Thanks, eidenk,

Just to clarify, I'm installing the 98SP 2.1a onto the existing, previously installed, 98SP and 98SE2ME upgrades.

Most version conflict files refer to WinME files, version 4.90.3000 etc.; plus hh.exe, hhsetup.dll, etc.; and mouhid.vxd, vip.386.

I installed your sesp21a-en.exe

And my 2nd windows98 wouln't boot up.

Luckily I have SYSTEM COMMANDER 7.03(SC7)and 3 OS's installed.
I.- 98SE_A admin/CD Burning/Audio editing/NO Network
II.- 98SE_B Internet and Gaming
III.- XP just to stay Modern, LOL

1.-After reboot SC7, recognised it as a DOS system and it wouln't boot from it
2.-I loaded the 98SE_A and noticed that the IO.SYS in my 98SE_B was gone, I had a IO.001,
which i copied "Copy of IO.001" and renamed the IO.001 to IO.SYS, rebooted.
3.- This time SC7, recognised it as a "Windows 98" system, not Windows 98SE But I could finally boot from it.
4.- I copied my 98SE_A's IO.SYS on top of the 98SE_B's IO.SYS, and rebboted.
5.- This time SC7, recognised it as a "Windows 98SE" system, all back to normal. :-)

I hope this helps anyone that might had a similar problem.

And Gape thks a lot to keep Win98 alive. THKS a million.

BTW i can even Play, Tactical Ops, NFS underground 2, Unreal Tournament 2004, thks to You all, and my tweaking of course.

@plop:

This is a normal situation. Because 982ME installs some newer WinME files. I think keeping newer files is a good idea.

But you can re-install latest 98SE2ME after installing 98SESP to make sure that everything is OK.

mamas6667:

Thanks for the info.

Like Gape said, 98SE2ME installs newer versions of system files from WinME setup CD or even newer WinME hotfixes [patched files].
Please see READ1ST.TXT for details [the "FAQ" chapter, where it starts with: "* 98SE2ME does NOT interfere with Gape's Windows 98 SE Service Pack 2 (SP2):"]:
http://www.mdgx.com/9s2m/READ1ST.TXT
Full list of files replaced by 98SE2ME is here:
http://www.mdgx.com/98-5.htm#FME

If you installed HH.EXE, HHSETUP.DLL, HHCTRL.OCX, ITIRCL.DLL + ITSS.DLL from my older unofficial HHUPD.EXE update [which I have recently replaced with newer files update], and then if you try to install the official one from:
http://www.mdgx.com/add.htm#HHU
the newer files will not be overwritten, and you may have to replace them yourself by hand.
They go to:
- %windir% [usually C:\WINDOWS]:
HH.EXE
- %windir%\SYSTEM [usually C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM]:
HHSETUP.DLL
HHCTRL.OCX
ITIRCL.DLL
ITSS.DLL

If this is the case, make sure you register them properly [after you copy them to proper directories = see above] by running this batch file:


MOUHID.VXD is not replaced [nor installed] by 98SE2ME.

Newer VIP.386 [build 4.10.2227] is installed by 98SE2ME options 1 + 2.
VIP.386 4.10.2227 is also installed by Maximus-Decim's NUSB:
http://www.msfn.org/board/?showtopic=43605

Hope this helps.

MOUHID.VXD - this was the problem of improper version number 4.10.2223.0 (in Intellipoint 4.12) instead of 4.10.0.2223 (in Q254660) stored in the file. These files are otherwise identical, just version 4.10.0.2223 is correct.


NUSB22 does not contain VIP.386 file.

Do you know what is the origin of this 4.10.2227 version? You wrote in http://www.mdgx.com/9s2m/READ1ST.TXT "patched Win98 SE VIP.386 4.10.2227 modded by Maximus-Decim" but the file has too many differences to be just modded - at least in my opinion.

Petr

My bad, VIP.386 4.10.2227 is actually installed by Maximus-Decim's Cumulative Update:
http://www.msfn.org/board/?showtopic=50611
not by NUSB.
I have no idea where he got that file, I couldn't find any reference to it at Microsoft web site, so I assumed he [or someone else] modded the older VIP.386 4.10.2226 from Q259728. [?]

If you binary compare them, version 4.10.2227 is so different to 4.10.2226 (and 4.10.2224) that it does not look like simple modding. What versions exist?
Q238329 3.8.1999 14:50 4.10.2223
Q238453 23.9.1999 11:39 4.10.2224
Q242962 1.10.1999 17:38 4.10.2225
Q259728 10.5.2000 13:20 4.10.2226
Q?????? 9.8.2000 15:27 4.10.2227
Q329128 1.8.2002 12:27 4.10.2228 (not available)

So it looks like 4.10.2227 COULD be original file from Microsoft.

Petr

Original version Q269388 with vip.386 4.10.2227

http://rapidshare.de/files/8930707/269388USA8.exe.html

no... simply over sp2.1. Route : SP 1.6, sp16.2 ..., sp2.0 , sp2.1, sp2.1a

dsound.dll (again)

installing the SP2.1a after DirectX9c (as recommended) with the following line

in the update.inf, makes the SP overwrite the new dsound.dll (4.09) from DirectX9c with the old one (4.07) from the SP
DxDiag also recognizes the deprecated file and recommends the reinstallation of DirectX9c

Is there an alternative installation method?
maybe another number than ",4"

Use ",32"

Here is complete list of numbers:
http://www.winpack.org/petr/INF_web/copyfile.htm

You can combine them, e.g. 1024 + 4 = 1028, 1024 + 32 = 1056 etc.

Petr

Edit: new URL

thanks a lot.
also for the "copyfile"-link@Petr

Thank you so much for the terrific work. Win98SE was unable to download new updates until applying the Unofficial Win98 SE SP -- works fine again now. Sent you a donation. Awesome .. thank you!!!!!!!

Maximus-Decim:
Many thanks for the VIP.386 4.10.2227 hotfix.

BTW...
Found it also here:

Microsoft Windows 98/98 SE HP Omnibook Portable Computer Docking Error VIP.386 (build 4.10.2002 for Win98/98 SP1 + build 4.10.2227 for Win98 SE) Fix:
http://www.martini-man.com/pub/HPOmnibook/...9388/README.TXT
Direct download [189 KB, English]:
http://www.martini-man.com/pub/HPOmnibook/.../269388USA8.EXE

REGARDING MY problem

I installed your sesp21a-en.exe
And my 2nd windows98 wouln't boot up
IO.SYS was corrupted etc..................

The file I downloaded from Rapidshare (i think) was corrupt evnthough it passed the MD5 and WINRAR test.
The SP2.CAB was corrupt the rest OK!

So I got a new copy from Majorgeeks. And this time everything went all right!! :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I did a complete reinstall of windows.

The only problem is that I lost my "shortcut arrows" on links after I installed 98SE2ME Option 2 (700 WinME system files ) after SP2.1a, and I want them Back!!

I know that if I install Option 3 [Windows Graphical User Interface (GUI),
Shell + Browser Integration Controls + APIs]
I will be able to see the arrows again.
But I don't want to because option 3, slows down my windows responsivenes, believe or not!

So how do I get the "shortcut arrows" back!!!


PLs help me.


Thks to the whole team for their efforts in keeping windows 98SE alive, and running faster than any other OS!!

@mamas6667


Install TweakUI if you haven't do so and then go in Control Panel/TweakUI/Explorer/Shortcut Overlay. Tick the appropriate radio button. Click OK. Log-off or reboot. Arrows should be back.

Sorry Tweak UI 1.33 was not able to solve my problem!

I think there has to be another solution, and i'm sure this is happened before to some of you!

It happens to me every single time I install the 98se2ME option 2.

For this reason, you should post your question in the 98SE2ME thread.

Hi,

Thanks for using 98SE2ME.
Hope you like it.

This issue is detailed in 98SE2ME READ1ST.TXT:
http://www.mdgx.com/9s2m/READ1ST.TXT
under the "98SE2ME.PIF COMPLETE GUIDE" chapter. Quoted fragment:
I have added this REG tweak to 98SE2ME because most of the people I know do not want to see those arrows on their desktops.

BTW:
Please post all your comments/bugs/problems/etc related to 98SE2ME in the 98SE2ME forum:
http://www.msfn.org/board/?showtopic=46349

Hope this helps.

...hmm, strange, I've never lost the shortcut arrows, even with repeated installs of (updated) 98se2me's, or fresh os installs...
-but I also use X-SETUP to make sure those arrows are there... (free version)...
>;]

I wonder if there is any reason why SP2.1a contains DHTMLED.OCX build 6.01.9231, instead of DHTMLED.OCX build 6.01.9232?

When MDGx suggested this file he referenced the later build from Win 2000 SP4 Update Rollup 1. As I understand it, SP4 UR1 was revised because of specific problems that many people were experiencing with it. So, in full, the update is now called SP4 UR1 v.2 (I think). Could it be that the DHTMLED.OCX build in SP2.1a is from the original SP4 UR1, and that v.2 contains the later build?

Anyway, thanks to anyone who offers an explanation of the different build numbers.

Also, does anyone know the source of Vredir.vxd build 4.10.2231 in SP2.1a? The latest build of this file I am able to find is 4.10.2230, in Q293793.

Again, thanks.

I suppose it is because both these files come from MS05-013: Vulnerability in the DHTML editing component ActiveX control could allow code execution and there must be some (unknown to us) reason why Microsoft have different file in Windows 98 SE version and Windows 2000 version of this fix.No, SE SP 2.1a contains Windows 98 version of this file.
It comes from Directory Services Client Update for Windows 98. The simplest thing is to google for vredir.vxd 4.10.0.2231 - the first result is this knowedgebase article.

Petr

bugreport 2.1a German:

dsound.dll seems older than from directx 9c... after install of servicepack the dsound.dll from directx9 was overwritten and diablo2 crashed on start, also DXDIAG reports an version error with dsound.dll ... after reinstall of direct x 9c, it works again.

dsound.dll in servicepack comes from dx7?
please change install behaviour of this dll.

THKS Mr. MDGx it worked perfect! :-) :-) :-)

I aplied OVERLAY.REG, then I hit F5, and magic all shortcuts back!




THKS to all for your time and quick response!

THKS Mr. MDGx it worked perfect! :-) :-) :-)

I aplied OVERLAY.REG, then I hit F5, and magic all shortcuts back!




THKS to all for your time and quick response!

another good reason why the dsound.dll file (4.07) should either not be included in the 98se SP or the
pack should not install that file if DX8 or DX9 is installed under Win98se.

I sure like to see vip.386 version 4.10.2227 included in the next release of SE SP.

and I would like to see the pack display a dialog box asking whether or not to un-install the 98se SP.
Double-clicking on SE SP in Add/Remove programs uninstalls the pack immediately, without prompting
the user whether to uninstall the pack or not. that's kinda dangerous since one time I accidently clicked on the uninstall SE SP entry in Add/Remove programs on a Win98se machine. ouch!

2.1a does that.

In English version of SESP it is correct.
No, in the current version the dialog should appear. Have you used the last version?

Petr

Ah, I didn't know this. So, I guess it remains to be determined whether the DHTMLED.OCX from the 2000 fix (build 6.01.9232) is in any way superior to the 98 SE version (assuming, of course that they both have the same functionality on 98 SE systems and that it's ok to install 6.01.9232 on them), because if it had been judged superior, it would be in the SP2.1a... Is that right? The policy of including files from other OS is sometimes followed by SP2.1a, is it not?

Anyway, not to worry, just curious.



Thank you. The simple answers are sometimes the best.

Hello,
this SP is naturally a good new but, before I'll tested, I've some questions:


1) I noticed some of updates integrated in this pack concern Microsoft Office.
I believed SPs contain only fixes for the operating system.
Why integrate these fixes and not integrate fixes for Media Player by example?
What happened on computers, which haven't Office? I asked that because it's possible installing this pack at first. Do the files modified concern also WordPad?


2) Another fix, Q885836, is integrated in this pack. Is programming security fix for Win98 it possible?
Because, at this address: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/ms04-041.mspx ,
it's clearly indicated:



3) Is the problem about Windows 2000 icons (which I've already mentioned) resolved?

Thank you in advance for your replies.

If you mean the following files:
Html32.cnv
Mswrd832.cnv
Msconv97.dll
Mswrd632.wpc
then these files are part of standard Windows 98 (SE) install. There are also updates intedned for Windows 98 (SE) containing some of these files, like Q823559. SESP just contains newer version of these files.

I've read at least one report that new Mswrd632.wpc behaves better in Windows 98 SE than the original one so I believe it was correct to add this update into SESP.

Petr

No. It will be resolved in the next version.

excuse my ignorance but reinstalling DirectX 9.0c December 2005 after USP2.1a and/or 98SE2ME would overwrite all this old files???



ALso is there a switch/command line to force DirectX to force reinstall, as usually just updates the missing files if any, and if you use the same version of directX doesn't do anything!!!!!!!

According to Microsoft webpage this version of DirectX is not for Windows 98 (SE).

Does anybody know why?

Petr

Win98SE being phased out by MS I would think. Isn't it the same for the IE updates ?

But DirectX 9.0c Redistributable (October 2005) for Software Developers - Multilingual has in the list of supported operating systems:

Windows 2000;
Windows 2000 Advanced Server;
Windows 2000 Professional Edition ;
Windows 2000 Server;
Windows 2000 Service Pack 2;
Windows 2000 Service Pack 3;
Windows 2000 Service Pack 4;
Windows 98;
Windows 98 Second Edition;
Windows ME;
Windows Server 2003;
Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1;
Windows Server 2003, Datacenter x64 Edition;
Windows Server 2003, Enterprise x64 Edition;
Windows Server 2003, Standard x64 Edition;
Windows Small Business Server 2003 ;
Windows XP; Windows XP 64-bit;
Windows XP Home Edition ;
Windows XP Home Edition N;
Windows XP Media Center Edition;
Windows XP Professional Edition ;
Windows XP Professional N;
Windows XP Service Pack 1;
Windows XP Service Pack 2;
Windows XP Starter Edition;
Windows XP Tablet PC Edition

If you compare the list with the list for dec05 version, you will see that:
Windows 98;
Windows 98 Second Edition;
were deleted and
Windows XP Embedded;
Windows XP Embedded Service Pack 1;
Windows XP Embedded Service Pack 2;
were added.

I don't think that anything changed in Windows 98 support between October and December 2005.

Petr

I have just briefly tried to install it on 98SE in a virtual machine. It does install without problems. 98 and 98SE just aren't supported anymore I think. Files are essentially the same as the previous DX9.0c it would appear. D3DX9 files are added and also some junk such as png images of input devices.

I have installed DX 9.0c December 2005 edition on 98SE, and installed ok.
It installed all DX files, not just the newer ones [which are actually not needed for proper DX operation]:

D3DX9_25.DLL [from August 2005 edition]
D3DX9_26.DLL [from September 2005 edition]
D3DX9_27.DLL [from October 2005 edition]
D3DX9_28.DLL [from December 2005 edition]

I believe these files just add support for MDX [Managed DirectX], not needed unless one develops/distributes DX apps/games.

I have used the full offline setup [46 MB]:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/1...2005_redist.exe
but the web based online setup:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/7.../dxwebsetup.exe
should work the same, one just needs to wait for downloading all components from MS servers [a major drag for dial-up users ].
DX 9.0c:
http://www.mdgx.com/dx.htm#DX9

MS removed 98 + 98 SE from supported OSes list because they are not supported [not even "extended"] anymore, they are both within the "paid incident support phase" [last MS support phase], until June 30 2006:
http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=6898
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/
http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/
On the other hand, WinME is still within the "extended support phase", until June 30 2006:
http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=6519
That's [probably] why they still list WinME on the DX December 2005 Redist page.

BTW:
DX SDK December 2005 contains [and installs] the latest beta of DX 10.0 for Windows 2000/XP/2003/Vista:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/directx/sdk/readmepage/
Unfortunately DX 10.0 does not work with 9x OSes.
DX SDK [any 2005 edition] cannot be installed on and doesn't work with 9x OSes.

DX10b consists of only 2 files:

D3DX10.DLL
X3DAUDIO.DLL

contained inside these CABs [X86 32-bit versions]:

Beta_Dec2005_D3DX10_x86.cab
Beta_Dec2005_XACT_x86.cab

Note that support for newer hardware is minimal at this point.
Windows Vista [formerly known as Longhorn] will install complete DX 10.0 RTM.
________________________________

98SE2ME does not install/overwrite any DX files.
Please see READ1ST.TXT for details:
http://www.mdgx.com/9s2m/READ1ST.TXT
Scroll all the way to the bottom of the "FAQ" chapter [ * 98SE2ME does NOT interfere with Gape's Windows 98 SE Service Pack 2 (SP2): ] to view the complete list of USP2 files 98SE2ME replaces/overwrites.

Hope this helps.

Does it not also install D3DX9_24.DLL from February 2005 edition ?

They are actually Direct3D helpers needed for some recent games and apps and they should work under 9x which is why they are installed probably. So far they weren't officially freely redistributable though they were people redistributing them without the SDK as they were absolutely needed for some games.

See here for example : http://www.toymaker.info/Games/html/d3dx_dlls.html

The managed DirectX component is in Dec2005_MDX1_x86.cab and Dec2005_MDX1_x86_Archive.cab I think. I don't think it does install on 9x. I haven't checked it out.

Also xinput.dll, an Xbox 360 Controller, does not install apparently. That's in Oct2005_xinput_x86.cab.

I've one question yet :
Will the software update for web folders (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;892211) be integrated on these next SP ? This update is compatible with Windows 98 SE

Why do you think that it is not included? It is here since sesp20rc1 published on February 2nd 2005.

Petr

I believe that that update isn't included because there aren't Fp4autl.dll and Fp4awec.dll in the cabinet files of SP.

OK, KB892211 is included - but not all files.

SE SP 2.1a contains the following files from KB892211:

Msdaipp.dll 11.0.6715.15 (Microsoft Data Access Component Internet Publishing Provider)
Msdapml.dll 11.0.5510.0 (SharePoint Portal Server executable)

SE SP 2.1a does not contain the following files from KB892211:
Fp4autl.dll 4.0.2.7523 (Microsoft FrontPage Utility DLL)
Fp4awec.dll 4.0.2.4715 (Microsoft FrontPage Client Library)
Fpext.msg

Msonsext.dll 11.0.6715.15 (Microsoft Web Folders)
Nsextint.dll 11.0.5510.0 (SharePoint Portal Server)
Pkmws.dll 11.0.5510.0 (SharePoint Portal Server Windows API Stub Library)

Windows 98 SE contains the following versions:
Msdaipp.dll 8.102.1403.0 (Microsoft Data Access Component Internet Publishing Provider)
Msdapml.dll 8.102.1403.0 (Microsoft OLE DB Provider for Internet Publishing)
Fp4autl.dll 4.0.2.2619
Fp4awec.dll 4.0.2.2611
Fpext.msg is present
Msonsext.dll 9.0.2612 (Microsoft Office Name Space Extension)
Nsextint.dll is not present
Pkmws.dll is not present

I'm not sure now why just part of KB892211 update was included in the SESP.

Petr

My friend has a PC that I setup using my "Win98 Upgrade CD" which includes:

• DirectX 9.0c
• MDAC 2.81
• Win 98 SE SP 2.1a
• etc., etc., etc.

A game the kids wanted to try out called:
Sudoku by Pappocom

Required files:
• Microsoft Windows Installer 2.0
• Microsoft MDAC 2.8 (if you do not already have 2.6 or better)
• Microsoft XML 4.0 Service Pack 2
• Microsoft Visual C++ 6.0 Runtime Service Pack 6

Apparently, the only thing missing was MS XML 4.0 SP2

Was wondering if that will be included in a future release or should I add it to my own upgrade CD.

The game was smart enough to not only figure out which components were needed, but download them also. Just would prefer everything be included for easy "load-and-go" especially on dial-up computers.

Just to let everyone here know, an MSFN member (bobthenob) has kindly rendered a couple of logos for the Unofficial Service Pack, should anyone wish to use them:

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=63215&st=0

If he has the time, he might provide you with your own customised version!

http://www.members.aol.com/robinbrownmarti...logo/win984.png
http://www.members.aol.com/robinbrownmarti...logo/win983.png

These versions are rendered in Franklin Gothic (which I believe is the correct font for the Windows logo).

I asked for the particular wording on these logos. Gape, Petr or anyone else concerned, if you would like to correct or change it in any way, let me or bobthenob know (and hopefully he will have the time to make the changes).

Petr, if you like the logos, I'm sure bobthenob won't mind doing a "98 Gold"/"98 Final Edition" version. Sorry for not asking for this originally.

Wow, good!

? mytempdir no longer hosting?

"The file was removed.
Reason: Hosting period expired."

?

I have the 2.0 BETA 3 service pack. I assume it would be a simple task to upgrade to this new version? I am not really a computer person, so I hope you don't mind me asking.
Thanks, John

Simply install the current version over the BETA 3. Don't forget the close all open programs.

Would it better if I installed the 2.1a over what I have with the PC in the safe mode?
Thanks.