff I don't think you can install 98 on it, but there are some things that will allow you to access a partition with it as the file system. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

Edited October 23, 2011 by Steven W

[cdoublejj]

well sporific's locked up but, then after reboot started working fine, it didn't occur to me that i should have patched the patcher with the 50 meg 2008 file.

EDIT, clean installed gonna try it again just in case.

EDIT: so every thing seemed to go fine a few minor hiccups except for MGDx's wmp 10 patch it just hangs and you have to end task it it manages to copy some files cause wmp mentions needing a newer os cause some file being called demands it.

EDIT: i found the restart application setting it combs through some updates over again, seems ie6 and wmp updates are the one giving trouble.

Edited October 23, 2011 by cdoublejj

[Foxbat]

Which I have. So, are there any duplications/problems/benefits to using it with your pack?

I guess I'm also not clear on the difference to you using files from XP in your pack vs using files from ME? Why is one a problem and the other not? Or am I just confused?

MDGx's 98SE2ME is not a "service pack" type of project. That's why it is categorized under "Enhancements, Replacements + Transformation Packs".

XP files are sometimes included in these packages because they have been found to work in 98SE, and are more updated than its ME equivalent if there is one.

These questions should go in the 98 SE SP 3.0 BETA 4 thread. I think we should start moving the discussion over there since most of this is about Gape's/PROBLEMCHYLD's Service Pack.

[dencorso]

These questions should go in the 98 SE SP 3.0 BETA 4 thread. I think we should start moving the discussion over there since most of this is about Gape's/PROBLEMCHYLD's Service Pack.

And this thread is closed, from now on, to help the transition.

... I may move the relevant posts there when time permits, if you provide me with a list of posts to be moved (by PM, please).