winxpi

Member
  • Content count

    207
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About winxpi

  • Birthday

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.w98upg.net.tf/

Profile Information

  • OS
    none specified
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

581 profile views
  1. Just quoting partly because of better overview. So youtube did assumably perform better on machines one,two, three. Besides the processing power, Id think it depends also on the DirectX/OpenGL version the graphics card can handle. Somewhere I read that, OpenGL ES and WebGL are related. "OpenGL ES is based roughly on OpenGL 2.0" (Wikipedia) And since WebGL 1.0 is based on OpenGL ES 2.0 this could in fact mean it requires a graphics card that supports atleast "OpenGL 2.0" for rudimentary HTML5 standard support like HTML5 Canvas and other stuff. I researched this two months ago, but ofcourse theres no assurance this is the way it is. Im not an Expert on all the features a graphics card and GPU can offer, but sure the graphics cards Nvidia7800GT/7900GS are better suited for youtube with html5 than mine and offcourse the 5900XT (even though its better than what I have onboard) you mentioned. The extra RAM and processing power also are benefical. I got a quite good internet connection, Windows 98SE doesnt get the full bandwith, but still 2MB/s (16Mbps) are possible at a time. So I think youtube is just overestimating the connection, but in other situations it might be a factor. Good news however that HTML5 seems not to be incompatible with Windows 98SE itself thanks to available HTML5 support browsers, but rather a question of Hardware. Thanks for your feedback!
  2. Since whe are here in the "Working Web Browsers on Windows 9x" -section and its getting a bit off-topic, I'd like to ask (youtube was mentioned), did anyone of you get HTML5 to work properly on youtube with Windows 98SE or Windows ME? I use the Flash Player all the time, since its in really slow-motion if HTML5 is ever used. It may have to to, that I only have 1 Ghz single-core, 256 mb ram, 100 Mbps Network card and an integrated graphics cards, which according to bios has either 32 or 64 MB. However: Anybody had good experience using HTML5 for video playback ? And if yes: Which graphics cards do you use for it? I dont need 720p or 480p quality, Im good with 360p and 240p on Windows 98SE. Just curious if HTML5 performs better for someone, since I read it dependant on the graphics card and GPU and other sources claimed it has to do with the Network card(which might be true for smartphones with the same processing power, integrated Gpu and more ram) but sure not for all desktop pcs.
  3. According to suse.com the SiS 900 PCI Fast Ethernet Adapter does support 100 Mbit/s speed. I aswell have a Windows 98 machine which has a built-in Fast Ethernet Adapter with so called 100 Mbit/s speed that doesnt get the complete bandwith on any speedtest. We have a max out at approximately 3 MB/s. The highest I could achieve on Windows 98SE however was 2 MB/s using that connection and Patch 5E cable (and latest drivers ofcourse for the Network Interface Card). There might be the possibility of duplex mismatch(read about that on wikipedia). It could happen if that mode is set on your SiS 900 PCI Fast Etherenet Adapter (NIC) or the router/modem you use(Id rather say the NIC because you archive the maximum speed on the laptops/handhels). Try to find out it you can change the setting. Im not so familiar with SiS 900, but for the type of NIC I use there was such a setting that could be changed in the Control Panel =>Network applet. But like I said I didnt archieve the full bandwith on that one. But 80 Kb/s must be improvable.
  4. Interesting. Maybe its browser specific. I cant remember right now if Opera 12 remebers it , but atleast on IE11 it does(I know thats no option). But ofcourse only aslong as you havent cleaned the cache yet. Well that PC uses an ethernet cable directly linked to the wireless router/modem (its a modem with integrated wifi router). All the notebooks get a faster speed on the speed tests. Somewhere I read that maybe due to lack of RAM /Graphics card. Usually I can load a youtube video on a smartphone faster (well should be said that youtube is handled differntly on smartphones aswell and better implementation of HTML5, graphics processor chip maybe a reason) and thats via wifi in the same household. But havent tried the speed test there. Sorry for the double post hope its just a bit more better overview.
  5. ### When you use embedding the code changes. I cant tell you why that is. would look like this : youtube.com/embed/VIDEOID?nohtml5=1 If you dont use embedding its youtube.com/watch?v=VIDEOID&nohtml5=1 But there are examples that may not work. I noticed the same with a notebook where I used Internet explorer 11, some of the music videos might not play with flash because of copyright restrictions. Didnt try if the restriction message also showed up on 98se thought. Hower it should work in most cases. Interesting would be if we could find a solution for the slow performance when using HTML5 player. I rather use flash because on a Pentium 3 machine it even slower when HTML5 is used. Flash atleast gives me a relatively good performance(as long as I dont have multiple videos open).
  6. I'll give you a temporary fix (however it can't the final solution since also users with Windows XP and above don't want to be fixes to HTML5 by default). Simply add "&nohtml5=1" at the end of a youtube video. Maybe one day they will also remove this fallback option but maybe we have some time to. Can't open videos another way on my older machine with 98se. And I'm not going to install android gingerbread (not even on a usb Flash drive) or lower just to make use of HTML5... I'm hoping to find some alternative but it's nearly impossible and internet speed is really slow on that one, maybe Microsoft programmed the Network Drivers to have limitations. Can't get above the 1MB/s. But 3 MB/s would be possible through my ISP.
  7. Ok following Information whom it may concern. None of the above mentioned links work currently. Concerning Uploading.com "OOPS! Looks like file not found" issue I can re-upload the german and english Version of the recent Windows 98 Upgrade Pack (WUPG98). But who doesn't want to wait I recommend downloading directly from MDGX: Summary for the WUPG98 http://www.mdgx.com/web.htm#WUP English Version: http://www.mdgx.com/spx/WUPG98.EXE Deutsche "German" Version: http://www.mdgx.com/spx/WUPG98DE.EXE Don't want to promise to much, but it may be possible that WUPG98 becomes a last cameo (on ist original website or not we will see, I will leave a link if the host.sk Domain will not bei available) where Internet browsing will play an key issue. This will either as a whole new pack version or as an smaller "Extension" so people by popular demand can also have new features without having to choose either Revolution Pack, unofficial SP2/SP3 or the WUPG98 for Windows 98. Additional info as of 16.09.2016: Wanted to announce already in January 2016 that the current project status for the "Windows 98 Upgrade Pack" aka WUPG98/W98UPG is frozen because a new version containg a few older and newer unofficial updates was planed also an additional language with another imporant addition being improvement for browsing the Internet on 98SE PCs. Since Microsoft Windows Update Server (v4) is offline the main goal for the new WUPG98 is impossible for the planned complete pack in this particular third language. Thats the background story why maybe there will only be a smaller "Extension" to be released.
  8. Maybe I should point out, that this Change of referrer has atleast one downside. For me: YouTube and other pages had a fallback using html5 instead of Adobe Flash Version I installed. Found out that after removing the additional keys that I mentioned above this issues stops and Adobe Flash is used again. So backup your "HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\5.0\User Agent" entries before you do any changes or create two .reg files for both scenarios as I did if you want to do this workaround (althought it only Counts for Messages you get in your browser). If you need to revert like me add this changes now into a new .reg file and call if "default.reg" and then run it with administrative privileges. Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\5.0\User Agent] "Compatible"=- "Platform"=- "Version"=- The reg-file basically removes the 3 new entries from above. Additionally you can also create two .reg files. One you may call "Referrer10.reg"(or whatever you like) and the other one "Default.reg"(to restore the Default Settings on referrer). If you aren't sure if it worked you can still run regedit.exe with administrative privileges (CTRL+R for Windows 8 or use the Metro menu and type "regedit" and just right-click the administrative privileges). For 7 it would be STart=>Run "regedit" then SHIFT+ENTER and it will be start with administrative privileges. If you cant get regedit running with administrative privileges just Google "Run as Administrator" you will find what you Need to know. However if you started regedit successfully with administrative privileges you can look up HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\5.0\User Agent and check if the keys are removed or still in place and remove "Compatible", "Platform" and "Version" by Hand (right-click delete). So after doing the Research the plus-side is: Most Web sites relying on referrerer will Thing you are using Windows 10 and also Msn page is one of them. Downside is also Flash-Content or the whole Flash Player itself may rely on the referrer Information and then not run at all. So I can't say this is a permanent solution rather a work-around.
  9. I must admit Windows 9x or XP are not my main OSes anymore. Use 7 and 8.1 at the moment very often, still having one windows 9x system around but offcourse we are speaking about the Windows 10 upgrading issue here. Just saying cause I've not been around a while. And I just found out someting helpfull (don't know if you people read about it before). Atleast it helps when you installed some of the IE Updates. Like I had on a Windows 7 client when I installed a cumulative Update for IE. So the second thing is the issue that you get nagging "Upgrade to Windows 10" boxes on outlook.com (former hotmail). I'll send you the code I used (but you should modify it regarding the IE browser version you are using). Don't know if the "Windows Registry Editior Version 5.00 part still counts for Win8. But can say its been 5.00 since Windows 2000. Don't think its been changed much when you consider Windows 7 is actually 6.1 and 8 actually 6.2. Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\5.0\User Agent]@="Mozilla/5.0""Compatible"="compatible""Platform"="Windows NT 10.0""Version"="MSIE 11.0"Well and the only thing it does is stopping to show you the blue box on outlook page after sign out in Internet Explorer. Hope this may help somebody.
  10. Hello! I've been MIA the last years. However theres a cosmetic bug in Windows 98SE (don't know if its also in ME) that results as followed: When I open a folder or place where files exist and I have access to the adressbar (which displays the path normally), its by default also possible to type in the adress bar. And when you do this the text cursor aka caret appears on typing (or after using copy and paste). However now to the issue If you use RENAME (or press F2) and then copy the file or folder name e.g. "autoexec.bat" (regardless of using CTRL+C or right-clicking copy) and double-click to the adressbar the text won't get the blue focus it normally gets when you mark a text before removing it with backspace. So easily said the field in the addressbar now cant get tagged. You still can paste the text of the filename you copied ("autoexec.bat"), but at the moment there is no focus(tagging)and no caret when you want to paste "autoexec.bat" in the adressbar field. And instead of reading "autoexec.bat" in the adressbar after usage of CTRL+V in Windows explorer you will read "C:\autoexec.bat" now. Btw: I noticed a work-around: If you use rename and then copy the file/folder name but now...click another file. And after this you can mark the text in the addresbar of Windows Explorer (the text cursor is available) and paste to make it read "autoexec.bat " instead of "C:\". Seems to be some bug with the focus. This bug doesn't occur in browsers, its just in the Windows Explorer for Files. Would be curious to find out if its only in Windows 98SE or also ME and maybe also 2000 or NT4.
  11. The actual file is fine. It is a WinRar SFX and is a perfectly safe archive. Here is the one from that link that I just tested ... 2013-04-28 00:55 29,746,887 wupg98en-AFL.EXE The problem that the above commenter is describing originates from the piece of crap website called Uploading.com. When you first get to the intermediate page for downloading you have to quickly uncheck the box that says "use download accelerator". The page is on a timer, so you have to be fast ... If you fail to do this, the default automatically sends you the "download accelerator", a euphemism for a spyware laden un-necessary software ... Note the size of the file indicated by the arrow. Many sites send you a downloader and most times they are a few hundred KB in size like this one. You do not want or need the "downloaders" because at the very least they will have toolbars, if not actual spyware. So uncheck that box quickly and you should never see the downloader. I suggest the OP edit the top post and warn folks ( you can use this image if you want - http://i.imgur.com/k3pd4aP.jpg - it is that first one shown ). P.S. Another thing to note is that the default action for that file download dialog in my Opera window there is "Save" and NOT "Run". I can't remember if that is something that Opera has by default or if it is a preference I changed. But it is a very important distinction because if it were "Run" it would mean the only thing separating your computer from malware is a single click or "Enter". EDIT: typos Thank you for asking. I had to put the download file on "uploading.com" because several times when it was on "host.sk" servers the downloads were unavailable althought I put the file on the server. So I choosed to use a external server which is more reliable!
  12. Thank you very much! I hope everything is ok again. Anyway if you use Firefox there should be nearly zero problems.
  13. *NUSB won't be needed, USB improvement is already integrated in WUPG98. About MDIE6CU I have to say the last IE6 Update in the 98Pack is called *KB953838 Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (October, 2008) . So if MDIE6CU has updates newer than Oct. 2008 YOU SHOULD INSTALL THEM if using IE6(!). Not if you use firefox already. *About MDDACU and MDCU I know to less.
  14. That's not a "list of ingredients"... it's three flavors of "cake" (methods vary, but still a "cake").You have 3 options (all "single file" solutions, duh!) - 1 - AutoPatcher - Update after Initial Install 2 - SESP2.x/3.x - Update after install or "slipstream" 3 - WUPG98 - Similar to AutoPatcher, but "not selectable" MDGx keeps a list of Official and Unofficial on MSFN as well as these 3 projects - follow the "Stickies". The only other option is UBCD and I'm not ready to F#$% with that right now as I have my own personal projects. Even so, many files might need updated (based on MDGx' Updated list), e.g NUSB. Read the lists and judge for yourself. Each has a different method; download the one you choose and test it for yourself. UBCD was based on AutoPatcher and used Unattended method of which I've (and others) tried to help you with (say "thanx"). WUP98 exists since 2005. So you may say "Autopatcher is simiar to WUPG98 but "selectable" and is 300 mb big (WUPG98 not even 30 MB slim) because it exists of dozens of unofficial updates and a lot of updates from 1998 till 200x. WUPG98 has even 1 update from 2010 included. Anyway the main different is that you cannot select updates in the now nearly 6 years old WUPG98 because of its reliability in the former setup routine which never changed. Its called Upgrade Pack because it doesn't only install updates but other good things too (like Movie Maker 1, Internet Games etc,a "Superbar" alternative etc.) And 98SE SP2 (existing since 2004) is the first ever unofficial Service Pack that existed on this board and was main idea for many now know packs/patchers.