Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account


Photo

98 SE SP 3.32

* * * * * 1 votes

  • Please log in to reply
2359 replies to this topic

#151
erpdude8

erpdude8

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,139 posts

btw, i have heard about other member project "98 Service Pack 2.1b" that contain file newer than 2.1a can i see the link?

thanks


doesnt seem to be a link for the "98 Service Pack 2.1b". does not exist.

So far I have no problems installing the Win98se Service pack 2.1a. It is when I UN-install (or remove) the Win98se service pack that I have some doubts.

Gape needs to make some changes to the SPUNINST.INF file of the 98se service pack. The current version of the SP (during un-install) will restore the DHTMLED.OCX file with the original one from the Win98se setup files which is a BAD idea for Win98se users who have installed IE 5.01 or better and IE uses that file. Any references to the DHTMLED.OCX file should be removed from the SPUNINST.INF file.

that's just one of my main concerns when un-installing the win98se sp. my other concern is that it will restore the MSMOUSE.VXD file with the original version from the Win98se setup files. This may not be a good idea for Win98se users who have installed the Microsoft Intellipoint Mouse software which has it's own version of the MSMOUSE.VXD file. He may also want to remove references to that file from the SPUNINST.INF file.


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#152
PsycoUnc

PsycoUnc

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 236 posts
-uninstall issues... yes:
...
-as wonderful as MDGx and Gape/others have been with their packages, honestly, they both have been very remiss with the uninstall/update/modified issues, something which should have been dealt with at the very beginning, especially considering the very "unofficial"-ness of these packages... even evil M$ has taken measures to provide (not-always-reliable) uninstall/version conflict measures, I must admit... I, myself, as a previous commercial programmer, would never have had the gall to offer OS-modifying packages without very reliable, flexible, uninstall options... something other than "well, just backup before you first try it or every time you try an updated version of it"... don't get me wrong, I love these guys, they RULE, but please, it MUST BE DONE... and done reliably... sry
>;]
[...and, again honestly, any time I've tried to uninstall the SP or 98se2me's changes, it's been a nightmare of instability... ]

Edited by PsycoUnc, 16 March 2006 - 03:24 AM.


#153
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts

I remember downloading the WinME Q299014 Help & Support update from WU in summer 2001. This update replaced the older Help & Support update [Q278497] which sometimes hangs while trying to install the files.

Q299014 was removed from WU after MS updated to V4 of the WU site. V4 of Windows Update site started to work for Win98/ME systems in November 2002. Q299014 was featured in V3 of WU.

Thanks, Erp!

So, we have to thank the wonderful "Update" to V4 for this "improvement" to ME.

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#154
erpdude8

erpdude8

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,139 posts
your welcome CLASYS.

The V4 Windows Update site started in early 2002 and only worked for Windows XP systems. then MS added support for Windows 2000 systems a few months later and near the end of year 2002, the V4 site started to work for Windows 98 & Millennium.

I long to see all those unofficial Win98/98se updates (such as voltrack.vxd 4.10.1999, update.sys v4.10.2223, krnl386.exe v4.10.1999, ifsmgr.vxd 4.10.2227 < this one is listed at MDGx's web site and unofficial gdi.exe/gdi32.dll v4.10.2226 fix) included in the next release of the Windows 98 SE Service Pack. The ME service pack I am testing has some of the unofficial ME updates included (such as update.sys v4.90.3001, krnl386.exe v4.90.3001 and unofficial gdi.exe/gdi32.dll v4.90.3002 fix).

#155
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
I'll be glad to see those and other updates added as well [as discussed here previously]

The SP installs the equivalent of Q249635 - USB Driver Uses the Largest Supported Report Size to
fix some USB problems with semi- or more complex device handling. It updates Hidclass.sys to
4.10.2223.

I installed the USB 2.0 support for the aLi chipset in my USB 2.0 card and it installed ME's version
4.90.3000.0.

Any problems here? Is this really the best file for 98SE w/SP 2.1a? [btw, actually installing 249635
does correctly report the ME driver in QFECHECK.]

cjl

ps: Is it me, or is anyone else having problems perusing the forums where the first article or so is
repeated as you advance through the forum pages?
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#156
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
I've been going through my list of available fixes and came upon this one:

Your Computer May Hang While Resuming From Standby Mode with a Removable Device in the Docking Station (252187)

The SP 2.1a seems to install the much-discussed ESDI_506.PDR file version 4.10.0.2225, while the 252187 update installs 4.10.0.2226. Does this revision have any reason to be avoided? Might it impact on the discussion about larger partition sizes?

More to a specific point [why I found it] is that I have a friend with a T20 ThinkPad and a removable LS-120 (as mentioned in the KB252187 article) and a "super-dock" with the UltraBay 2000 in it. It seems he may need this update in order to use the drive in the dock, is this correct? [And not available in SP 2.1a.) [PS: he also has a CD-R/W drive which is dock-worthy; he tends to use the T20 with the UltraBay battery for more total mobile lifetime, etc., and then brings the machine to the dock at his office where the R/W drive also is; I know he can take out the extra battery while on AC power, and put the R/W drive in the machine's UltraBay, but can he do it the way he prefers, i.e., just to dock it?]

Using the LS-120 in the machine's UltraBay, I have built a bootable 98SE[lite-micro] system for maintenance purposes. The whole thing fits in 87 MB not counting the swap file.

I can send Q252187.EXE along to anyone who needs it, etc. The KB article doesn't appear to offer it directly.

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#157
MDGx

MDGx

    98SE2ME + 98MP10

  • Super Moderator
  • 2,678 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
* Microsoft Windows 98 SE Computer Hangs with Removable Device in Docking
Station ESDI_506.PDR build 4.10.2226 Fix:
http://support.micro....com/?id=252187
Direct download [154 KB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/Q252187.EXE
Install this ESDI_506.PDR Fix ONLY on IBM portables with removable disks!
Install ESDI_506.PDR build 4.10.2225 Fix below on ALL other PCs/portables!


* Microsoft Windows 98/98 SE ScanDisk Errors With (E)IDE Hard Disks > 32 GB
ESDI_506.PDR (build 4.10.2186 for Win98/98 SP1 + build 4.10.2225 for Win98 SE)
Fix:
http://support.micro....com/?id=243450
Direct download [158 KB, English]:
http://download.micr.../243450USA8.EXE
Install this ESDI_506.PDR Fix on ALL PCs/portables EXCEPT IBM portables with
removable disks!
Install ESDI_506.PDR build 4.10.2226 Fix above ONLY on IBM portables with
removable disks!


Hope this helps.

#158
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
I remember about the not installing the file on other than IBM portables, so yes, what you say is coming back to me, etc.

My specific problem is that the KB article refers to a previous generation to the specific laptop. This one is NOT the 600-x series, but the newer T20. The removables from the mentioned era are called "UltraBay" while on the T20-T23 they're called "UltraBay 2000" not compatible with "UltraBay". To make life more complicated, I have to work on a T30 Thinkpad which uses a quasi-compatible to UltraBay 2000 called "UltraBay Plus" and eventually some quite newer machines using the current generation called "UltraBay Slim". Other than the 2000 and Plus being similar, all of the models are incompatible with each other. However, docks exist that allow crossing the lines, muddying it further. It appears the 600-type model is supported on a newer dock concurrent with the more standard dock associated with the T20 family bearing an internal UltraBay 2000 in it, and that's precisely the dock being used with the T20.

So, is the caveat about which to use particular to the machine? The dock? The combination? [I don't have a 600 to put the super-dock on; I would apply the 2226 patch if I did, just as I would if I had the older dock with the "plain" UltraBay on the 600; But neither of these cases are what I am asking about, etc.]

cjl [clear as mud]

ps: Is there a way to know that something isn't working/in conflict? If the 2226 version fixes something, what does it also break? I am willing to try various hard disks, test partition schemes and/or programs if need be, as I have available a 60 GB that is compatible with all of them [7200 RPM, 9.5 ms seek, 2.5" Hitachi/IBM Travelstar; it belongs with the T20 which is running a goodly amount faster with this 60 in it than the original 4200 RPM 12 GB that was in it!], as well as that 12 GB itself, and a 40 GB 5400 RPM that belongs in the T30. And of course all sorts of desktop scenarios just to reveal what the restriction actually breaks if need be.
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#159
nudgegoonies

nudgegoonies
  • Member
  • 5 posts
Hi,
sorry for posting again. My story is on the last 2 pages. Everything works. I did a new installation. This time i installed the drivers before the SP. The order of installation has no effect. I needed one more restart because one application that belongs to a driver needed a restart aftrer updating msvcrt, -vcp and mfc42. When i installed this app after SP all theses files where already there. The effect with the networkoptions is still the same. The first time i clicked ok in network options windows was updating the driver-database (i hope this is the correct translation from german). And everytime after clicking ok, even without clicking anything else than ok, windows copies ndis.vxd from sp2 and a second file wich i can't catch because the windows disappears too fast.
Bye,

#160
relay12

relay12
  • Member
  • 1 posts
[/quote]
[quote name='appp' post='454619' date='Jan 26 2006, 05:15 AM']Don't get me wrong. I am not for forcing good tools on chickens who are afraid of trying it.
But read my lips for once: WINTOP WORKS FOR ME ON WINDOWS 98SE.
Sorry, I don't care that the page says win95 only.[/quote]


Btw,
If you like wintop and want something a little more technical detail in the display I highly recommend taskinfo from http://www.iarsn.com/taskinfo.html and ProcessExplorer from http://www.sysinternals.com. I have used taskinfo on win9x machine for several years without problem, and the other one looks good too. I suppose the point is not every on would want wintop but I do agree an option to slip it in might be good. :D[code=auto:0]

Edited by relay12, 23 March 2006 - 05:07 AM.


#161
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
In Service Pack 2.1a can be found the following file:

09/25/2000 11:48p 4.71.3336.0 329,488 Rpcrt4.dll

which apparently comes from the Q269874.exe file associated with the KB269874 article:

DCOM IStream::Write() Corrupts Data with No Error Return

Anyone have this fix?

I *almost* have it, in that it's available on many ftp websites, usually associated with many other fixes, in an archive generally known as cpatch.

The problem is that this one is stored in a self-extracting zip executable archive with a password set.

I can point or send anyone to the file offering to crack the password, etc.

cjl

ps: If not from 269874, where did Rpcrt4.dll come from?
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#162
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
Also found in this CPATCH archive is the cht version of 306889, which supplies the version of apmbatt.sys found in SP 2.1a. Anyone have the usa version of this? [The apmbatt.sys file itself is the usa-en version of the file or there are no language-specific variations of the file; was this how it was added to the SP?]

Alternatively, can anyone modify the cht version to usa-en or other language versions?

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#163
Petr

Petr

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

In Service Pack 2.1a can be found the following file:

09/25/2000 11:48p 4.71.3336.0 329,488 Rpcrt4.dll

which apparently comes from the Q269874.exe file associated with the KB269874 article:

DCOM IStream::Write() Corrupts Data with No Error Return

Anyone have this fix?

I *almost* have it, in that it's available on many ftp websites, usually associated with many other fixes, in an archive generally known as cpatch.

The problem is that this one is stored in a self-extracting zip executable archive with a password set.

I can point or send anyone to the file offering to crack the password, etc.

cjl

ps: If not from 269874, where did Rpcrt4.dll come from?


Do you mean http://ftp.ntu.edu.t.../269874usa8.exe for example? It is not password protected.

Petr


Also found in this CPATCH archive is the cht version of 306889, which supplies the version of apmbatt.sys found in SP 2.1a. Anyone have the usa version of this? [The apmbatt.sys file itself is the usa-en version of the file or there are no language-specific variations of the file; was this how it was added to the SP?]

Alternatively, can anyone modify the cht version to usa-en or other language versions?

cjl



http://ftp.mdgx.com/files/Q306889.EXE

Petr

#164
MDGx

MDGx

    98SE2ME + 98MP10

  • Super Moderator
  • 2,678 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
DCOM98 RPCRT4.DLL build 4.71.3336 Fix for Windows 98/ME:
http://support.micro....com/?id=269874
- RPCRT4.DLL Patch for Windows ME [296 KB]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/ME269874.EXE
- RPCRT4.DLL Patch for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE [1.39 MB]:
http://ftp.isu.edu.t.../269874usa8.exe

These patches posted here:
http://www.mdgx.com/add.htm#COM

Hope this helps.

#165
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
Thanks, guys! As always, you are all the best!

Petr: At the site I found there is this "other" Q269874.EXE, and it is a password-protected self-extracting zip archive. I suspect because the site is cht [Chinese-Taiwan]-oriented, this is some augmentation for local language-specifics; clearly the one you pointed me to is for the usa-en version.

I'm almost done getting all of the QFECHECK-worthy updates [well, all I know of!] into a batch of START /WAIT xxxxxx.exe /q:a /r:n command lines, so that the SP 2.1a augmented by installing all of these updates agree with each other [well, after a reboot!].

I assume there is no reason not to do both, but a question:

Does it matter which order?

Here's what should be an easy one:

I have Q246817.EXE. Does this also cover KB246615 as well?

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#166
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
I was away awhile, and I apologize if this is old business:

Can someone explain EXACTLY what the VOLTRACK.VXD story is?

I have update 273468 providing VOLTRACK 4.10.0.1998 which I believe is redundant to doing nothing in 98SE.

I have also seen unofficial versions of 249824 [the official I assume is unavailable?] that claim to add 4.10.0.1999 and another 4.10.0.2000.

The SP 2.1a apparently does nothing for this file.

What is going on here?

tia,

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#167
Petr

Petr

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

I was away awhile, and I apologize if this is old business:

Can someone explain EXACTLY what the VOLTRACK.VXD story is?

I have update 273468 providing VOLTRACK 4.10.0.1998 which I believe is redundant to doing nothing in 98SE.

I have also seen unofficial versions of 249824 [the official I assume is unavailable?] that claim to add 4.10.0.1999 and another 4.10.0.2000.

The SP 2.1a apparently does nothing for this file.

What is going on here?

tia,

cjl


Official files are only these two versions:

Q234697 contains Voltrack.vxd 4.10.1999 and is intended for Microsoft Windows 98 Standard Edition, PC-AT Japanese only.

Q273468 contains Voltrack.vxd 4.10.1998 and it is exactly the same as the file contained on both Windows 98 Standard and Second Editions.

Petr

Edited by Petr, 29 March 2006 - 01:54 PM.


#168
pjmelect

pjmelect

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 28 posts
I have just tried the SP2a for the first time today. A good job, but I would like to make a few comments. Why has the update Q313829 been omitted, the Microsoft update site said that it is a recommended update. The animated logon logoff logos are truly awful only their creator could love them. They should be removed from the service pack.

#169
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts

I have just tried the SP2a for the first time today. A good job, but I would like to make a few comments. Why has the update Q313829 been omitted, the Microsoft update site said that it is a recommended update. The animated logon logoff logos are truly awful only their creator could love them. They should be removed from the service pack.

To my knowledge, 313829 is in there. In any case, for the record, there are a whole lot of issues that need to be addressed in order for 313829 to serve everybody [if possible]

1) The basics are that it updates to a newer version of SHELL32.DLL from NT4 to fix a security hole.

2) It is normal for it to be the first update mentioned within Internet Explorer under IE Help/About. Within this update string it is known as "q313829" as opposed to "Q313829" which is the signature format of all of the other updates to IE/OE [starting with a capital "Q"]. As an accomodation to 98lite when used with the SLEEK [V1] or MICRO shell, the normal installation of the hotfix Q313829 cannot be made, since SHELL32.DLL is actually the one from Win95B. However, the file is in there, just renamed to SHELL32.W98 as part of the overall SLEEK [V1] or MICRO implementation of 98lite at the time [as opposed to the OVERWEIGHT or CHUBBY shell versions which uses the standard SHELL32.DLL file].

In this situation, the Win95 versions of icons are all that are present in SHELL32.DLL and presumably a smaller head count of icon choices. [Some people care about this!]

To my knowledge, the SP 2.1a correctly does update this situation as well. In any case, I personally manually modify the designation to "Q313829" to indicate this subtle alternative should it apply. If no one objects, I would ask that this sublety become part of the SP. [Or it become an installation option; arguably others may want the capital Q just for consistency with the other updates!] [Note: There are restrictions on the use of the Win95 shell; it clearly isn't a free ride. However, while having many restrictions, it also offers many benefits that could be of use to many users. Curiously, it may also be of transient use to cause a cleaner/better installation of IE 6.0 or 6.0 SP1 and then abandoned in favor of the standard version.]

3) The update makes SHELL32.DLL change only in terms of updated files.

4) The updated SHELL32.DLL as provided is slightly incompatible with some known packages that use I believe "transparent" icons. A small patch restores this compatibility. [Contact the appropriate authors or MGDX.]

5) SHELL32.DLL is the home of some system icons and some possible alternative ones. Apparently portions of the O/S know of these icons by their relative position within SHELL32.DLL [presumably unchanged by the Q313829 update in this regard]. The reason we know this is that if you patch the icon pixels, your updated icons are used. Thus, nothing is checking or anything of the sort; just using an area designated for a particular function.

There is an SP option to use the more "modern" icons associated with WinME/Win2K/XP. By some means I'm not sure even matters with respect to 313829, the associated text verbiage can be made to match such as "My Network Places" instead of "Network Neighborhood". Regardless, these changes are part of the option as well. The net result is a SHELL32.DLL consistent with Q313829 but icon-wise patched for ME cosmetics.

There is a consideration with regard to the icon patch I don't think has been addressed, albeit a minor one.

In theory, any icon-bearing file can be used for any system icon pretty much. However, there is a nuance to the situation: Unless the Recycle Bin icon is within the designated file [and perhaps more specifically is the one in the designated position, I am not sure of this aspect!], then a display anomaly occurs where the displayed main Recycled Bin is updated, but when you open a drive window to display a drive-specific "local" Recycle Bin, the icons used there are the original ones, not the updated ones.

Thus, the designation of the "standard" icons in terms of being within SHELL32.DLL and perhaps being in the standard positions [recycle bin empty and recycle bin non-empty] is important to maintain.

The minor problem is that within SHELL32.DLL is about 1.5 sets of icons for this, not two. So, if the main set is chosen for the ME variant, there aren't enough alternate icons to fulfill a reasonable alternative and avoid the display anomaly.

Thus, I would suggest that if the ME design is opted for, some other icon be replaced by the standard one to at least have an alternate set of reasonable icons for this purpose; this allows the user to change their mind freely without having to regret letting in the ME icon option in the first place. [Just look at all of the icon choices within SHELL32.DLL whether ME-oriented or standard to see what I mean. Clearly something can be designated within the ME-modified one to have essentially the standard type still also available without having to dump the entire ME modification overall.]

6) QFECHECK is not a factor for Q313829, so don't look there for proof it's installed; only within IE Help/About.

If all else fails, check the version number of SHELL32.DLL. Q313829 installs version 4.72.3812.600 stemming from December 6, 2001 11:25 PM. The original release should be version 4.72.3612.1700 from April 23, 1999 10:22 PM.

Hope that helps.

Logo files:

I agree, those optional files are pretty funky! Perhaps there should be a way to specify alternate files to be applied. My personal favorite was part of an earlier release, which is essentially the original 98 FE logo screen, except tastefully modified to clearly say Second Edition.

The main thrust of the SP is to make it easier to install what you want/need. I can always hand copy alternate logo.sys, logow.sys, logos.sys files. But wouldn't be nice if I can specify which ones I want to optionally apply? On the 98lite [litepc] site are a bunch of others that should be looked at, created by other users of 98lite [I have no art skills whatsoever!]

cjl

ps: Someone modified the standard logos.sys, the one black with orange lettering that says "It is safe to shut down Windows" to instead say "It is safe to shut down Windows, or is it?"
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#170
MDGx

MDGx

    98SE2ME + 98MP10

  • Super Moderator
  • 2,678 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

4) The updated SHELL32.DLL as provided is slightly incompatible with some known packages that use I believe "transparent" icons. A small patch restores this compatibility. [Contact the appropriate authors or MGDX.]

This is what to do if bothered by overlay icons after installing updated SHELL32.DLL:
http://www.mdgx.com/98-5.htm#PSBF

#171
krick

krick

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 115 posts

Logo files:

I agree, those optional files are pretty funky! Perhaps there should be a way to specify alternate files to be applied. My personal favorite was part of an earlier release, which is essentially the original 98 FE logo screen, except tastefully modified to clearly say Second Edition.


I agree as well. The current logo screens included in SP2 are kinda scary. The older "tasteful" ones that you mention are the best.

As a possible second choice, there's two interesting variations on the animated XP logo screen floating around. One says "Windows 98SE" instead of "Windows XP", the other simply says "Windows". Both are very tasteful.

#172
Acheron

Acheron

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 988 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
Windows Update v4 Windows 98SE Prerequistes

For those people who try to use Windows Update on a fresh Windows 98SE machine please install the following updates, so Windows Update won't throw up any cryptic error messages:

- Windows Installer 2.0
- Microsoft XML 3.0 SP7
- Q323172 Security Update - Certificate Validation Flaw Could Enable Identity Spoofing
- Q329115 Security Update - Flaw in Certificate Enrollment Control Could Allow Deletion of Digital Certificates
- Q293818 Security Update - Erroneous VeriSign-Issued Digital Certificates Pose Spoofing Hazard
- Root Certificates Update
- Internet Explorer High Encryption Pack

Well, this took me some time. Hope somehow this information is useful anyway :hello:
Say no to bloatware. Download Nero Lite!

#173
erpdude8

erpdude8

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,139 posts

- Internet Explorer High Encryption Pack

Well, this took me some time. Hope somehow this information is useful anyway :hello:


The direct link to get the Internet explorer 128-bit high encryption pack you mentioned is specifically for IE 5.0 only, hp38guser It will NOT work with IE 5.01 and higher IE versions [whoops!]

Here's the IE High Encryption pack for Internet Explorer 5.01 [NOT IE 5.0]:
http://download.micr...US/ie501dom.exe
(IE 5.01 SP1/SP2, IE 5.5 orig./SP1/SP2 and IE 6.0 orig/SP1 include 128-bit encryption)

And the IE High Encryption pack for Internet Explorer 4.x for Win95, 98 FE and NT4:
http://download.micr...N-US/ie4dom.exe

I was away awhile, and I apologize if this is old business:

Can someone explain EXACTLY what the VOLTRACK.VXD story is?

I have update 273468 providing VOLTRACK 4.10.0.1998 which I believe is redundant to doing nothing in 98SE.

I have also seen unofficial versions of 249824 [the official I assume is unavailable?] that claim to add 4.10.0.1999 and another 4.10.0.2000.

The SP 2.1a apparently does nothing for this file.

What is going on here?

tia,

cjl


CLASYS,

The 98se SP 2.1a does not include VOLTRACK.VXD file. I'll have to request Gape to add unofficial Q249824 voltrack.vxd 4.10.1999 fix and other unofficial 98se updates like UPDATE.SYS v4.10.2223 and KRNL386.EXE v4.10.1999 into the next release of the 98se SP.

unofficial voltrack.vxd v4.10.2000 fix was available in early summer 2005 for a very short time but was pulled due to versioning problems (and other unforseen problems) and was reverted back to unofficial Q249824 voltrack.vxd v4.10.1999 patch.

The Q273468 patches for Win95 & 98 were bundled inside the Iomega drivers and since I use IomegaWare software for my ZIP 100 Parallel removable drive, Iomega setup installs Q273468 automatically.

note to Gape: I have obtained the newer build of FP4AWEC.DLL file [4.0.2.9010]. Let me know if you want the newer file whenever you are not busy so you can include this in the next release of the 98se SP.

Edited by erpdude8, 07 April 2006 - 07:18 PM.


#174
FixitMad

FixitMad

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 26 posts
Great Job hp38guser for providing the Windows Update v4 Windows 98SE Prerequistes. This information is extremely helpful. Thanks also to erpdude8 for the updated High Encryption pack for Internet Explorer links!

Many thanks to Gape for providing this awesome UNOFFICIAL Windows98 SE Service Pack. This is truly a great service.

As a side note, it seems that Microsoft is not willing to provide me with some recent updates on their system for Windows 98se. I'll have to wait until the next version of 98 SE SP comes out.

:thumbup

Edited by FixitMad, 14 April 2006 - 07:16 AM.

****************
Thanks,

FixitMad

"You know you are lost when you see the Red X"

#175
erpdude8

erpdude8

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,139 posts
the next release of the 98se service pack wont be ready until Gape says so. I havent seen a post from him for several weeks. looks like he's busy. perhaps by May or June or when he is done with his studies he may release a new version.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



How to remove advertisement from MSFN