Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Unofficial Windows98SE Patch

CmdrTaco posted more than 10 years ago | from the who-do-ya-trust dept.

Windows 417

usrid0 writes "A service pack for Windows 98 Second Edition has been released. Big deal, right? It is if it doesn't come from Microsoft. "

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The eternal question: (5, Insightful)

Tirel (692085) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033659)

Can you trust him?

I don't know about you, but I'll rather be keeping my win98 systems safely protected behind nat and a strict firewall than trusting some stranger offering me unofficial service packs.

Re:The eternal question: (5, Interesting)

Mr. Darl McBride (704524) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033677)

I don't know about you, but I'll rather be keeping my win98 systems safely protected behind nat and a strict firewall than trusting some stranger offering me unofficial service packs.
Most of what he's done is to update libraries. You can find byte-for-byte identical ones in newer releases of the OS and VS/VB libraries. As far as the rest goes, it's not just security. It adds things like the newer start menu, support for >512 megs, and better USB support.

There's no source code of course, but this stuff isn't exactly opaque. Get yourself a copy of IDA Pro [datarescue.com] or SoftIce and dig in. You might learn a thing or two!

Re:The eternal question: (2, Insightful)

crackshoe (751995) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033678)

I'd go for the stereotypical response "But Can You Trust Redmond?!?!?!?!?"... but at least they're accountable for their actions.

Re:The eternal question: (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033721)

I'd go for the stereotypical response "But Can You Trust Redmond?!?!?!?!?"... but at least they're accountable for their actions.

I'm curious. Other than shareholders, to whom are they accountable?

Re:The eternal question: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033723)

"but at least they're accountable for their actions."

*Ponder* To post or not to post... that is the question.

Re:The eternal question: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033731)

You're funny. Accountable for their actions. hahaha!

Re:The eternal question: (1, Insightful)

Methuseus (468642) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033735)

They are? I think that the suit against MS and the resulting decision prove your statement false....

Mod parent up (1)

empaler (130732) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033951)

Funny! Funny!

Wait, it's tragic.

Hey, this is regular greek!

Re:The eternal question: (1)

sjwt (161428) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033682)

maybe he needs to OS the patch,
just provied a page of links to the offical
patches, then a warning on the unofical bits.

Re:The eternal question: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033684)

Is that to say you run win 98?*raises eyebrow*

"... keeping my win98 systems..."??? (2, Funny)

quinkin (601839) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033686)

"... keeping my win98 systems..." - I didn't really understand this part of your post. Ah well, it's better than ME I guess...

Q.

Re:The eternal question: (5, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033712)

. . .some stranger offering me unofficial service packs.

As opposed to the strangers offering you nats and firewalls?

KFG

Re:The eternal question: (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033713)

Can you trust him?

Can you trust microsoft?

Re:The eternal question: (4, Funny)

Seehund (86897) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033714)

Of course you can trust him! The URL has the word "security" in it! I get e-mail from Citibank, eBay and PayPal all the time, and since the URLs in those e-mails contain the word "secure" somewhere, I know I can trust them with my account details and passwords. I mean, come on, a patch for a silly computer operating system is nothing important compared to my bank accounts!

Gotta appreciate Citibank et al's customer service though. Even though I'm not one of their customers, they send these helpful e-mails as if I were one.

Re:The eternal question: (1)

That's Unpossible! (722232) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033765)

Of course you can trust him! The URL has the word "security" in it!

Actually that is just where the article is, the guy hosting the software is located here: http://exuberant.ms11.net/ [ms11.net]

No "secure" in the URL, so it can't be trusted!

Re:The eternal question: (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033759)

it's a collection of patches available from other microsoft(windowsupdate&etc) anyways.

-

Re:The eternal question: (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033796)

No, the eternal question should be:
"Would it be more trustable than Win98?"

Is really hard to be more unsafe than with the unpatched windows, and is easier to develop a simpler trojan that do all the damage that you can image than go thru all the trouble to make a "patch".

Re:The eternal question: (5, Insightful)

sambira (169347) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033859)

Don't know if you can trust this Service Pack but can you trust one from MS? Who knows, this Service Pack might actually fix something instead of breaking things.

Zombie patch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033886)

Hey guys, when your freshly-patched 98SE computer starts reporting in to its zombie masters due to that deeply embedded rootkit, dont go crying to Bill.

Link and Download Mirrors (5, Informative)

Mr. Darl McBride (704524) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033663)

The author's page is here [ms11.net] , from the end of the article. His 98 SE service pack page is here [ms11.net] . He's got an Amazon.co.uk wishlist linked from that page (your Amazon US account works there as well). Be sure to check that out if you want to say thanks. :)

Mirrors of the 10.5meg patch are here [majorgeeks.com] , here [softpedia.com] , and here [soft32.com]

Re:Link and Download Mirrors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033732)

Does it mean that windows is following the open source model? Oh wait ...

Re:Link and Download Mirrors (2, Interesting)

beacher (82033) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033779)

Heh.. Hope he's got an advanced plan... 20 GB Bandwidth is $99/year for the most expensive advanced plan, and if the slashdot effect holds true, he's gonna use his bandwidth up umm.. today? 12000 bytes to load the page... 1.67 million hits...
I'm really on the fence on this one.... Windows 98 users should know that their products are EOL'd, but then again this guy is giving back freely (albeit in an un-authorized and non-authoritaive manner).
Nah, Alper.. thanks but no thanks.. Your effort is admirable. If my laptop crashes and burns it'll be my last Windows system to go and it won't be a day too soon.

Re:Link and Download Mirrors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033895)

Does this guy have permission to redistribute the files?

Nice Virus (4, Funny)

grennis (344262) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033665)

I think I got this one in an email a few days ago.

patch for Windows (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033669)

here [freebsd.org]

Re:patch for Windows (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033729)

I dont get it.

Patch for freeBSD. (4, Funny)

nlinecomputers (602059) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033785)

Get your patch for FreeBSD here [apple.com]

Re:Patch for freeBSD. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033843)

You have to patch the hardware too?! I don't want FreeBSD "fixed" that badly to replace the whole machine, it has lots of life left.

Nice try, funny guy.

Like windows 98 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033675)

it would appear that ezine.daemonnews is also dead, what with it being unsupported by daemonnews (no new issues since march, etc).

I don't expect anyone is going to rush out with an emergency ezine patch, however. :-P~

Already installed a couple of unofficial patches. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033679)

http://www.cygwin.com
http://www.mozilla.org

Re:Already installed a couple of unofficial patche (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033894)

Yesterday, I installed this other security update: http://fedora.redhat.com/

HAR HAR (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033683)

WOW! SLASHDOTTED ALREADY! I GUESS THE GUY FORGOT TO PATCH HIS IIS BOX WITH THIS!!! LOLOL!OL!

Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Lameass filter countered. Post aborted!

Winner: Most Pointless Screenshot of the Year (5, Funny)

horati0 (249977) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033685)

Yep, it's Windows 98 [ms11.net] , alright.

Re:Winner: Most Pointless Screenshot of the Year (1)

GraZZ (9716) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033715)

Those look like Win2k icons on the desktop though.

Not that that's very impressive in itself... Or did Win98 even support 16bit color icons?

Re:Winner: Most Pointless Screenshot of the Year (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033722)

That looks a lot like Win2K... that it?

/haven't seen Win98 in a while

Re:Winner: Most Pointless Screenshot of the Year (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033748)

Looks like Windows ME, actually.

Re:Winner: Most Pointless Screenshot of the Year (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033868)

Windows ME icons. Windows 2000 colour scheme.
RTF Service Pack's Page.

Re:Winner: Most Pointless Screenshot of the Year (4, Informative)

mindriot (96208) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033844)

Except his service pack included the ME/2000 desktop icons...

just repackaged (5, Insightful)

NoDoZ (232151) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033689)

This is cool, 98SE is still my favorite windows for lower end machines.

The article doesn't really specify, but it looks like this guy just too all the microsoft fixes and repackaged them. So most (if not all) of the stuff in it is 'official'

I prefer NT4 (4, Informative)

enosys (705759) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033827)

I prefer NT4. It's more stable and faster. My old computer is a Pentium 133 with 32 megs of RAM. I used to have Win98SE on it. Explorer was slow opening new windows because of all the web view crap that M$ added and while the OS itself tended to not totally crash I had to reboot it far too often because an app crashed and then wouldn't work right if I tried to run it again.

When I installed NT4 with SP6a there was a big improvement! Getting all the right drivers was a pain, and until I got that there was some instability, but now it's rock solid. Explorer is amazingly fast. (The "desktop upgrade" that you can get with IE4 makes it slower but it's still faster than Win98SE. I uninstalled it.) IE seemed to run faster. Applications in general don't crash, and if something crashes it won't mess anything up and can be run again without a reboot.

I ended up IERadicating [litepc.com] IE and installing Opera [opera.com] and then web browsing was fast. For IM I installed Miranda IM [miranda-im.org] and that is fast too. It's almost like I never needed to upgrade from a 133 MHz Pentium. NT4 may be a pain to install but it's fast and quite usable.

The only bad things about NT4 are the poor DirectX support and worse support for DOS games than Win9x. In this case I can live with that. That computer is too slow for most DirectX stuff anyways, and I don't care about old DOS games nowdays.

Re:just repackaged (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033919)

This is cool, 98SE is still my favorite windows for lower end machines.

Not only that, but there is a lot of hardware out there that never got drivers updated past Win98. I have an Okidata winprinter that works just fine, but the driver only works up to Win98. It would be really cool if there was a mini Win98 program that did nothing but run drivers, and could run on an add-in card or USB drive.

So... (2, Informative)

daishin (753851) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033692)

However, critical security updates will continue to be posted as necessary through June 30, 2006.

That means that in 2006 98SE users can get bugfixes for 2005, in keeping with how Microsoft makes fixes.

Is he the guy? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033694)

Is he the guy that's been emailing me Security Updates for months now? I don't need to use 512M with Win98SE, so he can stop now. Thanks!

guarantees... (4, Funny)

deadmongrel (621467) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033695)

Microsoft cannot vouch for the validity or quality of download packages offered by third parties not sanctioned by Microsoft."
How could they? They can't even vouch for their own products. How in the world are they going to vouch for someone else product?

Re:guarantees... (2, Interesting)

Koguma (608998) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033764)

You're right. Cause this IS all their own shite, just crapped out of a different orifice.

Re:guarantees... (1)

kunudo (773239) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033842)

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if he got into some kind of trouble for doing this.

Re:guarantees... (4, Insightful)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033881)

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if he got into some kind of trouble for doing this.

Microsoft licenses its patches to allow redistribution, so long as they in the end get run on duly authorized installations of Windows. This package just wraps a bundle of patches up to each run in sequence... which is exactly what a Service Pack does, or a network admin does when he's pushing bunches of patches on his network...

What's so special?? (-1, Troll)

Koguma (608998) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033696)

From the article it states that it's a collection of M$ eleased patces ad hotfixes. He just bundled them up with an installer. Heck, my mom can do that.

Re:What's so special?? (4, Interesting)

ReallyQuietGuy (683431) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033754)

someone actually modded you up? sheesh. the point is, your mom didn't, he did.

i've personally had to deal with manually installing the individual patches MS has released for NT4 machines one by one (by one... somewhere in the region of 25-35 patches per machine; MS' advisory on chaining patches without having to reboot after each one is useful but still doesn't help all that much) because MS won't release a proper service pack 7 with all the security updates rolled into it, and if i had to maintain win98se machines, i'd be very happy to run into this.

and as for all the other posters - offhand i'd say i trust him.

Re:What's so special?? (1)

Koguma (608998) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033804)

Hey genius. Here's a clue. In your winnt dir there's a list of all the patches and hotfixes applied to your box. To do what he did, setup a vanilla machine, run update. Pack up all the nice directories that say HOT FIX464GATES5645ASS56456 Service Pack4645EAT345ME234 Take those and shove them up an installer of your choice. My point is, that this is a -simple- -un newsworthy- feat. Perhaps you'd like to know next time I backup my machine too.

Re:What's so special?? (1)

Koguma (608998) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033823)

Argh, I hate correcting myself. That would be WINDOWS not winnt. Though under winnt it would be there as well.

Re:What's so special?? (1)

wintermute1974 (596184) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033878)

I will agree with you that it is not the technical feat of collecting Microsoft's patches and then rolling them into a single downloadable executable that is newsworthy here.

But what you seem to be missing is that something so simple wasn't done by Microsoft, and that it fell to a concerned Windows user to create the all-in-one executable.

It means Microsoft's users care more about its operating systems that Microsoft does.

Re:What's so special?? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033896)

Hey, genius. Here's a clue for you, too.
He also added:

Solves 512 MB of RAM problem.
256-color tray.
Better Notepad.
Optimized swap file usage.
Better WDM and USB support.
General "USB 1.x Mass Storage Device" support.
Adaptec ASPI 4.60.1021 drivers.
Windows Scripting Host 5.6.
DCOM98 1.3.
OLE Automation Libraries 2.40.4522.
Dial-Up Networking 1.4.
Microsoft Installer 2.0.
Visual Basic 6.0 SP6 runtime library.
Visual C++ 6.0 SP6 runtime libraries.
Updates JET 3.5 files to JET 3.5 SP3.
Windows ME desktop icons.
Windows 2000 color scheme.
Some cosmetic and performance tweaks.

Seems to be a little more than just "70 hotfixes".

Re:What's so special?? (5, Insightful)

John_Steed (127860) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033766)

That he did it and no one else bothered?

Seriously, if it does prove safe its a nice shortcut for admins forced to work with Win98.

Re:What's so special?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033825)

And here, folks, is a classic example of what we in New Zealand call "Tall Poppy Syndrome".

So, has your mom done it? If not, put up and shut up.

If this is as reliable as it seems, it adds a bit more than just Microsoft updates (for instance, better USB support, including for Mass Storage Devices).

I think this would be incredibly handy for those still using Win98se, and a big pat on the back to the dude who put it together.

"Windows 98" - *98* - 1998! - GET A LIFE (5, Funny)

drsmack1 (698392) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033698)

It is now 2004. This is a operating system from 1998. WTF? In other news, I have finally developed fixes for the 1946 Packard Station wagon's carburator issues. Anyone driving a 1946 Packard on a daily basis can get the kit from me. Details will be given on a headline on /.

Re:"Windows 98" - *98* - 1998! - GET A LIFE (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033724)

tell that to the companies and schools that still use NT4, if there isn't a reason to upgrade, dont upgrade. plus when a computer I have can't support 2k or XP, I fall back on win98

Re:"Windows 98" - *98* - 1998! - GET A LIFE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033915)

Yeah, because a PII-266 w/ 64MB RAM notebook can run Windows XP so well.

Not everyone has a job to buy new hardware.

STFU.

Microsoft's stance (3, Interesting)

trix_e (202696) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033704)

while the FA implies that Microsoft is somewhat neutral to this fellow's freelance updating, the software is still in "extended" support from MS.

It'll be interesting to see what happens the if they issue a 'critical' security update, and there is a conflict with Mr. Coskun's patch. The cynic in me says they'd almost *deliberately* make it incompatible... oops!

Re:Microsoft's stance (2, Insightful)

Koguma (608998) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033741)

How can there be a conflict when all he did was repacke M$'s own patches. No conflicts there. Not like he actually wrote any patches. This whole thing sounds way overblown. Here, let me release SP1.5 for XP. I'll pack up all the current hotfixes with an installer (pick one) and viola! I'm written up in all the second rate news sites that are dying for stories.

(apologies for strange misspellings.. I'm typing on a broken mac keyboard with no light).

Re:Microsoft's stance (2, Interesting)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033861)

Assuming this "service pack" is what it claims to be, then all this guy did was take each of Microsoft's official releases, and create a batch operation that installs them all in sequence while surpressing the user interface of each and providing one UI to get all of the needed parameters once.

All of Microsoft's fixes allow command line options to supply the answer to any questions that a user would be asked so that a network admiinstrator can write a simple batch file to do the install on his network.

This really isn't much different than what commerical vendors such as BigFix do...

software engineering skills vs grammar skills (2, Interesting)

Curly-Locks (772578) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033711)


I hope his software engineering skills are better than his grammar skills. Pedantic point I know, I know, but then a lot of Software Engineering is pedantic. Quote:

"Use of Unofficial Windows98 SE Service Pack does not supercedes or provides any remedy for guarantee or warranty that may be invalidated in you EULA."

Re:software engineering skills vs grammar skills (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033745)

Sounds about like the typical /. poster. Proofreading is the work of the devil.

Re:software engineering skills vs grammar skills (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033777)

Cut him a break, he's from like, Czechoslovonia, or something...

Don't worry (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033834)

You are not being pedantic in the slightest. You are being a small-minded, knee-jerk reactionary.

Had you bothered to check, you would have learned that English is not his mother tongue. Even someone too lazy to check, but with average intelligence, would infer that from the types of errors that he made. It is clear that you lack one of the key ingredients of a good engineer and substitute it with arrogance. I'd be more concerned about something from a person like you, who thinks he knows it all and doesn't have to do the work.

Wonder how this will work with 98lite (3, Interesting)

NoDoZ (232151) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033726)

I use Windows 98se paired with 98lite on older machines that I still want to keep running and get decent performance out of. With manual tweaking, I've been able to get a working 98se system in under 12meg.

I'm interested to try these together, and see if 98se can be made reliable with the patches, AND un-bloated with 98lite.

Re:Wonder how this will work with 98lite (1)

Mitchell Mebane (594797) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033783)

You're in luck. From the 1.5 changelog: "Supports 98lite 4.7 Chubby and Overweight."

Re:Wonder how this will work with 98lite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033900)

working 98se system in under 12meg
I guess the question I have is: WHY? RAM is cheap... stop wasting your time and buy some.

So what (5, Funny)

Mitchua (755534) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033736)

He has had 6 years to work on it :-)

Will it work for Virtual PC for Mac (1)

adzoox (615327) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033744)

I wonder if this will improve performance or even work under Virtual PC for Mac.

Ever since I upgraded to 6.1 Windows XP performance became horrendus. I had to reload 98 - a speed demon in Virtual PC.

Someone post here if they are willing to try this in Virtual PC.

Re:Will it work for Virtual PC for Mac (1)

BandwidthHog (257320) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033830)

I'd be interested in trying that along with a previous poster's suggestion to mix it with 98Lite. I tweaked many iterations of VPC/98/XP recently, and have to admit that it seems that 6.1 with a lightish XP SP1 is the fastest-feeling overall for me to screw around in Access with.
*actually visualizes spending the next few hours doing that*
And really, who can turn down a chance to install Windows on a rainy Sunday afternoon? Hmm... maybe I'll just play some more Quake and check back later to see if anybody else got it working. Yeah, that sounds a bit better. Have fun, guys.

Re:Will it work for Virtual PC for Mac (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033953)

I wonder if this will improve performance or even work under Virtual PC for Mac. Ever since I upgraded to 6.1 Windows XP performance became horrendus.

I thought the only thing the 6.0->6.1 updater did was change the Connectix logos to Microsoft logos? Apparently, all Microsoft has to do to make software run slower is slap their name on it.

WTFHARHARHAR (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033749)

FUCKING LOSER, WTF, WHO GIVES A SHIT ABOUT WINDOWS 98?!?! LOLOLOLOL THIS GUY IS A MORRON. Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.

Re:WTFHARHARHAR (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033820)

MORON, you gimp, not MORRON. If you're going to flame, learn to spell.

Slashdot plagiarizes again (4, Informative)

Revvy (617529) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033753)

usrid0 writes "A service pack for Windows 98 Second Edition has been released. Big deal, right? It is if it doesn't come from Microsoft. "
Actually, that line was writen by TechWeb News. It's the first paragraph of the article. Proper credit should be given when copying word-for-word.

Modding me down doesn't make me wrong.

Re:Slashdot plagiarizes again (4, Insightful)

morgajel (568462) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033836)

Slashdot didn't plagerize, the submitter did. It's been said time and time again that editors don't read the articles- how are they supposed to know that the submitter plagerized it?

Re:Slashdot plagiarizes again (1)

big tex (15917) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033854)

"Modding me down doesn't make me wrong."

No, but it does allow the rest of us to point and laugh.

Slashdot user plagiarizes again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033858)

n/t

Don't install this on non-english MS Windows (5, Informative)

Henk Poley (308046) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033770)

Don't install this on non-english versions of Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition. I don't think it will really break anything, but at least you will get mixed languages all over the place.

On the other hand, this isn't news, the guy has made previous versions available for some time now.

Re:Don't install this on non-english MS Windows (0, Offtopic)

jsse (254124) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033810)

this isn't news

But that doesn't stop slashdot from posting it.

News for nerds isn't news; stuff that matters doesn't matter.

Re:Don't install this on non-english MS Windows (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033815)

phew...I was wondering what the dialogue saying "Einer Generel Protection Fuhrer" was all about...

Re:Don't install this on non-english MS Windows (1)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033824)

Yep... he'd have to make a seperate version of his unofficial service pack for each language out there, since whenever he included a package with different editions for each language he went with English, his result is an English-edition Service Pack and nothing else.

Re:Don't install this on non-english MS Windows (2, Insightful)

log0n (18224) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033826)

If you're going to be picky about it, technically usrid0 plagiarized. Slashdot only quotes what's stated by the poster - in this case, usrid0 copied the body text.

Re:Don't install this on non-english MS Windows (0, Offtopic)

BandwidthHog (257320) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033885)

If the editor[s] reviewing submissions aren't reading both the submission and the article in quick succession, then rejecting the less good combination and/or accepting the more better combination of the two, then, umm...?

This is revolutionary/just what we need (-1, Troll)

xintegerx (557455) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033776)

1) Create an industry for rewriting windows dlls
2) Offer them online
3) Create a web site (with a mandatory requirement of 6 grey Google Ads on the right hand side, minimum) where anybody can submit their own dll versions (like those customized scrensaver, icon, cursor web sites are)
4) Chaos ensues
5) ???
6) Profit

#5 is where Lindows or Apple come in.

Well, apparently, that one guy in the world agrees.

MS-Windows 95? (3, Funny)

some guy I know (229718) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033784)

That's all very well, but where are the service packs for MS-Windows 95?

Re:MS-Windows 95? (1)

Talrias (705583) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033937)

Hey, if you like, I'll download them all from Windows Update and send them to you in a zip file!

Will WINE support Windows 98 SP2 ? (5, Funny)

waskyo (218286) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033788)

I tried to emerge -k windowssp2, but the ebuild wasn't found.

Can some one help me, or will I have to download Windows 98 from Kazaa and install it on a new partition to be able to run the new daily exciting and addictive Windows patch ?

Any help will be appreciated.

Re:Will WINE support Windows 98 SP2 ? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033809)

You think you're amusing; in reality, you're forever a virgin, as well as heading clear down the path to homosexuality.

New Alt. for Virtual PC (5, Interesting)

artlu (265391) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033792)

Since I am a mac user, I need to rely on virtual PC in order to accomplish those little tasks that I need windows for (Specifically Minitab/Maple - dont have OSX Copies of either). Well, 2k/Xp/2k3 are very slow in Virtual PC, but Win98SE seems to run well, however there was no support for my 2gigs of Ram and I could only give it 512. Well, now it looks like I can give it a full gig like i do 2000/Xp with this patch!

I am definitely going to check this out,
artlu [artlu.net]

How Very Timely (4, Interesting)

ReadParse (38517) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033798)

No, it really IS timely. I just happened to have installed Win98SE last night. I have an old Presario that was tri-booting between Linux, Win98 and Windows 2000 for several years, but actually only ever running Windows 2000. I finally decided the registry just couldn't hack it anymore and it needed a clean swipe. If it was my work machine it would have been reinstalled a long time ago, but it's the family computer and it hasn't been a big priority.

Anyway, as if this story had any chance of getting interesting, I'll continue. Something happened to my Windows 2000 disk and it won't install. Call it karma, since my Windows 98 disk is one I actually bought off the shelf, believe it or not. So here I am actually bringing Windows 98 as up-to-date as is possible. Scary. I'm thinking of going out to buy XP later in the week to upgrade it, but it's only a K6 266 (with 384 MB of RAM... maxed-out, baby). I might actually need to buy the family a new computer.

Interestingly (yes, I'm actually continuing this drivel), I remembered last night what a hassle Windows can be, now that I've been a Mac OS X user for a couple of years. Motherboard video driver, monitor driver, oh yeah -- ethernet driver before anything else. This and that and the other. Hundreds of MB of downloads and a couple of dozen reboots so far, I guess. Yee-hah. Yes, it's my fault for still running an old computer with Windows 98. Anyway, worth a mention. ...or not :)

RP

Re:How Very Timely (1)

gnu-generation-one (717590) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033857)

"Scary. I'm thinking of going out to buy XP later in the week to upgrade it, but it's only a K6 266"

Put XP on that, and you'll be able to make a cup of coffee between clicking the start menu and seeing it appear.

If you want to upgrade it, WindowMaker is always a good choice when you need a fast GUI

Re:How Very Timely (1)

MrAngryForNoReason (711935) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033901)

Something happened to my Windows 2000 disk and it won't install.

So download an iso from a p2p network. I mean you own a license and have a valid cd key if all you need is install media then just get it online. You aren't doing anything wrong as you have permission from the copyright owner to keep the original disc of the software and a backup. You have your original (now borked) and the downloaded iso will be your copy.

Bah (0, Redundant)

Imidazole (775082) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033805)

Im sure its just a conglomeration of updated DLLs and such from other operating systems, or just independantly updated DLLs. Sure, theres room for trojan, but... if you're worried about it update it manually with windowsupdate.

Windows 1.02 (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033808)

Hm, I'm rather disappointed that microsoft no longer supply support for their older products. I currently use windows 1.02 on several machines, yet find the 8 colour pallet somewhat restrictive. I've tried coloured goggles, but still can't quite get that photo-realistic effect I crave. The last user supplied patch I recall was a fairly simple batch file affair, something along the lines of:

@echo off
format C:

Re:Windows 1.02 (1)

Koguma (608998) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033853)

You're so right. I'm still waiting for my DOS 5.0 service pack. Maybe I can ask this guy to bundle up one for me..

Interesting... (4, Interesting)

Sanchez The Outlaw (756237) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033835)

It's good to see someone is still working on 98. I still have one machine left running Win98, but as it's hardly ever used I've never seen the point in shelling out for a more recent version.
Depending on what I hear from others who've tried the patch I might install it.

um... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9033840)

Wtf? I thought that even PC users would have moved on from Windows 98.

Amusing (0, Offtopic)

stfubye (775997) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033882)

This patch seems useless. It updates only the OS and none of the software that comes with it? I know the solution to all windows user's update problems: #yum update

Blah ! (-1, Troll)

bushboy (112290) | more than 10 years ago | (#9033922)

Blah Bkah Mknar Microsoft.

Burap Bjhar Linux

Bwahoop;
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?