doe$ any one know if updates goin 2 b available
even after microsoft discontinue support
if not i need a service pak with latest and greatest updates
just put my computer in shop not knowin when 2 expect
hardware problems
Full Version: 98 no longer supported
MSFN Forums > Microsoft Software Products - Discussion & Support > Windows 95/98/98SE/ME > Windows 9x Member Projects
maybe. we'll have to wait and see. Microsoft will end support of Win98, 98se and ME on june 30, 2006 as noted at this page:
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifean1
do you use Windows 98 SE, PROBLEMCHYLD?
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifean1
do you use Windows 98 SE, PROBLEMCHYLD?
QUOTE (erpdude8 @ Feb 10 2006, 06:54 AM) 
maybe. we'll have to wait and see. Microsoft will end support of Win98, 98se and ME on june 30, 2006 as noted at this page:
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifean1
do you use Windows 98 SE, PROBLEMCHYLD?
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifean1
do you use Windows 98 SE, PROBLEMCHYLD?
yes all of the time
every now and then xp
I'm assuming that Windows Update might be left there, but never updated. I've read that some folks have managed to get to the old Windows 95 Windows Update site. They didn't say if it worked.
Really no problem. Just download them all from mdgx.com. Either get his kit which has his descriptions of the updates in text file format or just print out the pages you need.
Just organize them well in folders and sub-folders and burn them to a cdr. It'll take time, but you only do it once! Keep an eye on the thread here regarding new updates.
There will be a time when the system will not be completely secure, but no system really is anyway. If an attacker figures out an unpatched entry you're suseptable to having an attack succeed. This would be true even on the latest operating system.
Just keep your firewall's, virus scanners, spyware apps, etc updated and the system patched as much as is possible and in most cases nothing bad will get ya.
They stopped making fixes long ago (after all, we are on "extended support.") We just get security updates now anyway. Those WILL stop in June. So, once in a while we might get attacked and lose everything. Just make sure you're all backed up and this shouldn't be the end of the world if it happens.
Really no problem. Just download them all from mdgx.com. Either get his kit which has his descriptions of the updates in text file format or just print out the pages you need.
Just organize them well in folders and sub-folders and burn them to a cdr. It'll take time, but you only do it once! Keep an eye on the thread here regarding new updates.
There will be a time when the system will not be completely secure, but no system really is anyway. If an attacker figures out an unpatched entry you're suseptable to having an attack succeed. This would be true even on the latest operating system.
Just keep your firewall's, virus scanners, spyware apps, etc updated and the system patched as much as is possible and in most cases nothing bad will get ya.
They stopped making fixes long ago (after all, we are on "extended support.") We just get security updates now anyway. Those WILL stop in June. So, once in a while we might get attacked and lose everything. Just make sure you're all backed up and this shouldn't be the end of the world if it happens.
It seems that mdgx.com is going to be the "unofficial" Windows 9x Update site... is every single 9x-related fix/update there?
However, 98se is inherently more secure than the NT-series, as exemplified by the latest malwares and exploits (including WMF-vulnerability) that just don't work at all under a 9x system. This is because malware writers have focused on the most widely used operating systems so as to cause as much damage with their malware, and currently that OS is XP. A virgin install of 98se is, as far as I know, immune to *all* non-user-initiated remote exploits because of its detached network functionality.
I have NO virus scanner, NO antispyware, NO firewall, and have had NO problems for 5 years.
However, 98se is inherently more secure than the NT-series, as exemplified by the latest malwares and exploits (including WMF-vulnerability) that just don't work at all under a 9x system. This is because malware writers have focused on the most widely used operating systems so as to cause as much damage with their malware, and currently that OS is XP. A virgin install of 98se is, as far as I know, immune to *all* non-user-initiated remote exploits because of its detached network functionality.
I have NO virus scanner, NO antispyware, NO firewall, and have had NO problems for 5 years.
QUOTE (LLXX @ Feb 10 2006, 03:21 PM)
It seems that mdgx.com is going to be the "unofficial" Windows 9x Update site... is every single 9x-related fix/update there?
However, 98se is inherently more secure than the NT-series, as exemplified by the latest malwares and exploits (including WMF-vulnerability) that just don't work at all under a 9x system. This is because malware writers have focused on the most widely used operating systems so as to cause as much damage with their malware, and currently that OS is XP. A virgin install of 98se is, as far as I know, immune to *all* non-user-initiated remote exploits because of its detached network functionality.
I have NO virus scanner, NO antispyware, NO firewall, and have had NO problems for 5 years.
However, 98se is inherently more secure than the NT-series, as exemplified by the latest malwares and exploits (including WMF-vulnerability) that just don't work at all under a 9x system. This is because malware writers have focused on the most widely used operating systems so as to cause as much damage with their malware, and currently that OS is XP. A virgin install of 98se is, as far as I know, immune to *all* non-user-initiated remote exploits because of its detached network functionality.
I have NO virus scanner, NO antispyware, NO firewall, and have had NO problems for 5 years.
thanx 2 all u players in the game 4 your support
its 98se2me til i die!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't know if it's so locked up. My ZoneAlarm always shows ton's of stuff it has blocked from the outside world. It would be nice if I felt 98SE was so secure. Then I wouldn't need to fuss with Virus Scanning, firewalls, Spybot S&S, etc.
But I'm thinking there must be some stuff on your system you didn't ask for if you never block anything and never scan for spyware. Unless, and I don't know much about it, but I've read some folks apply some blocking themselves with Router's and using the hosts file.
I'm directly connected with a cable modem. I think I still need my firewall's virus scanners, spybot checkers, popup blockers, etc.
I don't normally go to potentially dangerous websites, but occasionally find myself wandering. It's nice to know I have some protection installed.
He, he! So by going back to 98SE I've upgraded my security further, eh?
Cool!
But I'm thinking there must be some stuff on your system you didn't ask for if you never block anything and never scan for spyware. Unless, and I don't know much about it, but I've read some folks apply some blocking themselves with Router's and using the hosts file.
I'm directly connected with a cable modem. I think I still need my firewall's virus scanners, spybot checkers, popup blockers, etc.
I don't normally go to potentially dangerous websites, but occasionally find myself wandering. It's nice to know I have some protection installed.
He, he! So by going back to 98SE I've upgraded my security further, eh?
Cool!
QUOTE (Eck @ Feb 11 2006, 03:05 PM)
I don't know if it's so locked up. My ZoneAlarm always shows ton's of stuff it has blocked from the outside world.
Most (if not all) of those alerts probably fall into one of the catagories below (which are mainly a form of ping for open ports):
1a) Is just a ping to your IP from a script-kiddie looking for open ports within an ip range
which your computer happened to fall into. If you have no open ports to the outside world there is nothing to worry about.
1b) A script kiddie and/or virus looking for open ports to NetBIOS 137,138, and 139. If you have file or printer sharing enabled, then netbios has those ports open. If you have no unprotected shares available, you should be fine. I've personally done some IP scans myself out of curiosity and a bit of personal research. Turns out that netbios is usually open with un-protected shares (often the c: drive) in the open on 1 out of every 20 PC's. It's often due to unknowing users enabling file sharing while not thinking of the consequences.
2) Probably a virii looking for a pre-infected system with a specific port open to exploit. Again, if you don't have ports open that shouldn't be open, thee isn't anything to worry about. Also, make sure you have security patches in place (MSBlast and LSASS ring a bell in the NT world?)
3) ZoneAlarm screaming for attention because it's lonely.
4) A form of spy/mal/ad-ware receiving data from it's provider.
note: The only ports I've noticed open on a regular basis are 21 (ftp) ,80 (http) , 137-139 (netbios). With the rare 3306 (mySql). 21 and 80 are often open to the outside world by the router for remote connecting and firmware updating. Otherwise it's a web\file server.
You can use a program called "netmon" (32-bit version of netstat) to view you're currently active conections and check for any open ports you don't want open. CLose your browser(s) first before opening it to clear out any connections open due to your browser connecting to a site you're viewing. You can also use 'netstat' in the command line to view any currently open ports and active connections.
Not to gloat or anything but my win98se system is
in the DMZ of my router. It also has no firewalls installed and runs 24/7 as a webserver. I'm basically a fort with no walls which has yet to have any savage 'invaders' come home for lunch. I'd say windows 98 is pretty secure
QUOTE
I'm directly connected with a cable modem. I think I still need my firewall's virus scanners, spybot checkers, popup blockers, etc.
Of course, pop-ups are inevitable and so is spy/ad/mal-ware. No system can prevent those using default system settings. Only way to avoid them is to not wander off the reputable sites path and install software that you know do not contain any 3rd party software bundled with it.
However, the old saying always stands true... "Curiosity killed the cat" (Or killed the pc).
My ports 137-139 are open according to netstat -a -n, but refuse all connections.
1. HOSTS file: Make one that blocks as much advertising and malicious sites as you can. You can download many of them from the Internet, then merge them together and remove duplicate lines. Now, all of those annoying advertising banners will disappear. As an added benefit, you can easily add entries to this blocklist, and also use it as a sort of DNS server to reach important sites if DNS servers are down.
2. IE configuration: Very Important! Everyone blames IE because it's so insecure, but in fact they are the ones that don't take the time to configure it properly. Configure Internet Zone security to Custom Level, and disable everything contained within. Repeat for Restricted Sites Zone. Most important to disable are:
- ActiveX <- the most dangerous
- File Download
- Font Download <- an "exploit" font can cause execution of arbitrary code when rendered...
- Javascript <- also kills popups too!
- Active Scripting <- also kills popups too!
Then configure the Trusted Sites zone to enable most items, except ActiveX which has been more useless than useful. I'd leave Font Download disabled too. Add sites that you absolutely trust not to harm your computer to this zone e.g. MSFN.
3. Antispyware/adware: Get any good antispyware/adware program e.g. Adaware, and run it, removing anything that it detects as malicious. Then get rid of the antispyware program itself. You won't be needing it.
4. Antivirus: Download and run more than one antivirus program one after another, scanning for and removing any infection. Do not install it so as to run in the background nor attempt to provide "active protection". I like to keep one standalone scanner, e.g. F-Prot for DOS (free version), around for scanning downloaded files. There is no need to scan every file in the system periodically if you know that they were not infected. Only scan files that were just downloaded.
5. Firewall: Not needed at all. A hardware disconnect switch, or just unplugging the network cable, is more than sufficient security if all you plan to do is work off-line for a while.
6. Awareness: Although you can now visit, with absolutely no effect, sites that would overwhelm a system that was not properly configured with inenumerable amounts of popups and malware, what you choose to download must still be inspected carefully. In other words, the system itself is secured, so all entry points have to be secured as well. This would be software that you download or receive from others. Besides a preliminary virus scan, careful inspection of the files contained within must be done. I usually unpack installers and extract what files I need of the software manually.
You follow all of the above steps, your system will stay clean forever
QUOTE
Of course, pop-ups are inevitable and so is spy/ad/mal-ware. No system can prevent those using default system settings. Only way to avoid them is to not wander off the reputable sites path and install software that you know do not contain any 3rd party software bundled with it.
For some reason everyone "has to have" a popup-blocker and antispyware program running in the background. I find that disturbing, since in reality a default install of 98se can already be configured using what it has, to completely eliminate such annoyance and risks. This is what I recommend instead:1. HOSTS file: Make one that blocks as much advertising and malicious sites as you can. You can download many of them from the Internet, then merge them together and remove duplicate lines. Now, all of those annoying advertising banners will disappear. As an added benefit, you can easily add entries to this blocklist, and also use it as a sort of DNS server to reach important sites if DNS servers are down.
2. IE configuration: Very Important! Everyone blames IE because it's so insecure, but in fact they are the ones that don't take the time to configure it properly. Configure Internet Zone security to Custom Level, and disable everything contained within. Repeat for Restricted Sites Zone. Most important to disable are:
- ActiveX <- the most dangerous
- File Download
- Font Download <- an "exploit" font can cause execution of arbitrary code when rendered...
- Javascript <- also kills popups too!
- Active Scripting <- also kills popups too!
Then configure the Trusted Sites zone to enable most items, except ActiveX which has been more useless than useful. I'd leave Font Download disabled too. Add sites that you absolutely trust not to harm your computer to this zone e.g. MSFN.
3. Antispyware/adware: Get any good antispyware/adware program e.g. Adaware, and run it, removing anything that it detects as malicious. Then get rid of the antispyware program itself. You won't be needing it.
4. Antivirus: Download and run more than one antivirus program one after another, scanning for and removing any infection. Do not install it so as to run in the background nor attempt to provide "active protection". I like to keep one standalone scanner, e.g. F-Prot for DOS (free version), around for scanning downloaded files. There is no need to scan every file in the system periodically if you know that they were not infected. Only scan files that were just downloaded.
5. Firewall: Not needed at all. A hardware disconnect switch, or just unplugging the network cable, is more than sufficient security if all you plan to do is work off-line for a while.
6. Awareness: Although you can now visit, with absolutely no effect, sites that would overwhelm a system that was not properly configured with inenumerable amounts of popups and malware, what you choose to download must still be inspected carefully. In other words, the system itself is secured, so all entry points have to be secured as well. This would be software that you download or receive from others. Besides a preliminary virus scan, careful inspection of the files contained within must be done. I usually unpack installers and extract what files I need of the software manually.
You follow all of the above steps, your system will stay clean forever
You explained that better than I could personally LLXX. When I meant default settings... I meant manufacturer\factory presets. Didn't mean user settings such as IE at 'highest' security settings with a couple other additional user-tweaks to it for example.
Sounds like you don't have file&Printer sharing enabled then.
If you don't have File&Printer sharing enabled and if you wish to close those ports, there is a way. By default, netBIOS is enabled in the tcp-ip protocols whenever you install any network adaptor (even with dial-up).
To disable it, install IPX\SPX or NETBeui. Then unbind all components listed under your TCP-IP protocol 'bindings' tab and accept settings. It may ask if you want to bind one now. Just say no and continue. Re-open then click the 'netbios' tab. The checkbox should no-longer be gray and checked. If still checked but not gray, uncheck it, accept changes and restart.
NetBIOS is now disabled and those ports (137-139) closed. Disabling netbios only has the side effect of not being able to use computer name recognition (urls such as "\\petes_pc") to connect to file&Printers shared on other pc's through file\printer sharing. Rather you would use the actual ip (such as "\\192.168.0.1") or bind network drives to letters using "net" in the command line.
QUOTE
My ports 137-139 are open according to netstat -a -n, but refuse all connections.
Sounds like you don't have file&Printer sharing enabled then.
If you don't have File&Printer sharing enabled and if you wish to close those ports, there is a way. By default, netBIOS is enabled in the tcp-ip protocols whenever you install any network adaptor (even with dial-up).
To disable it, install IPX\SPX or NETBeui. Then unbind all components listed under your TCP-IP protocol 'bindings' tab and accept settings. It may ask if you want to bind one now. Just say no and continue. Re-open then click the 'netbios' tab. The checkbox should no-longer be gray and checked. If still checked but not gray, uncheck it, accept changes and restart.
NetBIOS is now disabled and those ports (137-139) closed. Disabling netbios only has the side effect of not being able to use computer name recognition (urls such as "\\petes_pc") to connect to file&Printers shared on other pc's through file\printer sharing. Rather you would use the actual ip (such as "\\192.168.0.1") or bind network drives to letters using "net" in the command line.
And, using Firefox as default for browsing couldn't hurt. Although, if folks follow your advice and turn off all that stuff I suppose IE is just a safe.
Personally, I'd rather have the functionality and don't mind the ad's on web pages. It's the popups and being diverted to other sites that are the annoying things. But using Firefox with the popup blocker enabled generally protects against that. And since I don't wander around all that much I rarely encounter websites that do evil stuff!
I install the Yahoo Toolbar for the occasional IE use, like when a site uses ActiveX for stuff. Hardly ever really. And the Yahoo thing has its popup blocker. When using XP I don't even install that. XP's IE has its own.
I recently was using a very old computer so I didn't install Firefox since IE plays better with limited resources. I hadn't used IE for years for general browsing. Ya know what? I really didn't miss Firefox. Internet Explorer is pretty good! No wonder the browser usage percent, although growing for Firefox, is so heavily IE. After all, it's built in and unless folks have problems most will just use what their computer comes with.
I've read that HP will be including Firefox on new computers and offer a choice of browsers as part of its OOBE. That's cool.
Personally, I'd rather have the functionality and don't mind the ad's on web pages. It's the popups and being diverted to other sites that are the annoying things. But using Firefox with the popup blocker enabled generally protects against that. And since I don't wander around all that much I rarely encounter websites that do evil stuff!
I install the Yahoo Toolbar for the occasional IE use, like when a site uses ActiveX for stuff. Hardly ever really. And the Yahoo thing has its popup blocker. When using XP I don't even install that. XP's IE has its own.
I recently was using a very old computer so I didn't install Firefox since IE plays better with limited resources. I hadn't used IE for years for general browsing. Ya know what? I really didn't miss Firefox. Internet Explorer is pretty good! No wonder the browser usage percent, although growing for Firefox, is so heavily IE. After all, it's built in and unless folks have problems most will just use what their computer comes with.
I've read that HP will be including Firefox on new computers and offer a choice of browsers as part of its OOBE. That's cool.
On a 98SE no longer supported mode, has anyone noticed what Apple is doing with Quicktime? They're encouraging webmasters to encode in formats that Quicktime 6.5.2 can't use (since Apple won't update it to allow it.)
And, even on video's that will play fine on 6.5.2, the player will stop playing the video (which had been playing fine, and proceed to go to the playing site's video page where you can click a link that tells you to install XP if you want to play these video's. (A system requirements page.)
So they'll play fine but Apple doesn't want to let the 6.5.2 player do it!
Last time it happened, I was at a site that offered WMP as a choice so I just finished the video that way.
Jeez! I was halfway throught the video in the Quicktime browser embed when it stopped and hijacked me back to the page of the website's Quicktime video's. And when I just clicked the link again it opened the embed for a second then immediately hijacked me back. So, like I said I just watched it in WMP9.
But that's not possible on sites that are only Quicktime.
And has anyone noticed that 6.5.2 plays and sounds better than 7.0.4? The thing's still buggy.
Even Microsoft issued an codecs update with WMP 10 codecs for the 9 player. What's with Apple? I can see them making the new player only for XP, but why not let their most recent older version still play stuff? I'm not talking about that new format but all the stuff it's completely able of playing.
And, even on video's that will play fine on 6.5.2, the player will stop playing the video (which had been playing fine, and proceed to go to the playing site's video page where you can click a link that tells you to install XP if you want to play these video's. (A system requirements page.)
So they'll play fine but Apple doesn't want to let the 6.5.2 player do it!
Last time it happened, I was at a site that offered WMP as a choice so I just finished the video that way.
Jeez! I was halfway throught the video in the Quicktime browser embed when it stopped and hijacked me back to the page of the website's Quicktime video's. And when I just clicked the link again it opened the embed for a second then immediately hijacked me back. So, like I said I just watched it in WMP9.
But that's not possible on sites that are only Quicktime.
And has anyone noticed that 6.5.2 plays and sounds better than 7.0.4? The thing's still buggy.
Even Microsoft issued an codecs update with WMP 10 codecs for the 9 player. What's with Apple? I can see them making the new player only for XP, but why not let their most recent older version still play stuff? I'm not talking about that new format but all the stuff it's completely able of playing.
Couldn't you just install the Quicktime (.MOV) codec and not the whole thing? That's what I have on my system...
That would be a great fix if it was fully effective. I don't think it's just the mov file format though. It's internet sites either using that new codec only available on Quicktime 7 or somehow shutting down the links when they don't detect Quicktime 7.
Apple REALLY wants everyone updated to 7, and they don't care if the minicule percentage of users on Windows 9x get shut out.
I don't think the just the Quicktime codec and MPClassic will enable these files to play.
Am I thinking incorrectly? (Wouldn't be the first time.)
Is Quicktime Alternative now up to date with the newer file formats introduced in Quicktime 7? I'd imagine those folks are working on it, but I've never used it. This makes me unsure how using that with, say, MediaPlayerClassic would interact with embedded Quicktime content on the internet.
Never having used 3rd party unofficial codec packages, I'm inexperienced with how it all works.
For Quicktime I've always installed the 2.1.2.59 player so my old games would be happy and whatever the latest official Quicktime release is so the web functions would work. I don't think the older player is even used by the old games. The file associations remain with the new player. The game just detects the old player on the system and so it doesn't error out.
I have one old Star Trek Picard Chronicles encyclopeic type thing that only runs if Quicktime 2.0.8 (I think that's the one) is installed. Since that version changes the file associations too much I've taken to do without seeing Captain Picard's Borg experience. Saw it, been there. I'd rather not have to play so much with the file type settings to get them near where they belong. It moves JPEG out to a seperate type. And I need to apply a fix to restore thumbnails since 2.0.8 breaks them. I can do without that.
So, I've established that Apple is strange the way they design for the Windows versions of Quicktime. But my point of putting this here was to say that here's one example of total 98 abandonment. It seems they want you to throw out your old games and operating systems and buy new stuff. BUT I LIKE MY OLD STUFF!
From my experience with 98SE now, I'd say it's running my hardware better than XP can. Things are noticably zippier!
Apple REALLY wants everyone updated to 7, and they don't care if the minicule percentage of users on Windows 9x get shut out.
I don't think the just the Quicktime codec and MPClassic will enable these files to play.
Am I thinking incorrectly? (Wouldn't be the first time.)
Is Quicktime Alternative now up to date with the newer file formats introduced in Quicktime 7? I'd imagine those folks are working on it, but I've never used it. This makes me unsure how using that with, say, MediaPlayerClassic would interact with embedded Quicktime content on the internet.
Never having used 3rd party unofficial codec packages, I'm inexperienced with how it all works.
For Quicktime I've always installed the 2.1.2.59 player so my old games would be happy and whatever the latest official Quicktime release is so the web functions would work. I don't think the older player is even used by the old games. The file associations remain with the new player. The game just detects the old player on the system and so it doesn't error out.
I have one old Star Trek Picard Chronicles encyclopeic type thing that only runs if Quicktime 2.0.8 (I think that's the one) is installed. Since that version changes the file associations too much I've taken to do without seeing Captain Picard's Borg experience. Saw it, been there. I'd rather not have to play so much with the file type settings to get them near where they belong. It moves JPEG out to a seperate type. And I need to apply a fix to restore thumbnails since 2.0.8 breaks them. I can do without that.
So, I've established that Apple is strange the way they design for the Windows versions of Quicktime. But my point of putting this here was to say that here's one example of total 98 abandonment. It seems they want you to throw out your old games and operating systems and buy new stuff. BUT I LIKE MY OLD STUFF!
From my experience with 98SE now, I'd say it's running my hardware better than XP can. Things are noticably zippier!
I've been happily using ffdshow and/or QuickTime Alternative to watch QT files. Streaming can be a little dicey, but for the most part I've had success. I'm a little biased though; I got sick of Apple QT refusing to properly play high quality trailers and such, only to have a more versatile media player and the afore-mentioned decoders run through it like it was nothing. I also (and maybe this no longer applies) enjoy being able to full-screen video without having to pay to do so.
Just a thought, if this is only affecting the Windows Version of Quicktime...
...perhaps apple had been payed off by microsoft to do this in an attempt to help force poeple to convert to XP?
...perhaps apple had been payed off by microsoft to do this in an attempt to help force poeple to convert to XP?
QUOTE (Eck @ Feb 11 2006, 09:24 PM)
On a 98SE no longer supported mode, has anyone noticed what Apple is doing with Quicktime? They're encouraging webmasters to encode in formats that Quicktime 6.5.2 can't use (since Apple won't update it to allow it.)
And, even on video's that will play fine on 6.5.2, the player will stop playing the video (which had been playing fine, and proceed to go to the playing site's video page where you can click a link that tells you to install XP if you want to play these video's. (A system requirements page.)
So they'll play fine but Apple doesn't want to let the 6.5.2 player do it!
Last time it happened, I was at a site that offered WMP as a choice so I just finished the video that way.
Jeez! I was halfway throught the video in the Quicktime browser embed when it stopped and hijacked me back to the page of the website's Quicktime video's. And when I just clicked the link again it opened the embed for a second then immediately hijacked me back. So, like I said I just watched it in WMP9.
But that's not possible on sites that are only Quicktime.
And has anyone noticed that 6.5.2 plays and sounds better than 7.0.4? The thing's still buggy.
Even Microsoft issued an codecs update with WMP 10 codecs for the 9 player. What's with Apple? I can see them making the new player only for XP, but why not let their most recent older version still play stuff? I'm not talking about that new format but all the stuff it's completely able of playing.
And, even on video's that will play fine on 6.5.2, the player will stop playing the video (which had been playing fine, and proceed to go to the playing site's video page where you can click a link that tells you to install XP if you want to play these video's. (A system requirements page.)
So they'll play fine but Apple doesn't want to let the 6.5.2 player do it!
Last time it happened, I was at a site that offered WMP as a choice so I just finished the video that way.
Jeez! I was halfway throught the video in the Quicktime browser embed when it stopped and hijacked me back to the page of the website's Quicktime video's. And when I just clicked the link again it opened the embed for a second then immediately hijacked me back. So, like I said I just watched it in WMP9.
But that's not possible on sites that are only Quicktime.
And has anyone noticed that 6.5.2 plays and sounds better than 7.0.4? The thing's still buggy.
Even Microsoft issued an codecs update with WMP 10 codecs for the 9 player. What's with Apple? I can see them making the new player only for XP, but why not let their most recent older version still play stuff? I'm not talking about that new format but all the stuff it's completely able of playing.
What the bleep?! You're saying that it will refuse to play even under Windows 2000? I would understand if the software's from Microsoft. Why would Apple force Windows 2000 users to upgrade to Windows XP?!
Sorry!When I said XP I mean't 2000/XP. Whatever operating system's that Quicktime 7 is compatible with. This is bad for 9x users, who can only install Quicktime 6.5.2 and earlier.
I checked some info on Quicktime Alternative. Even their newest versions are only for the NT based operating systems. No 9x since they are based on Quicktime 7. You have to use the older Quicktime 6.5.2 based Quicktime Alternative on 9x systems.
And I also noticed there is a web plugin for Quicktime Alternative that enables the embedded web stuff to work. Of course, this just means they will work if the files are compatible with your version of Quicktime, just like the official Quicktime.
So there's no advantage for me to use the Alternative rather than the official Quicktime.
So far I haven't encountered this sort of thing with any of the other software I use. Inevitably, this stuff is going to happen though.
I do have 2 retail boxes of XP Home so if things get super annoying in the future I can always DOWNGRADE again to XP!
What XP-specific features are the newer QT versions using? New exported functions in DLLs?
Sometimes it's just a versioncheck, and you can force it to install by faking the version or unpacking the installer and doing it manually. Other users have reported success with this method in getting "2K/XP-only" games to run under 9x.
I don't use QT much at all anyway (staying with WMVs and AVIs), so I can't help specifically. But many of these "2K/XP-only" programs actually will run fine on 9x with a faked version or manual install.
Sometimes it's just a versioncheck, and you can force it to install by faking the version or unpacking the installer and doing it manually. Other users have reported success with this method in getting "2K/XP-only" games to run under 9x.
I don't use QT much at all anyway (staying with WMVs and AVIs), so I can't help specifically. But many of these "2K/XP-only" programs actually will run fine on 9x with a faked version or manual install.
I don't use it a heck of a lot either, but do consider the older version for the older games and the latest version for the occasional website visit as essential in my setup of a computer. This is just so when I want to see something I don't need to endure installing a plugin. The links will just play.
That's the idea, anyway. Apple has just made this a bit tougher if I'm using 9x.
I have no idea whether there are XP necessary files in Quicktime 7, but since it's designed specifically for XP/2000 I assume there are some. Searching around I haven't come across anyone saying they've installed Quicktime 7 on 98SE, and I'm pretty sure that if it could have been done then the Quicktime Alternative folks would have made their latest versions 9x compatible, but they haven't.
If they can't do it, I'm fairly certain I can't.
That's the idea, anyway. Apple has just made this a bit tougher if I'm using 9x.
I have no idea whether there are XP necessary files in Quicktime 7, but since it's designed specifically for XP/2000 I assume there are some. Searching around I haven't come across anyone saying they've installed Quicktime 7 on 98SE, and I'm pretty sure that if it could have been done then the Quicktime Alternative folks would have made their latest versions 9x compatible, but they haven't.
If they can't do it, I'm fairly certain I can't.
QUOTE (Eck @ Feb 11 2006, 09:08 PM)
I recently was using a very old computer so I didn't install Firefox since IE plays better with limited resources.
Actually, it just appears that Internet Explorer don't use much resources, because of the fact that it's integrated into the OS!
If you don't use Internet Explorer, it's recommended that you deintegrate Internet Explorer from Windows with 98 Lite (if using Windows 9x) or nLite (if using Windows XP or Windows 2000) and use K-Meleon.
Yes, I understand but IE does have its occasional uses. I've always read about these options but never took the plunge!
Also, I've just toured about (been watching Buffy lately so have a little Giles going I suppose) and I noticed that although the movie trailers on the Quicktime website won't play, most of the links on music sites and even those from the Apple site do. And, after having watched a few of these when I had Quicktime 7 on XP, and now with Quicktime 6.5.2, these things just play better on Quicktime 6.5.2.
Eh, I think I'll manage okay for now. If I like trailers that much I can just go to a theatre and see one movie and I'll get all the trailers I can stand.
Adding to the not compatible with 9x subject, how about those new Creative X-Fi soundcards? Judging by the Creative forums, many buyers are finding they're not compatible with anything! (He, he.)
Better not keep talking like that though or Creative will downgrade me again from "Trusted Contributer" to "Frequent Contributer." For some reason they recently upgraded me back to trusted. Well, I do try to help some folks there.
Also, I've just toured about (been watching Buffy lately so have a little Giles going I suppose) and I noticed that although the movie trailers on the Quicktime website won't play, most of the links on music sites and even those from the Apple site do. And, after having watched a few of these when I had Quicktime 7 on XP, and now with Quicktime 6.5.2, these things just play better on Quicktime 6.5.2.
Eh, I think I'll manage okay for now. If I like trailers that much I can just go to a theatre and see one movie and I'll get all the trailers I can stand.
Adding to the not compatible with 9x subject, how about those new Creative X-Fi soundcards? Judging by the Creative forums, many buyers are finding they're not compatible with anything! (He, he.)
Better not keep talking like that though or Creative will downgrade me again from "Trusted Contributer" to "Frequent Contributer." For some reason they recently upgraded me back to trusted. Well, I do try to help some folks there.
QUOTE (Eck @ Feb 12 2006, 12:28 AM)
I have one old Star Trek Picard Chronicles encyclopeic type thing that only runs if Quicktime 2.0.8 (I think that's the one) is installed. Since that version changes the file associations too much I've taken to do without seeing Captain Picard's Borg experience. Saw it, been there. I'd rather not have to play so much with the file type settings to get them near where they belong. It moves JPEG out to a seperate type. And I need to apply a fix to restore thumbnails since 2.0.8 breaks them. I can do without that.
I have installed QT 2.1.2.59 *both* the 32-bit and the 16-bit versions, and old games [Myst, STNG etc] + old screen savers [After Dark Star Trek, After Dark Star Wars] seem to work ok in 98 SE.Then you can also install newer QT 6.5.2 [I recommend QT alternative 1.55 which installs QT 6.5.2], has completely different files, just don't allow any newer versions to delete older ones during installation.
All available QT versions, including unofficial QT alternative [nag + bloat free]:
http://www.mdgx.com/toy.htm#MED
QT alt home:
http://home.hccnet.nl/h.edskes/finalbuilds.htm#quicktimealt
To view JPEG/JPG files, I recommend using IrfanView, XNview or PhotoFiltre, all free(ware):
http://www.mdgx.com/toy.htm#GRA
Hope this helps.
That's exactly what I do! Except for the 16 bit version. I don't have a game that uses it.
I install the 2.1.2.59 32bit Quicktime, adjust the control panel to "optimize by bitmap" and 22050 audio, reboot, then install Quicktime 6.5.2 on 9x or Quicktime 7.0.4 on XP. I tell Quicktime to not load the system tray icon and the use default file formats and MIME, and to use General Midi, reboot, done.
But, that Picard Dossier thing requires the older 32 bit Quicktime 2.0.8 (or .3, I forget). It's the one that comes on the Borg cd. I used to install it, as well as the other two, so the Picard Dossier would work (doesn't unless that version is installed), but now do not because I was tired of needing to do stuff like fixing the file association so that the newer Quicktime Picture Viewer is used instead of the 2.0.8, the newer player instead of 2.1.2.59, and fix the JPEG (all by itself instead of with the group it belongs in). As well as fixing the thumbnails.
It never gets back to exactly where it belongs. 2.1.2.59 does not do all this stuff, only the older version. And once the latest Quicktime is installed over 2.1.2.59 all is well, with the latest taking over the proper associations. But if 2.0.8 is there, it's still messed up. That older version does the same crap to XP as well. And then I have to manually type in where that shim thing is (see, I already forgot) that opens Windows Picture and Fax Viewer in the File Type Associations properties. It's just a pain in the neck.
Once you've seen that Picard thing a few times, it's really enough. I have much the same in the Star Trek Encyclopedia 3.0.
Also,
I actually enjoy some of the bloat the official versions come with. I turn off what I don't want. But sometimes I want to be presented with some nice links to see stuff. (Not the RealPlay huge page, I tell that to start with the player only.) The page Quicktime opens is interesting at times. I just wish all the stuff would work with 6.5.2 on 9x, but I suppose that's not happening. Apple has moved on.
I install the 2.1.2.59 32bit Quicktime, adjust the control panel to "optimize by bitmap" and 22050 audio, reboot, then install Quicktime 6.5.2 on 9x or Quicktime 7.0.4 on XP. I tell Quicktime to not load the system tray icon and the use default file formats and MIME, and to use General Midi, reboot, done.
But, that Picard Dossier thing requires the older 32 bit Quicktime 2.0.8 (or .3, I forget). It's the one that comes on the Borg cd. I used to install it, as well as the other two, so the Picard Dossier would work (doesn't unless that version is installed), but now do not because I was tired of needing to do stuff like fixing the file association so that the newer Quicktime Picture Viewer is used instead of the 2.0.8, the newer player instead of 2.1.2.59, and fix the JPEG (all by itself instead of with the group it belongs in). As well as fixing the thumbnails.
It never gets back to exactly where it belongs. 2.1.2.59 does not do all this stuff, only the older version. And once the latest Quicktime is installed over 2.1.2.59 all is well, with the latest taking over the proper associations. But if 2.0.8 is there, it's still messed up. That older version does the same crap to XP as well. And then I have to manually type in where that shim thing is (see, I already forgot) that opens Windows Picture and Fax Viewer in the File Type Associations properties. It's just a pain in the neck.
Once you've seen that Picard thing a few times, it's really enough. I have much the same in the Star Trek Encyclopedia 3.0.
Also,
I actually enjoy some of the bloat the official versions come with. I turn off what I don't want. But sometimes I want to be presented with some nice links to see stuff. (Not the RealPlay huge page, I tell that to start with the player only.) The page Quicktime opens is interesting at times. I just wish all the stuff would work with 6.5.2 on 9x, but I suppose that's not happening. Apple has moved on.
QUOTE (Eck @ Feb 12 2006, 02:24 AM)
On a 98SE no longer supported mode, has anyone noticed what Apple is doing with Quicktime? They're encouraging webmasters to encode in formats that Quicktime 6.5.2 can't use (since Apple won't update it to allow it.)
The latest QT installers don't work with Win98SE, the latest viable one seems to be QuickTime Alternative v.1.61.
That's right. The last one using the Quicktime 6.5.2 base. The newer ones use Quicktime 7 as a base, which is not 9x compatible.
That's my point.
That's my point.
QUOTE (Eck @ Feb 15 2006, 12:08 PM)
That's right. The last one using the Quicktime 6.5.2 base. The newer ones use Quicktime 7 as a base, which is not 9x compatible.
That's my point.
That's my point.
The latest iPod software includes Quicktime 7. my brother likes to use his iPod a lot but can only connect to a usb 2.0 port or a firewire [IEEE 1394] port; it wont work when connected to a usb 1.0/1.1 port.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.