In article nNore.12570$gL4.12061@trnddc07 writes:

related to a temporary directory that can't be found. But the
lack of error messages makes troubleshooting difficult.

Is this your Win98SE box ??

Nope, on the Win2000 day-to-day computer. I fixed the temporary
directory path problem today by changing the environment setting to
something else, then changing it back to what it should be.

I'm guessing that this got changed in the registry. I wonder what else
got changed, and how long it will take me to find it.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1118712585k@trad...

In article nNore.12570$gL4.12061@trnddc07 writes:

related to a temporary directory that can't be found. But the
lack of error messages makes troubleshooting difficult.

Is this your Win98SE box ??

Nope, on the Win2000 day-to-day computer. I fixed the temporary
directory path problem today by changing the environment setting to
something else, then changing it back to what it should be.

I'm guessing that this got changed in the registry. I wonder what else
got changed, and how long it will take me to find it.


In my 98SE systems, I use the System File Checker constantly.

I had some issues with the Microsoft security patches from March...
Security Update for Windows 98 (KB888113) and Security Update
for Windows 98 (KB891711) seemed to cause scripting errors when
surfing the web. Turns out that something happened to both my IE
preferences and to the manner in which Zone Alarm looked at web
sites.

I can't be real specific, most of this is a wee bit over my head.

Anyway, Zone Alarm expired at the end of March, and the stupid
web site refused to accept the passwords I had set up for upgrading
over the web, so I just went out and bought the newest version.

This new version has become bloated and invasive, something that I
used to praise ZA of *not* being. Even though I was upset that it
was writing things into boot reminders (DOS), I decided to go ahead
with the available on-line upgrade. It doubled those entries and added
even more BS that is totally unecessary... anti-virus monitoring ?!?!?
Holy smoke... now Zone Alarm is trying to tell me how to run my PC.
The actions that some of the settings used to take had totally changed,
and using my old settings, Zone Alarm was blocking even the most
simple little animated .gifs from fully loading. Finally, after much wasted
time, I managed to get stable surfing back in place.

Well... along come two more Microsoft updates in May.... Cumulative
Security Update for Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (KB890923),
and *another* copy of Security Update for Windows 98 (KB891711).
The latter of which installed itself in two different locations and if you
disable it in startup, or uninstall one copy (which is all that shows up
in add/remove), then the other copy, written into the boot, kicks in.

On the first re-boot after this, the blue screen of death greeted me
with great anger. Before it was over, windows was refusing to boot
in any manner other than 'safe' mode. I have no idea what the cause
of this was, but it's a symptom that apparently hundreds of people have
shared. I don't even know what I did to finally restore my system, and
it was a couple of hours in a solid state of shock and panic before I was
seeing signs of the system coming back to life and it would boot without
going in safe mode. Disabling Zone Alarm allowed me to start resetting
things like my screen resolution and other items that were affected.
Restarting with ZA let me reset it's security configurations slowly
but surely until everything seemed to return to what appreared to be
normal.

My best assumption, is that the last few security updates were more
than meets the eye. Both Microsoft and Zone Alarm had some odd
interpretations of security implementation, and they were in *serious*
conflict with one another.

As the days have passed, problems have again begun to rear their heads
with me changing nothing. Once again, ZA is not allowing simple .gifs
and a great deal of scripting to load from web pages. I've checked my
setting over and over again, and nothing is different from what I've done
for the past three years *except* these recent so-called security patches
and the new version of Zone Alarm.

Once I have everything backed up and can go to storage for my mother-
board drivers and a couple of pieces of software, I'm reloading Windows
for the first time in over 4 years... and I am going back to Version 3 of
Zone Alarm, and I do not plan on installing any updates from Microsoft
that were released after December of 2004.

Call me paranoid or delusional, but these patches seem to me to be
compromising security rather than fixing it. Zone Alarm no longer
reports to me when my IP address changes, and a few other little
anomalies that don't make any sense.

Lo and behold, today there are two more security patches for Win98...

I just have the oddest feeling that these are opening doors rather than
closing them. I hope the same upgrade & patch path is available and
the individual patches haven't been written into something cumulative.
I'd really like my computer to work again with the settings for security
that I have chosen in the past, without my web browser being more
or less compromised by these "fixes".

DM

In article RDFre.2630$kj5.2370@trnddc03 writes:

In my 98SE systems, I use the System File Checker constantly.

My recollection of SFC is that it works a little differently in Win98
than in 2000 or XP, at least it's more informative and tells you what
it's doing. I did run it on the Win2000 computer (that's how I found
the missing AUTOEXEC.NT file) and it just runs. It doesn't tell you
what it found out of whack, if anything.

In the case of the TMP environment variable, the problem wasn't a
missing system file. I'm guessing that something changed in the
registry, and I don't think SFC cares about that. The manager window
that lets you set the path for the TMP directory probalby writes
whatever you enter into the registry, but I suspect that it doesn't
read (for display) what's actually in the registry, but just remembers
what was last entered via that route. (all speculative on my part - I
don't have the schematic g) I didn't dig in with the registry editor
since my intuitive fix worked.

I had some issues with the Microsoft security patches from March...
Security Update for Windows 98 (KB888113) and Security Update
for Windows 98 (KB891711) seemed to cause scripting errors when
surfing the web. Turns out that something happened to both my IE
preferences and to the manner in which Zone Alarm looked at web
sites.

What does SFC do when you've installed a patch or update to the
operating system? It asks you to put in the original installation CD,
so it's possible that it would replace a missing updated file with the
old version. Is that what happens?

Anyway, Zone Alarm expired at the end of March, and the stupid
web site refused to accept the passwords I had set up for upgrading
over the web, so I just went out and bought the newest version.

This new version has become bloated and invasive, something that I
used to praise ZA of *not* being.

I'm just using the free version. I figured it was working but just for
kicks I went to the Gibson Research web site (grc.com) and played with
their Shields Up test. It trys to probe all the ports (or the first
1000 or so) and tells you if they're open, closed, or stealth (the
probe gets no response from your machine). With Zone Alarm turned on,
it showed stealth for all of my ports. So I shut down Zone Alarm, ran
the port probe test again, and it still showed them all as stealt. So
maybe my router is doing that, or my ISP is. I figure that if there's
really a problem, Gibson would want to show it in his test since he's
trying to sell stuff that seals up computers.

As the days have passed, problems have again begun to rear their heads
with me changing nothing. Once again, ZA is not allowing simple .gifs
and a great deal of scripting to load from web pages.

Honestly, I'd feel more comfortable if it blocked something now and
then. I do get pop-ups when some program or Windows service that I
have't put on the "good guy" list tried to access the Internet. Real
Player is one example. If I want to use it to play a non-downloadable
file, I'll anser the pop-up with "allow" but won't tell it to always
allow that program to access the internet. I want to know when it's
"phoning home" and then don't let it. But I've been disappointed. It
hasn't tried to access the Internet other than when I sent it there.

Call me paranoid or delusional, but these patches seem to me to be
compromising security rather than fixing it. Zone Alarm no longer
reports to me when my IP address changes, and a few other little
anomalies that don't make any sense.

I don't recall that I ever saw that (I'm sure it changed now and then
when I was on AOL dial-up) but then I've only been using the program
for less than two years. Maybe I never got an old enough veresion.

Lo and behold, today there are two more security patches for Win98...

Who says Microsoft doesn't support old versions. G


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1118782896k@trad...

In article RDFre.2630$kj5.2370@trnddc03 writes:

My recollection of SFC is that it works a little differently in Win98
than in 2000 or XP, at least it's more informative and tells you what
it's doing. I did run it on the Win2000 computer (that's how I found
the missing AUTOEXEC.NT file) and it just runs. It doesn't tell you
what it found out of whack, if anything.

No advanced options for displaying the results or notifying along the way?

You're aware that the first time it runs it reports nothing, yes? The first
run is for building a data base; which is why folks should run it the minute
the OS install disc is first taken out, and then run after every update or
install of software so as to keep up with all changes that occur.

I had some issues with the Microsoft security patches from March...
Security Update for Windows 98 (KB888113) and Security Update
for Windows 98 (KB891711) seemed to cause scripting errors when
surfing the web. Turns out that something happened to both my IE
preferences and to the manner in which Zone Alarm looked at web
sites.

What does SFC do when you've installed a patch or update to the
operating system? It asks you to put in the original installation CD,
so it's possible that it would replace a missing updated file with the
old version. Is that what happens?

I run it so often, that the only time it asks me for the install disc is in
the event of a corrupted file. I created a directory for backing up all
files that get booted, and directed SFC to backup any files it was
replacing (98SE). But yes, it would be easy to replace a newer
version of a file with an older version if one wasn't careful or simply
wanted to go backward for some reason. The newest file would be
backed up as well before the old one would go in it's place.

This new version has become bloated and invasive, something that I
used to praise ZA of *not* being.

I'm just using the free version. I figured it was working but just for
kicks I went to the Gibson Research web site (grc.com) and played with
their Shields Up test. It trys to probe all the ports (or the first
1000 or so) and tells you if they're open, closed, or stealth (the
probe gets no response from your machine). With Zone Alarm turned on,
it showed stealth for all of my ports. So I shut down Zone Alarm, ran
the port probe test again, and it still showed them all as stealt. So
maybe my router is doing that, or my ISP is. I figure that if there's
really a problem, Gibson would want to show it in his test since he's
trying to sell stuff that seals up computers.

I'm not so sure any more. Version 5.xx (pro) is simply not acting right.
Active program icons never dissappear from it's display even though
they've been shut down for hours.... many more funny anomalies, too.

The computer my friend brought over was running the free version of
ZA, and it has locked up tighter that a drum after getting 4 of the 6
updates (the last two only came out a week or so back, and he was
already dead in the water.

As the days have passed, problems have again begun to rear their heads
with me changing nothing. Once again, ZA is not allowing simple .gifs
and a great deal of scripting to load from web pages.

Honestly, I'd feel more comfortable if it blocked something now and
then. I do get pop-ups when some program or Windows service that I
have't put on the "good guy" list tried to access the Internet. Real
Player is one example. If I want to use it to play a non-downloadable
file, I'll anser the pop-up with "allow" but won't tell it to always
allow that program to access the internet. I want to know when it's
"phoning home" and then don't let it.

Same here. I don't even use an exceptions list. I tell it to ask me
for approval on every piece of software, even those I access the
net with quite often (FTP, AdAware, etc) except IE and OE.

But I've been disappointed. It
hasn't tried to access the Internet other than when I sent it there.

Do you use Real JukeBox? It tries every time it's opened, just like
Windows Media Player.exe and Setupwmp.exe do when you launch
the MS media player.

Call me paranoid or delusional, but these patches seem to me to be
compromising security rather than fixing it. Zone Alarm no longer
reports to me when my IP address changes, and a few other little
anomalies that don't make any sense.

I don't recall that I ever saw that (I'm sure it changed now and then
when I was on AOL dial-up) but then I've only been using the program
for less than two years. Maybe I never got an old enough veresion.

I don't think the free version has that warning, and even in the Pro version
it's fairly peculiar to just DSL/cable dynamic (changing) IP addresses.

Lo and behold, today there are two more security patches for Win98...

Who says Microsoft doesn't support old versions. G

My point exactly. Two years ago Microsoft Windows Update site claimed
that support for 98 & 98SE would only be available for a few more weeks.
I think it was discussed here as a reason to move on to newer OSes.

However, now here we are in 2005 and MS has offered 6 new "patches"
since Christmas. Since I got them two at a time, I can't tell you which
ones caused the problem; but each time, they caused my formerly reliable
firewall to crash wildly. Why should Windows patches for an 8 year old
operating system be alienating a stable and reliable firewall?

So now, I'm thinking both MS *and* ZLabs are digging too deep.

Anyway, I only mentioned this because your temporary problem sounded
a little like a couple I'm privy to.

Your conspiracy-minded acquaintance,

DM

In article Gx9se.13357$9a1.1787@trnddc01 writes:

My recollection of SFC is that it works a little differently in Win98
than in 2000 or XP, at least it's more informative and tells you what
it's doing.

No advanced options for displaying the results or notifying along the way?

There are a number of switches, but I haven't tried them all to see
what they do. I suppose that somewhere in the Microsoft knowledge base
there's complete documentation for it, but I haven't looked.

You're aware that the first time it runs it reports nothing, yes?

No, I wasn't. I assumed that it used the source disk as the reference.
That would be the way to get back to "ground zero" but that's likely
to put you back to pre-service pack installation. I wasn't aware that
the "gold standard" was on the computer's own disk. Sounds kind of
risky to me.

The first
run is for building a data base; which is why folks should run it the minute
the OS install disc is first taken out, and then run after every update or
install of software so as to keep up with all changes that occur.

This seems like something that should be automatic with every
installer, including service packs. Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. Maybe
it is, someties.

Same here. I don't even use an exceptions list. I tell it to ask me
for approval on every piece of software, even those I access the
net with quite often (FTP, AdAware, etc) except IE and OE.

I don't use Outlook Express, but I do have it installed and there's a
mailing list. I initially had that on the Zone Alarm "allow" list, but
have taken it off. I keep hearing tales of worms that take control of
OE and send out spam on their own. If that's what it actually does,
then Outlook Express should pop up and aske if I want to allow it
access to the Internet, warning me that it was being called by
something other than me. But so far that hasn't happened.

Do you use Real JukeBox? It tries every time it's opened, just like
Windows Media Player.exe and Setupwmp.exe do when you launch
the MS media player.

I don't use Real Jukebox, but I use Media Player. When Zone Alarm asks
me if I want to allow access to setupwmp.exe, I tell it no and what I
want to play on line plays anyway.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1118712585k@trad...

In article nNore.12570$gL4.12061@trnddc07 writes:

related to a temporary directory that can't be found. But the
lack of error messages makes troubleshooting difficult.

Is this your Win98SE box ??

Nope, on the Win2000 day-to-day computer. I fixed the temporary
directory path problem today by changing the environment setting to
something else, then changing it back to what it should be.


By the way... the reason that this was on my mind, was that a friend
just brough me his old Win98 PC which crashed on his after these
latest updates from Microsoft, and he was using the freeware version
of ZoneAlarm.... no frills at all. So, I get to bring back to life another
PC that I'm very familiar with, over the next couple of days. I'll let
you know if I find anything obvious.

DM