Rhelic Posted August 25, 2005 Share Posted August 25, 2005 (edited) Yea, if I was an admin over a company's network, I wouldn't think twice to mass deploy Gape's SP2, assuming I could disable all the 3rd party stuff.But if I was running Win98SE personally, I do like the new icons and some of the 3rd party apps (just the ones that fix hardware limitations, ex: HD size) and I also like adopting the Win2000 (or XP) style start bar.(Although on second thought, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, if I was to deploy SP2, I should allow the icons and Win2000 style for end users.)Honestly, I'm a tried & true XP user, I can't stand the older OSes but I won't deny there are many Win98 computers (we have hundreds dere) and they really need the updates MS has created and refused to give out to the public. And I know many of the users here swear by Win98 SE, I don't agree with them but I agree to disagree. OS wars are for script kiddies. Edited August 25, 2005 by Rhelic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Targaff Posted September 10, 2005 Share Posted September 10, 2005 Yea, if I was an admin over a company's network, I wouldn't think twice to mass deploy Gape's SP2, assuming I could disable all the 3rd party stuff.And therein lies my problem, actually (so I'm glad this thread has occurred) - the place I work at *never* updates properly, and because it obviously leads to problems, I tend to update/fix computers as I go along, which I've done with USP since it's clearly the easiest way to go. Except now I'm realising I'll have to go back to those machines and change the icons back, since they could be a potential source of trouble...I too love using them on my own machine, and replace them without a thought. But the problem with making them optional, I think, would mean including two versions of shell32.dll (each a meg) and 2-3 versions of explorer in the USP. It's a bit of a lose-lose, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhelic Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 I don't see how the icons could be a problem. If there were any bugs they would have been reported (hundreds, if not thousands of computers run this patch) here.Also as an admin, you have a moral duty (and your job) to update machines to a state of sane security and I think we can all agree, a 98SE machine without SP2 is not a secure or possible stable box.Changes in icons and the start bar pale to what would happen if your network crumbles, end machines are hacked and company data is stolen.... all automagically by a new TCP/IP virus. If I was an admin of the network where I work, I would notify management, prove the patch works with all company apps, then mass deploy.I'm just saying the ability to remove any non Microsoft/non 98SE stuff would just be nice from a purist perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acheron Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 I think Gape should add some credits into the pack. Like some shortcut at the desktop to Gape's website would rock.The new icons are just a small improvement to Windows 98.I hope we can merge Gape's pack with Tihiy's revolution pack some day. That would be awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Targaff Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 I don't see how the icons could be a problem.[...]Also as an admin [...]Just to clarify, the icons aren't a problem in a technical sense; and I'm not an admin, just a user who happens to know how important it is to keep the computers upgraded when no-one else in the firm seems to have a clue (we don't have an admin, just an external support company). Which is where I may have a problem with icons, because the firm doesn't have any right to use the icons, technically, and I don't really have the right to install them, so while I personally have no objections to them, I can see why it might become an issue for others (i.e. said firm) somewhere down the line. I'd rather be able to upgrade the computers surreptitiously, and my having installed files with the icons in makes that more difficult, especially when secretaries are sharp enough to notice (as in one instance) the "second edition" tagged on to the modified boot logo, even though it's not something they would ever have reason to pay attention to. Curse their diligence!I'd just rather not get them or myself into trouble, basically Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 (edited) I think Gape should add some credits into the pack. Like some shortcut at the desktop to Gape's website would rock.The new icons are just a small improvement to Windows 98.I hope we can merge Gape's pack with Tihiy's revolution pack some day. That would be awesome <{POST_SNAPBACK}>imo that should always be left optional for people who don't want Tihiy's revolution pack, after all it's not that hard to run two install programs one after another and keep everybody happy (those who want the candy and those who don't). Edited September 13, 2005 by miko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlo555 Posted September 13, 2005 Author Share Posted September 13, 2005 You gotta be kidding me. What possible trouble could you get in for changing the GUI. I don't really see any real problem there. I do see how you might end up with technical problems though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 (edited) i imagine you could get into trouble for using hacked MS files on a companys system/network not least because of the MS licence agreements or security concerns.imagine trying to explain it to some dumb nazi suit with managerial responsibility for IT."soooo you put hacked Microsoft files on our network . . . "btw most (if not all) of the icons can be changed through the registry (also 24bit color icons work on 98SE). Edited September 14, 2005 by miko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Targaff Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 it should be version 4.72.3612.1700 with a crc32 of 255fb85eif you want 256 colour icons in the tray just not the hacked in icons download a relavent hex edited explorer.exe from here - http://www.dr-hoiby.com/TrayIconIn256Color/index.phpI just thought I'd add as a PS to this, incidentally, since I can't see it mentioned before, that Dr Hoiby's site does not (currently) have the relevant info for 4.72.3612.1700, listing only the info for 4.72.3110.1. As best I can tell, this information would be:name : explorer.exesize : 171,280version : 4.72.3612.1700//------------Offset 0x3895 : 01 -> 11Offset 0xB50F : 01 -> 11Anyone care to verify that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizardofwindows Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 i think ill go see Dr Hoiby's to help my eyesight lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlo555 Posted September 29, 2005 Author Share Posted September 29, 2005 (edited) That's alright, I just got the explorer.exe from IE 5.5 anyway. Edited September 29, 2005 by Jlo555 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 it should be version 4.72.3612.1700 with a crc32 of 255fb85eif you want 256 colour icons in the tray just not the hacked in icons download a relavent hex edited explorer.exe from here - http://www.dr-hoiby.com/TrayIconIn256Color/index.phpI just thought I'd add as a PS to this, incidentally, since I can't see it mentioned before, that Dr Hoiby's site does not (currently) have the relevant info for 4.72.3612.1700, listing only the info for 4.72.3110.1. As best I can tell, this information would be:name : explorer.exesize : 171,280version : 4.72.3612.1700//------------Offset 0x3895 : 01 -> 11Offset 0xB50F : 01 -> 11Anyone care to verify that?<{POST_SNAPBACK}>can anyone confirm this (is this as it's used in the SP ?) i'd just like to add it to my 'notes' for future reference. 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