azagahl Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 This is my first time postingWelcome, I hope you like it here! You will find a a lot of experts here (I'm not one )."XP is prettier"Yes, 98 SE looks a bit retro for a virgin OS installation. But after USP2RC2 and 98SE2ME and a little sprucing up (themes, Webshots, etc..) my 98 SE looks gorgeous. XP always feels klunky, unresponsive, and akward, so it is kinda hard to enjoy how it looks.And Tihiy's Revolutions makes 98 SE look absolutely fantastic, but I've had trouble with recent versions...WindowBlinds (at a cost of course)It costs money but there is also a cost of having painfully sluggish GUI performance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superscotty19 Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 Hello again!Thanks for that, azagahl ...You don't have to convince me about the downsides of XP - I agree 110% and then some! I guess that's just my point though - if 98SE could have the responsiveness that it does (thanks to USP) but the option of being more skinnable, it will really have some punch.I have no doubt that USP2RC2 will bring all sorts of new and exciting features, but from what I've seen, 982ME and Revolutions doesn't seem as stable as the USP - is this correct (no offense intended to the developers of these packs)? Also, are they both freeware? Aside from what I've read about them on this forum, I know nothing about them.Thanks again!-Scott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acheron Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 For 98SE2ME you need both Windows 98 and Windows ME licenses. I'm not going to buy that Windows ME crap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDGx Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 I have no doubt that USP2RC2 will bring all sorts of new and exciting features, but from what I've seen, 982ME and Revolutions doesn't seem as stable as the USP - is this correct (no offense intended to the developers of these packs)? Also, are they both freeware? Aside from what I've read about them on this forum, I know nothing about them.Hi superscotty19, and welcome to this MSFN forum.To answer your questions about 98SE2ME [which I develop + maintain]:1. It is completely free solely for educational purposes, with only 1 condition: you must post any corrections/improvements you may come up with in this forum, so we can all can benefit from them.2. It is very stable. Let's just say I use these > 600 WinME system files for > 4 years on my PC without problems. B)And besides, you have the option to allow full backup creation of your Win98SE OS before installing any WinME files, and you can restore from there anytime.On top of that, every option [except 1 + 2 which make full OS backup] backs up the file(s) it replaces.3. Of course, same as XP, 2000, 2003 etc, all Win9x/ME OSes are copyrighted to MS which means that u must have the OS to which 98SE2ME applies already installed on your local HD from a legally obtained Setup CD [English only], and in order to install options 1, 2 + 3 you must also have a legal copy of WinME Setup CD [English only].Of course you can copy/burn/borrow/whatever stuff on your computer from whatever sources, but piracy is NOT condoned by me nor by this forum.Therefore same applies to [examples] and all similar upgrades/packs/SPs: 98SE SP 2.0 RC2, 98SE/ME Revolutions Pack, AutoPatcher XP, AutoPatcher 2000, XP Security Pack, Windows XP Post-SP2 Update Pack, XP Longhorn Transformation Pack, XPize Transformation Pack etc...That's 1 of the main reasons they are all unofficial. To learn everything about 98SE2ME, please see READ1ST.TXT:http://www.mdgx.com/9s2m/READ1ST.TXTTo learn about Tihiy's Revolutions Pack + Gape's SP 2.0 RC2, you need to contact their authors, @ the respective forums.Gape:http://www.msfn.org/board/?showtopic=41684Tihiy:http://www.msfn.org/board/?showtopic=39333Hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDGx Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 Gape:MS released yesterday Windows 2003 Server SP1 RTM.You know what this means... HTML Help 1.41 is finally out of beta. Hope you can add these files to the next SP 2.0 release.They contain most current MS security patches.Thanks.Unofficial Windows 98/98 SE/ME/NT4 HTML Help v1.41 HHSETUP.DLL, ITIRCL.DLL, ITSS.DLL + HH.EXE + HHCTRL.OCX Update build 5.2.3790.1830 from Windows 2003 SP1 Final (RTM/Gold) [681 KB, English]:http://www.mdgx.com/files/HHUPD.EXEHow to install HTML Help 1.41 on Windows 98/98 SE/NT4:Download + install HHUPD.EXE .How to install HTML Help 1.41 on Windows ME:1. You MUST disable System Restore: open Control Panel -> System -> Performance Tab -> File System -> Troubleshooting area -> check the "Disable System Restore" box -> click OK -> reboot.2. Download + install CoolKill [797 KB, freeware]:http://www.prowebsitemanagement.com/downloads/coolkill.zip3. Run COOLKILL.EXE -> right-click on the CoolKill icon in Taskbar Tray -> highlight STMGR.EXE -> left-click on it to terminate this process.4. Download + install HHUPD.EXE (see above).5. You may want to reenable System Restore: open Control Panel -> System -> Performance Tab -> File System -> Troubleshooting area -> uncheck the "Disable System Restore" box -> click OK -> reboot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tihiy Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 I've seen problems with 98SE2ME, especially on localized (Russian) 9x Windows. I'm not bashing it, but I think it should be more... customizable. For example, installing fonts and updated keyboard layouts can cause problems that i've seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDGx Posted April 5, 2005 Share Posted April 5, 2005 I've seen problems with 98SE2ME, especially on localized (Russian) 9x Windows. I'm not bashing it, but I think it should be more... customizable. For example, installing fonts and updated keyboard layouts can cause problems that i've seen.Your wish is my command... B)Please try the 4-4-2005 98SE2ME edition:http://www.msfn.org/board/?showtopic=37302Most of these issues should have been resolved.PS: Please note that 98SE2ME was never meant to be installed on/used with any 98SE editions other than English because that's the only 1 I can test it on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
os2fan2 Posted April 6, 2005 Share Posted April 6, 2005 Is there room on this fixpack for the novoltrk.reg file?This prevents Win9x from overwriting diskette labels from other vendors: seeInfo: http://freedos.maussner.net/freedos/news/html-old/1497.htmlFile: http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/win9x/ download novoltrk.zip for the reg file.W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gape Posted April 6, 2005 Author Share Posted April 6, 2005 Is there room on this fixpack for the novoltrk.reg file?This prevents Win9x from overwriting diskette labels from other vendors.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Interesting fix. I think I can add this fix into the next SP (2.0.1 or 2.1). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superscotty19 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Hi superscotty19, and welcome to this MSFN forum.Hi MDGx! And thanks for such an informative reply!I completely understand 982ME now (thanks again). As for the rest of them, I know you gave me links to the other forums, but since you seem to be a one stop font of knowledge I was wondering if you know this off the top of your head ... I've noticed that Revolutions does utilize some files from ME, correct? I assume this would imply that the user requires a valid copy of ME ... ? I checked the Revolutions forum and found this:Q: I was under the impression one did not need ME for 9X Revolutions....am I wrong? I thought one only needed 32bit color....A: No. You don't need ME for using it. But it uses some ME files included. If you surely need only 32-bit icons support, you should manually extract from shellupdate.exe:CODEuser32.dlluser9x.dlldll.dllcomctl32.dlluser.exeand place into \system dir.This confuses me. You don't need ME, but it uses ME files??? Are the files listed the ones from ME, and if so, are they optional?Therefore same applies to [examples] and all similar upgrades/packs/SPs: 98SE SP 2.0 RC2, 98SE/ME Revolutions Pack, AutoPatcher XP, AutoPatcher 2000, XP Security Pack, Windows XP Post-SP2 Update Pack, XP Longhorn Transformation Pack, XPize Transformation Pack etc...Whoa whoa whoa!!! I've never even heard of half of those patches/programs! Do you have links to the ones that apply to 98SE (excluding 98SE SP, Revolutions of course) and that don't require a valid copy of another OS?Thanks again for all your help. For what it's worth, I own a technology consulting firm, and I'm trying to utilize all the tools you guys make as much as possible when I build systems for my clients. Your work is oustanding and deserves to be given some push!-Scott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDGx Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Hi MDGx! And thanks for such an informative reply!I completely understand 982ME now (thanks again). As for the rest of them, I know you gave me links to the other forums, but since you seem to be a one stop font of knowledge I was wondering if you know this off the top of your head ... I've noticed that Revolutions does utilize some files from ME, correct? I assume this would imply that the user requires a valid copy of ME ... ? I checked the Revolutions forum and found this:Q: I was under the impression one did not need ME for 9X Revolutions....am I wrong? I thought one only needed 32bit color....A: No. You don't need ME for using it. But it uses some ME files included. If you surely need only 32-bit icons support, you should manually extract from shellupdate.exe:CODEuser32.dlluser9x.dlldll.dllcomctl32.dlluser.exeand place into \system dir.This confuses me. You don't need ME, but it uses ME files??? Are the files listed the ones from ME, and if so, are they optional?Therefore same applies to [examples]and all similar upgrades/packs/SPs: 98SE SP 2.0 RC2, 98SE/ME Revolutions Pack, AutoPatcher XP, AutoPatcher 2000, XP Security Pack, Windows XP Post-SP2 Update Pack, XP Longhorn Transformation Pack, XPize Transformation Pack etc...Whoa whoa whoa!!! I've never even heard of half of those patches/programs! Do you have links to the ones that apply to 98SE (excluding 98SE SP, Revolutions of course) and that don't require a valid copy of another OS?Thanks again for all your help. For what it's worth, I own a technology consulting firm, and I'm trying to utilize all the tools you guys make as much as possible when I build systems for my clients. Your work is oustanding and deserves to be given some push!-Scott.1. You're very welcome, and thanks for your kind appreciation. 2. Best to ask Tihiy details about Revolutions, that's his "baby":http://www.msfn.org/board/?showtopic=39333As far as I know, it uses ME files [modded by Tihiy of course], but u don't need to install any WinME files from the setup CD. This also means u can use Tihiy's files on either 98SE or ME.3. Those other unofficial service packs/patches/security upgrades/etc I've mentioned are for XP + 2000, not for 9x/ME.U can find them all linked under "Free Updates + Patches" @ my main web page:http://www.mdgx.com/Hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tihiy Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Hi, superscotty19If something about RP confuzes you, ask me.The newer versions of RP (since 2.1) are separated into few parts,- Basic (32-bit icon support)- Shell Update (yes, it actually uses some Windows ME files)- Toolbar Patch (32-bit icons for toolbars)so you don't need to extract anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdillon Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Has silent-install support been added to 2.0 yet? It would be very nice to have, especially for anybody (like me) who would like to deploy this on a large network with a lot of Win98SE computers. The ability to enable/disable the optional installation features while doing the silent install would be nice too. Actually, it doesn't have to be "silent", just "unattended". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tihiy Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Yes, clicking on a lot of "No" buttons is annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azagahl Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 deleted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now