defrag 'fix' for win98 on large drives

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or the
like before.
Very interesting.
Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available from
this guy
http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

OT: Your headers ("Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409")
tell me you need to visit Windows Update ASAP. You're running much
less-secure versions of OE, IE and Windows, Duradan.
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security

Mastering Newsgroups in Outlook Express
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/community/columns/newsgroups.mspx

Duradan wrote:
> Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or
> the like before.
> Very interesting.
> Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available from
> this guy
> http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
> Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

??? That's what my headers show too, Bear, and I have all the critical updates for
IE and OE installed. This is Win98, remember?
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx

"PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uT2i9DkPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> OT: Your headers ("Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409")
> tell me you need to visit Windows Update ASAP. You're running much
> less-secure versions of OE, IE and Windows, Duradan.
> --
> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
>
> Mastering Newsgroups in Outlook Express
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/community/columns/newsgroups.mspx
>
> Duradan wrote:
> > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or
> > the like before.
> > Very interesting.
> > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available from
> > this guy
> > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
> > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I cannot seem to get to that site. What is the "fix" there?
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx

"Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:O93hN5jPFHA.904@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or the
> like before.
> Very interesting.
> Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available from
> this guy
> http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
> Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

This is what I saw there- only 2 -a conferencing and this patch:
Shareware and Demo Programs written by Rudolph Loew
that have been packaged for internet distribution. Many more programs are available for the PC and Amiga Computers.

The High Capacity Disk Patch Program patches Windows 98/98SE/ME to provide direct support for hard drives larger than 137GB without requiring a controller card or the Intel Application Accelerator which can only beused with an Intel chipset motherboard. The patch installs support for the48-Bit addressing mode required for hard drives larger than 137GB.
NOTE: Some Programs and Documentation report this limit as 128GB.
--
mae

"glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message news:%2349mJckPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| I cannot seem to get to that site. What is the "fix" there?
| --
| Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
| http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
| http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
|
| "Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:O93hN5jPFHA.904@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or the
| > like before.
| > Very interesting.
| > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available from
| > this guy
| > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
| > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
| >
| >
|
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Yea, I know there are still 13 I need to get. But with the latest 711 patch
flap, I was harshly affected by it, I've been less strident in my updating.
I use FireFox to browse new sites and often IE for familiar trusted sites.
OE probably has several in that waiting load of.....updates.
I will be sure not to hit that one until I see some reliable "I tried it on
my Win98 system and it is fine" statements.
I am thinking about his 'fix', but like you guys said, if it works, why is
it so hard to find?
Here is our correspondence

First, his reply to my letter prior.

My Patch Program does not affect Windows SCANDISK or DEFRAG so you will
still need to make individual Partitions less than 127GB. You can run
SCANDISK in DOS, not a DOS Box, on larger Partitions. I haven't found a
DEFRAG that will work. The ones I have found on the Web so far use the
Windows DEFRAG libraries so they have the same problem.

You should be able to Install the Drive on most if not all Motherboards
using the Patch.

You should not need to reformat or Repartition the Drive to move from one
Motherboard to another with the Patch.


Sincerely,

Rudolph R. Loew
rloew@hotmail.com


>From: "duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com>
>To: <rloew@hotmail.com>
>Subject: high capacity disc patch
>Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 03:17:40 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Originating-IP: [64.4.56.209]
>X-Originating-Email: [duradan428@hotmail.com]
>X-Sender: duradan428@hotmail.com
>Received: from 64.4.56.209 by BAY101-DAV8.phx.gbl with DAV;Sun, 10 Apr 2005
08:25:28 +0000
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
>
>Hi. About your large capacity drive program. Will it allow the basic
Windows98 defrag and scandisc programs to function on the full 137GB+ of a
drive?
>And if not, is there a program that will defrag the entire space as a
single partition?
>Currently I have just installed a 160GB drive on a controller card, but if
your software will eliminate the defrag/scan problems it would be much
prefered.
>Not to mention having the large drives install directly on a mobo in future
would be nice.
>I have an AMD based AOpen AK77-333 mobo with the via Via Apollo Pro chipset
family and am running Win98SE.
>Also, would I have to reformat the drive to move it to the mobo under
Windows for the software to deal with it or can I keep the current data
intact during the move?



"PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uT2i9DkPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> OT: Your headers ("Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409")
> tell me you need to visit Windows Update ASAP. You're running much
> less-secure versions of OE, IE and Windows, Duradan.
> --
> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
>
> Mastering Newsgroups in Outlook Express
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/community/columns/newsgroups.mspx
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Someone should build a defragger for large drives and get rich . There is
about to be a massive influx of large drives being bought by the average
users and not knowing it won't be possible to defrag or scan for errors.
Drives over 120GB are getting cheap, and us poor folks still using our Win98
are gonna need it.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Duradan wrote:

> Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available from
> this guy
> http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
> Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?

I've not seen that software yet - and congrats to Mr. Loew for doing that.

However, using a modern controller card with its exceptional advantaged
qualifications is the ultimate way to do it, period! ..all else comparatively
is limited.

Continuing from my reply to your earlier post and now to this one Duradan,
using any modern Controller card which takes care of not only that 9x 127GB
limitation issue, but it also inherently gives the extra remarkable advantage
of increasing overall system performance dramatically, even much better than
any AA (application accelerator) which is intel proprietary anyway not to
mention its other software based limitations; whereas the controller card has
no such limitations whatsoever and besides covers all brand motherboards. A
controller card also gives the advantage of having extra dual primary ports
with that wonderful convenience as well.

I would not own a desktop computer that does not use a controller card, not
only just for W9x usage but for W2000/WXP also where those show and overall
system performance increase using it as well.

It's a no-brainer, and for those who have one and have compared the
differences with and without it - know what I'm talking about.
It's especially noticeable when using todays fast modern motherboards and
processors and run 9x - you have no idea what you are missing. Even works
well for those with old mb's and processors too.

Here's a link with some screenshots of it:
http://www.newegg.com/app/Showimage.asp?style=album
..here's just one of many places you can buy it:
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=16-102-007&depa=0
..but of course buy it wherever you want - but without question be sure it's
a Promise ULTRA133 TX2 model because it's the best & includes the latest
mods.

Rick
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I am Win98SE, IE6 SP1, fully updated, but with an unchecked Kb891711...

X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441

(A) At IE6, Help, About:
SP1, Q313829, Q328970, Q328389, Q324929, Q810847, Q813951, Q816506,
Q813489, Q330994, Q818529, Q822925, Q828750, Q824145, Q832894,
Q837009, Q831167, Q823353, Q867801, Q833989, Q834707, Q889293, Q867282,
& 891781.

(B) At "START, Run, MSInfo32, Software Environment, Software Updates",
or at "START, RUN, QFECheck"..:

Windows 98 Second Edition=4,10,0,2222
Updates=Year 2000 Update for Windows 98b
SP2: Windows 98 Second Edition USBHUB
W98: KB891711, Q245729, Q274113, Q314147, Q323172, Q323255,
Q329115, Q811630, Q840315, Q888113, & Q890175.
W98SE: Q823559, Q245272, Q256015, Q259728, Q260067, Q273017, Q273991
Win98SE: Q249973, Q238453, Q239887, UHCD
Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video
Windows 98 TELNET

(C) At "Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs":

(1) 128 bit encryption support for Dial-up Networking
(2) Internet Explorer Q891781
(was Q889293, Q834707, Q867801, Q831167, Q832894, Q824145,
Q828750, Q822925, Q818529)
(3) Microsoft Data Access Components KB870669
(4) Microsoft Internet Explorer 5 Web Accessories
(5) Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 SP1 and Internet Tools
(6) Microsoft Internet Print Services
(7) Microsoft Outlook Express 6
(8) Microsoft VGX Q833989
(9) MSN Messenger 4.5.
(10) Outlook Express Q823353 (was Q837009, Q330994)
(11) Windows 98 KB891711 Update
(12) Windows 98 Q823559 Update
(13) Windows 98 Q840315 Update
(14) Windows 98 Q888113 Update
(15) Windows 98 Q890175 Update
(16) Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video Update
(17) Windows Media Player system update (9 series)

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
news:%237wDKXkPFHA.1392@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| ??? That's what my headers show too, Bear, and I have all the critical
updates for
| IE and OE installed. This is Win98, remember?
| --
| Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
| http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
| http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
|
| "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
| news:uT2i9DkPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| > OT: Your headers ("Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express
6.00.2800.1409")
| > tell me you need to visit Windows Update ASAP. You're running much
| > less-secure versions of OE, IE and Windows, Duradan.
| > --
| > ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
| > MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
| >
| > Mastering Newsgroups in Outlook Express
| >
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/community/columns/newsgroups.mspx
| >
| > Duradan wrote:
| > > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used
usenet or
| > > the like before.
| > > Very interesting.
| > > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix'
available from
| > > this guy
| > > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
| > > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
| >
|
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

This is the first I have heard of it, and if it works as advertised then
he's done a real service to the W9x community. But I am a bit suspicious,
as it was my understanding that the problem was based in the BIOS and the
way that Windows is forced to use the BIOS for disk services. That's why
the controller card option works. If he can do in software what a new
controller does in the BIOS then there's no reason that the fix shouldn't be
OK.

If the fix has been around for some time, I would query why we haven't heard
more about it. Or perhaps it's brand new. Why not e-mail him and ask some
questions (like why isn't he advertising this a bit more widely!).
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"mae" <agrannie@notemail.msn.com> wrote in message
news:%23ZwSgUlPFHA.2788@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
This is what I saw there- only 2 -a conferencing and this patch:
Shareware and Demo Programs written by Rudolph Loew
that have been packaged for internet distribution. Many more programs are
available for the PC and Amiga Computers.

The High Capacity Disk Patch Program patches Windows 98/98SE/ME to provide
direct support for hard drives larger than 137GB without requiring a
controller card or the Intel Application Accelerator which can only beused
with an Intel chipset motherboard. The patch installs support for the48-Bit
addressing mode required for hard drives larger than 137GB.
NOTE: Some Programs and Documentation report this limit as 128GB.
--
mae

"glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
news:%2349mJckPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| I cannot seem to get to that site. What is the "fix" there?
| --
| Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
| http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
| http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
|
| "Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:O93hN5jPFHA.904@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or
the
| > like before.
| > Very interesting.
| > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available
from
| > this guy
| > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
| > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
| >
| >
|
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I thought that too, but he only seems concerned about the boot
process. From the manual-

"
REQUIREMENTS

Windows 98, 98SE or ME (Read WINDOWS ME Section Below if using Windows ME)

BIOS support for hard drives >137GB or
A Windows Compatable Boot Manager that supports hard drives >137GB
A Mini Boot Manager is now available from Rudolph R. Loew
"

btw, the demo is good for up to 145GB.


"Jeff Richards" <JRichards@msn.com.au> wrote in message news:%237nXChmPFHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> This is the first I have heard of it, and if it works as advertised then he's done a real service to the W9x community. But I am
> a bit suspicious, as it was my understanding that the problem was based in the BIOS and the way that Windows is forced to use the
> BIOS for disk services. That's why the controller card option works. If he can do in software what a new controller does in the
> BIOS then there's no reason that the fix shouldn't be OK.
>
> If the fix has been around for some time, I would query why we haven't heard more about it. Or perhaps it's brand new. Why not
> e-mail him and ask some questions (like why isn't he advertising this a bit more widely!).
> --
> Jeff Richards
> MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
> "mae" <agrannie@notemail.msn.com> wrote in message news:%23ZwSgUlPFHA.2788@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> This is what I saw there- only 2 -a conferencing and this patch:
> Shareware and Demo Programs written by Rudolph Loew
> that have been packaged for internet distribution. Many more programs are available for the PC and Amiga Computers.
>
> The High Capacity Disk Patch Program patches Windows 98/98SE/ME to provide direct support for hard drives larger than 137GB
> without requiring a controller card or the Intel Application Accelerator which can only beused with an Intel chipset motherboard.
> The patch installs support for the48-Bit addressing mode required for hard drives larger than 137GB.
> NOTE: Some Programs and Documentation report this limit as 128GB.
> --
> mae
>
> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message news:%2349mJckPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> | I cannot seem to get to that site. What is the "fix" there?
> | --
> | Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> | http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> | http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
> |
> | "Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | news:O93hN5jPFHA.904@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> | > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or the
> | > like before.
> | > Very interesting.
> | > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available from
> | > this guy
> | > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
> | > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
> | >
> | >
> |
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

You have a lot of old cumulative listings there in your IE About box that
were already assimilated by newer cumulatives, etc, which brings up the point
I'm really surprised that the newer updates don't clean up the list from
there.

Rick

PCR wrote:
> I am Win98SE, IE6 SP1, fully updated, but with an unchecked Kb891711...
>
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
>
> (A) At IE6, Help, About:
> SP1, Q313829, Q328970, Q328389, Q324929, Q810847, Q813951, Q816506,
> Q813489, Q330994, Q818529, Q822925, Q828750, Q824145, Q832894,
> Q837009, Q831167, Q823353, Q867801, Q833989, Q834707, Q889293, Q867282,
> & 891781.
>
> (B) At "START, Run, MSInfo32, Software Environment, Software Updates",
> or at "START, RUN, QFECheck"..:
>
> Windows 98 Second Edition=4,10,0,2222
> Updates=Year 2000 Update for Windows 98b
> SP2: Windows 98 Second Edition USBHUB
> W98: KB891711, Q245729, Q274113, Q314147, Q323172, Q323255,
> Q329115, Q811630, Q840315, Q888113, & Q890175.
> W98SE: Q823559, Q245272, Q256015, Q259728, Q260067, Q273017, Q273991
> Win98SE: Q249973, Q238453, Q239887, UHCD
> Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video
> Windows 98 TELNET
>
> (C) At "Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs":
>
> (1) 128 bit encryption support for Dial-up Networking
> (2) Internet Explorer Q891781
> (was Q889293, Q834707, Q867801, Q831167, Q832894, Q824145,
> Q828750, Q822925, Q818529)
> (3) Microsoft Data Access Components KB870669
> (4) Microsoft Internet Explorer 5 Web Accessories
> (5) Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 SP1 and Internet Tools
> (6) Microsoft Internet Print Services
> (7) Microsoft Outlook Express 6
> (8) Microsoft VGX Q833989
> (9) MSN Messenger 4.5.
> (10) Outlook Express Q823353 (was Q837009, Q330994)
> (11) Windows 98 KB891711 Update
> (12) Windows 98 Q823559 Update
> (13) Windows 98 Q840315 Update
> (14) Windows 98 Q888113 Update
> (15) Windows 98 Q890175 Update
> (16) Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video Update
> (17) Windows Media Player system update (9 series)
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net
> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:%237wDKXkPFHA.1392@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>| ??? That's what my headers show too, Bear, and I have all the critical
>| updates for IE and OE installed. This is Win98, remember?
>| --
>| Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>| http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>| http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
>|
>| "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
>| news:uT2i9DkPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>| > OT: Your headers ("Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express
>| > 6.00.2800.1409") tell me you need to visit Windows Update ASAP. You're
>| > running much less-secure versions of OE, IE and Windows, Duradan.
>| > --
>| > ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>| > MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
>| >
>| > Mastering Newsgroups in Outlook Express
>| >
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/community/columns/newsgroups.mspx
>| >
>| > Duradan wrote:
>| > > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet
>| > > or the like before.
>| > > Very interesting.
>| > > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available
>| > > from this guy
>| > > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
>| > > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

glee wrote:
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 in your headers
> means you have an OE update installed (Q823353) that is not for Win98,
> though it may have been offerred for a brief period of time according to
> reports that I have not confirmed. Outlook Express Update 823353 was not
> released for Win98/98SE/ME according to this:
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms04-018.mspx
> Read the FAQ section...it is not listed as "critical" for those systems,
> so the update was not released for them.

I was just looking at that myself ! ..and was trying to figure out how he
got that. There is no place in WU that offered me that, but looking up his
listings I found what he did which was to install:
MS04-018, 823353, Cumulative for OE, July 13, 2004
Where WU for 9x only offers:
MS04-013, 837009, Cumulative for OE, April13, 2004
....so I went after what he had here:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=AD6A96BC-DAF0-4EAB-89B8-BD702B3E3E5D&displaylang=en
..downloaded and installed it just fine to check it out ...and then went
back to scour over the
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-018.mspx
..and do see it says in the beginning and in FAQ that W98 is affected but I
guess they just didn't get a chance yet to put the download link there, or
like I see you have said maybe they pulled it ... oh well, now I have it
too - I can easily reverse it, the only thing it appears it actually changes
different is the Inetcomm.dll file size changed, also a number of other dll's
date changed by 3 months but the file size is identical and haven't bothered
looking at the dlll versions to compare those yet etc......
...well no biggy mostlikely.

Rick

> --
> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
>
>
> "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
> news:ed2F%23QtPFHA.2604@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> I am Win98SE, IE6 SP1, fully updated, but with an unchecked Kb891711...
>>
>> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
>> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
>>
>> (A) At IE6, Help, About:
>> SP1, Q313829, Q328970, Q328389, Q324929, Q810847, Q813951, Q816506,
>> Q813489, Q330994, Q818529, Q822925, Q828750, Q824145, Q832894,
>> Q837009, Q831167, Q823353, Q867801, Q833989, Q834707, Q889293, Q867282,
>> & 891781.
>>
>> (B) At "START, Run, MSInfo32, Software Environment, Software Updates",
>> or at "START, RUN, QFECheck"..:
>>
>> Windows 98 Second Edition=4,10,0,2222
>> Updates=Year 2000 Update for Windows 98b
>> SP2: Windows 98 Second Edition USBHUB
>> W98: KB891711, Q245729, Q274113, Q314147, Q323172, Q323255,
>> Q329115, Q811630, Q840315, Q888113, & Q890175.
>> W98SE: Q823559, Q245272, Q256015, Q259728, Q260067, Q273017, Q273991
>> Win98SE: Q249973, Q238453, Q239887, UHCD
>> Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video
>> Windows 98 TELNET
>>
>> (C) At "Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs":
>>
>> (1) 128 bit encryption support for Dial-up Networking
>> (2) Internet Explorer Q891781
>> (was Q889293, Q834707, Q867801, Q831167, Q832894, Q824145,
>> Q828750, Q822925, Q818529)
>> (3) Microsoft Data Access Components KB870669
>> (4) Microsoft Internet Explorer 5 Web Accessories
>> (5) Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 SP1 and Internet Tools
>> (6) Microsoft Internet Print Services
>> (7) Microsoft Outlook Express 6
>> (8) Microsoft VGX Q833989
>> (9) MSN Messenger 4.5.
>> (10) Outlook Express Q823353 (was Q837009, Q330994)
>> (11) Windows 98 KB891711 Update
>> (12) Windows 98 Q823559 Update
>> (13) Windows 98 Q840315 Update
>> (14) Windows 98 Q888113 Update
>> (15) Windows 98 Q890175 Update
>> (16) Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video Update
>> (17) Windows Media Player system update (9 series)
>>
>> --
>> Thanks or Good Luck,
>> There may be humor in this post, and,
>> Naturally, you will not sue,
>> should things get worse after this,
>> PCR
>> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:%237wDKXkPFHA.1392@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> | ??? That's what my headers show too, Bear, and I have all the critical
>> updates for
>> | IE and OE installed. This is Win98, remember?
>> | --
>> | Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>> | http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>> | http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
>> |
>> | "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> | news:uT2i9DkPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> | > OT: Your headers ("Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express
>> 6.00.2800.1409")
>> | > tell me you need to visit Windows Update ASAP. You're running much
>> | > less-secure versions of OE, IE and Windows, Duradan.
>> | > --
>> | > ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>> | > MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
>> | >
>> | > Mastering Newsgroups in Outlook Express
>> | >
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/community/columns/newsgroups.mspx
>> | >
>> | > Duradan wrote:
>> | > > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used
>> usenet or
>> | > > the like before.
>> | > > Very interesting.
>> | > > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix'
>> available from
>> | > > this guy
>> | > > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
>> | > > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

"Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or the
>like before.
>Very interesting.
>Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available from
>this guy
>http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
>Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
>

The 48 bit lba patch may work in terms of allowing the computer to use
the larger hard drives.

However this is not going to do anything whatever about the
limitations of Scandisk and Defrag which are *not* related to the
actual size of the drive or partition but rather to the total number
of clusters on the drive.

Scandisk and Defrag will not work on a drive with more than 4.1
million total clusters. This will happen on a drive as small as 17 gb
if it uses a 4k cluster size, on drives 33 gb or larger with 8k
clusters, on drives 65 gb or larger with 16k clusters, or on drives
129 gb or larger with 32k clusters.

And 32k is the largest possible cluster size for FAT32 drives.

(Note - all of the above figures are based on binary gigabytes = 2^30
bytes.)


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
http://aumha.org/alex.htm
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

"Rick Chauvin" <justask@nospamz.com> wrote in message
news:evw0ncuPFHA.580@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> glee wrote:
> > X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 in your headers
> > means you have an OE update installed (Q823353) that is not for Win98,
> > though it may have been offerred for a brief period of time according to
> > reports that I have not confirmed. Outlook Express Update 823353 was not
> > released for Win98/98SE/ME according to this:
> > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms04-018.mspx
> > Read the FAQ section...it is not listed as "critical" for those systems,
> > so the update was not released for them.
>
> I was just looking at that myself ! ..and was trying to figure out how he
> got that. There is no place in WU that offered me that, but looking up his
> listings I found what he did which was to install:
> MS04-018, 823353, Cumulative for OE, July 13, 2004
> Where WU for 9x only offers:
> MS04-013, 837009, Cumulative for OE, April13, 2004
> ...so I went after what he had here:
>
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=AD6A96BC-DAF0-4EAB-89B8-BD702B3E3E5D&displaylang=en
> ..downloaded and installed it just fine to check it out ...and then went
> back to scour over the
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-018.mspx
> ..and do see it says in the beginning and in FAQ that W98 is affected but I
> guess they just didn't get a chance yet to put the download link there, or
> like I see you have said maybe they pulled it ... oh well, now I have it
> too - I can easily reverse it, the only thing it appears it actually changes
> different is the Inetcomm.dll file size changed, also a number of other dll's
> date changed by 3 months but the file size is identical and haven't bothered
> looking at the dlll versions to compare those yet etc......
> ..well no biggy mostlikely.

:) Yes, I know how he could have gotten it, because I got it that way on another
machine, and also had it on this one for a while, then uninstalled it here. The
update does seem to work fine on my Win98SE machines, though it probably isn't a
good idea to go installing patches that weren't tested on that OS. What I am
curious about is how PCR got it.....the way you describe, or through Windows Update.
I have heard it was briefly available for Win98, but I never saw it at Windows
Update myself. Did you?
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx

>
> > --
> > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> > http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> > http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
> >
> >
> > "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
> > news:ed2F%23QtPFHA.2604@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> >> I am Win98SE, IE6 SP1, fully updated, but with an unchecked Kb891711...
> >>
> >> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
> >> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
> >>
> >> (A) At IE6, Help, About:
> >> SP1, Q313829, Q328970, Q328389, Q324929, Q810847, Q813951, Q816506,
> >> Q813489, Q330994, Q818529, Q822925, Q828750, Q824145, Q832894,
> >> Q837009, Q831167, Q823353, Q867801, Q833989, Q834707, Q889293, Q867282,
> >> & 891781.
> >>
> >> (B) At "START, Run, MSInfo32, Software Environment, Software Updates",
> >> or at "START, RUN, QFECheck"..:
> >>
> >> Windows 98 Second Edition=4,10,0,2222
> >> Updates=Year 2000 Update for Windows 98b
> >> SP2: Windows 98 Second Edition USBHUB
> >> W98: KB891711, Q245729, Q274113, Q314147, Q323172, Q323255,
> >> Q329115, Q811630, Q840315, Q888113, & Q890175.
> >> W98SE: Q823559, Q245272, Q256015, Q259728, Q260067, Q273017, Q273991
> >> Win98SE: Q249973, Q238453, Q239887, UHCD
> >> Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video
> >> Windows 98 TELNET
> >>
> >> (C) At "Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs":
> >>
> >> (1) 128 bit encryption support for Dial-up Networking
> >> (2) Internet Explorer Q891781
> >> (was Q889293, Q834707, Q867801, Q831167, Q832894, Q824145,
> >> Q828750, Q822925, Q818529)
> >> (3) Microsoft Data Access Components KB870669
> >> (4) Microsoft Internet Explorer 5 Web Accessories
> >> (5) Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 SP1 and Internet Tools
> >> (6) Microsoft Internet Print Services
> >> (7) Microsoft Outlook Express 6
> >> (8) Microsoft VGX Q833989
> >> (9) MSN Messenger 4.5.
> >> (10) Outlook Express Q823353 (was Q837009, Q330994)
> >> (11) Windows 98 KB891711 Update
> >> (12) Windows 98 Q823559 Update
> >> (13) Windows 98 Q840315 Update
> >> (14) Windows 98 Q888113 Update
> >> (15) Windows 98 Q890175 Update
> >> (16) Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video Update
> >> (17) Windows Media Player system update (9 series)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thanks or Good Luck,
> >> There may be humor in this post, and,
> >> Naturally, you will not sue,
> >> should things get worse after this,
> >> PCR
> >> pcrrcp@netzero.net
> >> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> news:%237wDKXkPFHA.1392@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> >> | ??? That's what my headers show too, Bear, and I have all the critical
> >> updates for
> >> | IE and OE installed. This is Win98, remember?
> >> | --
> >> | Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> >> | http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> >> | http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
> >> |
> >> | "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> | news:uT2i9DkPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >> | > OT: Your headers ("Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express
> >> 6.00.2800.1409")
> >> | > tell me you need to visit Windows Update ASAP. You're running much
> >> | > less-secure versions of OE, IE and Windows, Duradan.
> >> | > --
> >> | > ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> >> | > MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
> >> | >
> >> | > Mastering Newsgroups in Outlook Express
> >> | >
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/community/columns/newsgroups.mspx
> >> | >
> >> | > Duradan wrote:
> >> | > > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used
> >> usenet or
> >> | > > the like before.
> >> | > > Very interesting.
> >> | > > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix'
> >> available from
> >> | > > this guy
> >> | > > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
> >> | > > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

WU installed on both 98/98se. Guess to correct the tilde or mistake?
itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
..com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1.
http://download.windowsupdate.com/msdownload/update/v3-19990518/cabpool/IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU_5ee60d6c9b9464c7ddf332147ebd16f.exe
2004-07-17 15:34:24 20:34:24 Success IUENGINE Local path
c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1\IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
Successful Saturday, July 17, 2004 Cumulative Security Update for Outlook
Express 6 SP1 (KB823353) Web site
--
mae


"glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
news:uiEKA3tPFHA.3076@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
| X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 in your headers
means you
| have an OE update installed (Q823353) that is not for Win98, though it may
have been
| offerred for a brief period of time according to reports that I have not
confirmed.
| Outlook Express Update 823353 was not released for Win98/98SE/ME according
to this:
| http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms04-018.mspx
| Read the FAQ section...it is not listed as "critical" for those systems,
so the
| update was not released for them.
| --
| Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
| http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
| http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
|
|
| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
| news:ed2F%23QtPFHA.2604@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| > I am Win98SE, IE6 SP1, fully updated, but with an unchecked Kb891711...
| >
| > X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
|
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I *hate* when that happens.

And yet...

[On 11 Apr-05] Duradan wrote:
> Yea, I know there are still 13 I need to get.
<snip>
--
~PAÞ

glee wrote:
> ??? That's what my headers show too, Bear, and I have all the critical
> updates for IE and OE installed. This is Win98, remember?
>
> "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uT2i9DkPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> OT: Your headers ("Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409")
>> tell me you need to visit Windows Update ASAP. You're running much
>> less-secure versions of OE, IE and Windows, Duradan.
>> --
>> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>> MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
>>
>> Mastering Newsgroups in Outlook Express
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/community/columns/newsgroups.mspx
>>
>> Duradan wrote:
>>> Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or
>>> the like before.
>>> Very interesting.
>>> Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available
>>> from
>>> this guy
>>> http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
>>> Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I believe as long as the mobo can read the larger drives the mini boot
manager isn't needed. Older mobos can't but anything from the last few years
can, as my AOpen does. It had no problem recognizing the drive in BIOS, it
was just Windows that had the problems with the drive on the mobo
controller.
With the controller card, the LBA 48-bit barrier in Windows is irrellevant
as the card handles all that internally and just passes the data to the PCI
bus.
The card does have a BIOS screen immediately after the mobo BIOS and prior
to Windows loading. Is that a DDO or whatever?

"Bill Blanton" <bblanton@REMOVEmagicnet.net> wrote in message
news:%23o11a%23oPFHA.2348@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I thought that too, but he only seems concerned about the boot
> process. From the manual-
>
> "
> REQUIREMENTS
>
> Windows 98, 98SE or ME (Read WINDOWS ME Section Below if using Windows ME)
>
> BIOS support for hard drives >137GB or
> A Windows Compatable Boot Manager that supports hard drives >137GB
> A Mini Boot Manager is now available from Rudolph R. Loew
> "
>
> btw, the demo is good for up to 145GB.
>
>
> "Jeff Richards" <JRichards@msn.com.au> wrote in message
news:%237nXChmPFHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > This is the first I have heard of it, and if it works as advertised then
he's done a real service to the W9x community. But I am
> > a bit suspicious, as it was my understanding that the problem was based
in the BIOS and the way that Windows is forced to use the
> > BIOS for disk services. That's why the controller card option works.
If he can do in software what a new controller does in the
> > BIOS then there's no reason that the fix shouldn't be OK.
> >
> > If the fix has been around for some time, I would query why we haven't
heard more about it. Or perhaps it's brand new. Why not
> > e-mail him and ask some questions (like why isn't he advertising this a
bit more widely!).
> > --
> > Jeff Richards
> > MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
> > "mae" <agrannie@notemail.msn.com> wrote in message
news:%23ZwSgUlPFHA.2788@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > This is what I saw there- only 2 -a conferencing and this patch:
> > Shareware and Demo Programs written by Rudolph Loew
> > that have been packaged for internet distribution. Many more programs
are available for the PC and Amiga Computers.
> >
> > The High Capacity Disk Patch Program patches Windows 98/98SE/ME to
provide direct support for hard drives larger than 137GB
> > without requiring a controller card or the Intel Application Accelerator
which can only beused with an Intel chipset motherboard.
> > The patch installs support for the48-Bit addressing mode required for
hard drives larger than 137GB.
> > NOTE: Some Programs and Documentation report this limit as 128GB.
> > --
> > mae
> >
> > "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
news:%2349mJckPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > | I cannot seem to get to that site. What is the "fix" there?
> > | --
> > | Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> > | http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> > | http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
> > |
> > | "Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > | news:O93hN5jPFHA.904@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > | > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet
or the
> > | > like before.
> > | > Very interesting.
> > | > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available
from
> > | > this guy
> > | > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
> > | > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
> > | >
> > | >
> > |
> >
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

That is exactly the model I have installed.

"Rick Chauvin" <justask@nospamz.com> wrote in message
news:uhD6OlpPFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Duradan wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available
from
> > this guy
> > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
> > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
>
> I've not seen that software yet - and congrats to Mr. Loew for doing that.
>
> However, using a modern controller card with its exceptional advantaged
> qualifications is the ultimate way to do it, period! ..all else
comparatively
> is limited.
>
> Continuing from my reply to your earlier post and now to this one Duradan,
> using any modern Controller card which takes care of not only that 9x
127GB
> limitation issue, but it also inherently gives the extra remarkable
advantage
> of increasing overall system performance dramatically, even much better
than
> any AA (application accelerator) which is intel proprietary anyway not to
> mention its other software based limitations; whereas the controller card
has
> no such limitations whatsoever and besides covers all brand motherboards.
A
> controller card also gives the advantage of having extra dual primary
ports
> with that wonderful convenience as well.
>
> I would not own a desktop computer that does not use a controller card,
not
> only just for W9x usage but for W2000/WXP also where those show and
overall
> system performance increase using it as well.
>
> It's a no-brainer, and for those who have one and have compared the
> differences with and without it - know what I'm talking about.
> It's especially noticeable when using todays fast modern motherboards and
> processors and run 9x - you have no idea what you are missing. Even works
> well for those with old mb's and processors too.
>
> Here's a link with some screenshots of it:
> http://www.newegg.com/app/Showimage.asp?style=album
> ..here's just one of many places you can buy it:
>
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=16-102-007&depa=0
> ..but of course buy it wherever you want - but without question be sure
it's
> a Promise ULTRA133 TX2 model because it's the best & includes the latest
> mods.
>
> Rick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Thank you Ron. What we need now is a programer who can build a defragger and
diskchecker for Win98/ME that will work on large partitions over the 128GB
barrier. Couple that with Robert Leow's Win98 LBA 48-bit fix and and we can
get around the coming large hard drive sized forced migration to new
software.


"Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7cjl51phfsrjepcecpo8c0pef90e3oblq0@4ax.com...
> "Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or
the
> >like before.
> >Very interesting.
> >Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available from
> >this guy
> >http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
> >Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
> >
>
> The 48 bit lba patch may work in terms of allowing the computer to use
> the larger hard drives.
>
> However this is not going to do anything whatever about the
> limitations of Scandisk and Defrag which are *not* related to the
> actual size of the drive or partition but rather to the total number
> of clusters on the drive.
>
> Scandisk and Defrag will not work on a drive with more than 4.1
> million total clusters. This will happen on a drive as small as 17 gb
> if it uses a 4k cluster size, on drives 33 gb or larger with 8k
> clusters, on drives 65 gb or larger with 16k clusters, or on drives
> 129 gb or larger with 32k clusters.
>
> And 32k is the largest possible cluster size for FAT32 drives.
>
> (Note - all of the above figures are based on binary gigabytes = 2^30
> bytes.)
>
>
> Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
> --
> Microsoft MVP
> On-Line Help Computer Service
> http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
>
> In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
> http://aumha.org/alex.htm
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Duradan wrote:
> Thank you Ron. What we need now is a programer who can build a defragger
and
> diskchecker for Win98/ME that will work on large partitions over the 128GB
> barrier.

But that's not going to happen, in all probability.

> Couple that with Robert Leow's Win98 LBA 48-bit fix and and we can
> get around the coming large hard drive sized forced migration to new
> software.
>
>
> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:7cjl51phfsrjepcecpo8c0pef90e3oblq0@4ax.com...
>> "Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet or
the
>>> like before.
>>> Very interesting.
>>> Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available
from
>>> this guy
>>> http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
>>> Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
>>>
>>
>> The 48 bit lba patch may work in terms of allowing the computer to use
>> the larger hard drives.
>>
>> However this is not going to do anything whatever about the
>> limitations of Scandisk and Defrag which are *not* related to the
>> actual size of the drive or partition but rather to the total number
>> of clusters on the drive.
>>
>> Scandisk and Defrag will not work on a drive with more than 4.1
>> million total clusters. This will happen on a drive as small as 17 gb
>> if it uses a 4k cluster size, on drives 33 gb or larger with 8k
>> clusters, on drives 65 gb or larger with 16k clusters, or on drives
>> 129 gb or larger with 32k clusters.
>>
>> And 32k is the largest possible cluster size for FAT32 drives.
>>
>> (Note - all of the above figures are based on binary gigabytes = 2^30
>> bytes.)
>>
>>
>> Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
>> --
>> Microsoft MVP
>> On-Line Help Computer Service
>> http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
>>
>> In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
>> http://aumha.org/alex.htm
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

If your BIOS supports 48-bit LBA, then this Window's disk driver
(which apparently replaces the original Win98 disk driver, ESDI_506.PDR,
with its own) should have no issues, and you don't need the boot manager.
I've never seen it before either, and can't really comment on how solid
it is, or if it works as advertised.
Let us know ;)

Seeing the card enumerated on bootup, or seeing the card's own BIOS messages
doesn't mean you have a DDO installed, and otoh doesn't mean you don't. If
there is a DDO installed you should see a message immediatley after BIOS POST
refering to it, such as "Press Ctrl to enter EZ-BIOS" (or similar)..There are
other ways to check, but it's a pretty good bet that if your BIOS supports
48-bit LBA, then there's no overlay.





"Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e3oPNLxPFHA.3156@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>I believe as long as the mobo can read the larger drives the mini boot
> manager isn't needed. Older mobos can't but anything from the last few years
> can, as my AOpen does. It had no problem recognizing the drive in BIOS, it
> was just Windows that had the problems with the drive on the mobo
> controller.
> With the controller card, the LBA 48-bit barrier in Windows is irrellevant
> as the card handles all that internally and just passes the data to the PCI
> bus.
> The card does have a BIOS screen immediately after the mobo BIOS and prior
> to Windows loading. Is that a DDO or whatever?
>
> "Bill Blanton" <bblanton@REMOVEmagicnet.net> wrote in message
> news:%23o11a%23oPFHA.2348@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> I thought that too, but he only seems concerned about the boot
>> process. From the manual-
>>
>> "
>> REQUIREMENTS
>>
>> Windows 98, 98SE or ME (Read WINDOWS ME Section Below if using Windows ME)
>>
>> BIOS support for hard drives >137GB or
>> A Windows Compatable Boot Manager that supports hard drives >137GB
>> A Mini Boot Manager is now available from Rudolph R. Loew
>> "
>>
>> btw, the demo is good for up to 145GB.
>>
>>
>> "Jeff Richards" <JRichards@msn.com.au> wrote in message
> news:%237nXChmPFHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> > This is the first I have heard of it, and if it works as advertised then
> he's done a real service to the W9x community. But I am
>> > a bit suspicious, as it was my understanding that the problem was based
> in the BIOS and the way that Windows is forced to use the
>> > BIOS for disk services. That's why the controller card option works.
> If he can do in software what a new controller does in the
>> > BIOS then there's no reason that the fix shouldn't be OK.
>> >
>> > If the fix has been around for some time, I would query why we haven't
> heard more about it. Or perhaps it's brand new. Why not
>> > e-mail him and ask some questions (like why isn't he advertising this a
> bit more widely!).
>> > --
>> > Jeff Richards
>> > MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
>> > "mae" <agrannie@notemail.msn.com> wrote in message
> news:%23ZwSgUlPFHA.2788@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> > This is what I saw there- only 2 -a conferencing and this patch:
>> > Shareware and Demo Programs written by Rudolph Loew
>> > that have been packaged for internet distribution. Many more programs
> are available for the PC and Amiga Computers.
>> >
>> > The High Capacity Disk Patch Program patches Windows 98/98SE/ME to
> provide direct support for hard drives larger than 137GB
>> > without requiring a controller card or the Intel Application Accelerator
> which can only beused with an Intel chipset motherboard.
>> > The patch installs support for the48-Bit addressing mode required for
> hard drives larger than 137GB.
>> > NOTE: Some Programs and Documentation report this limit as 128GB.
>> > --
>> > mae
>> >
>> > "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:%2349mJckPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> > | I cannot seem to get to that site. What is the "fix" there?
>> > | --
>> > | Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>> > | http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>> > | http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
>> > |
>> > | "Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > | news:O93hN5jPFHA.904@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> > | > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used usenet
> or the
>> > | > like before.
>> > | > Very interesting.
>> > | > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix' available
> from
>> > | > this guy
>> > | > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
>> > | > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
>> > | >
>> > | >
>> > |
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Thanks for that info, mae. Apparently is *was* available at some time on WU, though
not any longer. I am going to dig some more and see if I can find out "the rest of
the story".
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx

"mae" <agrannie@notemail.msn.com> wrote in message
news:uItjy8wPFHA.3292@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> WU installed on both 98/98se. Guess to correct the tilde or mistake?
> itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
> .com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1.
>
http://download.windowsupdate.com/msdownload/update/v3-19990518/cabpool/IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU_5ee60d6c9b9464c7ddf332147ebd16f.exe
> 2004-07-17 15:34:24 20:34:24 Success IUENGINE Local path
> c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1\IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
> Successful Saturday, July 17, 2004 Cumulative Security Update for Outlook
> Express 6 SP1 (KB823353) Web site
> --
> mae
>
>
> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:uiEKA3tPFHA.3076@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 in your headers
> means you
> | have an OE update installed (Q823353) that is not for Win98, though it may
> have been
> | offerred for a brief period of time according to reports that I have not
> confirmed.
> | Outlook Express Update 823353 was not released for Win98/98SE/ME according
> to this:
> | http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms04-018.mspx
> | Read the FAQ section...it is not listed as "critical" for those systems,
> so the
> | update was not released for them.
> | --
> | Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> | http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> | http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
> |
> |
> | "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
> | news:ed2F%23QtPFHA.2604@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> | > I am Win98SE, IE6 SP1, fully updated, but with an unchecked Kb891711...
> | >
> | > X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
> |
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

glee wrote:
> "Rick Chauvin" wrote in message
> news:evw0ncuPFHA.580@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
[...]
>> I was just looking at that myself ! ..and was trying to figure out how he
>> got that. There is no place in WU that offered me that, but looking up
[...]

> :) Yes, I know how he could have gotten it, because I got it that way on
> another machine, and also had it on this one for a while, then uninstalled
> it here. The update does seem to work fine on my Win98SE machines, though
> it probably isn't a good idea to go installing patches that weren't tested
> on that OS. What I am curious about is how PCR got it.....the way you
> describe, or through Windows Update. I have heard it was briefly available
> for Win98, but I never saw it at Windows Update myself. Did you?

No actually I never saw it available at WU and only installed it yesterday
when I saw PCR's post and was trying to figure out how I missed that OE
Cumulative update myself, and so had did a little research and found it and
thought I had just missed it somehow and so installed it. In the meantime
while I was doing that you posted about it which I never saw your post till I
already had my email typed and so just sent it anyway adding onto to it what
I did; otherwise I wouldn't have posted if I had saw yours first before I did
all that.

I suspect PCR got it from WU because as a rule he is not one to step out of
the box to often otherwise.

I wonder if it's actually okay to have this installed that now on my pc, I
suspect it really is okay, but now the big question I do wonder why they
pulled it from WU where I see now mae got it. Anyway, please do tell us tell
us when you find out k. Also I wanted to ask you if you ever let your MS
channels know about the IE6SP1 delete hang? ..and what they said about it?

Thanks
Rick

> --
> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
>
>>
>> > --
>> > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>> > http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>> > http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
>> >
>> >
>> > "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
>> > news:ed2F%23QtPFHA.2604@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> >> I am Win98SE, IE6 SP1, fully updated, but with an unchecked Kb891711...
>> >>
>> >> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
>> >> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
>> >>
>> >> (A) At IE6, Help, About:
>> >> SP1, Q313829, Q328970, Q328389, Q324929, Q810847, Q813951, Q816506,
>> >> Q813489, Q330994, Q818529, Q822925, Q828750, Q824145, Q832894,
>> >> Q837009, Q831167, Q823353, Q867801, Q833989, Q834707, Q889293, Q867282,
>> >> & 891781.
>> >>
>> >> (B) At "START, Run, MSInfo32, Software Environment, Software Updates",
>> >> or at "START, RUN, QFECheck"..:
>> >>
>> >> Windows 98 Second Edition=4,10,0,2222
>> >> Updates=Year 2000 Update for Windows 98b
>> >> SP2: Windows 98 Second Edition USBHUB
>> >> W98: KB891711, Q245729, Q274113, Q314147, Q323172, Q323255,
>> >> Q329115, Q811630, Q840315, Q888113, & Q890175.
>> >> W98SE: Q823559, Q245272, Q256015, Q259728, Q260067, Q273017, Q273991
>> >> Win98SE: Q249973, Q238453, Q239887, UHCD
>> >> Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video
>> >> Windows 98 TELNET
>> >>
>> >> (C) At "Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs":
>> >>
>> >> (1) 128 bit encryption support for Dial-up Networking
>> >> (2) Internet Explorer Q891781
>> >> (was Q889293, Q834707, Q867801, Q831167, Q832894, Q824145,
>> >> Q828750, Q822925, Q818529)
>> >> (3) Microsoft Data Access Components KB870669
>> >> (4) Microsoft Internet Explorer 5 Web Accessories
>> >> (5) Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 SP1 and Internet Tools
>> >> (6) Microsoft Internet Print Services
>> >> (7) Microsoft Outlook Express 6
>> >> (8) Microsoft VGX Q833989
>> >> (9) MSN Messenger 4.5.
>> >> (10) Outlook Express Q823353 (was Q837009, Q330994)
>> >> (11) Windows 98 KB891711 Update
>> >> (12) Windows 98 Q823559 Update
>> >> (13) Windows 98 Q840315 Update
>> >> (14) Windows 98 Q888113 Update
>> >> (15) Windows 98 Q890175 Update
>> >> (16) Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video Update
>> >> (17) Windows Media Player system update (9 series)
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Thanks or Good Luck,
>> >> There may be humor in this post, and,
>> >> Naturally, you will not sue,
>> >> should things get worse after this,
>> >> PCR
>> >> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>> >> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:%237wDKXkPFHA.1392@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> >> | ??? That's what my headers show too, Bear, and I have all the
>> >> | critical updates for IE and OE installed. This is Win98, remember?
>> >> | --
>> >> | Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>> >> | http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>> >> | http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
>> >> |
>> >> | "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> | news:uT2i9DkPFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> >> | > OT: Your headers ("Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express
>> >> 6.00.2800.1409")
>> >> | > tell me you need to visit Windows Update ASAP. You're running much
>> >> | > less-secure versions of OE, IE and Windows, Duradan.
>> >> | > --
>> >> | > ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>> >> | > MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
>> >> | >
>> >> | > Mastering Newsgroups in Outlook Express
>> >> | >
>> >> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/community/columns/newsgroups.mspx
>> >> | >
>> >> | > Duradan wrote:
>> >> | > > Fascinating how this works, using OE to post. I've never used
>> >> usenet or
>> >> | > > the like before.
>> >> | > > Very interesting.
>> >> | > > Thanks for the info, I expect I will try the program 'fix'
>> >> available from
>> >> | > > this guy
>> >> | > > http://members.aol.com/rloew1/
>> >> | > > Anyone think it might be worth the ten bucks?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom