Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Re: winhlp or winhlp32.exe needed

Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted

Mark Blain

Mar 11, 2007, 7:29:17 PM3/11/07
to wrote in

> winhlp.exe or winhlp32.exe needed. Recently forced to Vista, and using
> OLDER windows programs. *.HLP files no longer work. help at M$ says
> winhelp or winhelp32.exe is downloadable in the download center. I
> searched about 2 pages of d/ls and couldn't find it. found a few
> forums griping about this same problem, and a KB article claiming
> it'll be available early 2007. It's now early, almost mid 2007 and the
> winhelp.exe file can't be found.
> If you have it can I get a copy from you ? It'll be several weeks
> before I can get my old internal drives attached to this vista
> machine. Luckily most of my stuff was archived on an external USB
> drive. Even better than DVD's.

Winhlp32 for Vista is available at

The link was posted recently in

Message has been deleted


Mar 20, 2007, 7:37:29 PM3/20/07
On 11 Mar 2007 23:29:17 GMT, Mark Blain <> wrote:

>Winhlp32 for Vista is available at
>The link was posted recently in

I tried to go through MS's "validation procedure" to download the
code. The download button disappears once you validate, and there is
nothing to download.

I finally, decided to recode my help files as HTML and add them to the
package. The code selectively uses the .hlp or the .html files:

If SysInfo1.OSPlatform = 2 Then
' OSPlatform = 2 for Win NT/2000/XP/Vista
' Use.html file for compatibility with Vista
fil = App.Path & "\amort.html"
Call ShellExecute(Me.hwnd, "open", fil, "", "", 0)
' OSPlatform = 1 for Win 95/98/ME
' Use .hlp file and winhelp
fil = App.Path & "\amort.hlp"
rc = Shell("winhelp " & fil, vbNormalFocus)
End If

Jan 24, 2008, 4:01:01 PM1/24/08
of things speculative and conceptual, which they
have never seen in the world and which are altogether out of the common.

2. There are different kinds of right understanding; some have right
understanding in a certain order of things, and not in others, where they go
astray. Some draw conclusions well from a few premises, and this displays an
acute judgment.

Others draw conclusions well where there are many premises.

For example, the former easily learn hydrostatics, where the premises are
few, but the conclusions are so fine that only the greatest acuteness can
reach them.

And in spite of that these persons would perhaps not be great
mathematicians, because mathematics contain a great number of premises, and
there is perhaps a kind of intellect that can search with ease a few
premises to the bottom and cannot in the least penetrate those matters in
which there are many premises.

There are then two kinds of intellect: the one able to penetrate acutely and
deeply into the conclusions of given premises, and this is the precise
intellect; the other able to comprehend a great number of premises without
confusing them, and this is the mathematical intellect. The one has force
and exactness, the other comprehensio

0 new messages