Is there any browser left for Win98se?

In message , 98 Guy writes:
[post marked as keep - lots of useful links there]
Unofficial Windows 98 Second Edition Service Pack 3.17

http://www.htasoft.com/u98sesp/

I downloaded it. My AV says that U98SESP3.EXE contains TR/Dropper.Gen,
whatever that is.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Old soldiers never die - only young ones

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , 98 Guy writes:
[post marked as keep - lots of useful links there]
Unofficial Windows 98 Second Edition Service Pack 3.17

http://www.htasoft.com/u98sesp/

I downloaded it. My AV says that U98SESP3.EXE contains TR/Dropper.Gen,
whatever that is.

I think it's a trojan, and not a virus, but you can probably look it up via
Google. I seem to recall having seen something similar before. But as to
how harmful it *really* is - that's a whole nother story. (To wit: I think
many aren't, but several have code fragments or signatures that are tagged
as being suspicious based on similar tags in files that truly bad)

On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:56:10 -0000, wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 06:29:39 -0600, philo
wrote:


If you want a very fast (though extremely minimal) browser, then use
OffByOne.

I have it installed. Its small so I just leave it. I've rarely ever
found pages to load properly with it. Does it work at all now with the
newer webpages? I normally used to only use on sites that I thought
might have malware. But I dont generally use those sites anyhow. As
far as I know, it dont load scripts, and many sites insist on Java
Script these days or they wont load at all. I normally keep JS disabled
because of the risks.

As to Opera, I also hated it when it first came out
but now use it occasionally on my Linux machine and it works fine.
The newsreader portion loads horribly slow though, too slow to use. It

Yes, I also find it slow to load; but I have several groups and a lot of
old posts.

has a lot of features I like but I don;t use it

Maybe it's more stable in linux. Not so in windows.

Working fine here (though I admit I'm on XP).

I only use Agent for newsgroups. I never seen a need for anything else.
I often wish those packaged browsers would allow to not install the
newsreader part or email part. I dont need either\ and actually prefer
to keep them all separate.

Yup, once you get used to one NG Reader, it's hard to move.

--
[dash dash space newline 4line sig]

Money/Life question

wrote:

I have Firefox 3.x installed.

Why haven't you tried a more recent version of Firefox then?
Such as 10?

Because it wont run in Win98. I tried to run FF4.x and that would
not run, so I know 10 wont run for sure.

You know I'm running Win98se.
Why do you keep repeating over and over to install Firefox 10 (or
any newer version). You claim to be using Win98, and you know darn
well that FF 2.x is the last version to work on w98se WITHOUT Kernal
Ex and FF 3.x is the last version to work WITH Kernal Ex.

Look.

Why are you being an ass here?

I've told you plenty of times that KernelEx will allow you to run
versions of Firefox higher than 3 or 3.5.

KernelEx will allow you to run Firefox 3.6.28 with no issues, and
versions 8.01 or 9.0 with a few issues. Some have gotten version 10 to
run.

I've told you that Kex will allow you to run versions of Opera higher
than 10 (like 11 and 12) but you want to be a stubborn ass and not even
try newer versions of Opera.

And why have you claimed that you can't run a more recent version
of Opera? You should have at least tried version 12.

Ver 10.x is the last ver meant for Win98.

What do you want?

Forget what was "meant" for win-98. Today, in the year 2013, you do
what you can. You use what others have created. That means you use
KernelEx to the best of it's ability. That means you go beyond the
"official" last versions of this or that.

There was an important change to KernelEx a few years ago. If you
have any version of KernelEx 3.x, you are strongly advised to
replace it with the most recent version (4.5.2).

I upgraded it about a year ago. Not sure which version I have.
How do I find out? Is there a way to show the version number?

Do a file-search for the file KEXBASES.DLL (it should be in your
c:\windows\KernelEx directory). It should have a file-date of
11/14/2011. If you right-click on it, and select the Version tab, it
should show "4, 5, 12, 0". There should be a file in that directory
with the name "Release Notes.txt". It should start with this:

=========
KernelEx v4.5.2 by Xeno86
2011-11-14

(...)

* Now working: Mozilla Firefox 8.0
=========

Note how Firefox 8.0 is listed as being compatible / working.

What version of Adobe Flash do you have installed?

(many websites use flash)

Ver 9 it appears. Isn't that the last one that works on 98?

Again, you must let go of what is claimed to be the last official
version for win-98. Let go of that idea.

With KernelEx, I have Flash version 11.3.300.268 running just fine. The
most recent version is 11.6.602.168 and if I wanted I could simply go
out and obtain the most recent file (NPSWF32.dll) and copy it over this
current version.

(Windows scripting host 5.7)

Will this help improve scripting on other browsers besides IE?
I removed IE entirely, many years ago.

I can't say for sure, but I am sure that your removal of IE is
interferring or limiting some degree of web-compatibility for your other
browsers, and is most likely giving you jscript issues.

No matter how much you don't like the idea that Microsoft bundled or
tied IE into Windows 98, and no matter how good it makes you feel that
you've surgically removed IE from your computer, I've always thought it
was a dumb thing to do because it does break other aspects of your
computer's functionality, for no real gain.

and FF 3.x is the last version to work WITH Kernal Ex.

Go and obtain Firefox version 3.6.28. Try it, see if you like it.

If you're more ambitious, try Firefox 8.0.1.

You might (or will) have issues with bookmarks and/or browsing history
under FF 8, but not with 3.6.28.

You will (I think) not have any Java functionality for any version of
Firefox 3.5 or higher. This is also true for Opera 10 (?) and higher.

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:56:26 -0700, "Bill in Co"
wrote:

LOL. Good point. But I'd make the suggestion to some holdouts that it just
might be worth the migration, unless everything they have now (old software)
is all they need (although nowadays, even getting XP might be a problem).

Everything I have as far as old software *IS* everything I need. I dont
even like the new software, it's all bloatware. Even Agent for these
newsgroups turned into a major bloat. I still use ver 2.x and it's all
I need. I spent the first ten years of having a computer, learning how
to use the damn thing and learning all the software. In the middle of
all of that I had to change from Dos to Windows, and sort of learn all
over, then went from Win3.x to Win9.x. In the middle of all of that I
had to switch from using BBSs to the internet, which was pretty crude in
the early days. Around the time Win98 came around, I finally had a
computer that actually could be used to do productive things, after all
those years spend during the turmoil of the early days and all the
changes.

If I kept up with MS and other software companies, and kept upgrading,
I'd never have a productive machine. Which to me means why even have a
computer. The kids these days mostly only have computers which to them
are toys. They play games and use their nauseating facebook to waste
lots of time, and an upgrade means spending a few hours reinstalling
their games and tweaking their facebook. For me, it would take months
to reinstall everything, and there are a few if not many pieces of old
software that may not run on XP and up. Not to mention some of the real
old software I may no longer have the install disks for them.

It's just like a very old Windows 3.x program that I used regularly, and
it was a one of a kind program, refused to work in Win98. I needed that
program bad. For the last 12 years Ive had to drag out the old 386 with
Windows 3.11, plug in all the cables for monitor and keyboard printer
etc, and run the program. Oddly enough, not too long ago, I discovered
that it will run in Win2000. Weird!

Anyhow, my point is this. I'd rather spend a few hours here and there
adding Kernal Ex, modifying drivers, and other stuff to keep Win98
working, than spend months reinstalling everything, and many more months
trying to relearn how to use all the new crap that I never wanted
anyhow.

In my opinion, there has only been two useful improvements in MS OSs
since Win98se. 1. Much better USB support. 2. Allowing much larger Hard
drives. Other than that, what have they improved? Just added lots of
bloat, which slows down every faster CPU to the same speed the older
ones had before all the bloat.

There is no reason that I have to upgrade. This is not a game machine
or toy. It's used for productivity and general internet use. There is
nothing that XP has to offer me. Win2000 asists me in the event I cant
get drivers for some USB device, and 2000 is just the bloatless version
of XP anyhow.

It's just the goddamn web that has become an issue with their bloated
websites filled with scripts and flash crap. (None of which is needed).
So, it's not my needs that have changed, it's just that I'm being forced
to change by the damn web.

Here is the joke of the whole matter, and the last laugh will be on the
idiots who make all that bloated ****. There was recently an article on
TV. They said that the time is coming where the internet is going to
slow way down. They said in a year from now, it may be less than half
as fast as now. The reason is because of all the mobile devices using
the web, all the social media sites, and most of all, the excessive
amount of videos being used...... The reason, is that there simply is
not enough air space to run all this stuff, and a large percentage of
data is send over the air. I guess the joke will be on them.....

It's like I was looking for a little car repair info and found a website
that had what I needed. But, they only had it in video form.....
I'm on dialup, it took me 2 hours to download the damn video. When it
was done, I ended up with a video that could have been explained in one
short paragraph, with 2 or 3 photos to show the parts. In other words,
200K of text and photos, versus a 25 meg video.

I guess you could say I jumped off the bus. That's the upgrade bus and
all the bloat they seem to thing I want (and dont). Win98 was the peak
of perfection for MS. WinME was a flop, and Win2000 was the beginning
of their downfall, although 2000 was still tolerable. XP was nothing
more than a severely bloated Win2000. Vista was another flop, and I
wont even go near anything beyond that....

My computer is a tool that gets used. The kids that use them as toys
can spend all their money upgrading, only to make MS wealthy to be able
to play their games and send more useless crap to Facebook. I dont buy
a new hammer everytime someone makes one with a fancier handle. I like
my old simple one. I wont be buying new computers or operating systems
either. I like my old one.

I still like 98 (it's on the other computer), but not its limitations in
practice(in terms of what can be installed on it anymore, KernelEx
notwithstanding). And unfortunately KernelEx is only a "solution" for a
limited number of apps. As I mentioned, you can't even install something as
good as the old and excellent Adobe Audition 1.5 (its best version) for
audio rework, or Cyberlink PowerDirector, for video rework.

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 01:04:11 -0700, "Bill in Co"
wrote:

I'm not sure if that's related to the infamous, large number of files
copying problem (hangup) in windows explorer, but if so, that was "resolved"
(as I mentioned earlier) with swapping out the two browse DLL files.

Can you give me more info on this please! What files, where do I get
the replacements, etc....

wrote:
In other words,
200K of text and photos, versus a 25 meg video.

Well said, all of it. As to the bit above, it's not the download I mind
but having to endure the video. I can skim text at a glance and find an
read only the relevant bits, but I have to sit through the boredom of
all of the video. This whole culture is going illiterate and people who
read are becoming such a minute minority, nobody bothers to cater for
them any more.

The web was nice while it lasted.

wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 01:04:11 -0700, "Bill in Co"
wrote:

I'm not sure if that's related to the infamous, large number of files
copying problem (hangup) in windows explorer, but if so, that was
"resolved"
(as I mentioned earlier) with swapping out the two browse DLL files.

Can you give me more info on this please! What files, where do I get
the replacements, etc....

The way we solved the problem (where explorer hangs up when deleting a large
number of files) was to replace the "browselc.dll" and "browseui.dll"
versions installed by IE6 with the versions installed by IE5.5 (and reboot).

I'm not sure where you can find them online (but I think they are out
there), but someone here might know. Or, if you still have a IE5.5
Microsoft CD, you could probably extract them out of one of its cabinet
files. The browse DLL file version numbers you want would be 5.50 xxxx.

However, if you never had IE6 on your computer, then this may not be your
problem. But you could check the versions you have in the windows\system
folder (right click and get the version number) and see what it says.

Axel Berger wrote:
wrote:
In other words,
200K of text and photos, versus a 25 meg video.

Well said, all of it. As to the bit above, it's not the download I mind
but having to endure the video. I can skim text at a glance and find an
read only the relevant bits, but I have to sit through the boredom of
all of the video. This whole culture is going illiterate and people who
read are becoming such a minute minority, nobody bothers to cater for
them any more.

The web was nice while it lasted.

Hear! Hear!
Like most things, it got overused and abused, and dumbed down for the
masses. How many store clerks can even make change anymore without a
register? Maybe two?

wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:56:26 -0700, "Bill in Co"
wrote:

LOL. Good point. But I'd make the suggestion to some holdouts that it
just
might be worth the migration, unless everything they have now (old
software)
is all they need (although nowadays, even getting XP might be a problem).

Everything I have as far as old software *IS* everything I need. I dont
even like the new software, it's all bloatware. Even Agent for these
newsgroups turned into a major bloat. I still use ver 2.x and it's all
I need. I spent the first ten years of having a computer, learning how
to use the damn thing and learning all the software. In the middle of
all of that I had to change from Dos to Windows, and sort of learn all
over, then went from Win3.x to Win9.x. In the middle of all of that I
had to switch from using BBSs to the internet, which was pretty crude in
the early days. Around the time Win98 came around, I finally had a
computer that actually could be used to do productive things, after all
those years spend during the turmoil of the early days and all the
changes.

If I kept up with MS and other software companies, and kept upgrading,
I'd never have a productive machine. Which to me means why even have a
computer. The kids these days mostly only have computers which to them
are toys. They play games and use their nauseating facebook to waste
lots of time, and an upgrade means spending a few hours reinstalling
their games and tweaking their facebook. For me, it would take months
to reinstall everything, and there are a few if not many pieces of old
software that may not run on XP and up. Not to mention some of the real
old software I may no longer have the install disks for them.

It's just like a very old Windows 3.x program that I used regularly, and
it was a one of a kind program, refused to work in Win98. I needed that
program bad. For the last 12 years Ive had to drag out the old 386 with
Windows 3.11, plug in all the cables for monitor and keyboard printer
etc, and run the program. Oddly enough, not too long ago, I discovered
that it will run in Win2000. Weird!

Anyhow, my point is this. I'd rather spend a few hours here and there
adding Kernal Ex, modifying drivers, and other stuff to keep Win98
working, than spend months reinstalling everything, and many more months
trying to relearn how to use all the new crap that I never wanted
anyhow.

In my opinion, there has only been two useful improvements in MS OSs
since Win98se. 1. Much better USB support. 2. Allowing much larger Hard
drives. Other than that, what have they improved? Just added lots of
bloat, which slows down every faster CPU to the same speed the older
ones had before all the bloat.

There is no reason that I have to upgrade. This is not a game machine
or toy. It's used for productivity and general internet use. There is
nothing that XP has to offer me. Win2000 asists me in the event I cant
get drivers for some USB device, and 2000 is just the bloatless version
of XP anyhow.

It's just the goddamn web that has become an issue with their bloated
websites filled with scripts and flash crap. (None of which is needed).
So, it's not my needs that have changed, it's just that I'm being forced
to change by the damn web.

Here is the joke of the whole matter, and the last laugh will be on the
idiots who make all that bloated ****. There was recently an article on
TV. They said that the time is coming where the internet is going to
slow way down. They said in a year from now, it may be less than half
as fast as now. The reason is because of all the mobile devices using
the web, all the social media sites, and most of all, the excessive
amount of videos being used...... The reason, is that there simply is
not enough air space to run all this stuff, and a large percentage of
data is send over the air. I guess the joke will be on them.....

It's like I was looking for a little car repair info and found a website
that had what I needed. But, they only had it in video form.....
I'm on dialup, it took me 2 hours to download the damn video. When it
was done, I ended up with a video that could have been explained in one
short paragraph, with 2 or 3 photos to show the parts. In other words,
200K of text and photos, versus a 25 meg video.

I guess you could say I jumped off the bus. That's the upgrade bus and
all the bloat they seem to thing I want (and dont). Win98 was the peak
of perfection for MS. WinME was a flop, and Win2000 was the beginning
of their downfall, although 2000 was still tolerable. XP was nothing
more than a severely bloated Win2000. Vista was another flop, and I
wont even go near anything beyond that....

My computer is a tool that gets used. The kids that use them as toys
can spend all their money upgrading, only to make MS wealthy to be able
to play their games and send more useless crap to Facebook. I dont buy
a new hammer everytime someone makes one with a fancier handle. I like
my old simple one. I wont be buying new computers or operating systems
either. I like my old one.

I still like 98 (it's on the other computer), but not its limitations in
practice(in terms of what can be installed on it anymore, KernelEx
notwithstanding). And unfortunately KernelEx is only a "solution" for a
limited number of apps. As I mentioned, you can't even install something
as
good as the old and excellent Adobe Audition 1.5 (its best version) for
audio rework, or Cyberlink PowerDirector, for video rework.

I agree with a lot of what you've said, but I just got stuck with some apps
needing WinXP, and also the mess you pointed out with the web requirements
nowadays.

WinXP isn't quite so bad once you get it tamed down and customized.

As for reinstalling apps: I didn't do that. I simply used "PC Mover" to
move all my stuff over from the Win98SE computer to the WinXP computer.
There was no way I was going to reinstall everything. And the transition
went pretty well (only a few apps needing "touching up" or reinstalls).