If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch has beendiscovered!
It appears that some combination of a Windows-98 hot-fix and some
hacking at least 4 years ago, possibly by some Germans, has resulted in a very simple set of 2 files that can allow Windows 98 to use up to 4 gb of ram. As time goes on we'll learn more about how this patch originated, but it seems to have been circulating in German-language windows forums up until now. Thanks to Dencorso and his obtuse and irrational censorship as he lords over the Windows-98 Forums at MSFN.org, he indicated that such a German patch existed, and he labeled it as "warez". I then began a discussion on "FoolsDesign.org" and the location of the patch files was posted thanks to a user there. That thread can be found he http://www.foolsdesign.org/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=607 Once Dencorso found out about that thread, he removed his own MSFN post where he described his censorship of the topic. He's so anal he even censored himself! Why on earth those moderators at MSFN think that Microsoft is in any way concerned about Windows 9x today defies explanation. They are their own worst enemies when it comes to helping advance and grow the Windows 9x/me enthusiast community. Their censorship efforts do nothing but instill a culture of fear and intimidation and diminish the community at MSFN. Hopefully more enthusiasts and win-98 users will discover the free and uncensored windows 98 usenet groups and also the software forum at foolsdesign.org. Are you reading this Dencorso? Will you and your other moderators change your ways and allow more free and open discussion about how to advance Windows 9x/me - Microsoft be damned? Here is a link to the new VMM32.vxd and VMM.vxd files that allow Windows 98 to use all available ram on any motherboard you have, up to 4 gb: http://www.freora.de/index.php?optio...id=3&Itemid=52 Scroll down to the last item, which is: 4 GB Hauptspeicher für WIN 98SE ( mit vmm98sed.zip )hot! But don't click on it. Instead, click on the small little "Download" button right beside the "Details" button. What you will download is Vmm98sed.zip (about 1mb in size). When you unpack it, you will find a reproduction of the Windows directory tree that helps tell you where to put these files. Inside WINDOWS\SYSTEM\ you will find VMM32.VXD and you will copy that file to your own WINDOWS\SYSTEM directory, over-writing the existing file which you should first rename to VMM32.vxd.old. You will also see a subdirectory called VMM32 which contains VMM.VXD (which you should copy to your WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VMM32\ directory, and there will be no pre-existing file with that name. There is some indicatation that a file called ENABLE.VXD should also be placed in the WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VMM32\ directory. That file is not normally found on win-9x systems, but it is on the win-98 CD. Here is a link to that file: http://filepost.com/files/98e56ddd/ENABLE.VXD/ The two files VMM32.VXD and VMM.VXD seem to have been in circulation since January 2010 because they were submitted to virustotal.com on that date for malware analysis. That was the first and only time they have been seen by Virustotal until I submitted them yesterday. The scan 4 years ago was negative, and so was my scan, so they are clean as far as 53 Anti-virus programs are concerned. I have varified that they work, as I have 2 gb ram on my system now and Windows System Properties shows 2046 mb available memory. Any questions? Comments? Post them! No censorship here! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch hasbeen discovered!
98 Guy wrote:
Inside WINDOWS\SYSTEM\ you will find VMM32.VXD and you will copy that file to your own WINDOWS\SYSTEM directory, over-writing the existing file which you should first rename to VMM32.vxd.old. That vmm32.vxd carries a date of 2002-10-12 while my existing one is newer, from 2006-10-26. I don't know where that came from. Should I still risk overwriting it? Axel |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch has been discovered!
In microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion Axel Berger wrote:
98 Guy wrote: Inside WINDOWS\SYSTEM\ you will find VMM32.VXD and you will copy that file to your own WINDOWS\SYSTEM directory, over-writing the existing file which you should first rename to VMM32.vxd.old. That vmm32.vxd carries a date of 2002-10-12 while my existing one is newer, from 2006-10-26. I don't know where that came from. Should I still risk overwriting it? I'd compare the exact file sizes. If the same, it's almost a given that the files are too. If not, it depends whether you have any problems with what you've got. -- __ __ #_ |\| | _# |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch hasbeen discovered!
Axel Berger wrote:
That vmm32.vxd carries a date of 2002-10-12 while my existing one is newer, from 2006-10-26. I don't know where that came from. Should I still risk overwriting it? Rename your existing file (put .old at the end). You can rename the file while running windows (sometimes the OS locks your access to system files, but not in this case). |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch has been discovered!
Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
In microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion Axel Berger wrote: 98 Guy wrote: Inside WINDOWS\SYSTEM\ you will find VMM32.VXD and you will copy that file to your own WINDOWS\SYSTEM directory, over-writing the existing file which you should first rename to VMM32.vxd.old. That vmm32.vxd carries a date of 2002-10-12 while my existing one is newer, from 2006-10-26. I don't know where that came from. Should I still risk overwriting it? I'd compare the exact file sizes. If the same, it's almost a given that the files are too. If not, it depends whether you have any problems with what you've got. Better way to compare is to enter this from the command prompt: fc /b vmm32.vxd vmm32.new (Replace the file names with the correct ones, of course.) If it tells you anything other than "no differences encountered" then they are not the same. Simple. -- Beauty is one of the rare things which does not lead to doubt of God. -- Jean Anouilh |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch hasbeen discovered!
Auric__ wrote:
That vmm32.vxd carries a date of 2002-10-12 while my existing one is newer, from 2006-10-26. I don't know where that came from. Should I still risk overwriting it? I'd compare the exact file sizes. If the same, it's almost a given that the files are too. If not, it depends whether you have any problems with what you've got. Better way to compare is to enter this from the command prompt: fc /b vmm32.vxd vmm32.new (Replace the file names with the correct ones, of course.) What on earth are you people blathering about? We're talking about vmm32.vxd. It's a file that is dynamically created by windows when windows is installed and also when new hardware is detected. It's pointless to compare file-size and file-date between two different vmm32.vxd files. There is a default or initial vmm32.vxd that is on the windows 98 CD, and that is used initially but it will not remain static during the install process. The modded version has some key bytes changed, so of course it will not compare with the original CD version. You will note that you won't see a Version tab when you right-click on vmm32.vxd and select properties. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch hasbeen discovered!
98 Guy wrote:
It's a file that is dynamically created by windows when windows is installed and also when new hardware is detected. It's pointless to compare file-size and file-date between two different vmm32.vxd files. If that's so, don't I lose all the entries Windows has already made there? Axel |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch hasbeen discovered!
Axel Berger wrote:
It's a file that is dynamically created by windows when windows is installed and also when new hardware is detected. It's pointless to compare file-size and file-date between two different vmm32.vxd files. If that's so, don't I lose all the entries Windows has already made there? There is no modification or interference with your registry in relation to changing the vmm32.vxd file. I *believe* that when win-98 is first installed, it uses the default vmm32.vxd as-is, and any additional virtual device drivers that are specific to your system are placed in the /vmm directory and are not incorporated into the default vmm32.vxd file. But under some circumstances Win-98 can rebuild vmm32.vxd and incorporate those extra ..vxd files from the /vmm directory, and that's why you'd end up with a different vmm32.vxd file than the default version from the CD. For example, the default VMM32.VXD file on the win-98se CD is 464 kb in size, but my actual VMM32.VXD in c:\windows\system was 907 kb before I renamed it and replaced it with the modified file, which is 903 kb in size. Again remember that if you first rename your existing VMM32.vxd (to, say, VMM32.vx_ or VMM32.vxd.old) and then copy the new VMM32.vxd to c:\windows\system (and also copy the file vmm.vxd to c:\windows\system\vmm32) and if Windows doesn't boot, then simply re-start in DOS and restore your original vmm32.vxd (and delete the vmm.vxd that you put in c:\windows\system\vmm32). Here's more info about VMM32.VXD ========================= Win9x installation of VMM32.VxD It is accepted that VMM32.VxD is initially a basic file which is built up with additional VxDs (required specifically by that PC's own components) during Win98+ installation. Those additional VxDs are then accessed from within VMM32.VxD. However that initial VMM32.VxD file is not an empty skeleton waiting to be filled. It is a substantial 475,084 bytes on the CDs of both Win98 (Win98_48.cab) and Win98SE (Win98_54.cab). This is the size prior to installation. It contains many components that will be used by Win9x and is added to at the time of Win98, 98SE, or ME installation. After Win9x installation, any additionally installed VxDs will be placed in \Windows\System\VMM32. These will take priority over any previous VxD within VMM32.VxD. The size of VMM32.VxD in the Windows\System directory after installation will vary from system to system. It will now be substantially (perhaps twice) larger than the CD version and should carry the date of your last installation of Win9x. The increased size is partly the result of specific VxDs being added during Win9x installation. To view the contents of the 'new' VMM32.VxD run RegEdit and go to the Key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Contro l/VMM32Files where the right pane shows all the files that comprise VMM32.VxD. It is now said that ALL the VxDs required for your own system will be present, though you could check your own Registry just to make sure. http://www.thpc.info/upd/vmm32.html ========================== |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch hasbeen discovered!
98 Guy wrote:
the default VMM32.VXD file on the win-98se CD is 464 kb in size, but my actual VMM32.VXD in c:\windows\system was 907 kb before I renamed it and replaced it with the modified file, which is 903 kb in size. This sounds exactly similar to my case, so now I'll go ahead and do it. Danke Axel |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch has been discovered!
In microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion 98 Guy "98"@guy. com wrote:
What on earth are you people blathering about? We're talking about vmm32.vxd. It's a file that is dynamically created by windows when windows is installed and also when new hardware is detected. It's pointless to compare file-size and file-date between two different vmm32.vxd files. Ah OK, my mistake. I'm just one of those wierd guys who runs w98 on PCs (well, a PC) from around 1998, so I haven't needed to look that deeply into these aspects of the inner workings. By the way, to those reading, 98guy posted this topic in the MSDOS newsgroups (eg. comp.os.msdos.misc) too, so there is some more discussion to look at there as well. -- __ __ #_ |\| | _# |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DIRECTORY|SEO|WEBSITE|SOFTWARE|APPLICATION|DESIGN|DEVELOPMENT|DELHI|INDIA | priya.jaiswal | General | 0 | April 11th 08 04:31 PM |
Microsoft Can't Patch Flaw in Windows 98, ME. Last Patch Tuesday dead ahead. | Cymbal Man Freq. | General | 7 | June 15th 06 09:06 AM |
development system for high reliability apps? | Scott Kelley | Software & Applications | 1 | February 1st 06 01:09 AM |
Major problem with a Windows 98 system | The Waker | General | 4 | December 10th 05 09:43 PM |
Major problem in my pc, very slow (windows millenium) | Mis | General | 1 | July 22nd 04 06:13 PM |