Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

shell32.dll

Last response: in Windows 95/98/ME
Share
March 29, 2002 11:58:51 AM

Having trouble with programs and this driver. I can't open programs sometimes but after I re boot they open. Can some one help. Scandisk.exe won't run either! OS is 98SE.

Music equals changing frequencies in space over time!

More about : shell32 dll

March 29, 2002 3:04:54 PM

Where can I find this driver? And would this stop scan disk from running?

Music equals changing frequencies in space over time!
Related resources
March 29, 2002 3:38:16 PM

The easiest way to replace the file would be to reinstall the operating system as an overwrite. Put your Win98SE CD in the CD-ROM, click Start\Run and browse to the setup.exe on the CD. Highlight the file, and click OK.

Many times, this is the best way to repair or replace corrupted and/or missing files in Win98. Afterwards, update your version of DirectX, and go to Windows Update. Re-download and install any updates needed for your operating system version.

I suggest this method, instead of just attempting to replace the file ... because if shell32.dll is missing, you may be missing <i>other</i> necessary files also, due to whatever originally occurred on your system that deleted the file.

Toejam31

<font color=red>My Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847" target="_new"><font color=green>Toejam31's Tantalizing Tantric Toy</font color=green></A>
<font color=red>Second Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=15942" target="_new"><font color=green>Toey's Dynamite DDR Duron</font color=green></A>
____________________________________________________________

<font color=purple>"Procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."</font color=purple>
March 29, 2002 8:10:06 PM

When I put 98 disk in and go to run setup.exe I get the infameous blue screen of death!

Music equals changing frequencies in space over time!
March 29, 2002 8:15:42 PM

Time to reformat =). Or get 2k or XP

<font color=red>:</font color=red> <font color=white>:</font color=white> <font color=blue>:</font color=blue>
March 29, 2002 10:34:53 PM

Okay, I was right ... your system has a few more problems than just one missing file.

I'd boot the system to DOS with a <A HREF="http://www.mirrors.org/archived_software/www.bootdisk.c..." target="_new">startup disk</A> and access the setup.exe on the installation CD from there. That way, no Windows files are running at the time.

Do you need instructions on how to do this?

If this doesn't work, as Zlash suggested, you might be looking at a format/reinstall to get the best results.

Toejam31

<font color=red>My Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847" target="_new"><font color=green>Toejam31's Tantalizing Tantric Toy</font color=green></A>
<font color=red>Second Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=15942" target="_new"><font color=green>Toey's Dynamite DDR Duron</font color=green></A>
____________________________________________________________

<font color=purple>"Procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."</font color=purple>
March 30, 2002 12:03:55 PM

Thanks Toejam for the help. Is it worth going to XP or 2000 OS? I've read about a lot of diver problems with XP. Is the increased stability worth the change?

Music equals changing frequencies in space over time!
March 30, 2002 2:43:48 PM

In a word ... yes. Definitely yes. And here are the reasons:

1.) Win2K/XP are true 32-bit operating systems. This means that the OS's fully support multi-threading, multi-tasking and multi-processing. Most well-written programs for the GUI support multi-threading.

2.) Win2K/XP supports what is called Process Separation. This means that an errant program will not bring down the entire system if a problem occurs, unlike Win9x.

3.) Win2K/XP supports Side-by-Side components, which allows multiple versions of .dlls with the same name to exist for separate applications. With the addition of Window File Protection, I think this is a major accomplishment, as Win9x cannot offer protection for the core system files in this manner, resulting in the familiar "DLL Hell" when programs are installed that overwrite or replace those same files.

4.) Win2K/XP has a Protected Kernel Mode Architecture, which prevents kernel mode operation of code such as drivers, thereby improving system reliability. The Kernel is smaller, and more efficient at delegating tasks.

5.) Win2K/XP has far better Memory and System Resource management than Win9x. This in itself may be the single best reason to upgrade. Win9x Memory Management is, to put it simply ... lousy. Memory & System Resources used by applications in a 16-bit environment could often not be reclaimed without rebooting the system, as a best case scenario. In the worst, caused the system to become highly unstable or crash.

Extensive testing has shown that as physical memory is added to a Win9x system, the performance benefits decrease exponentially. And there is a problem with Win95/98/ME after adding more 512MB of RAM. The Vcache, which contains the memory addresses for the disk-caching driver, can increase to 800MB. This bug causes conflicts with other hardware, such as the AGP port ... not to mention using up all the memory in the system. A user must manually change the settings in the system.ini file, or the system will display errors messages, refuse to boot, or even crash.

Win9x has a priority issue with memory ... it uses the virtual memory first, and the physical memory second. With a Win9x managed swap file, hard disk paging can occur frequently when an intensive application is used. Again, in order to manage these events, a user must create a custom swap file, and manually adjust the system.ini file.

It has been shown that Win9x has little use for additional blocks of RAM beyond 64MB.

None of these issues occur in Win2K/XP. Windows 2000 and Windows XP can work efficiently with up to 4GBs of RAM.

6.) Win2K/XP have a vastly improved TCP/IP stack, which results in higher download speeds. I have found a twenty percent increase in speeds with my ADSL modem vs Win9x, with a similar driver set.

7.) Win2K/XP supports more efficient file systems, such as NTFS.

FAT32 has some limitations. It cannot support files over 4GB in size, which is something to be taken in account if you wish to work with large video files. FAT32 cluster sizes are much larger than in NTFS, which increases the hard disk slack space. NTFS is a journaling file system, and FAT32 is not. NTFS writes a log of changes being made, which offers a significant benefit in cases where a system loses power, experiences an unexpected reset, or crashes. NTFS can quickly return the disk to a consistent state with running CHKDSK (the replacement for SCANDISK) ... FAT systems cannot do this. Furthermore, NTFS performs well when reading, writing, and mounting large volume sizes. FAT32 performance is reduced for volumes larger than 32GB in two areas:

A.) Boot time with FAT32 is increased because of the time required to read all of the FAT structure. This must be done to calculate the amount of free space when the volume is mounted.
B.) Read/write performance with FAT32 is affected because the file system must determine the free space on the disk through the small views of the massive FAT structure. This leads to inefficiencies in file allocation.

Win9x can only use FAT16 or FAT32 file systems.

To summarize, use of Win2K or WinXP, even on a home desktop, means better speed and stability for programs, better memory management, true multi-tasking, easier recovery if the system crashes, no more problems with over-written .dlls, protection for the system core files, efficient use of larger amounts of memory, better file allocation, and support for larger hard drives with less loss of space. These are faster, far more stable operating systems.

However ...

Migrating to one of these operating systems is not necessarily the best move unless you get <i>yourself</i> prepared. This entails everything from flashing the BIOS to the latest version to assembling the latest drivers needed by the system <i>in advance</i>. And reading up on any issues that might arise as result of your particular hardware configuration. Otherwise, you may find yourself spending more than a few hours troubleshooting your system and becoming very frustrated as a result.

Websites like this <A HREF="http://www.ntcompatible.com/" target="_new">one</A> are an excellent place to get started on your research. I can provide more links if you wish!

Toejam31

<font color=red>My Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847" target="_new"><font color=green>Toejam31's Tantalizing Tantric Toy</font color=green></A>
<font color=red>Second Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=15942" target="_new"><font color=green>Toey's Dynamite DDR Duron</font color=green></A>
____________________________________________________________

<font color=purple>"Procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."</font color=purple>
March 30, 2002 3:42:39 PM

Again I thank you Toejam. You definetyl know alot about these different OS. I have flashed my bios to the latest ver. 1009 Asus A7v board. Just put in PNY geforce4 TI 4400. What do you recomend downloading drivers to disk then a clean install of OS or could I get by installing over current OS. I need a stable system. Nice site you directed me to. I did some reading on faq. I thought Oldbear had a thread on this site some where (THG) about this do you remember reading that?

Music equals changing frequencies in space over time!
March 30, 2002 5:11:54 PM

Anytime you are going to install a new operating system, a clean installation is preferable if you are looking for stability.

As for the drivers, it would be an excellent idea to have them on a CD, neatly organized, and already extracted into easily identifiable folders. Most drivers come zipped in some form, whether as self-extracting ZIP files, or with the standard .ZIP file extension. The more of the drivers that you can add to the system manually, without resorting to the installation launcher commonly built into a driver set, the better your chances of a successful installation, IMHO.

As I recall, the only times I have allowed a driver to install automatically on a system running WinXP was with the chipset drivers, because there was no other choice! As a result, I often avoid many conflicts and errors attributed to bad-written drivers and/or IRQ conflicts. It's a little more work, but the end result is a more stable system.

I have two CDs with 66 folders distributed between them, for two different operating systems. They contain <i>some</i> third-party software, but the folders are primarily updated drivers for different kinds of hardware. I also keep a folder on one of my partitions for this purpose, with all the other folders as sub-directories. Periodically, as newer drivers arrive on the scene, I update and burn the folders to a couple of disks, and take them with me whenever I make a housecall. It certainly beats downloading everything from the Internet each time I set up a system!

It's a heck of a lot faster, too ... and I can keep track of what I am doing. I don't have to scratch my head and wonder if I've missed anything. I just go down the list, and begin the installations.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if OldBear had a thread about this, and other helpful websites on this forum. He knows his stuff.

Toejam31

<font color=red>My Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847" target="_new"><font color=green>Toejam31's Tantalizing Tantric Toy</font color=green></A>
<font color=red>Second Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=15942" target="_new"><font color=green>Toey's Dynamite DDR Duron</font color=green></A>
____________________________________________________________

<font color=purple>"Procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."</font color=purple>
!