[rloew]

dencorso, on 24 June 2010 - 11:55 AM, said:

lightning slinger, on 24 June 2010 - 02:27 AM, said:

wsxedcrfv, on 23 June 2010 - 06:49 PM, said:

I changed those two key values from 9.0.277.0 to 10.0.45.2 (the most current version 10)

The most current version of Flash is 10.1.53.64, can you try it with that version?

I believe it won't work, because "10.1.53.64" has 10 charachters, while both "9.0.277.0" and "10.0.45.2" have 9. This means one can substitute "10.0.45.2" for "9.0.277.0" without occupying any space not intended for that string (i.e.: it's an isometric patch), but cannot do the same with "10.1.53.64", because the latter is one byte too long. I found out, not so long ago, that such a non-isometric patch breaks Flash 7, so I'm quite confident it'd similarly break Flash 10. And, even if I didn't know about the patching of Adobe 7, generally speaking, non-isometric patches are expected to break programs, and usually really do so.

You could always try 10.0.54.1. It has the right number of characters and should pass the Version test as it is an even newer Version (Future).

[frogman]

When I restarted the computer an Adobe message appeared asking me to update to a newer version of Flash player, when I hit to accept it looked like it was going to install, but then a windows message said that it wanted an upgraded version of windows, so does this mean if I install KernelEx then all new versions of the flash player will install?

And to answer your question why I use Firefox 2 is because when I had KernelEx installed my Zone Alarm Firewall failed to launch in the system tray.

Is there a way around this, like a configuration for KernelEx, I ask as I don't know too much about what to configure for that program.

Can I just point out that although I have Flash player 9 installed I have it reported as 10 by using the new modded driver.

This post has been edited by frogman: 24 June 2010 - 12:44 PM

[frogman]

I was told I could configure KernelEx so that windows thinks I have Windows 98 S.E for the Firewall problem that I just mentioned, but I don't know how to do this, can anyone help and advise me please?

I was confused why I would need to do this being that I already have Windows 98, but am I right in thinking that you can configure KernelEx for different programs on the system?

In other words have KernelEx to fool the system into thinking I have XP, but also to make it think I still have 98 for the firewall?

This post has been edited by frogman: 24 June 2010 - 12:49 PM

[rustweaver]

frogman, on 24 June 2010 - 12:46 PM, said:

I was told I could configure KernelEx so that windows thinks I have Windows 98 S.E for the Firewall problem that I just mentioned, but I don't know how to do this, can anyone help and advise me please?

I was confused why I would need to do this being that I already have Windows 98, but am I right in thinking that you can configure KernelEx for different programs on the system?

In other words have KernelEx to fool the system into thinking I have XP, but also to make it think I still have 98 for the firewall?

To disable KernelEx for one specific program you need to right click program shortcut or .exe file itself and choose properties. Then in compatibility tab you can either force Windows 98 compatibility mode or disable KernelEx extensions completely for that program.

That way rest of your system will be fooled into thinking it's running XP, and program that has issues with it will be isolated.

[aru]

wsxedcrfv, on 23 June 2010 - 06:49 PM, said:

I downloaded and installed what I think is the latest Flash version 9, which is 9.0.277.0. After installing it, I searched the registry for "9.0.277.0" and found it in two places:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\Adobe Flash Player Plugin
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\MozillaPlugins\@adobe.com/FlashPlayer

Listed under the key-names "DisplayVersion" and "Version".

I changed those two key values from 9.0.277.0 to 10.0.45.2 (the most current version 10).

After restarting my win-98 machine and visiting Adobe's version-checker web page and Google Street view, both still claimed that I had flash version 9. So that didn't work. In fact, upon the re-start, I got the adobe update screen telling me that a new version of flash was available (version 10.something). I didn't take adobe up on it's offer initially, but I did later and what-ever it downloaded, it didn't like my OS.

I then loaded NPSWF32.dll into a hex editor and searched for "9.0.277.0". It exists in many places, but it must be changed in two specific places. Once I changed it to 10.0.45.2 and re-opened firefox 2.0.0.20, Adobe said I was running 10.0.45.2, and google Street-view operated completely normally. I checked other websites (you-tube for one) and verified that flash content was rendered correctly (all video's played just fine).

I don't know if I'm allowed to offer this modded version of NPSWF32.dll here, or post a download link to it, so I'll wait for a green light from someone here in authority before I do.

Well done!
I have downloaded latest Flash version for Win98SE 9.0.277.0, and I have opened with an hex editor all files into the folder C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\MACROMED\FLASH and I have replaced the 9.0.277.0 string with 10.0.45.2.
Then I have searched into all the registry all entries with 9.0.277.0 and I have replaced them with the other string.
Now Google Street View works perfectly on my pc that don't has KernelEx installed.

For hex editor I use HxD ( http://mh-nexus.de/en/programs.php ), with this editor it's very easy to replace these strings.

Thank you,
aru

[rainyd]

Svenne, on 24 June 2010 - 12:30 PM, said:

Why use FF 2 when 3.6 runs on KernelEx?

Of course you can run Firefox 3.6.x (I've tested 3.6.3 version already) with KernelEx but as far as I know there's one (quite serious) problem - at least for me.

Java 6 update 20, which I have installed on my system, doesn't work with Firefox 3.6.x.
Because of that, I'm using Firefox 3.5.10.

[frogman]

I went back to Firefox 2.0.0.20 and even with that new driver street view doesn't work!

Why???

[dencorso]

@wsxedcrfv: you can spoof the Flash version, provided you use isometric patches, whatever the exact version you make it say it is. That'll fool a bunch of sites that just ask for a specific version of Flash for no reason at all, which are most, but won't work for those few that actually need new funcionality which doesn't exist in the older version-changed file. There's no solution for this, nor the spoof should be created with these few sites in mind, since, for them, even a successful spoof is bound to fail to work. There's no avoiding this fact.

[frogman]

I've had it with Windows 98, I will be purchasing a new custom built computer soon with Windows 7.

I have tried as much patching this old system, but I do think the time has come to upgrade it.

By the way the modified driver didn't work after I removed the KernelEx and went back to Firefox 2.

It won't be long before all AV vendors drop their support for 98, Avast being one of them.

[lightning slinger]

frogman, on 25 June 2010 - 06:21 AM, said:

I've had it with Windows 98, I will be purchasing a new custom built computer soon with Windows 7.

My take on Windows 98 and Windows 7 comparisons remind me of a quote by Albert Einstein;

Quote

Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.

This post has been edited by lightning slinger: 25 June 2010 - 07:18 AM

[frogman]

Update windows scripting engine, sorry but unsure what you mean?

[frogman]

wsxedcrfv, on 25 June 2010 - 06:50 AM, said:

frogman, on 25 June 2010 - 06:21 AM, said:

I've had it with Windows 98, I will be purchasing a new custom built computer soon with Windows 7.

You won't like it.

Why won't I like it?

I know people that have it and don't have all this hassle trying to view stuff that 98 seems to not be able to do without patches for this and that.

[frogman]

You never really answered the question on why I won't like Windows 7?

[frogman]

wsxedcrfv, on 24 June 2010 - 05:27 PM, said:

My NPSWF32.dll (10.0.12.36) is 3.6 mb in size. The 10.1.53.64 version is 5.8 mb. I'm going to see if the 10.0.12.36 version will run on a win-98 system without kernelEx.

Did you manage to run it without KernelEx on a win-98 system?

[frogman]

I have to give credit to wsxedcrfv, as I followed his instruction by renaming the 2 instances of flash 9 to version 10, this I didn't perform previously and now street view works without the need for KernelEx and having to update browsers.

So just to say that the renaming in regedit has to be done as the man says.

Thanks again wsxedcrfv, I may have to keep 98 after all.

Mind you some of the stuff you talk about is well over my head, perhaps you could teach me many things computer wise.

PS,

I hope that google street view works for some time as I tried it for a test and the message appeared about needing flash 10, I was about to scream, but when I opened the browser again it worked the second time, I wonder why it appeared to be intermittent?

Something tells me though that when the Adobe message appears after a cold boot that asks you to download a new version of flash, that is when I think a change occurs, and that is when street view may perhaps not work again.

Perhaps we can all report back our findings on this.

This post has been edited by frogman: 25 June 2010 - 02:13 PM

[frogman]

I report the Google Street View is still working on my 98 machine after using the modded driver method and renaming the 2 instances of flash 9 in the registry.

I want to ask something about the KernelEx, and that is when it's un-installed, there is a message that comes up saying do you want to preserve any custom settings, I selected NO, but if I had selected YES, would that therefore mean the next time I installed KernelEx it would remember the last configuration?

By un-installing and saying NO does this mean that all changes made to the system by KernelEx have now been removed and the Kernel back to how it was previously?