Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98 - Page 4

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

Threaded View

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

David H. Lipman wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

    You can call us fools all you want David but the truth must come
out.  Check out what secunia.com says about so called security in XP
Pro., XP Home and Windows 2000 Pro. and compare it to 98SE.  In
addition, it is nice to have the backwards compatibility with 98SE for
the older Windows 3.1 programs and DOS programs the school possesses.
    You mean you want the Albuquerque public schools and all public
schools in the United States to get rid of their older 98SE machines
that still work for newer ones that will not support the older software.
  Give us a break, David, the public schools are not so rich as to be
able to afford brand new XP Pro. computers all the time and in addition
let all the perfectly good software go to waste (Windows 3.1 and DOS
software that the schools still have).  This would be a crying shame if
it happened.  Think of the amount of garbage that would be generated by
this action.
    Actually, Microsoft is the real fool here for not yet listening to
my wise advice about having a Classics series that will run on older
computers as well as modern ones and be as backwards compatible as 98SE.
  It must be based on the 9x source code and it can indeed be done.  It
should actually be Microsoft's duty to do this for the good of all
humanity.  It in no way would threaten XP's and Vistas forth coming
legacy because it would be aimed at users who still want their old
programs to run and cannot run them anymore on XP machines.  This is all
too common and I have heard from many computer friends that I know about
how they want this to happen and are interested in more simplicity than
ever bloated and complicated code that is being released in newer
software.  This is what democracy in America is all about.  The consumer
gets to choose and the marketplace should be based on supply and demand.


http://secunia.com/product/22 /


View Indepth Details For This Product:
 > Display Summary Only
 > Secunia Advisory Statistics (All time)
 > 2006
 > 2005
 > 2004
 > 2003
 > List of Secunia Advisories (All time)
 > 2006
 > 2005
 > 2004
 > 2003
 > Send Feedback
          
Vendor     Microsoft

Product Link     N/A

Affected By     153 Secunia advisories

Unpatched     18% (28 of 153 Secunia advisories)

Most Critical Unpatched
The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows
XP Professional, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Highly critical

http://secunia.com/product/16 /

Vendor       Microsoft

Product Link     N/A

Affected By     138 Secunia advisories

Unpatched     18% (25 of 138 Secunia advisories)

Most Critical Unpatched
The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows
XP Home Edition, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Highly critical


http://secunia.com/product/1 /

Vendor       Microsoft

Product Link     View Here (Link to external site)

Affected By     131 Secunia advisories

Unpatched     15% (19 of 131 Secunia advisories)

Most Critical Unpatched
The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows
2000 Professional, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Highly critical

http://secunia.com/product/13 /

Vendor       Microsoft

Product Link     N/A

Affected By     32 Secunia advisories

Unpatched     9% (3 of 32 Secunia advisories)

Most Critical Unpatched
The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows
98 Second Edition, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Less critical

---------------------------------------------------------------------

David, I tri-boot with 98SE, XP Pro. and Windows Vista Ultimate 32 bit
that is being tested mainly for security issues but also for ease of
use.  I am a Microsoft shareholder so I want Microsoft to do well.
Microsoft is extremely tough to crack but I feel any company can be made
to do what is right if enough pressure is applied.  I plan on testing
Office 2007 soon as well.  In addition, I plan to expand my field to
learning about Apples and Linux.  The truth must come out!

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Supply & Demand are exactly what is in play here, Dan. You just happen to be
on the losing side of the Demand portion of that equation. Talk all you
want, Win9x is dead and will not be revived. Demand is precisely why this is
so.

You keep whining about all the old programming that supposedly won't work on
new systems. Please point these out. I know of very few applications that
will work on Win9x (or DOS) and won't work on WinXP. In fact, I don't know
of a lot of apps that will work on XP and won't work on 9x. In any case,
it's no big deal to install a separate partition for DOS and Win9x-only apps
(keep this partition away from the Internet!) -- assuming DOS or Win9x will
run on the *hardware* -- Modern hardware is the biggest set of compatibility
issues involved here.

--

Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User




Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Dear Gary & friends:

Supply & Demand means that the Supply side cannot force the Demand
side, and that it not the case here. As a quasi monopoly, Microsoft
(Supply) can force the demand to do what it wants.

During the last six years, I have spent big amounts of money that I
didn't wanted to spend, upgrading hardware and software, in order to
run exactly the same applications and features that I ran six years
ago (Office, Quicken, a Browser, and a few more). It is like a sort of
a "Microsoft and hardware manufacturers yearly tax".

A similar case would be if the car manufacturers control the fuel
specs and delivery. You change the fuel specs every three or four
years, and force all the world to change all their cars. Nice
business, isn't it?


Quoted text here. Click to load it
Thanks
Juan I. Cahis
Santiago de Chile (South America)
Note: Please forgive me for my bad English, I am trying to improve it!

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
be
is so.
on

Sigh, it appears more of them are comin out of the woodwork...
Actually, I'm not sure how much of the problem is *really* due to that, and
how much of it is just built into the installer, which balks when you try to
install it on a Win9x system (I've had that happen).

And perhaps some (most?) of the reason for that is simply that the
manufacturer doesn't want to take any chances, and have to support a Win9x
system, so this is the simplest way "out" for them.   And they most likely
haven't tested it on a Win9x system themself, for that matter, so they don't
want to be held accountable.

And here is one specific example:   I have seen at least a couple of apps
that WILL install on a Win9x system, but the File Menus won't work on them
(Open, Close), due to a change in the parameters of a function call in the
Windows API for opening files between Win9x and WinXP (the parameter list
was expanded for the latter).

Of course, if the app writer had wanted, he could have coded that in, but
chose not to (simpler that way), and just expected customers to use WinXP at
this point in time.

Quoted text here. Click to load it
apps
will
compatibility
legacy



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

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

    I would like to see if there is a market out there for a Windows
Classic series.  I have even contacted Microsoft that I would be willing
to help fund such an experiment.  The way I see it is that Microsoft has
nothing big to lose even if they try and put out another 9x product that
fills the niche that XP does not have and convinces the remaining
98/98SE and ME users to upgrade to this Classic series.  In addition, if
the 9x source code is so worthless, Gary then why doesn't Microsoft just
sell it and then be completely free of the burden of the 9x source code
and make even more revenue from a sale.
    If Microsoft is so confident that the 9x source code is mostly
worthless then the only logical conclusion to draw is to sell it and
make a few more dollars.  I think that the consumer and our schools
would benefit greatly if Microsoft does not want the 9x source then they
would just get rid of it and allow someone else to continue to improve
upon it since Microsoft can no longer be bothered to continue the 9x
source code.  There are some applications that cannot run in XP and one
is an educational Space program that was developed for Windows 3.1.
Another is some of the old King's Quest games by Sierra that have
trouble running in XP.  I was unable to install my old Microsoft Money
3.0 program in XP Professional.  I could go on if you want me to Gary.

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

I surely agree, Win9x was and is great for its era.
I threw away all those MS-Dos games-programs with '95 release.
Then the same for '95 when '98 released.
I have six grandchildren - so had a variety.
The programs improved - they wouldn't touch that old stuff.
Especially since their schools are very high tech.
I have 98 for 7+ yrs with no reinstall and used Dos mode very few times.
Well, the PS just went out - don't think I will replace it, so maybe goodbye
I don't think there would be a market, since even XP is getting dated.
--
mae

| Supply & Demand are exactly what is in play here, Dan. You just happen to
be
| on the losing side of the Demand portion of that equation. Talk all you
| want, Win9x is dead and will not be revived. Demand is precisely why this
is
| so.
|
| You keep whining about all the old programming that supposedly won't work
on
| new systems. Please point these out. I know of very few applications that
| will work on Win9x (or DOS) and won't work on WinXP. In fact, I don't know
| of a lot of apps that will work on XP and won't work on 9x. In any case,
| it's no big deal to install a separate partition for DOS and Win9x-only
apps
| (keep this partition away from the Internet!) -- assuming DOS or Win9x
will
| run on the *hardware* -- Modern hardware is the biggest set of
compatibility
| issues involved here.
|
| --
|
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
|
|
|
| >    Actually, Microsoft is the real fool here for not yet listening to my
| > wise advice about having a Classics series that will run on older
| > computers as well as modern ones and be as backwards compatible as 98SE.
-snip-


Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

mae wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

However, Microsoft with lots of billions of dollars can at least afford
to do a test run of another 9x operating system to see if it would make
money.  If it is a smashing success then Microsoft has made even more
money and if it is a failure then their loses would be limited if
Microsoft does a try run in a few markets to see if there is a desire
and a demand for this kind of product.  In addition, it might help get
the European Union off Microsoft's back a bit by showing Microsoft's
good will towards the market and people out there by doing this action.
  Nothing ventured then nothing gained, says I -- <smile>

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Really, I don't think that would be the way to go.

Here's a thought - we now have RAM and USB flash capacity that is
large enough to run the original Win95 without any HD at all; set
aside 384M of RAM as RAM drive, load everything off flash, and run
this is in the remaining 128M.

Well, that's pretty much what hand-helds are, aren't they?  No
co-incidence that mobile phone games look so much like the old 1980s
"home computer on TV" titles, eh?

And yet these devices aren't using the old vintage OSs, because our
concept of what a computer is, have changed to the point that we need
a different set of functionality.

For that reason, I'd see a future "lite" OS as being based on the NT
kernel, but with an unprecidented amound of fluff and gargage being
ripped out of it.  Once you do that, it's a lot safer and more stable,
and has the advantage of actually *working* with today's hardware.

What I really would like to see is a Win9x emulator, so we can run
those old DOS classics on new PCs.  A gaming PC without Wolfenstein,
Doom and Duke Nukem is like a bookshelf without Shakespeare, or a
graphic novel collection without The Watchmen   :-)



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


A Windows 9x emulator is a concept but then what Microsoft would need to
do was sell the 9x source code and I highly doubt that will happen.  The
only way to effectively do this is to market a Classic series of
operating systems based on 9x source code --- heck you could even
include aspects of the NT source code as long is does not remove the
greatness of DOS and the ability to run older Windows 3.1 programs and
DOS programs.  I have read of DOS-Box as being one solution to running
older titles in Windows XP as well as vdmsound being a concept.

I cannot endorse the provided websites below because I have not
currently tested them for full security and compatibility reasons ---
Disclaimer provided for RJK's benefit and others safety and sanity. <grin>

http://sourceforge.net/projects/vdmsound /

http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/news.php?show_news=1

http://www.answers.com/topic/windows-98

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98




|
| >However, Microsoft with lots of billions of dollars can at least afford
| >to do a test run of another 9x operating system to see if it would make
| >money.  If it is a smashing success then Microsoft has made even more
| >money and if it is a failure then their loses would be limited
|
| Really, I don't think that would be the way to go.
|
| Here's a thought - we now have RAM and USB flash capacity that is
| large enough to run the original Win95 without any HD at all; set
| aside 384M of RAM as RAM drive, load everything off flash, and run
| this is in the remaining 128M.
|
| Well, that's pretty much what hand-helds are, aren't they?  No
| co-incidence that mobile phone games look so much like the old 1980s
| "home computer on TV" titles, eh?
|
| And yet these devices aren't using the old vintage OSs, because our
| concept of what a computer is, have changed to the point that we need
| a different set of functionality.
|
| For that reason, I'd see a future "lite" OS as being based on the NT
| kernel, but with an unprecidented amound of fluff and gargage being
| ripped out of it.  Once you do that, it's a lot safer and more stable,
| and has the advantage of actually *working* with today's hardware.
|
| What I really would like to see is a Win9x emulator, so we can run
| those old DOS classics on new PCs.  A gaming PC without Wolfenstein,
| Doom and Duke Nukem is like a bookshelf without Shakespeare, or a
| graphic novel collection without The Watchmen   :-)
|
|
|
| >------------ ----- --- -- - -  -    -
|   Drugs are usually safe.  Inject? (Y/n)
| >------------ ----- --- -- - -  -    -

 I would totally agree, without the old "standbys" the world would crumble
(or at least mine would).

--
MEB
_______________



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98




| I surely agree, Win9x was and is great for its era.
| I threw away all those MS-Dos games-programs with '95 release.
| Then the same for '95 when '98 released.
| I have six grandchildren - so had a variety.
| The programs improved - they wouldn't touch that old stuff.
| Especially since their schools are very high tech.
| I have 98 for 7+ yrs with no reinstall and used Dos mode very few times.
| Well, the PS just went out - don't think I will replace it, so maybe
goodbye
| I don't think there would be a market, since even XP is getting dated.
| --
| mae

 OH NO, mae isn't going to using 98 anymore????!!!!
 Someone send her a new power supply.

 Gary you have to have one to fit her computer in that pile somewhere.

--
MEB
_______________


|
| | Supply & Demand are exactly what is in play here, Dan. You just happen
to
| be
| | on the losing side of the Demand portion of that equation. Talk all you
| | want, Win9x is dead and will not be revived. Demand is precisely why
this
| is
| | so.
| |
| | You keep whining about all the old programming that supposedly won't
work
| on
| | new systems. Please point these out. I know of very few applications
that
| | will work on Win9x (or DOS) and won't work on WinXP. In fact, I don't
know
| | of a lot of apps that will work on XP and won't work on 9x. In any case,
| | it's no big deal to install a separate partition for DOS and Win9x-only
| apps
| | (keep this partition away from the Internet!) -- assuming DOS or Win9x
| will
| | run on the *hardware* -- Modern hardware is the biggest set of
| compatibility
| | issues involved here.
| |
| | --
| |
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| |
| |
| |
| | >    Actually, Microsoft is the real fool here for not yet listening to
my
| | > wise advice about having a Classics series that will run on older
| | > computers as well as modern ones and be as backwards compatible as
98SE.
| -snip-
|



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

Hmmm... Just might, just might. Need the mobo model to know for sure what PS
models might work. I was amazed to discover how many incompatibilities there
are in this field, particularly when working with name-brand machines.

--

Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98


|
|
|
|| I surely agree, Win9x was and is great for its era.
|| I threw away all those MS-Dos games-programs with '95 release.
|| Then the same for '95 when '98 released.
|| I have six grandchildren - so had a variety.
|| The programs improved - they wouldn't touch that old stuff.
|| Especially since their schools are very high tech.
|| I have 98 for 7+ yrs with no reinstall and used Dos mode very few times.
|| Well, the PS just went out - don't think I will replace it, so maybe
| goodbye
|| I don't think there would be a market, since even XP is getting dated.
|| --
|| mae
|
| OH NO, mae isn't going to using 98 anymore????!!!!
| Someone send her a new power supply.
|
| Gary you have to have one to fit her computer in that pile somewhere.
|
| --
| MEB
| _______________

I still have 98se working ok (that PS replaced last year)
I only use 98 for all my personal files- records, scans etc.
If I run across a cheap PS I will replace but presently a case with PS is
cheaper than a replacement.
--
mae

|
||
|| |
|| |
|


Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

mae wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Why not dual boot, Mae and have the best of both worlds?

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98


| mae wrote:




| Why not dual boot, Mae and have the best of both worlds?

I have no interest or desire to do that with Win98.

--
mae


Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

mae wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Okay, suit yourself but it works really well if you do it right
especially if XP Professional and any other later Windows versions are
on another hard drive as is the case with me.  Windows 98 Second Edition
certainly enjoys being on the master and smaller drive. <grin>

--
Dan W.

Computer User

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98


| David H. Lipman wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
|>> Fantastic, I followed your instructions and saw the two colored boxes
|>> with Internet Explorer and it works fine.  Good point about making the
|>> original vgx.dll to a vgx.bak file just in case it is needed in the
|>> future for some reason which I highly doubt.  Thanks so much for going
|>> to the trouble of keeping 98SE machines secure.  I now have a bunch of
|>> work in patching all the 98SE machines at school.  <grin>  <P.S. I
|>> wonder when 2000 goes into unsupported mode as well if the XP and then
|>> Vista patches will be able to be deconstructed and broken down into
|>> pieces and used like this patch has been by us.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
|     You can call us fools all you want David but the truth must come
| out.  Check out what secunia.com says about so called security in XP
| Pro., XP Home and Windows 2000 Pro. and compare it to 98SE.  In
| addition, it is nice to have the backwards compatibility with 98SE for
| the older Windows 3.1 programs and DOS programs the school possesses.
|     You mean you want the Albuquerque public schools and all public
| schools in the United States to get rid of their older 98SE machines
| that still work for newer ones that will not support the older software.
|   Give us a break, David, the public schools are not so rich as to be
| able to afford brand new XP Pro. computers all the time and in addition
| let all the perfectly good software go to waste (Windows 3.1 and DOS
| software that the schools still have).  This would be a crying shame if
| it happened.  Think of the amount of garbage that would be generated by
| this action.
|     Actually, Microsoft is the real fool here for not yet listening to
| my wise advice about having a Classics series that will run on older
| computers as well as modern ones and be as backwards compatible as 98SE.
|   It must be based on the 9x source code and it can indeed be done.  It
| should actually be Microsoft's duty to do this for the good of all
| humanity.  It in no way would threaten XP's and Vistas forth coming
| legacy because it would be aimed at users who still want their old
| programs to run and cannot run them anymore on XP machines.  This is all
| too common and I have heard from many computer friends that I know about
| how they want this to happen and are interested in more simplicity than
| ever bloated and complicated code that is being released in newer
| software.  This is what democracy in America is all about.  The consumer
| gets to choose and the marketplace should be based on supply and demand.
|


There is NO security on a Win9x/ME PC.  It can NOT be hardened.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98

"David H. Lipman" wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Very surprised to hear you say that Dave - given your experience in
understanding the malware scene, and the number of services running on
NT/2K/XP machines that turned them into worm and trojan hosting
platforms.  Services that have no analog in Windows 9x.  Services that
had no reason to be running on "home" versions of XP.

The core OS and default installation settings of Win-98 was remarkably
invulnerable to malware attacks, which was the complete opposite for
2K and XP until as recent as 2004.  Even if this was more due to a
combination of luck and lack of sophistication it doesn't make it less
true.

It was only IE, Java and Outlook that created security holes in 98,
while there were plenty of security holes in NT-based OS's in addition
to those created by IE, etc, that were really only patched completely
in late 2004 with SP2 - well after many machines had a chance to
become irreversibly infected.  How many root kits affect Win-98?

Windows XP is hard enough for an AV program to monitor on a real-time
basis.  By all accounts, Vista will be a nightmare.  Milkro$haft seems
intent on making it impossible for third-party providers to develop
anti-malware software for it.

Or perhaps you think that the next generation of computer users don't
need to be running third-party protection software?  Perhaps you think
that Macro$haft can completely and competently fill that need for end
users, as perhaps you think that MS has demonstrated up to now a
satisfactory ability to develop and deploy trustworthy and secure
software?

Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98


| "David H. Lipman" wrote:
|
Quoted text here. Click to load it
|
| Very surprised to hear you say that Dave - given your experience in
| understanding the malware scene, and the number of services running on
| NT/2K/XP machines that turned them into worm and trojan hosting
| platforms.  Services that have no analog in Windows 9x.  Services that
| had no reason to be running on "home" versions of XP.
|
| The core OS and default installation settings of Win-98 was remarkably
| invulnerable to malware attacks, which was the complete opposite for
| 2K and XP until as recent as 2004.  Even if this was more due to a
| combination of luck and lack of sophistication it doesn't make it less
| true.
|
| It was only IE, Java and Outlook that created security holes in 98,
| while there were plenty of security holes in NT-based OS's in addition
| to those created by IE, etc, that were really only patched completely
| in late 2004 with SP2 - well after many machines had a chance to
| become irreversibly infected.  How many root kits affect Win-98?
|
| Windows XP is hard enough for an AV program to monitor on a real-time
| basis.  By all accounts, Vista will be a nightmare.  Milkro$haft seems
| intent on making it impossible for third-party providers to develop
| anti-malware software for it.
|
| Or perhaps you think that the next generation of computer users don't
| need to be running third-party protection software?  Perhaps you think
| that Macro$haft can completely and competently fill that need for end
| users, as perhaps you think that MS has demonstrated up to now a
| satisfactory ability to develop and deploy trustworthy and secure
| software?

Win9x/ME is sheltered from "most" RootKits.
Win9x/ME is not vulnerable TCP oport 135 and 445 or other similar buffer overflow
exploitations.

It is totally vulnerable to NetBIOS over IP worms, adware, spyware, BHOs, Trojan
Proxies,
spam proxies, spambots, most IRCbots, Keyloggers, yada, yada

If two peple use the same Win9x/ME box one user can not assign rights to or
remove rights
from the user.  all users are equal.

NTFS is a partitioning scheme.  NTFS does not crash.  Operating Ssystems crash.

I am not going to continue this.  I am only interested in the VML Exploitation
aspect of
this thread.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm



Re: Microsoft releases VML fix for Windows 98


Quoted text here. Click to load it

That's a fair point except it doesn't apply to a default installation
of file and printer sharing installation. Only after the bindings have
been manually sorted out from the default (everything bound to
everything) will there be no listeners to exploit.


Jim.


Site Timeline