Major new development in Windows 98 RAM memory capability patch has been discovered!

2752 views
Skip to first unread message

98 Guy

unread,
May 15, 2014, 10:06:09 AM5/15/14
to
I'm reposting the following to a few newsgroups where I know some people
still run win-98 as part of dual-boot setup, or have recently moved away
from win-98, or for general knowledge.

For at least the past 4 years, some windows-98 users have been able to
use up to 4 gb of ram by using these patches.

Memory constraints has long been seen as one of the major differences
between win-9x/me and the NT line of OS's. But clearly, as this patch
indicates, it has been an artificially-imposed constraint by Macro$haft.

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

It appears that some combination of a Windows-98 hot-fix and some
hacking at least 4 years ago, possibly by some Germans, has resulted in
a very simple set of 2 files that can allow Windows 98 to use up to 4 gb
of ram.

As time goes on we'll learn more about how this patch originated, but it
seems to have been circulating in German-language windows forums up
until now.

Thanks to Dencorso and his obtuse and irrational censorship as he lords
over the Windows-98 Forums at MSFN.org, he indicated that such a German
patch existed, and he labeled it as "warez". I then began a discussion
on "FoolsDesign.org" and the location of the patch files was posted
thanks to a user there. That thread can be found here:

http://www.foolsdesign.org/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=607

Once Dencorso found out about that thread, he removed his own MSFN post
where he described his censorship of the topic. He's so anal he even
censored himself!

Why on earth those moderators at MSFN think that Microsoft is in any way
concerned about Windows 9x today defies explanation. They are their own
worst enemies when it comes to helping advance and grow the Windows
9x/me enthusiast community. Their censorship efforts do nothing but
instill a culture of fear and intimidation and diminish the community at
MSFN. Hopefully more enthusiasts and win-98 users will discover the
free and uncensored windows 98 usenet groups and also the software forum
at foolsdesign.org.

Are you reading this Dencorso?

Will you and your other moderators change your ways and allow more free
and open discussion about how to advance Windows 9x/me - Microsoft be
damned?

Here is a link to the new VMM32.vxd and VMM.vxd files that allow Windows
98 to use all available ram on any motherboard you have, up to 4 gb:

http://www.freora.de/index.php?option=com_docman&task=license_result&gid=3&bid=3&Itemid=52

Scroll down to the last item, which is:

4 GB Hauptspeicher f�r WIN 98SE ( mit vmm98sed.zip )hot!

But don't click on it. Instead, click on the small little "Download"
button right beside the "Details" button.

What you will download is Vmm98sed.zip (about 1mb in size). When you
unpack it, you will find a reproduction of the Windows directory tree
that helps tell you where to put these files.

Inside WINDOWS\SYSTEM\ you will find VMM32.VXD and you will copy that
file to your own WINDOWS\SYSTEM directory, over-writing the existing
file which you should first rename to VMM32.vxd.old.

You will also see a subdirectory called VMM32 which contains VMM.VXD
(which you should copy to your WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VMM32\ directory, and
there will be no pre-existing file with that name.

There is some indicatation that a file called ENABLE.VXD should also be
placed in the WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VMM32\ directory. That file is not
normally found on win-9x systems, but it is on the win-98 CD. Here is a
link to that file:

http://filepost.com/files/98e56ddd/ENABLE.VXD/

The two files VMM32.VXD and VMM.VXD seem to have been in circulation
since January 2010 because they were submitted to virustotal.com on that
date for malware analysis. That was the first and only time they have
been seen by Virustotal until I submitted them yesterday. The scan 4
years ago was negative, and so was my scan, so they are clean as far as
53 Anti-virus programs are concerned.

I have varified that they work, as I have 2 gb ram on my system now and
Windows System Properties shows 2046 mb available memory.

Any questions? Comments?

Post them! No censorship here!

Rod Pemberton

unread,
May 15, 2014, 5:29:58 PM5/15/14
to
On Thu, 15 May 2014 10:06:09 -0400, 98 Guy com> <98@guy.> wrote:

> I'm reposting the following to a few newsgroups where I know some people
> still run win-98 as part of dual-boot setup, or have recently moved away
> from win-98, or for general knowledge.
>
> For at least the past 4 years, some windows-98 users have been able to
> use up to 4 gb of ram by using these patches.
>

Thanks for the info. I might download it to archive it, but I probably
won't go messing with my SE system. I was actually considering removing
KernelEx because I'm using Linux for my daily use now. This topic of
"Linux vs. Win98/SE" is continued at the bottom, if interested.

> Memory constraints has long been seen as one of the major differences
> between win-9x/me and the NT line of OS's. But clearly, as this patch
> indicates, it has been an artificially-imposed constraint by Macro$haft.
>
> ----------------------------
>
> It appears that some combination of a Windows-98 hot-fix and some
> hacking at least 4 years ago, possibly by some Germans, has resulted in
> a very simple set of 2 files that can allow Windows 98 to use up to 4 gb
> of ram.
>
> As time goes on we'll learn more about how this patch originated, but it
> seems to have been circulating in German-language windows forums up
> until now.
>
> Thanks to Dencorso and his obtuse and irrational censorship as he lords
> over the Windows-98 Forums at MSFN.org, he indicated that such a German
> patch existed, and he labeled it as "warez". I then began a discussion
> on "FoolsDesign.org" and the location of the patch files was posted
> thanks to a user there. That thread can be found here:
>
> [link]
>
> Once Dencorso found out about that thread, he removed his own MSFN post
> where he described his censorship of the topic. He's so anal he even
> censored himself!

Um, I'm not so sure about all that stuff. I really haven't been following
what they've been doing on MSFN since I installed Linux.

They let Rudolph Loew post about his commercial patches on MSFN, including
his 4GB patch. Maybe Dencorso suspected it was R. Loew's patch or based
on it and therefore mistakenly labeled it "warez"?

R. Loew's patches
http://rloew.limewebs.com/

> Why on earth those moderators at MSFN think that Microsoft is in any way
> concerned about Windows 9x today defies explanation. They are their own
> worst enemies when it comes to helping advance and grow the Windows
> 9x/me enthusiast community. Their censorship efforts do nothing but
> instill a culture of fear and intimidation and diminish the community at
> MSFN.

It seems there will never be another KernelEx version, or even an update
with the final fixes. The main developers aren't developing Kex anymore.
Everyone else on MSFN is apparently using the Kstub patcher to keep it
working.

Personally, I think one of the problems with KernelEx is the 16-bit
MS C compiler used for the project. No one has it. It would've been
nice if only the portions that required that compiler be written in
it, and the rest be written with some other C compiler that works on
DOS or Windows 98/SE, e.g., DJGPP, MinGW, Cygwin, Pelles C, OpenWatcom,
etc.

The other major problem is that they should be targeting WinXP
compatibility,
turning Windows 98/SE into Windows XP. They should be fixing Kex to use
whatever files they can get from the three XP service packs. That's where
98/SE is going to get all it's future software from. After XP totally
dies,
say another ten years, Windows 98/SE, even with Kex updated to be a reduced
version of XP, will simply be dead.

> Hopefully more enthusiasts and win-98 users will discover the
> free and uncensored windows 98 usenet groups and also the software forum
> at foolsdesign.org.
>

They also have that "hidden" project for Windows 98/SE which they almost
never mention or discuss in the main thread, like they're trying to keep
it a secret, which is *only* available to those who join MSFN and develop.
It's not available to anonymous users of MSFN. It's not on MDGX. Googel
and Yahoo indicate it's files aren't available anywhere else on the
internet.
It's called: Kstub.

> Are you reading this Dencorso?
>

Yeah, I've never seen "Dencorso" post here, at least not by that moniker.
Maybe, he does read here though. It seems that younger guys are not as
found of Usenet as they are of forums.

> Here is a link to the new VMM32.vxd and VMM.vxd files that allow Windows
> 98 to use all available ram on any motherboard you have, up to 4 gb:
>
> [link]
>
> Scroll down to the last item, which is:
>
> 4 GB Hauptspeicher für WIN 98SE ( mit vmm98sed.zip )hot!
>
> But don't click on it.

What happens if you click that?


This is the continuation of the topic of "Linux vs. Win98/SE" above:

I've "converted" to VLocity, 64-bit Vector Linux, for daily use.
I still develop code in DOS using DJGPP (GCC for DOS). So,
about the only thing I still use Windows 98/SE for anymore is as
a DOS console. DJGPP compiles much faster in the console window
than in real-mode DOS. This is probably due to the 32-bit
filesystem code and caching. Linux also has dosemu and DOSBox
available. I've only trivially used them with DJGPP.

I was fighting "tooth and nail" to stay on 98/SE, and I "ripped
out some hair" getting Linux working correctly, adjusting config
files, enabling bind (IP), disabling unneeded services and open
ports, tweaking internet buffers, and properly updating software.
But, all my hardware seems to work correctly now, unlike with
Windows 98/SE where everything was falling apart, and which wasn't
the case with numerous prior versions of Linux where at least one
piece of hardware wouldn't work. The only thing I haven't tested
yet in Linux is burning CD-ROMs. Linux will allow you're additional
cpu cores to work, your SATA drives to work, ultra-high resolution
video card modes (unlike VBEMP), etc.

After I installed Linux, all my Windows 98/SE problems went away.
I'm actually using the internet, much more now, because I'm not
fixing SE. No reinstalls of software every six months because
something was lost or changed "magically". No randomly lost
settings. No continuous searching for updates and patches. No
need to keep installing updates, except Adobe Flash and Java.
No autodetect hardware problems. I did have a bunch of new
problems to deal with for a while with Linux, but they're mostly
fixed now, AFAIK ... which is probably good enough until I know
differently! ;-)

My system no longer has any IDE drives. So, only the boot drive
is emulated by BIOS. Windows 98/SE won't recognize SATA. A
SATA-to-IDE adapter works for reading from CD-ROMs, but not for
burning CDs or updating firmware. I no longer can get video drivers
for SE either. I switched to using VBEMP, which is not bad except
for glitchy vertical scrolling and no really high resolution modes.
The motherboard BIOS on this machine won't let me disable newer
hardware features either, e.g., can't disable ACPI, to be compatible
with Win98/SE. I did find drivers for my motherboard's ethernet card.
They'll install and work, but only until I reboot. Then, Windows SE
fails with a protection error. So, without device drivers and BIOS
support, it's all falling apart now ...

Personally, I'd rather be on Windows. It has better software.
It has hardware drivers for it. It has high-end games for it.
I don't need to find the "Linux equivalent" of major software,
and have problems installing Linux-ware, wrong LIBC, need updated
version of TCL/TK, Perl, Python, blah etc. But, I just can't
justify Windows. I generally build my own computers and can't
justify the standalone price of Windows when Linux is available.
I also don't like the fact that just after you've bought Windows,
once the price came down, MS declares that it's dead and wants
you to buy a "new" version of Windows. To them, it was ten years
in development and seven years on the market when you bought it,
but to you, you just got it. Now, it's over.


Rod Pemberton

98 Guy

unread,
May 15, 2014, 9:02:56 PM5/15/14
to
Rod Pemberton wrote:

> > Once Dencorso found out about that thread, he removed his own
> > MSFN post where he described his censorship of the topic. He's
> > so anal he even censored himself!
>
> Um, I'm not so sure about all that stuff. I really haven't been
> following what they've been doing on MSFN since I installed Linux.

The short explanation is that the MSFN moderators consider byte-level
modifications of original Microsoft files to be "warez" and they will
not allow links to such modified files to be posted and (I think) not
even discussed.

They *seem* to allow auto-patchers to be linked to and discussed (an
auto-patcher is a program that will programatically modify your existing
original Microsoft file to generate the "hacked" file).

> They let Rudolph Loew post about his commercial patches on MSFN,

Yes, they (the moderators, at least Dencorso) loves Rlowe, and put no
limits on how he mentions his software on the MSFN site.

> including his 4GB patch. Maybe Dencorso suspected it was R.
> Loew's patch or based on it and therefore mistakenly labeled
> it "warez"?

No. The patch is a byte-level modification of the default VMM32.VXD on
the windows cd.

Within the last 24 hours, a coder at foolsdesign.org has made an
autopatcher to perform the mod:

http://rfmasterx.yolasite.com/resources/G-VMM%20Patcher.zip

> They also have that "hidden" project for Windows 98/SE which they
> almost never mention or discuss in the main thread, like they're
> trying to keep it a secret, which is *only* available to those
> who join MSFN and develop. It's not available to anonymous users
> of MSFN.
>
> It's called: Kstub.

Kex Stubs. It's not a secret.

==========
http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/157173-kext-diy-kernelex-extensions/

Kext: DIY KernelEx extensions
A collection of tools for extending KernelEx
==========

Your impression that KernelX has been dormant or not pursued has, to
some extent (I believe large extent) been replaced by using these stubs
and tools (like import-patcher).

Bill Buckels

unread,
May 16, 2014, 11:43:14 AM5/16/14
to
Rod Pemberton wrote:
>Thanks for the info.

Thanks from me too Guy. I appreciate your efforts in both making this
available and in your excellent and detailed hilarious but sad stories of
what is happening in other forums. As ever, moderated groups don't work and
haven't worked since the BBS days.

But since they too have lots of info coming-in that is useful to the rest of
us, if those of us who share info freely are made aware of info like yours
it will not get lost. Mission accomplished so far:)

Guy wrote: >> Once Dencorso found out about that thread, he removed his own
MSFN post where he described his censorship of the topic. He's so anal he
even censored himself!

Guy, you're an excellent communicator! There wasn't a single thing that we
didn't understand.

Everyone has bad days:) I laughed when I read that, it so reminded me of me.
At least the guy isn't wasting his time sitting in the bar drinking...

Rod is right about the young guys... I hope they stay in their own sandboxes
and don't try to change usenet the way governments around the planet are
trying to dominate the internet. The Windows 95,98,ME days were great fun
and well worthy of retro-improvement. Like the rest of the so-called old
timers I have many computers of various vintages all live and afew Windows
98 machines in good working order.

It's good to know that if I am ever sick of developing for the the Apple II
or Commodore 64 or CP/M 80 or Windows XP or Windows 7 or whatever strikes my
fancy that I can bugger-around with neat new stuff for Windows 98. My linux
has been neglected in recent years but that doesn't mean I don't miss-it...

Not to mention MS-DOS which I was abolsutely passionate about when I was
much younger and slid between C and assembly with enthusiasm. There's many
lurkers like me who sometimes troll a little for fun and to tease the other
trolls... but the so-called serious minded like Mr. Pemberton always
apprecaite the news too evn when stretched a little off-topic as long as it
serves some on-topic purpose.

Thank you and give 'em hell over there in kindergarden or wherever it is
these guys think they are.

I have an MS-DOS website that has been pretty much parked while I mess with
older retro websites that I have. When and if I get to that before I leave
the planet, I'll be sure to talk about getting more RAM in Windows 98.

Bill


Rod Pemberton

unread,
May 16, 2014, 5:42:19 PM5/16/14
to
On Thu, 15 May 2014 21:02:56 -0400, 98 Guy com> <98@guy.> wrote:
> Rod Pemberton wrote:

>> Um, I'm not so sure about all that stuff. I really haven't been
>> following what they've been doing on MSFN since I installed Linux.
>
> The short explanation is that the MSFN moderators consider byte-level
> modifications of original Microsoft files to be "warez" and they will
> not allow links to such modified files to be posted and (I think) not
> even discussed.
>

Ok.

> They *seem* to allow auto-patchers to be linked to and discussed (an
> auto-patcher is a program that will programatically modify your existing
> original Microsoft file to generate the "hacked" file).
>

Didn't KernelEx 4.5.2 (or maybe 4.5.1...) add an in-memory
auto-patcher? I thought that I read that it did.

> No. The patch is a byte-level modification of the default VMM32.VXD on
> the windows cd.
>
> Within the last 24 hours, a coder at foolsdesign.org has made an
> autopatcher to perform the mod:
>
> http://rfmasterx.yolasite.com/resources/G-VMM%20Patcher.zip
>

Did they only patch the original VMM.VXD and VMM32.VXD?
What about the updates and hotfixes to those?

MDGX has some archived VMM.VXD updates:
http://www.mdgx.com/web.htm

Let's look at VMM32.VXD, VMM.VXD, ENABLE.VXD:


a) VMM32.VXD 475,084 bytes 4/23/1999 WIN98_54.CAB

Supposedly, it's a compressed archive of drivers.
So, it grows in size when drivers are added to the
system, e.g., on my system:

VMM32.VXD 928,319 bytes 6/14/2008


b) VMM.VXD (default is internal to VMM32.VXD)

Since VMM32.VXD is internal to VMM32.VXD, supposedly,
I have to wonder where they got their version to patch.
Did they cut VMM.VXD out of the original VMM32.VXD?

There are hotfixes which update VMM.VXD, creating an
external file. E.g., on my system, it's:

VMM.VXD 472,564 bytes 3/05/2001 4.10.2226

Obviously, it's not dated 4.10.1998.


c) ENABLE.VXD 4.10.1998 43,202 bytes 4/23/1999 WIN98_54.CAB

"ENABLE Virtual Device (Version 4.0)"

I'm not sure what this is for ... It's not installed on my system.

>> They also have that "hidden" project for Windows 98/SE which they
>> almost never mention or discuss in the main thread, like they're
>> trying to keep it a secret, which is *only* available to those
>> who join MSFN and develop. It's not available to anonymous users
>> of MSFN.
>>
>> It's called: Kstub.
>
> Kex Stubs. It's not a secret.
>

It's still not available outside of MSFN.


Rod Pemberton

98 Guy

unread,
May 16, 2014, 10:25:34 PM5/16/14
to
Rod Pemberton wrote:

> Didn't KernelEx 4.5.2 (or maybe 4.5.1...) add an in-memory
> auto-patcher? I thought that I read that it did.

==========
KernelEx v4.5.2 released
By Xeno, November 14, 2011 22:59

What�s new:

* Added KernelEx Virtual Device (VKrnlEx.vxd) project which makes
modification of kernel32.dll file on disk unnecessary by patching the
image directly in memory from kernel space before the shell starts

(and other stuff ...)
==========

> Did they only patch the original VMM.VXD and VMM32.VXD?
> What about the updates and hotfixes to those?
>
> MDGX has some archived VMM.VXD updates:
> http://www.mdgx.com/web.htm

That exact question was asked today:

-------
Do you think its possible to patch VMM.VXD 4.10.2226 thats included in
SP3. This was an update/hotfix M$ release in the past?
-------

I believe the answer will be - yes. Monitor this thread for details:

http://www.foolsdesign.org/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=607&start=60

> Let's look at VMM32.VXD, VMM.VXD, ENABLE.VXD:
> c) ENABLE.VXD 4.10.1998 43,202 bytes 4/23/1999 WIN98_54.CAB
>
> "ENABLE Virtual Device (Version 4.0)"
>
> I'm not sure what this is for ... It's not installed on my system.

Default VMM32.VXD file on the win-98se CD is 464 kb in size, but my
actual VMM32.VXD in c:\windows\system was 907 kb before I renamed it and
replaced it with the modified file, which is 903 kb in size.

Windows starts with default file during OS installation, and by the time
it's done it will grow as needed depending on your system and what
install options you chose.

I believe the author took his VMM32.VXD and patched it, and his system
did not include the options that would have led to enable.vxd being
rolled into his VMM32.vxd file, but apparently most (or some) systems
would have done so. So by using this patched file, your system won't
have the enable.vxd component. But the fix is easy - just find and
place the actual enable.vxd into \system\vmm32 directory.

This was translated from German:

-------------
The source was a Vmm32 "German installation without Accessibility" This
is missing in this vmm32.vxd the "enable.vxd" which is responsible for
Accessibility (input help = eyesight and hearing impaired). If one has
in his Windows installation in the setup so with ticked appears after
overwrite the old vmm32.vxd at every boot the following message:
(image). If this error occurs, you should uninstall the input help and
he's gone.
-------------

If you get some sort of error (in German) after placing the new
vmm32.vxd and vmm.vxd files on your system, it's because you need to add
enable.vxd to your \system\vmm32 directory. See the first post in this
thread about where to download that file (it can be extracted from the
original win-98 CD cab files as well).

I will soon post (via file-locker filepost.com) an english-language
version of VMM32.vxd that has been patched the same way this german one
was. But at the moment, I'm using this german patch for the past 2 days
and don't notice anything regarding the language difference.

> >> They also have that "hidden" project for Windows 98/SE which they
> >> almost never mention or discuss in the main thread, like they're
> >> trying to keep it a secret, which is *only* available to those
> >> who join MSFN and develop. It's not available to anonymous users
> >> of MSFN.
> >>
> >> It's called: Kstub.
> >
> > Kex Stubs. It's not a secret.
>
> It's still not available outside of MSFN.

Well, let's see if we can do something about that:

http://filepost.com/files/541665f2/kstub.rar/

Select "free" or "slow" download option, wait for count-down, solve
captcha, and download that file. Close any advertising windows or
pop-ups or pop-unders that appear during this process.

It will ask for password, which is the first letter of the alphabet
(lower case).

Rod Pemberton

unread,
May 17, 2014, 4:10:28 PM5/17/14
to
On Fri, 16 May 2014 22:25:34 -0400, 98 Guy com> <98@guy.> wrote:
> Rod Pemberton wrote:

> Windows starts with default file during OS installation, and by the time
> it's done it will grow as needed depending on your system and what
> install options you chose.
...

> I believe the author took his VMM32.VXD and patched it, [...]

That concerns me.

His could be all German, missing some file which are in mine,
have additional files not needed in mine, who knows what else, etc.


Rod Pemberton

Rod Pemberton

unread,
May 17, 2014, 4:34:23 PM5/17/14
to
On Fri, 16 May 2014 22:25:34 -0400, 98 Guy com> <98@guy.> wrote:
> Rod Pemberton wrote:
>> 98 Guy

>>> Kex Stubs. It's not a secret.
>>
>> It's still not available outside of MSFN.
>
> Well, let's see if we can do something about that:
>
> http://filepost.com/files/541665f2/kstub.rar/
>

That downloaded a 13.3MB .rar file! WTF?

That was via "Low Speed Download" on right hand side,
middle of the main page with Captcha entry.

In fact, it says "13.3MB" size under "kstub.rar".

"Low Speed" "SIMPLE DOWNLOAD" on bottom pop-up
redirects to some video file.

Dude, I'm not even opening this ...
That's **WAY** too big. Deleted.

Kstub is only 5KB or 20KB maximum with the other files:
http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/157173-kext-diy-kernelex-extensions/

It appears an off-MSFN link is on this page now.
The link seems dead though:
http://kernelex.sourceforge.net/wiki/Help:Contents

Internet Wayback archive archived that page,
but doesn't have kstub zip either.


Rod Pemberton

98 Guy

unread,
May 17, 2014, 6:03:09 PM5/17/14
to
Rod Pemberton wrote:

> >> It's still not available outside of MSFN.
> >
> > Well, let's see if we can do something about that:
> >
> > http://filepost.com/files/541665f2/kstub.rar/
>
> That downloaded a 13.3MB .rar file! WTF?
>
> That was via "Low Speed Download" on right hand side,
> middle of the main page with Captcha entry.
>
> In fact, it says "13.3MB" size under "kstub.rar".
>
> "Low Speed" "SIMPLE DOWNLOAD" on bottom pop-up
> redirects to some video file.

Jesus christ.

Dude - what's wrong with you?

Don't be so anal. I *tried* to create a complete package.

If you go and look at the first post here:

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/157173-kext-diy-kernelex-extensions/

You'll see this:

---------------
Other recommended updates:

Msvcrt.dll <- Msvcr70.dll / Msvcr71.dll (no links)
Msvcr90.dll 9.00.21022.8 (no link)

Msimg32.dll 5.00.2218.1 (Lab06_N(PRAVINSDEV).000328-1149)
Winhttp.dll 5.1.2600.1557 (xpsp2_gdr.040517-1325)

MsXML 4.0 SP2+fix SP3
--------------

I've gone and included those files (at least the ones that have links).

The kstub files are about 30 kb.

The other files:

msxml4-KB973688-enu.exe
msxml.msi
MSXML4.MSI
Windows2000-KB842773-x86-ENU.EXE
MSIMG32.DLL

are 14 mb.

In total, the rar is 13.5 mb - that's not a huge file by any means.
Download it, delete the msi's and exe's and dll's if you want them, and
you'll be left with the kstub files. I've even included the core.ini
mentioned in the msfn thread.

When downloading from file-post, select the "slow speed" option (because
you need to have a paid account to select the high-speed option), wait
for the count-down, close any pop-over or pop-under or extraneous
browser windows or tabs that it tried to spawn, and download the file.

If you want me to upload another file (minus the "recommended updates) I
will - just say so.

98 Guy

unread,
May 17, 2014, 6:13:41 PM5/17/14
to
Rod Pemberton wrote:

> > I believe the author took his VMM32.VXD and patched it, [...]
>
> That concerns me.
>
> His could be all German, missing some file which are in mine,
> have additional files not needed in mine, who knows what else,
> etc.

The more I think about it, the more it seems that VMM32.vxd contains
only Microsoft files and only contains vxd's based on the components
that you selected during original OS installation and possibly after
that if you changed any of the installation options.

It may very well be that most of these files are not language specific
or contain any dialog boxes or menus. I certainly haven't seen any
indication that my system now speaks German in any of the dialog menus
anywhere.

rlo...@gmail.com

unread,
Dec 6, 2015, 10:40:24 PM12/6/15
to
> CENSORED
>
> Scroll down to the last item, which is:
>
> CENSORED
>
> But don't click on it. Instead, click on the small little "Download"
> button right beside the "Details" button.
>
> What you will download is CENSORED (about 1mb in size). When you
> unpack it, you will find a reproduction of the Windows directory tree
> that helps tell you where to put these files.
>
> Inside WINDOWS\SYSTEM\ you will find VMM32.VXD and you will copy that
> file to your own WINDOWS\SYSTEM directory, over-writing the existing
> file which you should first rename to VMM32.vxd.old.
>
> You will also see a subdirectory called VMM32 which contains VMM.VXD
> (which you should copy to your WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VMM32\ directory, and
> there will be no pre-existing file with that name.
>
> There is some indicatation that a file called ENABLE.VXD should also be
> placed in the WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VMM32\ directory. That file is not
> normally found on win-9x systems, but it is on the win-98 CD. Here is a
> link to that file:
>
> http://filepost.com/files/98e56ddd/ENABLE.VXD/
>
> The two files VMM32.VXD and VMM.VXD seem to have been in circulation
> since January 2010 because they were submitted to virustotal.com on that
> date for malware analysis. That was the first and only time they have
> been seen by Virustotal until I submitted them yesterday. The scan 4
> years ago was negative, and so was my scan, so they are clean as far as
> 53 Anti-virus programs are concerned.
>
> I have varified that they work, as I have 2 gb ram on my system now and
> Windows System Properties shows 2046 mb available memory.
>
> Any questions? Comments?
>
> Post them! No censorship here!

I am the designer of that Patch. The latest version is available at rloew1.no-ip.com. The operators of that German site illegally hacked an early version of my Patch. 98 Guy is an Internet Troll that has been promoting this Warez version for years. Dencorso knew that it was Warez and banned 98 Guy.

The Fool's Design link showed that he initiated the Thread and that the links to the German site have been purged. The Thread has apparently been removed.

rts...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 29, 2017, 12:27:18 PM4/29/17
to
Thank you for the link to the German files. I put those in and went to 2GB with no problem. I then put in another GB, 2 512MB, and the ATI drivers crapped out. Would not reinstall. I set the AGP aperture to 128 from AUTO in the BIOS and that did not help. Went back to 2GB.

98 Guy

unread,
Nov 2, 2017, 9:35:46 PM11/2/17
to
Hey, glad to help. Good to hear that it worked (up to 2 gb anyways).

And hey Rudy - didn't see you post here. How's it go'in? Raking in the
big bux with your win-98 patches? Must be a huge market.

sn0wb0a...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 4, 2018, 11:42:13 AM2/4/18
to
Hello,
98 Guy, I installed these files in 98SE and I believe it was a success to get 768MB of memory working on Windows 98SE. However, I have two issues. Sometimes there is German when the system crashes by user fault and is there a patch for Windows ME that you can provide as I face the same issue there. Please get back to me asap! Thank You for your great contribution! I really appreciate it!

zap...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 24, 2019, 9:00:36 PM2/24/19
to
I have to say these files were not the best. I used them on my dual P3 system with 2gb ram it didn't work for long. First plug and play usb support started to to not work then the system froze on booting thereafter prompting a refresh.
though it works for a short time it indicates it is shareware.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages