[erpdude8]

erpdude8, on Feb 23 2005, 08:31 AM, said:

guess this forum thread can also be useful when requesting patches for obsolete Win95
and the now unsupported WinNT4.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

nope. I take this back. tried asking for three different Win95 hotfixes from microsoft support and have been told that they've ceased ALL support for Win95. guess they don't have any existing Win95 hotfixes anymore. so, this thread can NOT be used to request any Win95 hotfix nowadays. it's way too late for this. if anyone is still using Win95 (hopefully not), it would be best to upgrade to Win98 or higher.

however, the tips described earlier on obtaining hotfixes might still work when asking for NT4 hotfixes.

[Acheron]

You better hurry requesting Windows 98 Hotfixes. Half-way 2006 Microsoft will cut down on support for this OS.

[erpdude8]

eGo®Z, on Apr 2 2005, 05:04 PM, said:

hp38guser, on Mar 30 2005, 11:12 PM, said:

Well, so far all hotfixes in Unofficial pack have been translated to dutch now. So you don't have to worry if a hotfix is not available in languages other than English
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

unfortunately some English files can't be used for the translation to Asian Languages (like Korean, Japanese and so on...)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

that's too bad. then you'll just have to ask for the hotfixes for the specific language, such as Korean, Japanese, Chinese, etc. don't be surprised if MS tells you that a hotfix you requested isn't available in certain languages.

I'll try to ask as many Win98/WinME hotfixes I can request, hp38guser. Perhaps you and others should try emailing Microsoft support so I don't have to feel like I'm the only one doing this and getting results.


Instead of emailing MS support at:
wrhelp@microsoft.com

send your hotfix request here to this MS support email address:
support@microsoft.com

You may have to wait a few days (or maybe up to a week) for Microsoft to respond to your emails. The "wrhelp" address now takes too long.

[eidenk]

Quote

You better hurry requesting Windows 98 Hotfixes. Half-way 2006 Microsoft will cut down on support for this OS.

Where is the Microsoft ESDI_506.PDR Hotfix for enabling large drive support ? Who must I ask for it ?

This is the most critical bug affecting Win98 SE and Win ME and Microsoft does nothing at all about it though the problem is known to them since quite a long time and potentially threatens millions of end users worldwide who currently upgrade their hard disks on 98 or ME systems with huge data losses. The OS allows you to format those disks to their real size (at least Win ME does) and if you are unaware of the 48bit LBA adressing bug like most people are you''ll lose much if not all your data as soon as the OS will try to write on the disks beyond the 128 GB mark, regardless of partitioning.

Years ago, Microsoft proudly announced when they introduced FAT32 that the 9x familly of OSes was supporting partitions of up to 2 TB in size (and therefore Hard Drives up to something like 40 TB).

Microsoft has corrected this bug in Windows 2000 in which it was present as well several years ago with SP3 but not in Windows ME which is no older than Windows 2000.

A certain Rudolph R. Loew has apparently successfully written a patch ON HIS OWN for addressing this bug. It has apparently been tested positively on drives of up to 400 GB.

Can I suggest Microsoft to take contact with Mr Loew to buy his patch and issue it in emergency to their customers who need it as they seem unable to solve the problem themselves despite their billions and expertise ?

Or has maybe someone the address of a good lawyer so that I and others can successfully sue Microsoft for the sudden and huge data losses they have or will suffer solely for the reasons underlined above until Microsoft support officially ceases for the 98SE and Me OSes ?

[erpdude8]

FORGET IT, eidenk! There's NO esdi_506.pdr fix that wil support very large HDs for Win9xME systems beyond 137 gigs. so get over it!

Read topic on 137 Gb limit - esdi_506.pdr and other limits:
http://www.msfn.org/...showtopic=46752

If you want to use a 400 Gb HD, use Win2000 or XP and use NTFS file system as NTFS handles 100Gb & higher capacity HDs very well, unlike FAT32 which is crappy for drives bigger than 100 gigs.

Note that some existing hotfixes (such as Q230791,Q265528 & Q329128) may no longer be available due to unforseen problems these hotfixes cause.

[Gape]

erpdude8, on Jun 8 2005, 01:26 PM, said:

FORGET IT, eidenk!  There's NO esdi_506.pdr fix that wil support very large HDs for Win9xME systems beyond 137 gigs.  so get over it!
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[miko]

time to switch to decaf ?

[Vectis]

[erpdude8]

eidenk, on Jun 3 2005, 04:51 PM, said:

Can I suggest Microsoft to take contact with Mr Loew to buy his patch and issue it  in emergency to their customers who need it as they seem unable to solve the problem themselves despite their billions and expertise ?

Or has maybe someone the address of a good lawyer so that I and others can successfully sue Microsoft for the sudden and huge data losses they have or will suffer solely for the reasons underlined above until Microsoft support officially ceases for the 98SE and Me OSes ?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

DONT WASTE YOUR TIME, MONEY & ENERGY TRYING TO ACTUALLY SUE MICROSOFT!
...OR YOU'LL END UP WITH EVEN MORE MISERY!!!

--------

The problem with Win9xME systems not supporting very large HDs beyond 137Gb is both a SOFTWARE AND A HARDWARE PROBLEM! In order for the 400Gb HD to work on a PC, you'll need a PC made in 2004 or later, and a BIOS from 2004 or later and most likely a more recent version of Windows. So just patching the HD problem with a hotfix is just isn't good enough.

[Petr]

erpdude8, on Jun 29 2005, 05:36 PM, said:

The problem with Win9xME systems not supporting very large HDs beyond 137Gb is both a SOFTWARE AND A HARDWARE PROBLEM!  In order for the 400Gb HD to work on a PC, you'll need a PC made in 2004 or later, and a BIOS from 2004 or later and most likely a more recent version of Windows.  So just patching the HD problem with a hotfix is just isn't good enough.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not hardware problem, you can use 137GB+ disks with any IDE controller since its's invention more than 10 years ago. It's really just software problem, please read my post in 137GB limit - ESDI_506.PDR and other limits thread. BIOS is also software :-)

Award BIOS on my GA-6OXE-1 motherboard with i815EP chipset supports 137GB+ and it was produced in the first half of 2001.

ESDI_506.PDR patch is all you need for your box made in 2001+ to let Windows 98 SE fully support 137GB+ disks - but just in case you don't have specific IDE controller drivers like Intel Application Accelerator for your board, in that case you need nothing. There will be some cosmetic errors with some tools, and partition size limited to 136GB if you want to use DEFRAG and Windows SCANDISK (It's memory allocation problem). But you can use any other tools e.g. from Symantec.

Petr

[erpdude8]

Petr, on Jun 29 2005, 11:11 AM, said:

It's not hardware problem, you can use 137GB+ disks with any IDE controller since its's invention more than 10 years ago. It's really just software problem, please read my post in 137GB limit - ESDI_506.PDR and other limits thread. BIOS is also software :-)

Award BIOS on my GA-6OXE-1 motherboard with i815EP chipset supports 137GB+ and it was produced in the first half of 2001.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

BIOS is BOTH hardware & software. Realize that there are BIOS chips that CANT be upgraded via a flash software, especially in computers made before 1995. Only way to "update" the BIOS in non-flash BIOS chips is to replace the BIOS chip.

Yes, the ESDI_506.PDR patch is needed by itself if using PCs made in 2001 and later. BUT what about PCs made in 2000 and earlier? HA! that's what I'm driving at! You just cant use those 137Gb drives under very old PCs because both the BIOS & IDE controllers in pre-2001 era can't properly handle very large hard drives. see it IS both a hardware & software problem.

ok enough of that. Try asking for the Q230791, Q254087, Q265528 & Q329128 hotfixes sometime in July, Petr. if they're not available then, try again in August or September. And if MS tells you they are not available by the end of 2005 then there's a chance they're likely gone.

[erpdude8]

The only hotfixes I'll be requesting from this point on will be WinME hotfixes since I mostly use WinME.

btw, Petr, can you include Q242941 serenum.vxd fix in your 98 standard ed. SP?
believe it or not it has serenum.vxd 4.10.2222 dated 4/23/1999, the same file included in 98 SE.

[Petr]

erpdude8, on Jun 30 2005, 06:13 AM, said:

btw, Petr, can you include Q242941 serenum.vxd fix in your 98 standard ed. SP?
believe it or not it has serenum.vxd 4.10.2222 dated 4/23/1999, the same file included in 98 SE.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is the file from http://ftp.mdgx.com/files/Q242941.EXE .

Do you have any other?

Petr

[Petr]

erpdude8, on Jun 30 2005, 06:05 AM, said:

BIOS is BOTH hardware & software.  Realize that there are BIOS chips that CANT be upgraded via a flash software, especially in computers made before 1995.  Only way to "update" the BIOS in non-flash BIOS chips is to replace the BIOS chip.

From my point of view, BIOS a piece of software put into the flash chip or EPROM or ROM chip. I think we understand each other.

Quote

Yes, the ESDI_506.PDR patch is needed by itself if using PCs made in 2001 and later.  BUT what about PCs made in 2000 and earlier?  HA! that's what I'm driving at!  You just cant use those 137Gb drives under very old PCs because both the BIOS & IDE controllers in pre-2001 era can't properly handle very large hard drives.  see it IS both a hardware & software problem.

There are other possibilities how to use the disk and even boot from it. I took 200GB HDD, put it as a secondary disk into 10 years old PC and it was correctly detected by ESD_506.PDR. It is always software - BIOS on the motherboard, BIOS on an add-on card, software BIOS, dynamic disk overlay, dos drivers, windows drivers, etc.

Quote

ok enough of that.  Try asking for the Q230791, Q254087, Q265528 & Q329128 hotfixes sometime in July, Petr.  if they're not available then, try again in August or September.  And if MS tells you they are not available by the end of 2005 then there's a chance they're likely gone.

Yes, but I suppose they are gone already.

Petr

[erpdude8]

Petr, on Jun 30 2005, 12:04 AM, said:

erpdude8, on Jun 30 2005, 06:13 AM, said:

btw, Petr, can you include Q242941 serenum.vxd fix in your 98 standard ed. SP?
believe it or not it has serenum.vxd 4.10.2222 dated 4/23/1999, the same file included in 98 SE.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is the file from http://ftp.mdgx.com/files/Q242941.EXE .

Do you have any other?

Petr
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

nope. I'm not going to try to ask MS for the Win98 version of Q242941. sybesma and I were "led in circles" by MS support earlier this year when getting Q242941 but it was for Win95 systems and not for Win98. weird that MS article Q242941 mentions v4.10.2222 of serenum.vxd fix for ALL Win95/98 systems (the date mentioned there is 9/08/1999 which is wrong). Actual patch has date of 4/23/1999.

Petr said:

Yes, but I suppose they are gone already.

not really, I said if in my previous post. you could try asking again. I might try asking MS as well later in the year.

[erpdude8]

erpdude8, on Jul 1 2005, 08:11 PM, said:

Petr said:

Yes, but I suppose they are gone already.

not really, I said if in my previous post. you could try asking again. I might try asking MS as well later in the year.

yeah, I take it back. when certain Win98/ME hotfixes are not available, MS means they are not available anymore. So you can crosss hotfixes Q254087, Q265528 and Q329128 off your list as these hotfixes have been tossed into the abyss. if you try to ask for these hotfixes now, MS will either give you a cryptic response or tell you they're not available. you could try calling MS tech support by phone, then give you email address to them & request those three hotfixes; though it's a major longshot now.

I have bookmarked this Microsoft support page on a list of hotfixes for "desktop" operating systems:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?...ic_Existing.asp

this page takes a while to load using dialup because the list is very long.

[erpdude8]

check this out guys. I came across this page from a search site that talks about the ASN.1 Vulnerability under Windows 98:

http://www.webserver...4-2-128285.html

On that page somebody there received an email containing a link to obtain the Win98 KB828028 ASN.1 MS04-007 security hotfix. It's NO joke! If you read Microsoft security bulletin MS04-007:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/MS04-007.mspx

the bulletin does NOT even mention Windows 98. nor Windows ME. So you CAN request a non-critical security hotfix for Windows 98/ME from Microsoft support either by email or by phone. wonderful!

[bristols]

Excellent stuff erpdude8.

Your investigations prompted me to do some searching too. Maybe you've seen or know this already, but there's something interesting about KB828028 (and about requesting hotfixes from M$ generally) in this thread.

According to the poster (who is lamenting M$'s support for 9x):

Quote

I have been told by a "Premier customer" [they got this info via a paid contract and thus it's not NDA]that the reason they got why the info is not in the bulletin nor on Windows Update is that on the 98/ME platform it is not "wormable".

So, just to get this straight, if someone were to request a patch (like this one) in such a way, would it be unlawful to redistribute it in patchers such as Gape's SE SP2? Does anyone know?

[erpdude8]

bristols, on Nov 5 2005, 03:35 PM, said:

Excellent stuff erpdude8.

Your investigations prompted me to do some searching too. Maybe you've seen or know this already, but there's something interesting about KB828028 (and about requesting hotfixes from M$ generally) in this thread.

According to the poster (who is lamenting M$'s support for 9x):

Quote

I have been told by a "Premier customer" [they got this info via a paid contract and thus it's not NDA] that the reason they got why the info is not in the bulletin nor on Windows Update is that on the 98/ME platform it is not "wormable".

So, just to get this straight, if someone were to request a patch (like this one) in such a way, would it be unlawful to redistribute it in patchers such as Gape's SE SP2? Does anyone know?

Boy it has been a year since sybesma started this whole topic on requesting hotfixes by email. kudos bigtime for that guy. without him, guys like me and some others wouldnt be asking for these fixes.

puting only the updated files from the 98se hotfixes in gape's SP, ok. posting the actual 98/me hotfixes (aka. the exe patches that are named for example: 237493usa8.exe, the Q237493 patch) may not be legal unless you have gotten actual permission by MS. I know with certain 98se hotfixes like the Q242937 WDM Audio patch, some sound card makers/vendors had to get permission from microsoft to redistribute Q242937 along with the sound card drivers. other words, yes and no.

MS04-007/KB828028 is superseded by MS04-011/KB835732. The KB835732 security patches have newer msasn1.dll files than KB828028 plus some updated Windows specific system files into KB835732.

This post has been edited by erpdude8: 09 November 2005 - 04:40 AM

[maninabox]

Here a Microsoft reply about my request of hotfix.


-----------------
Hello,

Thank you for contacting Microsoft Online Customer Service.

Microsoft offers no-charge support for issues relating to hotfix. In order to create a support case and provide you with the requested hotfix, I request you to provide the following information:
- Your full name:
- Phone number (optional):
- Location/country:
- Any latest updates installed: (like Service Pack 2)

Once I have this information, I will be able to create a support case for you and provide you with the requested information.

We appreciate your patience and look forward to your reply with the above information.

Thank you for using Microsoft products and services.

Ajay
Microsoft Online Customer Service Representative
-----------------


I send request to support@microsoft.com for hotfix in italian language.
What does it mean?
I must send Microsoft all my private date!?!
Isn' t license number enough?
Can I send request to another email address with best outcome?