[Analada]

erpdude8, on Nov 20 2007, 04:02 PM, said:

RetroOS, on Nov 20 2007, 03:34 AM, said:

Cool update MDGx. But...
I have your 98MP10 installed, and when I installed WMP9URP9X, it back-dated the following two files:
\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\WMDMLOG.DLL v10 > v9
\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\WMDMPS.DLL v10 > v9
Also it added v9 of WMPBAND.DLL into \WINDOWS\SYSTEM.
98MP10 installed v10 of WMPBAND.DLL into \Program Files\Windows Media Player.
I had to reinstall 98MP10 to update those two back-dated files...

You should have installed WMP9UPR9X first and then 98MP10, RetroOS. OR UN-install 98MP10 and reinstall WMP9 and WMP9URP9X. Next time, remember that. anyways, re-installing 98MP10 solved your problem.

WMP9URP9X was designed to update the original release of WMP9 under Win98se & WinME, meaning without any unofficial addons like 98MP10.

98MP10 was created by MDGx while WMP9URP9X is my creation. I may release an updated
version of WMP9URP9X that will NOT install under Win98se with 98MP10 installed. WMP9URP9X does NOT really support 98MP10 and vice-versa. having both WMP9URP9X and 98MP10 addons installed may cause other problems that I don't know of and I have not really tested 98MP10 on any Win98se machine with WMP9 installed.

dencorso, on Nov 19 2007, 04:18 PM, said:

I'm aware of that, erpdude8, and have been using Q285189 for a long time now.
But thank you for the heads up just the same. You do rock!

no probs, dencorso. I've already sent the english and italian Q301453 patches for Win98 to MDGx.
Thanks again for the Q301453 patch for WinME.

Umm...I did the same thing...made the same mistake....

So, yes, probably a good idea if you can to prevent WMP9URP9X from installing under Win98se if 98MP10 installed.

[RetroOS]

erpdude8, on Nov 21 2007, 11:02 AM, said:

...
WMP9URP9X was designed to update the original release of WMP9 under Win98se & WinME, meaning without any unofficial addons like 98MP10.

98MP10 was created by MDGx while WMP9URP9X is my creation. I may release an updated
version of WMP9URP9X that will NOT install under Win98se with 98MP10 installed...

Okay then, I suppose I should redirect my 'cool update' to you erpdude8!
Your udpate did update some other files so instead of making it not install with 98MP10, maybe just don't back-date those two files...
What about the added WMPBAND.DLL file in the \WINDOWS\SYSTEM directory instead of \Program Files\Windows Media Player?
I've never had this file in \WINDOWS\SYSTEM before that I am aware of...

[Tihiy]

I'm sorry to say this, Elvis and others, but wmpband.dll won't ever work on 9x systems. [I was sure it has left the building long time ago?]

[dencorso]

Well, here is a brief version history for VNETBIOS.VXD:

04/23/99 10:22PM 4.10.0.1998 39,506 Vnetbios.vxd Win 98 SE (original distribution, same for FE)
07/13/99 08:32PM 4.10.0.2223 35,434 Vnetbios.vxd Win 98 FE (+ SE ?) Q265528, which nobody ever has obtained;
06/08/00 05:00PM 4.90.0.3000 38,633 Vnetbios.vxd Win ME (original distribution, also in Q272991)

Unpatched Win ME VNETBIOS.VXD will not load under Win 98 SE (or FE). Windows'll instead throw a "file is damaged" message and freeze while loading. But this can be solved by using my downversion patching trick. So here I offer you the patched version of Win ME VNETBIOS.VXD v 4.90.0.3000, renumbered as 4.90.0.3001, to reflect the fact it has been patched and runs OK under Win 98SE and FE (but not anymore under Win ME!).

Download-link: VNETBIOS.VXD v. 4.90.0.3001 for Win 98 SE (and FE)

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: 12 June 2008 - 07:14 PM

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

@ dencorso
Do you think your down version patching trick will work with most files?

[dencorso]

Hi, PROBLEMCHYLD!

Well, probably with most VxDs, yes.
Then, there are three types of Win ME VxDs:
1) Those that don't need any patching to load (almost all are included in 98SE2ME, except for a handful that load but do not work well, at least in some setups: VCACHE.VxD and NDIS.VxD are representative examples of the latter). MDGx has fully explored this field already. There are 11 VxDs (from %windir%\system\) and two PDRs (from %windir%\system\iosubsys\) that can just be transplanted as they are. See MDGx's 98SE2ME page.
2) Those that need downversion patching to load, but then work OK: besides the three already released (DISKTSD.VxD, CDVSD.VxD and VNETBIOS.VxD), I'm testing three more (DISKVSD.VxD, CDTSD.VxD and SMARTVSD.VxD), as I reported above. I do beleieve most VxDs and PDRs from %windir%\system\iosubsys\ and from %windir%\system\ will load after patching, the question is whether they'll work OK.
3) Those that do not work in Win 98SE, despite patching, even when patching gets them to load (probably most in %windir%\system\VMM32\, as well as those packed inside VMM32.VxD). I've kept away from those on purpose, because I don't believe they'll work.

With other types of files, like WDM drivers (.SYS and .MPD files), possibly, but I don't know for sure. They are PE executables, not LE executables, anyway... I just didn't investigate it at all, up to now.

In general, unnecessarily over-restrictive version checking is still a common programmer practice, so relaxing this restrction by patchig can provide many good finds. On the other hand, sometimes files are really tied to a specific OS version, and those won't work, despite patching (or worse: may wreak havoc in the test system, once one gets them to load through patching...). Lots of patience, good backups and careful testing are all that's required to find out.

This post has been edited by dencorso: 29 December 2007 - 12:04 AM

[MDGx]

* Unofficial Windows 98 SE Computer Hangs With IEEE 1394 (FireWire) DVD + USB Drives CDVSD.VXD 4.90.3004 Fix:
http://web.archive.org/web/20041113063902/...om/?kbid=304708
Direct download [78 KB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/Q304708.EXE
This CDVSD.VXD 4.90.3004 Fix installs also as part of NUSB:
http://www.msfn.org/...showtopic=43605
also here:
http://www.mdgx.com/web.htm#NUS

P.S.:
More updates to follow soon...
I will also update 98SE2ME to include CDVSD.VXD 4.90.3004 [unofficial], and also VIP.386 4.10.2228 [official], CONTROL.EXE 4.90.3001 [unofficial], DISKTSD.VXD 4.90.3001 [unofficial], NDIS.VXD 4.10.2226 [official], VCACHE.VXD 4.10.2223 [unofficial] [as soon as Xeno86 sends me VCACHE.VXD 4.10.2223 English, I only have Polish + French].

HTH

[MDGx]

Thank you dencorso... again

* Unofficial Windows 98 SE Networking Errors VNETBIOS.VXD 4.90.3001 Fix:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050206045511/...om/?kbid=272991
Direct download [70 KB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/Q272991.EXE

HTH

[MDGx]

Guys,

Good news...
Fixed *all* problems with both SCR569X.EXE [Unofficial MSE 5.6] + SCR579X.EXE [Unofficial MSE 5.7].
Everything works now 100%.
Please re-install the one you like.
No more errors that I'm aware of.
I personally recommend MSE 5.7, because some web sites are moving on to support exclusively MSE 5.7 [talk about universal internet standards ], which is installed by Windows Vi$ta.

- Unofficial MSE 5.7 5.7.0.16535 for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME [710 KB]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/SCR579X.EXE

- Unofficial MSE 5.6 5.6.0.8832 for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME [675 KB]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/SCR569X.EXE

Uninstall/restore function not necessary anymore, everything works now as expected.
If you don't like one, re-install the other.

Please post here any problems you might encounter with Unofficial MSE 5.6 or 5.7.

P.S.:
Please ignore %windir%\SYSTEM\WSHCON.DLL , which installs as part of Unofficial MSE 5.7 [SCR579X.EXE].
Works only with NTx OSes [2000/XP/2003/Vi$ta], but certain applications expect to find it in the same directory as all other MSE 5.7 files.

HTH

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

dencorso
what about Vxdmon.vxd?

[Bleeder]

MDGx, on Dec 1 2007, 03:46 PM, said:

Please post here any problems you might encounter with Unofficial MSE 5.6 or 5.7.

Many thanks for your work on this!

I recently noticed there is a newer MSE 5.6 jscript.dll in KB942840. Could that be added to your MSE 5.6 update?

[MDGx]

All December 2007 TZ (Time Zone) DST (Daylight Saving Time) updates for all Windows 32-bit (Win32) OSes are finally here [as of December 4 2007]:
http://www.mdgx.com/add.htm#TZU

Of particular interest in this 98/ME forum...

* Microsoft Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME 2006-2008 December 2007 Cumulative Daylight Saving Time (DST) Time Zone Updates (English):
http://support.micro....com/?id=942763
- Unofficial DST Update for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME [114 KB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/Q942763.EXE
- Unofficial DST Update for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME [117 KB, Italian]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/IT942763.EXE
ALL these DST Updates MUST be installed by ALL Windows users REGARDLESS of geographical or Time Zone location!
ALL Unofficial Cumulative DST Updates above install ALL Time Zone Updates and also delete obsolete 2006 Australian (Melbourne Commonwealth Games) DST registry entries (if any):
http://support.micro....com/?id=909915
Windows 98, 98 SP1 + 98 SE require ALL Year 2000 (Y2K) Updates + Q237493 TIMEDATE.CPL Fixes already installed:
http://www.mdgx.com/web.htm
DST Help and Support Center:
http://support.micro....com/gp/cp_dst/
List of products affected by DST:
http://support.micro...p/dst_prodlist/
How to Configure 2007 DST:
http://support.micro....com/?id=914387
DST Changes:
http://www.microsoft...s/timezone.mspx
DST Updates MSFN Forum:
http://www.msfn.org/...showtopic=87399
Wikipedia: Daylight Saving Time (DST):
http://en.wikipedia....ght_saving_time

HTH

[MDGx]

Bleeder, on Dec 2 2007, 12:00 PM, said:

I recently noticed there is a newer MSE 5.6 jscript.dll in KB942840. Could that be added to your MSE 5.6 update?

Here you go...

* Microsoft Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME Scripting Engines (MSE) v5.6 include: VBScript (VBS) 5.6, JScript (JS) 5.6, Windows Script Components (WSC), Windows Script Host (WSH) 5.6 + Windows Script Runtime (WSR) 5.6:
http://msdn2.microso...y/ms950396.aspx
- Unofficial MSE 5.6 5.6.0.8834 for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME [669 KB]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/SCR569X.EXE

Enjoy.

[dencorso]

Well, here is a brief version history for DiskVSD.VxD:

04/23/99 10:22PM 4.10.0.1998 10,194 DISKVSD.VXD Win 98 SE (original distribution, same for FE)
06/08/00 05:00PM 4.90.0.3000 10,140 DISKVSD.VXD Win ME (original distribution)
08/09/00 05:00PM 4.90.0.3001 10,140 DISKVSD.VXD Win ME Q271277


Unpatched Win ME DiskVSD.VxD will not load under Win 98 SE (or FE). Windows'll instead throw a "file is damaged" message and freeze while loading. This can be solved by downversion patching. So here I offer you the patched version of Win ME DiskVSD.VxD v 4.90.0.3001, renumbered as 4.90.0.3002, to reflect the fact it has been patched and runs OK under Win 98SE and FE (but not anymore under Win ME!).

Download-link: DiskVSD.VxD v. 4.90.0.3002 for Win 98 SE (and FE)

Q271277 "Computer Hangs Accessing Removable Disk Such as Magneto-Optical Disk" corrects a problem documented by Microsoft only for Win ME (it does not necessarily mean it doesn't exist in the Win 98 SE/FE version...), but since many of us are now running the patched version of Win ME DiskTSD.VxD, I think it's advisable to also run this matching DiskVSD.VxD just to be on the safe side. And, in any case, this is the most up-to-date existing version of DiskVSD.VxD known to work with Win 98SE (and FE).

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.

[MDGx]

UPDATED · 12-12-2007

Please see the top of this topic for most recent updates.

Enjoy.

[eidenk]

That's a huge list indeed.

Quote

MSE 5.7 requires MS IE 6.0 SP1 or newer already installed

Seems to be working just fine with IE 5.5 SP2 as well.

[RetroOS]

MDGx, on Dec 13 2007, 07:11 PM, said:

...
Updates:
Too many to list here...
...

WHOA !
Who said 9x was dead? - Oh wait, it was just a small pain in the side of my head!
Talk about a mammoth fourth quarter of updates for 2007 and what a start to 2008 with a hiss and a roar!

MDGx, how do you find time to keep up all those updates? You make up the hub of 9x support!
Maybe we should call you 'Little Microsoft'? - Just friendlier!

Well, 2008 is lookin' goooood!

Long Live Windows 9x!

[Acheron]

denCorso,

patching Windows ME files to run on Windows 98 is awesome . However to avoid confusion could you change for example patches the version numbering from 4.90.300x to 4.10.300x

The 4.10.3000 series will tell us that these files are not original Windows 98 files, since these files are in the range 4.10.1998 to 4.10.22xx
It will also prevent people from installing these files on Windows ME.

For example I would prefer it if your 4.90.0.3001 DISKVSD.VXD patched file now would be named 4.10.0.3001 keeping build subnumbers the same as the original patch.

[dencorso]

Acheron:
Your proposal makes sense. Then again, downversioning 4.90.0.xxxx to 4.10.0.xxxx is a major version change, that implies the patched version has some kind of continuity with previous 4.10.0.22xx VxDs, which is not quite the case. Sure, I know I don't need to explain to you anything about version numbers, but I provide the link to Petr's post about it for any reader who may need it. I had thought about upversioning the patches as 4.90.1.xxxx, then opted for the simpler 4.90.0.(xxxx+1) scheme because: (1) no real good solution exists for perfect versioning of patched versions, as you fully know, for you have participated in an analogous discussion regarding the versioning of LLXX patches in Enable48BitLBA, some time ago; (2) the solution reached there of not changing the version numbers doesn't appeal to me, for I feel there should be an easy way of recognizing a patched from an unpatched file, as PassingBy pointed out to me, even if at first I disagreed, because I had in mind precisely the discussion regarding the versioning of LLXX patches, and (3) my patch changes the file very little to achive its aim, so I opted for the present scheme that denotes this, and it seems safe since MS won't be issuing any more hotfixes for Win 9x/ME. In any case, the files are already released, and modifying their versioning scheme at this point would just add further confusion, by creating pairs of files differing only in their versioning scheme, since it is impossible to substitute all files everywhere after the initial release. So, I think it better to leave things as they are, at this point. But I promise you I'll muse about it for some more time and perhaps use a different versioning scheme for patched files in future releases of other patched files.

[the_guy]

Is there any way that you can make Windows Movie Maker it's own option, disabled unless Option 3 is installed?

the_guy