Antidote to knowing too much. :)

If you're really serious about what the current state of Win-98
enhancement is in terms of improving or fixing the GDI and User heaps,
you might want to have a look at the following two projects:


Revolutions Pack 9 (RP9):

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/1310...tions-pack-97/

Revolutions Pack 9 is mostly for appearance, skins, fonts (etc) but an
important component of this package is heap protection, cleanup and
optimization. This is a very lengthy thread about the win-9x/me heap
situation:

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/1309...pander-thread/

The heap "enhancements" are done by components known as "GDI Salvation"
and "User Salvation":

======================
Since i fail to deliver guide, i'll tell you how GDI Salvation works
he

1) Handle protection. 9x lacks proper GDI handle validation which may
result in incorrect memory access or wrong resource deletion and as
result crash, hang or BSOD. Which is not-so-ra i know a lot of
programs which try to delete deleted handles or wrong handles (icon
handles for example).

2) Handle arena cleaning. GDI relies on moveable 16-bit handles. Too bad
that they require significant memory overhead, since handle arenas are
allocated in heap too. Worse, they're never freed (by design?): that's
why when you quit heavyweight programs GDI resources don't go up back.
Even worse, they can fill most heap and make whole system slow crashing
a**. RP9 addresses this by running through those arenas and removing
free ones. This run is performed after every app termination or when
resource allocation fails. It's disabled for first 60 seconds of system
uptime and you can diable it through RPConfig.

Test numbers: try running programs which consume much GDI. I've runned 3
ImgBurns. After exiting them, without GDISalv 9% of GDI were lost.

3) Leak protection. Bizzare bug, but 'extended pen' GDI objects are
somehow not marked with owner, meaning they can leak permanently. This
was corrected in 9.0.2.

USER Salvation was explained before. In short, it saves 100 bytes per
process by combining comctl32 classes with system classes. Not much, but
you can run 60% more Notepad copies on clean system.
====================

Latest version or RP9 is he http://tihiy.net/files/RP9.exe
Previous version is he http://tihiy.net/files/RP9.0.exe
Revolutions Pack 9 is compatible with all system updates.
Revolutions Pack 9 may require updating system files in order to use all
features. These updates can be found he
http://tihiy.net/files/RP9Updates.exe

Now in addition to the heap enhancement performed by RP9, there is
another project called "GDI Heap Extender":

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/1361...heap-extender/

============================
GDI Heap Extender is a technology aimed to improve Windows 98/Me system
capability to load more programs and run more stable by extending
available GDI resources.

Alpha 1-5 apply extender technologies now only to one type of GDI
resource - DIB bitmap, which is most common heavy resource.
Beta 1-2 covers all bitmaps and thus saves more resources.

Eventually, this technology will be included into Revolutions Pack.

Beta (meaning - untested) version is aimed to ensu
- This technology will work on all systems and all file versions.
- This technology is applicable to real systems.
- This technology does not introduce problems with performance and
stability.

So, you can help me much by testing it. What you shouldn't see:

- Crashes, BSODs and lockups.
- Graphical glitches.
- Resource leaks.

Be awa
- Any crash would be fatal, and any error during initialization
will lock up your system.

Download:
http://tihiy.ahanix.org/rpXbeta2.zip
Beta 2 installs on top of latest RP9 (RP9.1.0) and replaces existing RP9
"GDI Salvation" techologies.

Extract zip somewhere, right-click on .inf file and select "Install".
==========================

On a more general note, it's most likely the (mis)behavior of the
applications you're running that is the cause of heap resource depletion
to the point of system failure. If you're still keen on running those
apps on your win-98 system, then you might want to try RP9 and GDI heap
extender.

98 Guy wrote:
If you're really serious about what the current state of Win-98
enhancement is in terms of improving or fixing the GDI and User heaps,
you might want to have a look at the following two projects:


Revolutions Pack 9 (RP9):

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/1310...tions-pack-97/

Revolutions Pack 9 is mostly for appearance, skins, fonts (etc) but an
important component of this package is heap protection, cleanup and
optimization. This is a very lengthy thread about the win-9x/me heap
situation:

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/1309...pander-thread/

The heap "enhancements" are done by components known as "GDI Salvation"
and "User Salvation":

======================
Since i fail to deliver guide, i'll tell you how GDI Salvation works
he

1) Handle protection. 9x lacks proper GDI handle validation which may
result in incorrect memory access or wrong resource deletion and as
result crash, hang or BSOD. Which is not-so-ra i know a lot of
programs which try to delete deleted handles or wrong handles (icon
handles for example).

2) Handle arena cleaning. GDI relies on moveable 16-bit handles. Too bad
that they require significant memory overhead, since handle arenas are
allocated in heap too. Worse, they're never freed (by design?): that's
why when you quit heavyweight programs GDI resources don't go up back.
Even worse, they can fill most heap and make whole system slow crashing
a**. RP9 addresses this by running through those arenas and removing
free ones. This run is performed after every app termination or when
resource allocation fails. It's disabled for first 60 seconds of system
uptime and you can diable it through RPConfig.

Test numbers: try running programs which consume much GDI. I've runned 3
ImgBurns. After exiting them, without GDISalv 9% of GDI were lost.

3) Leak protection. Bizzare bug, but 'extended pen' GDI objects are
somehow not marked with owner, meaning they can leak permanently. This
was corrected in 9.0.2.

USER Salvation was explained before. In short, it saves 100 bytes per
process by combining comctl32 classes with system classes. Not much, but
you can run 60% more Notepad copies on clean system.
====================

Latest version or RP9 is he http://tihiy.net/files/RP9.exe
Previous version is he http://tihiy.net/files/RP9.0.exe
Revolutions Pack 9 is compatible with all system updates.
Revolutions Pack 9 may require updating system files in order to use all
features. These updates can be found he
http://tihiy.net/files/RP9Updates.exe

Now in addition to the heap enhancement performed by RP9, there is
another project called "GDI Heap Extender":

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/1361...heap-extender/

============================
GDI Heap Extender is a technology aimed to improve Windows 98/Me system
capability to load more programs and run more stable by extending
available GDI resources.

Alpha 1-5 apply extender technologies now only to one type of GDI
resource - DIB bitmap, which is most common heavy resource.
Beta 1-2 covers all bitmaps and thus saves more resources.

Eventually, this technology will be included into Revolutions Pack.

Beta (meaning - untested) version is aimed to ensu
- This technology will work on all systems and all file versions.
- This technology is applicable to real systems.
- This technology does not introduce problems with performance and
stability.

So, you can help me much by testing it. What you shouldn't see:

- Crashes, BSODs and lockups.
- Graphical glitches.
- Resource leaks.

Be awa
- Any crash would be fatal, and any error during initialization
will lock up your system.

Download:
http://tihiy.ahanix.org/rpXbeta2.zip
Beta 2 installs on top of latest RP9 (RP9.1.0) and replaces existing RP9
"GDI Salvation" techologies.

Extract zip somewhere, right-click on .inf file and select "Install".
==========================

On a more general note, it's most likely the (mis)behavior of the
applications you're running that is the cause of heap resource depletion
to the point of system failure. If you're still keen on running those
apps on your win-98 system, then you might want to try RP9 and GDI heap
extender.

I'm not that keen anymore, since, for the most part, I've migrated to XP for
most work.

98 Guy wrote in :

If you're really serious about what the current state of Win-98
enhancement is in terms of improving or fixing the GDI and User heaps,
you might want to have a look at the following two projects:


How much do you know about this? Do you know if wxLua or similar tools are
affected, even if I'm careful to delete objects like pens and brushes after
using them? One thing I've noticed is that large images (like 9000*6000
pixels) will load in certain programs once, but attempts to reload later
cause blank ares where the image should appear. Sometimes all I have to do to
prevent this is wait, suggesting it gets cleaned up, but if it does bork, it
stays borked till I reboot. This happens even if I take care to delete all
the objects created to handle the image in wxLua, for example.

Lostgallifreyan wrote:

you might want to have a look at the following two projects:

Revolutions Pack 9
GDI Heap Extender

How much do you know about this?

To be honest - not much.

I do participate in the msfn.org forums, so I know that the people
developing, testing and using these tools are very knowledgeable and
accessible.

I don't know much about these two projects specifically because I simply
have not run into heap-related resource problems on my win-98 systems.
But I'm occasionally creating new win-98 installation images on new(er)
hardware, so at some point I probably will install them.

Do you know if wxLua or similar tools are affected,

I really would have no idea if something I've never heard of before
(wxLua) is compatible with this or that, and I doubt that most others at
msfn could answer that authoritatively (other than perhaps Tihy - the
author of these heap projects).

There's no harm in trying these heap tools.

I'm not sure to what extent you are a true or actual user of Windows 98
(your past usenet posting history doesn't reveal much along those lines)
but serious win-98 users should be at least reading the win-9x/me forums
on msfn.org - if not participating in them.

http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/8-windows-959898seme/

http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/91-w...mber-projects/

Just a note: If you do participate, your postings should be focused and
stay on topic and add something useful to the thread. In general I get
the impression they don't like it when threads turn into "I remember
when ..." or "I used to use ..." conversations that wander down memory
lane (which happens here quite frequently).

In message ,
Lostgallifreyan writes:
Paul in Houston TX wrote in
:

Lostgallifreyan wrote:
"Bill in Co" wrote in
m:

Huh? What is that supposed to do? I tried it here (on XP), and
didn't notice anything.


Really? Wow. Maybe another cool thing that got lost. Ctrl, and numeric
+, after clicking on some file, makes all the columns in detailed views
adjust to fit the widest string in each column. If WXP lacks that, I

I still think of it as "Control and grey plus", because that's how it
was described when I first encountered it: so it must have been at a
time when the numeric pad area was still colour-coded on most keyboards,
which makes it a _very_ long time ago.

have to wonder what other good ideas got lost before I or lots of other
people ever knew they existed in W9X.

Its in XP and I never knew about it.
What a handy thing!

It works in a few other places, too, not just an Explorer list view -
basically, it's worth trying, though doesn't always work, in anything
that has columns. Unfortunately, though it _can_ be made to work, it's
generally not worth the bother if you're using something that doesn't
have a separate numeric pad, such as all (?) netbooks and most smaller
laptops.

Thanks.

Yw. If anyone knows other good bits, post them, I'm sure I missed plenty.

Well, there are the keyboard shortcuts for an awful lot of things - the
one I find most generally useful is Win+E to open explorer (and at a
sensible place, too, not with C:\Documents and Settings\me\Start Menu or
similar as the focus, as doing it from the start menu does), followed by
the other Win+ ones - F for find (despite them now calling it search!),
M for minimise all ... (Win+L for lock, if you're on a work/networked
machine and want to leave your desk in a hurry - actually it works here
too, I just can't see having use for it as I'm the only person here.)

Since I'm crossposting this to XP newusers (I thought it might be useful
there!) I'll add another one that I'm constantly amazed people don't
use, though 98g and Lg probably do know it: the tab key moves between
fields in a form, and Enter activates. I find it painful to watch a new
user filling in something with multiple boxes (such as name and address
on a webform): they go to mouse to click in the name box, type their
name on the keyboard, hand back from keyboard to mouse to click into the
address field, back to the keyboard, mouse, keyboard, mouse, then
finally mouse to click on OK, when tab to go between fields and Enter to
do the OK will do that! Fair enough, I'm an oldie who remembers before
mice were common, but since you're using the keyboard to enter text
anyway, switching back and forth between it and the mouse is
inefficient. (In a _few_ cases, where the form designer has developed it
in a somewhat haphazard manner, the order in which tab moves through the
fields is a bit startling, but mostly it's fine.)

Oh, and shutdown: Win then U then U (or Win, U, enter in '9x - I'm very
cross that it's not the same, as I got so used to doing that under '9x,
and it does something slightly different in XP): far quicker than mouse.

You want to copy the name of a file for some reason? F2, Ctrl-C, Esc.
(After highlighting the file, yes with the mouse, first, obviously.)
It's then ready to be pasted where you want it. You want the full
name/path of the current folder? In explorer, click _once_ in the
address bar, then our old friend Ctrl-C again. (You have to have the
address bar present of course - turn on from View, Toolbars - but even
if you have to do that, it's often quicker - and less error-prone - than
typing out the path manually.)

(Even Ctrl-X, C, and V for cut, copy, paste aren't known to everyone.)

Closing applications - Alt-F4, but that requires a slight stretch of the
hand: quicker, IMO, is alt-space C (since all three keys are adjacent on
most keyboards).

In fact, the old Alt-space menu, which dates from W3.1 if not earlier!,
but still works up to at least XP (clicking on the icon at the top left
gets it too, but if you're clicking you might as well go top right
anyway) is quick for maximise (alt-space X) and restore (alt-space
enter) too. It's also useful to move and/or resize a window, if for some
reason you've shoved the title bar off the top of the window: this takes
a little practice though. (Alt-space, M, then arrows, then enter, for
move; Alt-space S then a single arrow to say which edge, then same or
opposite arrow a few times, then enter, or Esc to cancel.)

Things that aren't keyboard shortcuts: Well, in a file dialog box, which
defaults to the list view - right-click in an empty part of the window,
and you can select other views, such as the details view: handy if you
can't remember the filename but its size or date will jog your memory.
You can sort by the headings too, by the usual means of clicking on the
relevant heading (twice if necessary). In fact these boxes are more or
less a full explorer shell: you can create subfolders, delete files,
even open files to see, if you're not sure which one is the one you
want. (Right-click.)

What's hogging the PC (if it's suddenly running slowly)? Bring up Task
Manager (right-click on empty part of taskbar) and select processes tab,
then click (twice) on the CPU column heading.

I'm sure there are a few other things like "Ctrl-grey plus" that are
little if at all known: anyone who knows more, please share!
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Who can refute a sneer? - Archdeacon Paley, in his book Moral Philosophy

98 Guy wrote in :

Revolutions Pack 9
GDI Heap Extender

How much do you know about this?

To be honest - not much.

I do participate in the msfn.org forums, so I know that the people
developing, testing and using these tools are very knowledgeable and
accessible.

I don't know much about these two projects specifically because I simply
have not run into heap-related resource problems on my win-98 systems.
But I'm occasionally creating new win-98 installation images on new(er)
hardware, so at some point I probably will install them.


Nor have I, unless the basic examples I mentioned counted as such (they
didn't need to be interpreted as totally specific, I just named the contexts
for accuracy).

I look for stuff I need via Google, lead followed after lead. I can no more
read all the forums any more than I can download the internet. Besides, I
only heard of this stuff yesterday when you posted. Asking you is first base,
it's a tad premature to go hounding the makers for detailed answers...

Do you know if wxLua or similar tools are affected,

I really would have no idea if something I've never heard of before
(wxLua) is compatible with this or that, and I doubt that most others at
msfn could answer that authoritatively (other than perhaps Tihy - the
author of these heap projects).

There's no harm in trying these heap tools.


I intend to, but that too takes time. I need to see what the files are, that
matter, what of my own they replace, and what extra dependencies I must
consider. If I don't take the time to do that my efforts (and questions) will
be meaningless.

I'm not sure to what extent you are a true or actual user of Windows 98
(your past usenet posting history doesn't reveal much along those lines)
but serious win-98 users should be at least reading the win-9x/me forums
on msfn.org - if not participating in them.


That's just weird. No-one owes anyone any loyalties in this game. I've used
W98 for over a decade. Do I also need a badge to prove I belong? When I need
to find out something I pay deep attention but that's exactly why I can't
read everything. I'll do what I do, and let them do what I do. I've done more
alone than many do with a team to help them, so I'm not normally as
gregarious as this. Why else do you think I talk so much here? Making up for
lots of silence...

http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/8-windows-959898seme/

http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/91-w...mber-projects/

Just a note: If you do participate, your postings should be focused and
stay on topic and add something useful to the thread. In general I get
the impression they don't like it when threads turn into "I remember
when ..." or "I used to use ..." conversations that wander down memory
lane (which happens here quite frequently).


Not a problem. Talking here for fun is one thing, but when I want to note
something technical I reduce it to the barest minimum needed to do the deed.
If code is terse end clear, it doesn't need much commenting. I also write
poems (or used to at any rate). Same skills apply, if they're to be any good.

About that heap fixer, there was plenty of noise on the pages I read too. I
did read a few pages, it looks like it's still very much beta, work in
progress, crashing as many things at it fixes according to several early
posts, and the download is still listed as a beta two years later. So there's
no great need for me to rush, is there?

Lostgallifreyan wrote in
:

and let them do what I do.

Hmmm.. what they do.... Point being that they wouldn't let me dictate what
they should do, so I'll never tolerate anyone telling me what I should do.
People need to get paid well for binding contracts like that.

Lostgallifreyan wrote:

There's no harm in trying these heap tools.

I intend to, but that too takes time. I need to see what the files
are, that matter, what of my own they replace, and what extra
dependencies I must consider. If I don't take the time to do
that my efforts (and questions) will be meaningless.

That's your call, if you're so inclined.

Obviously these heap tools (and other such win-98 "helpers" like
KernelEx) don't *need* to have their operational details understood by
users to be effective or functional.

You remind me of another patron that once inhabited this newsgroup, who
was similarly (if not irrationally) critical of these third-party
projects and solutions - even though he had long since migrated away
from regularly using win-98.

I'm not sure to what extent you are a true or actual user of
Windows 98 (your past usenet posting history doesn't reveal
much along those lines)

That's just weird. No-one owes anyone any loyalties in this game.
I've used W98 for over a decade. Do I also need a badge to prove
I belong?

I just stated an observation. I wouldn't have thought that anyone
making serious use of win-98 these days would be doing so in relative
isolation from web and usenet forums specializing in the subject. Your
appearance here in this newsgroup is recent - but nonetheless you are
here now (and no, it's not that any sort of badge is expected).

but serious win-98 users should be at least reading the
win-9x/me forums on msfn.org - if not participating in them.

When I need to find out something I pay deep attention but
that's exactly why I can't read everything. I'll do what I
do, and let them do what I do.

I'm only pointing out other communities of users who are doing
interesting things to enhance and improve win-98. There's no need to
read everything that goes on there, but you should at least know they
exist, and even better you should at least glance at the thread subjects
every once in a while.

About that heap fixer, there was plenty of noise on the pages
I read too.

The second link I gave might be more to your liking then:

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/1309...pander-thread/

It's only 4 pages, but it's packed with a lot of background discussion
and info about the heap situation.

I did read a few pages, it looks like it's still very much beta

The heap extender is beta, but the GDI and User "salvation" component of
RP9 is more "finished" - if that's the right word.

So there's no great need for me to rush, is there?

No.

I was only raising these heap tools as a response to Bill's comments
about the heaps being deficient or problematic for Win-98.

Bill is (apparently) another one of those people who live in the past
when it comes to win-98 and don't really want to know about the
community-based solutions that have emerged over the recent years.
Heck- he's not even a regular user of Win-98 any more (more like a
win-98 basher or critic?).

98 Guy wrote in :

I just stated an observation. I wouldn't have thought that anyone
making serious use of win-98 these days would be doing so in relative
isolation from web and usenet forums specializing in the subject.

Actually that's kind of the point... It isn't built on a service model as
later systems are, and it hasn't got any formal support. While there are
people who thrive on each other in an effort to make fixes for it, it's even
more suited to being useful for people who want to go alone. Of all the OS's
capable of anything really useful and powerful, W98 is the best candidate for
that. Generalising about users of such an OS is an impossible task, I suggest
not doing it.

Think of what happens to old bikes. There might be a lot of people who will
work together to overcome flaws in the design, but a larger number just want
to strip the original design down to the basics, add the customised bits they
want, and ride off on them to wherever they want to go. For self-evident
reason, generalisation about most of those people, beyond that basic fact, is
all but impossible. Maybe one other thing can be said: those who go alone
can't risk using parts made in ongoing work, because they need to use
whatever is solid enough to keep them going in situations where they can't
spend much time pulling the thing apart every time something odd happens to
it.

Ok, so the analogy breaks down cos the net is easier to reach than a distant
garage on a desert highway, but it's also a state of mind. Right now I'm
happy to tear down all the dead weight and rebuild, but I don't want to do it
forever, most of the time I don't want to do it at all. I'm doing it now
mainly to see how likely this system is to keep me going another ten years.

98 Guy wrote:
Lostgallifreyan wrote:

There's no harm in trying these heap tools.

I intend to, but that too takes time. I need to see what the files
are, that matter, what of my own they replace, and what extra
dependencies I must consider. If I don't take the time to do
that my efforts (and questions) will be meaningless.

That's your call, if you're so inclined.

Obviously these heap tools (and other such win-98 "helpers" like
KernelEx) don't *need* to have their operational details understood by
users to be effective or functional.

You remind me of another patron that once inhabited this newsgroup, who
was similarly (if not irrationally) critical of these third-party
projects and solutions - even though he had long since migrated away
from regularly using win-98.

I'm not sure to what extent you are a true or actual user of
Windows 98 (your past usenet posting history doesn't reveal
much along those lines)

That's just weird. No-one owes anyone any loyalties in this game.
I've used W98 for over a decade. Do I also need a badge to prove
I belong?

I just stated an observation. I wouldn't have thought that anyone
making serious use of win-98 these days would be doing so in relative
isolation from web and usenet forums specializing in the subject. Your
appearance here in this newsgroup is recent - but nonetheless you are
here now (and no, it's not that any sort of badge is expected).

but serious win-98 users should be at least reading the
win-9x/me forums on msfn.org - if not participating in them.

When I need to find out something I pay deep attention but
that's exactly why I can't read everything. I'll do what I
do, and let them do what I do.

I'm only pointing out other communities of users who are doing
interesting things to enhance and improve win-98. There's no need to
read everything that goes on there, but you should at least know they
exist, and even better you should at least glance at the thread subjects
every once in a while.

About that heap fixer, there was plenty of noise on the pages
I read too.

The second link I gave might be more to your liking then:

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/1309...pander-thread/

It's only 4 pages, but it's packed with a lot of background discussion
and info about the heap situation.

I did read a few pages, it looks like it's still very much beta

The heap extender is beta, but the GDI and User "salvation" component of
RP9 is more "finished" - if that's the right word.

So there's no great need for me to rush, is there?

No.

I was only raising these heap tools as a response to Bill's comments
about the heaps being deficient or problematic for Win-98.

Except even those tools have some issues, as the two of you have already
commented on.

But indeed, the heaps being problematic in Win98 *can* be an issue in some
instances. Evidently you've been spared in your Win98 usage, and have
never run into it, which frankly, surprises me. :-)

(I'm talking about when the heap resources drop down to below 10% when
running some apps, and you're given a serious popup message warning you of
impending disaster, so to speak. (If you ignore this, your system gets
locked up, and you have to reboot - losing whatever you've been working on).

I will concede that it isn't a really common problem, however.

Bill is (apparently) another one of those people who live in the past

I live in the past on some things, but that's another story. :-)

when it comes to win-98 and don't really want to know about the
community-based solutions that have emerged over the recent years.

I'm aware of some of that, and sometimes read the msfn site stuff, with lots
of articles mentioning improvements for Win98, some of which I tried. You
just weren't aware of it (you know what they say about assumptions!).

Heck- he's not even a regular user of Win-98 any more (more like a
win-98 basher or critic?).

No, I live in the present, and that's why I'm using XP for the most part.
Correction: I stand corrected. I guess I am now living in the past, since
you can't even get an XP system, anymore. All that's out there is Vista or
Win7. Thanks, but no thanks.

And just for the record, I don't consider myself a win98 basher, per se.
But I do recognize and appreciate the benefits of using XP. I'm not stuck
in the Stone Age. If I truly were, I'd still be only using DOS, and there
was a time when I felt that way!