Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98 - Page 2

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

I agree with the moderation angle.
In this case, it consisted of one handful (literally) of so-called "critical
updates" (the older ones, that is), since the day they ever came out.
Period.

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
the
fool
could



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Just thinking about it... It occurs to me that one major difference between
you and me in this respect is that I'm directly responsible for several
machines, setting up, teaching the users, occasionally maintaining or
reconfiguring, adding major apps, etc., whereas you have only your one (or
perhaps two or three) machines that you oversee. (No, I don't administer
large networks or anything like that, just a lot of home systems and a
couple of small business networks.)

For my purposes, a "known state" is something that makes life a lot easier
for me. Keeping track of as many machines as I do would be much more
difficult if they were all as heavily tweaked as yours (and to some extent,
my own personal machines) are. Keeping fully patched fits into that "known
state" paradigm. Also makes t-shooting a lot easier, especially when it
involves in-depth research at the MS KB, etc. In fact, pushing for a similar
"known state" condition for users that post here makes offering advice a lot
easier, too.

--

Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Well, that's probably true, for the most part.    But I have a problem when
some "critical updates" have some "unintended consequences".     Which some
indeed have.

Heck, even updating from IE5.5 or IE.5.5 SP2, to IE6, for that matter,
created a major headache for me with that (large number or size of files)
FILE deletion/copy "hanging-up" problem in Windows Explorer.    Of course, I
resolved that by restoring two of the older IE 5.5 DLL files as has been
discussed here before.

And then we also at least initially lost the T-shooter help (but to be
honest, I've haven't used that, so no biggie, I guess).

And there are some others that I've long since forgotten about.

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
between
extent,
similar
lot
"critical
Quoted text here. Click to load it
the
prefer
an
fool
say.
could



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

See, that's the thing. I know that these disasters have occurred, and even
affected a significant number of people. But with all the different systems
I've worked on, and especially in my own numerous systems (including
multi-boot scenarios), I've never really run across any such issues where I
couldn't adjust *my* habits or the systems themselves in order to get around
whatever weakness occurred. Heck, for a long time I thought that putting XP
on anything slower than 1 GHz, and/or 512MB of RAM was a ridiculous idea.
Yet I now have an old Compaq (HUH?!?) 533 MHz (or maybe even slower) system,
with only 384 MB of RAM running XPSP2 and behaving just fine. I admittedly
don't do a lot of demanding work on it like I used to, high-end graphic art
and the occasional gigantic data manipulation project for wife's publishing
business, but I can certainly do most of that stuff still, using that
Compaq, it just takes a while. I've yet to run into any serious problems on
it, either, after several months of regular use (including as a "guest"
machine for daughter and others who use it for horrible things like music
downloads, IM, and other stuff that I've come to recognize as some of the
most risky internet behavior one can find.)

My "main" machine these days is an old P55/233MHz with 96 MB RAM, running
Win98SE and IE6.1, fully updated, loaded with the usual AV and other
background apps, hardly tweaked except for folder options, etc., and it's
rock solid. Most frustrating thing about that machine is that with
broadband, the stuff downloads a *lot* faster than the machine can process
and render it. But I've only had one session of BSODs due to stretching the
hardware too far. Was really easy to get out of that one by giving up on
what was already a ridiculous desire in the first place. I've also loaded
Office XP Pro (sans Outlook), Adobe Photoshop, and lots of other stuff on
that machine, with hardly a burp. (And I *use* those apps quite a bit, too.)
Can't recall the last time I saw an IPF on that system. Yes, major file
operations take a long time, but I've not seen any real failures.

--

Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

I want to address this specifically, since you tend to gloss over it:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
failures."

THAT is completely unacceptable for me.    For windows explorer to
needlessly either hang permanently, or hang for a few minutes, in copying or
deleting files, is Unacceptable - for me, and my use of this computer.

And just FYI, I haven't had any major failures either, even WITHOUT the
updates.   Except for a few "self induced" ones, that I was responsible for
pretty much on my own.   :-)      Or, of course, inevitably some problematic
shareware programs, which any critical updates would have had NO effect on,
anyways.


Gary S. Terhune wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
systems
I
around
XP
system,
art
publishing
on
the
too.)
Quoted text here. Click to load it
course,
between
extent,
similar
lot
came
in
an
things, I
thanks).
Quoted text here. Click to load it
XP
have



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Bill, the *major* file operations I was speaking of would take a long time
*regardless* of its Update status. It's a function of the hardware, not
Windows or any portion thereof. I see *no* problems with the usual
operations on a day-to-day basis. I've been doing a *lot* of bulk file
transfers from this place to that using this machine, across partitions and
even to/from external drives (and also extracting from NTFS partitions using
NTFS Reader), and can't recall a single true "hang". Of course, I didn't
install IE 5.5 or even IE6., I updated directly to IE 6.1

On the other hand, this is the *same* hardware I used when I was testing IE
5 beta and all versions of IE 5 and 6 since then, and I still can't recall
getting your error. I know it's been confirmed by others, but I simply don't
recall having seen it -- and I should have if it was as all-pervasive as you
say. Of course, my own memory is pretty shoddy these days, and it *was*
several years ago.

In any case, my point was: You and others who have carefully maintained and
heavily tweaked systems are an infinitesimal minority of Windows users. It's
fine for you to micro-manage your system and maintain your position of "no
updates", etc. In fact, in your situation, *because* of your custom
tweaking, you probably *have_to* maintain that methodology. But it is rather
disingenuous, and in a way a downright disservice to others users here, when
you promote your methodology as somehow more correct than the "company
line". And you do that, despite your disclaimers, whenever you drop your
nay-saying into a thread where users are advised to get fully updated.

There are always going to be bugs in new products or versions thereof. That
you have dealt with this ultimate truth by deciding to eschew anything new
from your system is probably the right way to go -- for you. But not for the
other 99.99999...% of users who aren't even interested in trying to do what
you do, let alone capable of doing so.

--

Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
and
using
IE

By many, many others - and right in here, Gary.

Quoted text here. Click to load it
you

And that may be another point.    :-)

Quoted text here. Click to load it
and
It's
rather
when

The "company line" is that we should all be moving to Vista, too!   So just
how "valuable" is that? (rhetorical)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I just don't agree with the philosophy the way it has been implemented.  And
it's neverending.   And it has undesired consequences, some of the time.
(Not that the intentions are bad).

I still say *true security* only comes from within - with proper knowledge,
and attention to detail, maintenance, and education, on the part of the
customer.   There's only so far you can dumb this down and supposedly create
a bulletproof, absolutely secure, system.   I think it's almost a myth to
assume it can be done.

Quoted text here. Click to load it
That
the
what
systems
where I
around
XP
idea.
system,
art
publishing
on
music
the
running
it's
the
loaded
on
too.)
Quoted text here. Click to load it
course,
been
for
have
it
offering
in
things,
thanks).
Quoted text here. Click to load it
patched
perfectly
run
computers
XP
have



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 19:19:56 -0600, "Bill in Co."


Quoted text here. Click to load it
have


My computer is having a major issue parsing 304 lines of mainly >
signs.


:(


Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

James Egan wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
have

Patience and persistence, my boy.     Old school values.   :-)



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

"Gary S. Terhune" wrote:
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Back in 2004 I created a Win-98se installation on new hardware and
cloned it to about 10 PC's in our office.  Naturally it was fully
patched and updated prior to the cloning, and it included NAV 2002,
Spybot, Spyware Blaster, AdAware, Firefox, a link to the MVPS hosts
file, and a few other goodies, in addition to all the application
software we use.  No real "tweaks" that I can recall, a few settings
in tweakui like auto-network-login.

Maybe once a month, or once every 2 months, I go to each computer and
update the various anti-malware components.  Prior to July 11, I
probably went 6 months between visits to WU.  

I think that you are over-estimating the need to oversee, maintain or
tweak a modern Win-98 system.  I did nothing special during the setup
of these systems except I went about it methodically and used some
very good shareware programs to make IE more secure.  The end result
is that I have a bunch of office computers that function day-in and
day-out for the users, just like the office toaster or coffee maker.

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Your machines aren't "heavily" tweaked, which is what I was talking about.
In fact, yours sound a lot like mine, and are thus fairly resilient when
presented with the myriad of situations that befall common users. I was
comparing systems like "ours", which are basically "company line" in
configuration, to systems like Bill's, which are so heavily tweaked that he
either can't make use of or doesn't dare go to many sites, and which require
him to be very vigilant whenever he changes the configuration, installs
apps, Updates, etc.

--

Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Fairly resilient machine?    Well, I'm not so sure about that.   I'd say
it's a toss-up (if you're just talking about the computer, and how it's been
tweaked.   None of my tweaking has ANYTHING to do with security issues.   It
has to do with USABILITY and CUSTOMIZATION issues.

Quoted text here. Click to load it
he

I just usually don't, and spend more time on newsgroups, that's all.
Why would I generally want to go to shady sites?    I'm not going to porn
sites.     :-)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

But that "requirement", as you put it, has NOTHING to do with security
issues, but has everything to do with operativeability issues, and making
sure nothing has changed for the worse (which sometimes happens when I've
installed some software).

I think I've said before that I restore a previous registry on a
not-so-uncommon basis, as a result of trying out some new programs, just to
cover my bases, sometimes.

And I meticulously run SFC before and after any such installations.   And
check which files (if any) have been erased right after installing
something.  Things like that.

Again, none of this has anything to do with "security issues", or "critical
updates".

And last, but not least, I'm on dial-up, which provides me an additional
layer of protection (if for no other reason, that when I'm offline, I AM
off-line, and when I am on-line, it takes a bit of time for something to
come into this computer, so I can often catch a glimpse of some undesired
activity (if there is any) in the nick of time.   :-)

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Bill, "customization" and "useability" tweaks can easily result in un
intended consequences. For this reason, I won't even recommend TweakUI. Not
after seeing what it did to Win98 when whatever that setting is that
disables IE in some manner did. Problem is, once you enabled that tweak, it
was nigh impossible to undo it. You've often seen someone here ask what's
wrong and the result turns out that they used TUI or similar and didn't
really understand exactly what they were doing. Fortunately, *most* of those
things are easily undone.

I wasn't talking about tweaking as being a security issue, but rather that
your tweaking might easily be what causes you problems that other don't
generally have when installing Updates or other apps. Sorry that I wasn't
too clear on that. What I was trying to say is that your decision to forego
Updates that address secutiy issues means that you aren't being protected
from whatever issue is being addressed. You rely on your own habits to keep
you out of harm's way and that's fine -- for you. But it's my experience
that most users aren't interested in or aren't able to guard their own
systems nearly as well as you or I might without relying on MS to patch
holes and other automatic apps to provide additional layers of protection, a
situation that worsens drastically when you add more users to the system
(kids, spouse, "friends" etc.) The vast majority of users (and even
yourself, <eg>) just want it to work.

You have your way, the "average" users have their way, and I like it in the
middle, <s>. I maintain fairly standard installations with few tweaks other
than the obvious ones involving Folder Options (mostly), I'm very careful
about what I put on the system, and I'm also careful about where I go on the
internet (except for my test system, of course, where I'm prone to doing all
kinds of things most people would shudder at -- I need to see these things
in action in order to understand what someone else is describing to me over
the phone or via news/emails).

But I'm also realistic, I realize that SPAM is a fact of life that I can
only do so much about before the prevention starts being its own problem,
and that no amount of design, whether pre-release or post-release, is going
to permanently protect me from the nasty people out there. I'm also not
interested in being frozen in time. I want to see where all this new stuff
goes, and I can't do that using only a Win98 machine on 5-year old or older
hardware.

--

Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User


Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I don't use it either.    I think it's a bit dangerous to have that one
installed.  :-)
But then again, I have done tweaks in the registry to customize some things
(and that's the only way I could have gotten those desired customizations).

Quoted text here. Click to load it
it
those

Well, I don't think so for the most part.    And a classic example is that
infamous Windows Explorer file copy/delete problem in IE6, which MANY users
here have reported - it's been pretty well documented as being fairly
common.   But not everybody sees it, because not everybody does it all that
often.

Quoted text here. Click to load it
forego
keep

And I think, ultimately, THAT is the ONLY way to establish true security
(said as a generalization).     (But sure, it probably wouldn't hurt to have
some help along the way).

Quoted text here. Click to load it
a
the
other
the
all
over
going
older
he



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

OK! Well, I'm betting we'll hit thread-depth limits here pretty soon, but
feel free to continue the discussion in some other thread farther down, (or
shall we just repeat the dance, <eg>?)

One last jab... Yes, most of us regulars decry idiot-proofing every chance
we get, but even *I* find it handy at times, and I wouldn't wish much less
on most of my "clients". They mostly *need* idiot-proofing!

--

Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 17:00:35 -0600, "Bill in Co."

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I think Gary's thinking of general laggardliness, rather than this:

http://cquirke.mvps.org/bexp1.htm

This is not just "slowdown"; this is "bugginess", pure and simple.  On
such PCs I just give up on Explorer and use the command line instead -
but it's a pretty pathetic commentary on a GUI OS when one has to go
command line just to delete or rename a single file.

And the amazing thing was, so-one seemed to have seen this bug before
in MS.  Everywhere, it was "hey, we didn't know - why don't you raise
it as a bug?"  Makes you wonder what kind of testing they do... "we
tested most of the common end-user scenarios, but not rare power-user
tasks like 'deleting a file', 'renaming', etc."

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Agreed.  You can kill and restart Explorer, and it's OK again unless
the problem behavior latches into place once more.

That latchability is charactaristic of the issue.  A PC that's never
had the problem will stay that way, until the problem happens for the
first time - thereafter, it will happen regularly.  During a new
Windows session, the problem is not in effect, but once it's
triggered, it affects all operations for the rest of that runtime.

It affects all Win98xx and WinME that have any IE 6 installed, (i.e.
original or SP1), and can be fixed by reverting two particular DLLs to
older IE 5.xx versions.  We have asked for clarification of the safety
impact of reverting those DLLs, but I haven't seen an answer.



Quoted text here. Click to load it
  Drugs are usually safe.  Inject? (Y/n)
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98



cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Also at  :)

http://rdchauvin.com/W98xIE6xBug.htm

Chris I was still waiting for you to link my page on yours like you said
you would, but I guess at this point the problem rarely comes up anymore
and most people hae moved on, but it would be nice nevertheless.. ..I put
so much blessed work into proving that out.

Rick




Quoted text here. Click to load it




Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 17:25:01 -0400, "Rick Chauvin"
Quoted text here. Click to load it





Ai, my apologies... I haven't write-accessed my formal web site for
ages, since changing systems and thus FTP tools.  All my recent
webbing has been done on the blog.

How does http://rdchauvin.com/ work, BTW?  I get an amazing wallpaper,
but can't see a way forward (IE 6 SP2).  

Lemmie try in Firefox 1.5.07... same effect.

Quoted text here. Click to load it
  Drugs are usually safe.  Inject? (Y/n)
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

| On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 17:25:01 -0400, "Rick Chauvin"
| >cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote:
|
| >> I think Gary's thinking of general laggardliness, rather than this:
|
| >> http://cquirke.mvps.org/bexp1.htm
|
| >Also at  :)
| >
| >http://rdchauvin.com/W98xIE6xBug.htm
|
| >Chris I was still waiting for you to link my page on yours like you
said
| >you would, but I guess at this point the problem rarely comes up
anymore
| >and most people hae moved on, but it would be nice nevertheless.. ..I
put
| >so much blessed work into proving that out.
|
| Ai, my apologies... I haven't write-accessed my formal web site for
| ages, since changing systems and thus FTP tools.  All my recent
| webbing has been done on the blog.
|
| How does http://rdchauvin.com/ work, BTW?  I get an amazing wallpaper,
| but can't see a way forward (IE 6 SP2).
|
| Lemmie try in Firefox 1.5.07... same effect.

Same here in IE6 SP1. It's just a wallpaper, nothing else. But he didn't
post that. He posted...
http://cquirke.mvps.org/bexp1.htm



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98



PCR wrote:

[....]

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Hi PCR, actually as you can see I only posted
 http://rdchauvin.com/W98xIE6xBug.htm

Rick




Site Timeline