Unofficial Windows98SE Patch

The eternal question: by Tirel · 2004-05-02 03:08 · Score: 5, Insightful

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: by Mr.+Darl+McBride · 2004-05-02 03:13 · Score: 5, Interesting

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 or SoftIce and dig in. You might learn a thing or two!
Re:The eternal question: by kfg · 2004-05-02 03:20 · Score: 5, Funny

. . .some stranger offering me unofficial service packs.

As opposed to the strangers offering you nats and firewalls?

KFG
Re:The eternal question: by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-02 03:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

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: by sambira · 2004-05-02 03:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

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.
Re:The eternal question: by theLOUDroom · 2004-05-02 04:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

Can you trust him?

Can you trust Microsoft?

After all, they resfue to take on ANY legal liability for the security of your systems. If they intentionally shipped you broken software, what recourse do you think you have?

If this guy publishes real, verifiable contact information, I'd trust him, and I expect he does.

Of course, to me, asking if you can trust this guy is like asking if you can trust someone with the key to those shitty luggage locks they put on suitcases. If you gave a shit about security, you'd be using something else anyways.

--
Life is too short to proofread.
Re:The eternal question: by sadomikeyism · 2004-05-02 04:38 · Score: 5, Insightful

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.
Is this a joke? What happened to your Open Source Religion? If just anybody can offer a patch for linux, and you trust THEM, why won't you trust someone else offering a patch for Windoze? A bit hypocritical, don't you think?

--
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves
Re:The eternal question: by silentrob · 2004-05-02 05:26 · Score: 5, Insightful

...their customers...

Microsoft doesn't support it's customers, but instead only supports their customers who have paid for Microsoft's product AND who have also let Microsoft gouge them over support costs to have thier paid-for product supported.

John Q. Consumer doesn't have enough money to warrent Microsoft's attention.

If MS release a patch that hoses systems or installs a rootkit...

Similar things have happened before (unintentional, I'm sure). Microsoft fixed the problems at it's leisure, never apologizing and never being held truly accountable. ...many people will be clamouring for their blood.

Sure, whatever. People have never really clamoured for blood when yet another virus broke out or yet another security hole was found. As far as I am aware, Microsoft has never paid for damages due to the problems with thier software. There are parts of their EULA that makes them immune to accountability, just for these reasons. Consumers just sit back and tolorate the problem until Microsoft get's around to fixing it.

I ask you this: Specifically, in what capacity is Microsoft accountable to it's customers?

Granted, they are accountable to the US DoJ and the EU Commission, but only because of the weight each carry and the fines they can impose.

In the end, I can see where you're coming from, and you have a decent point, but I think you're not really looking at the real Microsoft, but instead you're looking at the public image of Microsoft.
Re:The eternal question: by zangdesign · 2004-05-02 06:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

After all, they resfue to take on ANY legal liability for the security of your systems. If they intentionally shipped you broken software, what recourse do you think you have?

Of course, one could say the same about Open Source.

*ducks*

--
To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
Re:The eternal question: by Some+Clown · 2004-05-02 07:47 · Score: 5, Interesting

I agree with what you've said here, but with a caveat that may seem obvious to some, not so to others: MOST big companies operate this way. Take for example the company I work for, which will remain unnamed here, but is a Fortune 500 company. The software we design is used in mission-critical systems as well as average not-so-critical situations. We routinely have hundreds of bugs that we know about, but choose not to fix. Why? Simply put, it's not profitable to fix them unless they rise to a level that threatens our revenue. Now that's not my decision, mind you, just the way things happen to be. I've got two friends who work at Microsoft, one of which works in an area dealing with OS bugs. Just before Win2K was released, I was sitting with him as he showed me the millions of bugs (yes, millions) that they (Microsoft) weren't going to fix... ostensibly for the same reason as my company.

I'm not saying that this is right, or we shouldn't strive to be better. It just sometimes gets old to hear "Microsoft bad" all of the time (and I'm not disagreeing) and not have the sort of group realization that, the way Microsoft operates is pretty much business-as-usual for most large corporations (and not just software corps).

That's why we need a strong regulatory climate (but not overly heavy-handed), and a market that takes care of the rest. And to all of those who say that Microsoft is too big to take down with just market-pressure, what about IBM? What about the little geek with an idea who juked one of the biggest companies in the world so bad they almost didn't recover? Someday... if the Linux idea keeps growing, it will reach a point where it too can do to Microsoft what Microsoft did to IBM.

Wow... looking back that that little rant, I seem to have wandered off the reservation. Hmmm... I wonder if I toss in a quick "Microsoft Bad" if it'll be enough to protect me from the inevitable flames?

--
"...The mice will see you now..."

Link and Download Mirrors by Mr.+Darl+McBride · 2004-05-02 03:09 · Score: 5, Informative

The author's page is here, from the end of the article. His 98 SE service pack page is here. 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, here, and here

patch for Windows by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-02 03:10 · Score: 5, Funny

here

Already installed a couple of unofficial patches. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-02 03:13 · Score: 5, Funny

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

Winner: Most Pointless Screenshot of the Year by horati0 · 2004-05-02 03:14 · Score: 5, Funny

Yep, it's Windows 98, alright.

--
The neutrality of this sig is disputed.

just repackaged by NoDoZ · 2004-05-02 03:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

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'

Is he the guy? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-02 03:16 · Score: 5, Funny

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!

"Windows 98" - *98* - 1998! - GET A LIFE by drsmack1 · 2004-05-02 03:17 · Score: 5, Funny

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 /.

--

Humor from a Genetically Molested Mind

Re:"Windows 98" - *98* - 1998! - GET A LIFE by SomeGuyFromCA · 2004-05-02 06:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

> It is now 2004. This is a operating system from 1998. WTF?

I can tell you what the fuck, by ssh'ing over into my Lin/Win98 dual boot machine, cd /mnt/win/games, ls.

Duke3d, Fox Ranger, Freddy Pharkas Frontier Pharmacist, God of Thunder, GTA 1, Keen 1-6, Keen Dreams, Kilrathi Saga, King's Quest 6, Loom, Master of Magic, Monkey Island 1-3, Night Raid, Raptor, SimCity, SimCity 2000, Solar Winds 1 & 2, Space Quest 5, Star Trek: 25th Anniversary, Star Trek: Judgement Rites, Tyrian, Wing Commander: Kilrathi Saga, Wing Commander IV, Wing Commander: Prophecy, Wing Commander: Armada, Wing Commander: Academy, Wing Commander: Privateer, Wolf3d, Wolf3d: Spear of Destiny, and X-Wing Alliance.

All great games. All bought and paid for. And none of which I want to stop playing just because I've changed main machine OSes in the meantime.

--
if the answer isn't violence, neither is your silence / freedom of expression doesn't make it alright

So what by Mitchua · 2004-05-02 03:25 · Score: 5, Funny

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

Re:What's so special?? by John_Steed · 2004-05-02 03:30 · Score: 5, Insightful

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.

Don't install this on non-english MS Windows by Henk+Poley · 2004-05-02 03:30 · Score: 5, Informative

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.

Will WINE support Windows 98 SP2 ? by waskyo · 2004-05-02 03:34 · Score: 5, Funny

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.

New Alt. for Virtual PC by artlu · 2004-05-02 03:34 · Score: 5, Interesting

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

Do you trust Windows 98? by fmaxwell · 2004-05-02 04:07 · Score: 5, Insightful

Can you trust him?

The guy's web page says:

I highly recommend that you should backup your system before installing the pack.

and

This software is provided "as-is," without any express or implied warranty. In no event shall the provider be held liable for any damages arising from the use of this software.

If he was trying to get you to download and install a Trojan horse, why would he tell you to backup your system? Why would he have a disclaimer with dire warnings about 'no warranty' and "damages" rather than a statement that the software is "r33ly L33t" and that you need it now? Why would Information Week provide a link to it if it was a Trojan horse? There's 96 hits on Google when you look up "Alper Coskun" (with quotes) and "98SE" -- none of which mentions his sinister plot to get your oh-so-valuable data that you keep on an ancient Windows 98 PC. You figured out his clever ruse!

You need to take the aluminum foil off of your head.

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.

Will NAT and a firewall give you the ability to support more than 512 MB of RAM in 98SE? Will they give you improved swap file usage? Will it give you better WDM and USB support? Will the NAT and firewall provide you with general "USB 1.x Mass Storage Device" support? In fact, are you sure that there are no remotely exploitable bugs, that the OS isn't leaking your personal information, etc.?

But, I guess if you gave a rat's ass about security, functionality, or reliability, you wouldn't still be using Windows 98SE, would you?

Has anyone else tried it? by eww · 2004-05-02 05:06 · Score: 5, Informative

I have two Win98SE machines. I haven't needed to upgrade them. They are pretty stable so I don't need W2K or XP. 98Se works just fine for me.

Anyway I just installed the patch on my machine. The machine's preformace increased A LOT! Windows boot faster and preformance in general was very SNAPPY. Why can't every OS be like that? It seems to be a bunch of patches plus a few tweaks! :).

After installing it of course it changed my background and all the colors to W2K theme. Not that I mind but I was rather suprised that it didn't ask me or anything like that. My icon's stayed the old Win98 ones until I went into my properties for display settings. Under Icon's it showed all the new ones. So I click on "use large icons" and then they all changed to the new W2K icons. I hate large icon's so I unchecked it and the icon's still stayed W2K theme.

I kind of like it. I am hoping to try out the USB Mass storage device option. Flash cards are so much fun. Under newer OS's I don't have to do anything. Just plug em in. Under 98SE I have usally had to install the drivers.

Oh. I have an Athlon 750Mhz with 256MB of ram. Win98 just screams with this patch!

Now to try it on a an old K6-2 400 /w 128MB ram that has been running rather sluggish lately.

If anyone wants KISS then they should use 98SE on their new machine. It's fast, simple, not confusing, has industry support and everyone knows how to use it.

If your smart you will put it behind a firewall and then add some simple FREE AV software (www.free-av.com) works great for me. It can do everything I need like email, word processing, some games (newer ones barely work), surfing the internet. The only problem is computer games. But hey using an Xbox is a whole lot cheaper than getting a new Athlon 64 /w a $400+ video card. Plus everyone knows how to use it.

I've tried it with mixed results... by mike_diack · 2004-05-02 05:31 · Score: 5, Interesting

I've tried this patch with mixed results:

On my main system (triple boot, XP Pro, 98Se, Mdk 10, a PIII 600 with 768MB RAM), the patch was a definite improvement, faster bootup, better USB and nicer (Win2000 ish) UI.

On my parents system (dual boot, 2000/98SE, PII 300), it screwed up 98 so badly that it wouldn't boot and so I had to reinstall.

So go figure.

I'd used the earlier 1.1 and 1.2 patches on my own system as well previously with success..

--
Linux fan and Win32 developer

Trying it on 3 diff computers by Darthmalt · 2004-05-02 05:59 · Score: 5, Informative

works fine on an AMD 450 mHz seems to have sped it up a bit as well. pentium 350 mHz likes it as well. But the real test is an extremley unstable pentium 188 mHz That likes to randomly crash even if you have AIM and MSNmsg just sitting there doing nothing. I purposley (sp?) Ran too many progs at once and in combinations that usually cause it to crash. But I wasn't even able to make it crash when I tried. I recommend this to anyone using a win98se machine It now reports me as running Win 98se 4.10.2222 A

27 of 417 comments (clear)