Does anyone know where to find the KB916281 update for 9x?

I only found some newer, unofficial, updates here, but I'd rather use the latest official.

For the latest IE updates, go here:
http://www.msfn.org/board/98-FE-98-SE-ME-u...hes-t46581.html
The IE updates are all official Microsoft binaries.
Most of them are from Windows 2000 updates, just repackaged for Windows 9x.

I strongly suggest using the latest IE updates if you want any level of security.

Thanks.

What's exactly the deal with those "repacked" drivers? Was it just an installer that refused to continue if 9x is detected even though the actual DLLs work fine? How could anyone know for sure 9x is fully compatible?

Is there no place to find the latest official update? It's not like I have issues with the older version I currently use, so if to upgrade, I'd rather go with the safer route.

It's very simple. Microsoft have ceased support for Windows 9x series.
Therefore, updates are not packaged to install on 9x.
System updates have a very specific installer structure for a particular series of Windows (95. 98/Me, 2000, XP, Vista,...)
Components like Internet Explorer 6 SP1, and Windows Media Player 9 share the same files between 9x and 2000.
Each set of updated files that comes out for Windows 2000 are tested on 9x.
If the files do not all work, then the results are quickly posted and the update is not added or is removed from MDGx's update topic (above).
I think I've only found one IE6 update that had one file with a problem - fixed in next update - possibly an actual Microsoft bug...
Current IE6 updates work really well - faster than the last official 9x updates for IE6.

The advantage is that you get the latest security updates - this should never be under estimated!

There is the Windows Update Catalog site but one must be running Win98 and at least IE 5.50 for it to work. And after consulting my C:\Windows\Windows Update.Log file, I see that the direct link to the KB916281 update is here. But it's got a much longer name if you use that direct link - it's the same file otherwise. I only posted it to get you to look at your own Update log file and gather your own info and updates to be burned to CD before MS pulls 98 from the WinUP site.

Latest official update? Don't you mean last? MS don't do 98 updates anymore

Faster in what sense?

One thing I did notice in the past was that Q905915 made a certain version of the MSDN Lib I had installed (CHM based) take long to switch pages.

Nor overestimated. :) I do assume in general that newer equals better, but security fixes aren't my prime concern. In what instances did you find them that crucial?

I know, but I didn't think it would offer more than what you can download from the KB links. I did visit it actually, but it didn't work (maybe some browser settings).

Thanks. I didn't know that file held interesting info. :)

Can be both. And actually I'm not sure what's the difference between these two words. It seems to me "last" could be "previous" and in some cases "final", but also just "most recent". Latest is just "more recent", so it seems the less ambiguous choice. :)

Myself and some others have noticed that even the last two unofficial IE cumulative updates (from the official updates) have improved general response time and usability. Even Flash content appears smoother.
These changes were apparent right after installing the updates (and rebooting!).
See here for an example: http://www.msfn.org/board/98-FE-98-SE-ME-u...088#entry778088
I expect that on dial-up that may not be so noticable, but on broadband it is.


Firstly, the new updates are more stable than older ones.
Secondly, if you use Internet Explorer 6 SP1 to access public webpages on the Internet, then security fixes are crucial.
Research has shown that many website servers are not properly secured or kept up to date with security patches.
These servers are quickly compromised and malicious changes made to the web pages.
And of course some pages are designed to be malicious in nature.
If you access these pages (and you probably will not even know if a page is compromised), and your browser is vulnerable, then you may have just opened access of some sort into your computer.
This may be as simple as a crash or as devastating as remote control of Windows or remote access into your file system.

According to SecurityFocus last week, nearly 1 in 2 Internet users' computers could be compromised by accessing the Internet:

More than 45 percent of Internet users put their computers at risk of being compromised by malicious code because they surf the Web using browsers that are behind the times, four researchers warned on Tuesday.

See the full article here: http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11525/1

I don't see this as a trivial matter, but hey, it's your computer and your data.

If of course, you only use IE to access Intranet pages and web content on your local computer, and never access public web pages, then no problem.

For more information on web server security issues:
http://googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.com/2...nd-malware.html
http://www.sans.org/top20/
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Spyware/?p=811

That's interesting. Is it really noticeable in non-Flash content?

The media likes to make a big fuss over trivial matters. It's even less critical for us since we aren't computer illiterates who unwittingly stumble across the web. In all my Windows history I've probably only had 2-3 cases where odd randomly-named EXEs appeared and were set to load during startup. They didn't seem to cause any effect and weren't much trouble to remove.

How often does one venture into suspicious sites anyway? When I do it's usually with ActiveX disabled and possibly also scripting. And Win9x is much less of a target than XP.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with better security. I'm just saying it shouldn't be taken out of proportion.

By the way, server-side security is an entirely different matter. The issue here is client-side. Worrying about insidious hacking of existing websites that'd wreak havoc on client computers... I don't think I've ever heard of something like that transpiring. (Phishing attemps are something else, not that I've witnessed any [unless you count silly spam messages a la "Bank of America alert: must validate identity!!!1"]).

I've found all browsing is faster. I have not done any timing tests or the like so it's really just impressions...