[MDGx]

Many thanks for your kind appreciation.

I hope to keep you guys busy for the next few days testing all those updates.

[bristols]

Welcome back MDGx, and thanks as always for the updates.

[RetroOS]

Has anyone tested Sun Java 1.6.0_03 on Windows 9x? (Yes, it does work)
The installer claims that it is best on a newer OS but does not claim it will not work!
I've been running it for about a week.
It appears faster and more stable than 1.5.0_13.
No problems so far with IE6 and Firefox...

Anyone else had experience with Java 6 on 9x?

[Analada]

RetroOS, on Oct 25 2007, 12:08 AM, said:

Has anyone tested Sun Java 1.6.0_03 on Windows 9x? (Yes, it does work)
The installer claims that it is best on a newer OS but does not claim it will not work!
I've been running it for about a week.
It appears faster and more stable than 1.5.0_13.
No problems so far with IE6 and Firefox...

Anyone else had experience with Java 6 on 9x?

Yes it works well for me on firefox.

I'd like to get the enhanced ("unlimited") security files. Evidently they can be downloaded with the JDK (java development kit) but haven't yet found them. What is installed is limited 128 bit encryption.

It's probably a good idea to go with this version as it has fixed some security bugs.

[dencorso]

Hi, MDGx!

Now that you're back, let me please direct your attention to two subjects I believe will interest you.

1)Random occasional lock-ups due to CNTRL98 (updated Win 98 SE CONTROL.EXE v4.10.0.1999) update: see this post by fastlanephil and the second post following it, by myself. I believe CONTROL.EXE v4.10.0.1999 needs revision. But, unfortunately, all I can report about the lock-ups is that they are haphazard and occur for no apparent reason.

2) My own USB FDD DiskTSD.VxD 4.90.0.3000 Patch, to allow NUSB to work with FDDs without eliciting a BSOD!
Petr's findings (as quoted in my post) indicate there might be problems in incorporating it to 98SE3ME, so, please, do test it in this context. Also, the principle underlying this patch is pretty general, and might allow the use of other Win ME VxDs in Win 98SE. But among those that always crashed Win 98SE, which do you think would be the most worthy of investigation? Please advise.

bristols words also represent my own feelings exactly, so:

bristols, on Oct 24 2007, 10:37 AM, said:

Welcome back MDGx, and thanks as always for the updates.

Added on October 31st, 2007 - 01:09 AM: I confirm that the selfsame patching strategy applies to other files, as it has enabled me to have the following Win ME files running on my Win 98SE system, up to now without any detectable problems:

DISKTSD.VXD v. 4.90.0.3000
DISKVSD.VXD v. 4.90.0.3001
CDTSD.VXD v. 4.90.0.3000
CDVSD.VXD v. 4.90.0.3003
SMARTVSD.VXD v. 4.90.0.3000
and with a slightly modificated version patching
VNETBIOS.VXD v. 4.90.3000 (since Nov 10th 2007)

This post has been edited by dencorso: 16 November 2007 - 12:14 AM

[fastlanephil]

MDGx, on Oct 24 2007, 01:47 AM, said:

Many thanks for your kind appreciation.

I hope to keep you guys busy for the next few days testing all those updates.

Welcome back! {Whistling tune to Welcome Back Kotter)

MDGx, if you get a chance, I am very interested in what you think about this issue in Win 98 SE - ME:

fastlanephil, on Oct 16 2007, 02:04 AM, said:

fastlanephil, on Oct 14 2007, 01:16 PM, said:

galahs, dencorso, eidenk, rloew

From what I understand of the problem, in order to make Win 95-98-ME able to run (backward compatible with) 16-bit Win 3.X programs, they need to be able to operate in 16-bit mode. Thus the files, User.exe, User32.dll, GDI.exe, and GDI32.dll limit the 16-bit system resource size to 64 kbyte. Likewise, there are three 32-bit system resource limitations, 2 Mbyte each per this article (click "About System Resources" at the bottom):

http://www.mvps.org/...ros/repair.html

Some more reading on the subject:

http://onlinehelp.bc...s.htm#resources
http://www.aumha.org.../a/resource.htm

Thanks for the input everybody , I suppose that this is the real root of the system resource problem. Note that in two bytes there are ((2 raised to the 8th power) squared =) 65536 possible combinations, thus there is only a 64K 16-bit heap size.

"...The resource table is essentially a big list of information about all the resources that are in memory at any given time. So if an application tells Windows to load a resource, Windows finds an empty spot in this resource table, and fills it in with the information about the resource that was just loaded. Now, instead of giving the application a four-byte pointer to the resource, Windows can just tell the application where the resource is in the table. If I tell Windows to load a window, and that window winds up taking the 383rd slot in the resource table, Windows will tell me "Okay, I've loaded the resource, and it's #383." Since these 'index numbers' are much smaller numbers than memory addresses, under this scheme, a resource's number can be stored in only two bytes instead of four; when you only have a few megabytes of memory to work with, and lots of resources being used, that's a huge improvement.

There's a problem with this scheme. There's only so many different possible values that you can store in a certain number of bytes of computer memory, just like there's only so many different numbers you can write down if you aren't allowed to use more than a certain number of digits. If you have four bytes of memory to work with, you can store billions of different possible values in those four bytes. But if you only have two bytes, there's only 65536 different numbers that you can store in those two bytes. So if you use two-byte numbers as your resource identifiers, you can't have more than 65536 resources loaded into memory at one time; if you loaded more than that, there'd be no way for programs to tell them apart. But on the computers of the day, there'd be no way to fit more than a few thousand resources into memory at one time anyway. So this limitation wasn't seen as being a problem, and the Windows designers went ahead and used the resource table and two-byte resource identifiers.

Now, we leap ahead to the present day. Memory is incredibly cheap; the memory savings from using two-byte resource numbers instead of four-byte pointers simply aren't significant anymore. There'd be more than enough memory to hold hundreds of thousands of resources in memory at one time. But there's still only 65,536 different possible resource identifiers; so only that many resources can be loaded into memory at once. Beyond that, you're out of resources, no matter how much memory you have left."

http://www2.whidbey....ndow_memory.htm

http://www.msfn.org/board/Enable48BitLBA_B...0&start=300

[bristols]

MDGx, on Oct 24 2007, 09:47 AM, said:

I hope to keep you guys busy for the next few days testing all those updates.

I have been dutiful, MDGx. I have an issue to report concerning a DLL from the RICHED9X.EXE update. Using Miranda (the current ANSI version - 0.7.1), I get the following message when I click on a contact from my contacts list (in order to open a message window):

The specified module could not be found (USP10.dll)

The message appears only on the first occasion that I do this - not subsequently. The message window opens as normal after I dismiss the message, and I can continue without problem (at least I haven't discovered a problem yet).

[erpdude8]

bristols, on Oct 28 2007, 09:09 PM, said:

I have been dutiful, MDGx. I have an issue to report concerning a DLL from the RICHED9X.EXE update. Using Miranda (the current ANSI version - 0.7.1), I get the following message when I click on a contact from my contacts list (in order to open a message window):

The specified module could not be found (USP10.dll)

The message appears only on the first occasion that I do this - not subsequently. The message window opens as normal after I dismiss the message, and I can continue without problem (at least I haven't discovered a problem yet).

try using an older version of the usp10.dll file, bristols. And store a copy of the usp10.dll in the Miranda program's folder to ensure full compatibility. the updated riched9x.exe patch installs the usp10.dll file featured from WinServ2003 SP2.

Note to MDGx: The Exception Error Cmapieng.vxd fix for WinME is no longer available from the NAI web site. MS article 275003 still mentions the "broken" download link but I have removed references to the cmapieng.vxd patch from my Win98/ME updates page.

also, I have revised the unofficial WMP9 update rollup pack for Win98se/ME and made an unofficial WMP9 update rollup pack for Win2k; both include the recent wmp.dll ms07-047 security fix. Let me know if you need them.

This post has been edited by erpdude8: 29 October 2007 - 11:10 AM

[the_guy]

@erpdude8: I wouldn't mind looking at those.

the_guy

[Drugwash]

@ bristols: which version of usp10.dll do you have installed? I have 1.0471.4030.0, together with riched20.dll 5.30.23.1221 (I know about .1228 but dont' have it around) - the other richedit versions don't work correctly with SpellChecker in Miranda - and I have no such problem. Also, please specify which messaging plug-in you're using (SRMM, Scriver, tabSRMM, nConvers), and if that error comes up with any of the aforementioned (switch them in Options > Plugins, if you got them installed; make sure you install the appropriate, compatible versions).

[blackwire]

bristols, on Oct 28 2007, 10:09 PM, said:

MDGx, on Oct 24 2007, 09:47 AM, said:

I hope to keep you guys busy for the next few days testing all those updates.

I have been dutiful, MDGx. I have an issue to report concerning a DLL from the RICHED9X.EXE update. Using Miranda (the current ANSI version - 0.7.1), I get the following message when I click on a contact from my contacts list (in order to open a message window):

The specified module could not be found (USP10.dll)

The message appears only on the first occasion that I do this - not subsequently. The message window opens as normal after I dismiss the message, and I can continue without problem (at least I haven't discovered a problem yet).

The usp10.dll 1.0626.5756.0 (vista_rtm.061008-1400) file IS buggy! I have encountered the same error while running ms word 2000, and ms powerpoint viewer 2003 refuses to start because of the buggy usp10.dll file. I have downgraded to an older version, 1.0420.2600.2180 (xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158) and everything works fine now. Please update your RICHED9X.EXE package to fix these bugs. I love your work MDgx, without you, windows 9x would be completely useless.

This post has been edited by blackwire: 30 October 2007 - 01:18 PM

[bristols]

Drugwash, on Oct 30 2007, 12:31 AM, said:

@ bristols: which version of usp10.dll do you have installed? I have 1.0471.4030.0, together with riched20.dll 5.30.23.1221 (I know about .1228 but dont' have it around) - the other richedit versions don't work correctly with SpellChecker in Miranda - and I have no such problem. Also, please specify which messaging plug-in you're using (SRMM, Scriver, tabSRMM, nConvers), and if that error comes up with any of the aforementioned (switch them in Options > Plugins, if you got them installed; make sure you install the appropriate, compatible versions).

Hi Drugwash, apologies if I was too vague.

The version of USP10.DLL that (for me) causes Miranda problems is 1.0626.5756.0 (from the latest revision of MDGx's RICHED9X.EXE, as noted by blackwire in the post above). Like blackwire, I reverted to version 1.0420.2600.2180, which has cleared up the problem.

As for plugins, I have added none. I'm using a vanilla install (being still a Miranda newbie).

This post has been edited by bristols: 30 October 2007 - 01:55 PM

[MDGx]

Rich Text (RTF) Edit Controls RICHED20.DLL 5.50.99.2014 + USP10.DLL 1.422.3790.3959 Security Vulnerability Fix:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/ms07-013.mspx
Unofficial Windows 95/98/ME RTF Fix [1.12 MB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/RICHED9X.EXE

HTH

[blackwire]

The new version of RICHED9X.EXE works fine with MS office now. Thanks!!

This post has been edited by blackwire: 31 October 2007 - 06:41 PM

[bristols]

Yep, USP10.DLL version 1.0422.3790.3959 seems to work fine with Miranda. Thanks MDGx for the revision.

[erpdude8]

blackwire, on Oct 30 2007, 02:15 PM, said:

The usp10.dll 1.0626.5756.0 (vista_rtm.061008-1400) file IS buggy! I have encountered the same error while running ms word 2000, and ms powerpoint viewer 2003 refuses to start because of the buggy usp10.dll file. I have downgraded to an older version, 1.0420.2600.2180 (xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158) and everything works fine now. Please update your RICHED9X.EXE package to fix these bugs. I love your work MDgx, without you, windows 9x would be completely useless.

not just buggy, blackwire. Usp10.dll version 1.0626.5756.0 from Vista is more likely incompatible with Win9x/ME/NT4 OSes and users should revert to using v1.04x of usp10.dll

Quote

@erpdude8: I wouldn't mind looking at those.

the_guy

sure thing, the_guy. I've uploaded the revised unofficial WMP9 URPs for Win98se/ME and Win2k at the Usaupload site; email me for the links but I'm only going to keep the URPs up at USAUpload until this Friday. Hopefully MDGx has gotten my message last week about the updated WMP9 URPs and has gotten them.

This post has been edited by erpdude8: 05 November 2007 - 11:49 AM

[MDGx]

WMP9 URPs:

* WMP9URP: Unofficial Windows Media Player 9.0 (WMP9) Update Rollup Packs
(URP) for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/2000/ME install ALL previously released WMP9
Hotfixes, Patches + Updates:
- WMP9URP2K for Windows 2000 [8.96 MB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/spx/WMP9URP2K.EXE
- WMP9URP9X for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME [8.77 MB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/spx/WMP9URP9X.EXE
- ITMP9URP for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME [8.57 MB, Italian]:
http://www.mdgx.com/spx/ITMP9URP.EXE
Windows 98 SE, ME + 2000 require WMP9 [13.3 MB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/wmp.htm#WMP9
already installed!
Windows 98 + 98 SP1 require Unofficial WMP9 [13.3 MB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/spx/WMP90_98.EXE
already installed!
How to install WMP9 on Windows 98:
http://erpman1.tripo...m/cmptips2.html

HTH

[dencorso]

Well, here is a version history for CDVSD.VXD:

LENOVO Windows 95/98 installation supplement files - ThinkPad 390, 172x
12/04/1998 04:47p 4.10.0.2001 30,395 CDVSD.VXD Windows 98 FE

KB242534 Computer Hangs When Removing DVD-ROM Drive From Bay
12/03/1999 04:47p 4.10.0.2184 31,931 CDVSD.VXD Windows 98 FE
12/06/1999 12:46p 4.10.0.2223 32,443 CDVSD.VXD Windows 98 SE

KB265314 Error Message "No Valid Drive/Disc Found" Playing Audio CD After Using Data CD-ROM
06/21/2000 12:47pm 4.10.0.2185 31,931 Cdvsd.vxd Windows 98 FE
06/21/2000 12:33pm 4.10.0.2224 32,443 Cdvsd.vxd Windows 98 SE

KB265405 Problems Resuming After Suspend While MPEG Is Playing
06/28/2000 10:00am 4.10.0.2225 32,443 Cdvsd.vxd Windows 98 SE

KB274370 Error Message on a Blue Screen When You Try to Play Digital CD Audio
09/28/2000 10:26p 4.10.0.2186 32,443 Cdvsd.vxd Windows 98 FE
09/28/2000 10:05p 4.10.0.2226 32,443 Cdvsd.vxd Windows 98 SE
09/28/2000 10:08p 4.90.0.3002 41,643 Cdvsd.vxd Windows Me

KB304708 Your Computer May Stop Responding with IEEE 1394 DVD and USB Storage Drives
08/09/2001 7:08a 4.90.0.3003 41,643 Cdvsd.vxd Windows Me


Many of us are using CDVSD.VXD v. 4.10.0.2224, kindly posted by ElectricString, since Xeno86 found out that CDVSD.VXD v. 4.10.0.2226 is buggy, as reported here. CDVSD.VXD v. 4.10.0.2225 has not surfaced up to know, so it is unavailable for testing. The version history I presented above shows that Win ME CDVSD.VXD v 4.90.0.3002 is equivalent to Win 98SE CDVSD.VXD v 4.10.0.2226. This makes Win ME CDVSD.VXD v 4.90.0.3003 the most updated version of that VXD, up to the present, thus presumably incorporating all the previous hotfixes. Yet, unpatched Win ME CDVSD.VXD cannot run under Win 98SE. But the selfsame version patch that I applied to USB FDD DiskTSD.VxD 4.90.0.3000 Patch, allows Win ME CDVSD.VXD v 4.90.0.3003 to run flawlessy under Win 98SE. I have been using it since Oct 31st in my system, without any problem, so I can affirm it works OK and has not the bug Xeno86 found on v. 4.10.0.2226. So here I offer you the patched version of Win ME CDVSD.VXD v 4.90.0.3003, renumbered as 4.90.0.3004 to reflect the fact it has been patched and runs OK under Win 98SE and FE (but not anymore under Win ME!).

Download-link: CDVSD.VXD v. 4.90.0.3004 for Win 98 SE (and FE) or at uploaded to

As always, the standard disclaimer applies: It works great for me, but YMMV and I can guarantee nothing whatsoever about this patch, and about the use you make of it. By deciding to use it you fully accept that anything you do is of YOUR SOLE RESPONSIBILITY... Moreover, modding files voids the EULA, of course. You have been warned.

This post has been edited by dencorso: 16 November 2007 - 02:56 AM

[Drugwash]

Please try a real host, like http://uploaded.to/ or something. Maybe that way I could download it too. Thank you.

[EDIT]
Sorry, my IE seems to be FUBAR - I can't seem to download from that host either, although it used to work. Something is really FU here, and I need to fix it a.s.a.p. But I really dunno what to do first, it's driving me crazy.

This post has been edited by Drugwash: 16 November 2007 - 03:16 AM

[erpdude8]

dencorso, on Oct 5 2007, 07:44 PM, said:

Hi, erpdude8!

As you already know, the files for Win 98SE from Q329128 have recently surfaced in SESP30-alpha-1 and remain present in alpha-2. They are NDIS.VXD 4.10.0.2226; PPPMAC.VXD 4.10.0.2223 and VIP.386 4.10.0.2228, of course. But Q329128 also carries fixes for Win 98FE and ME. Yet, both in his anouncement and in the spupdate.inf included in SESP30-alpha-1, Gape refers to those files as if they were part of Q301453. And while both MSKB articles pertain to "multicast packets that have a TTL setting of 0 (zero)", Q301453 is for Win 2k/XP, while Q329128 is the correct article number for Win 9x/ME, and only Q329128 contains the above mentioned files. It is a fact that Q301453 points to Q329128 and vice-versa, but I don't see the point in referring to it in such a roundabout way. It is great that those files are now available, after everybody sought them for so long. And VIP.386 4.10.0.2228 IS better than 4.10.0.2227, for in some way the system becomes less resouce-hungry when 2228 is installed. I can't help but wonder whether Gape has the complete Q329128 or if he just found its files for Win 98SE somewhere. Gape, would you please be so kind as to enlighten us? You rock, both of you! Without your continued endeavours, our computing experience would be so much the poorer.
Keep on the good work! Win 9x/ME forever!

Well, dencorso, read this.

BREAKING NEWS about the latest NDIS.VXD, PPPMAC.VXD & VIP.386 files for BOTH Win98 FE and Win98 SE: I have obtained the actual Q301453 hotfix for Win98 from MS support! Unbelievable!!!

The files from the Q301453 Win98 hotfix are the same versions as the ones listed in Q329128. Q329128 is not available from MS BUT Q301453 for Win98 IS available as I've just emailed MS for it. yay!

This post has been edited by erpdude8: 16 November 2007 - 10:49 PM