Opera 10.54 on Windows 98 SE

[Wendell]

After updating msimg32.dll on Windows 98 SE, Opera 10.54 appears to
install and run without any problems. Without updating the DLL, Opera
will still run, but gives an error message about the transparency
feature.

On the same system, Opera 10.60 will not run. So maybe v10.54 is the
last to run on Win98.

The msimg32.dll v5.00.1693.1 that comes with Win98 needs to be
replaced with v5.00.2218.1 that comes with Windows ME. For details,
see this thread:

http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/topic153757.html

[98@Guy]

Wendell wrote recently in microsoft.public.win98.apps:

> After updating msimg32.dll on Windows 98 SE, Opera 10.54 appears
> to install and run without any problems. Without updating the DLL,
> Opera will still run, but gives an error message about the
> transparency feature.

I always find it interesting when someone without much of a posting
history posts to a dormant windows 98 newsgroup. I wonder what
motivated them to do it. How exactly did they choose which group to
post to. Why didn't they do a little more investigation to see what
might be the best group to post to.

So because this looks like some-what useful information, I'm adding a
couple of much more active groups to the original distribution so that
more people will see it.

> On the same system, Opera 10.60 will not run. So maybe v10.54 is
> the last to run on Win98.
>
> The msimg32.dll v5.00.1693.1 that comes with Win98 needs to be
> replaced with v5.00.2218.1 that comes with Windows ME. For
> details, see this thread:
>
> http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/topic153757.html

I don't use opera myself, as Firefox 2.0.0.20 works just fine as a
web-browser for win-98, and netscape communicator 4.79 is a perfectly
good usenet client.

[thanatoid]

"98@Guy" > wrote in
:

> Wendell wrote recently in microsoft.public.win98.apps:
>
>> After updating msimg32.dll on Windows 98 SE, Opera 10.54
>> appears to install and run without any problems. Without
>> updating the DLL, Opera will still run, but gives an error
>> message about the transparency feature.
>
> I always find it interesting when someone without much of a
> posting history posts to a dormant windows 98 newsgroup. I
> wonder what motivated them to do it. How exactly did they
> choose which group to post to. Why didn't they do a little
> more investigation to see what might be the best group to
> post to.
>
> So because this looks like some-what useful information,
> I'm adding a couple of much more active groups to the
> original distribution so that more people will see it.

What would the world do without your sage advice and protection?

>> On the same system, Opera 10.60 will not run. So maybe
>> v10.54 is the last to run on Win98.
>>
>> The msimg32.dll v5.00.1693.1 that comes with Win98 needs
>> to be replaced with v5.00.2218.1 that comes with Windows
>> ME. For details, see this thread:
>>
>> http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/topic153757.html

Changing the DLL did NOTHING on my USB@10 install. IIRC, it
actually ****ed it up. It's probably just another way MS have
thought up of introducing spyware into computers whose owners
don't like IE.

> I don't use opera myself, as Firefox 2.0.0.20 works just
> fine as a web-browser for win-98, and netscape communicator
> 4.79 is a perfectly good usenet client.

Not to mention you are too stupid to use Opera. Firefox - IE for
people who like to proudly say they "don't use IE".



--
Mozart tells us what it's like to be human, Beethoven tells us
what it's like to be Beethoven and Bach tells us what it's like
to be the universe.
- origin unknown

[Hot-text]

Old news 98@Guy
we @ Opera 10.60 on windows 98 SE
it was up dated 2 days a go!

[98 Guy]

thanatoid wrote:

> What would the world do without your sage advice and protection?

The same thing it would do without your crass comments and foul outlook.

> > I don't use opera myself, as Firefox 2.0.0.20 works just
> > fine as a web-browser for win-98, and netscape communicator
> > 4.79 is a perfectly good usenet client.
>
> Not to mention you are too stupid to use Opera.

So that makes you just stupid enough to use it I suppose.

> Firefox - IE for people who like to proudly say they "don't use IE".

No.

Firefox - a browser that actually works better than IE 6 has for the
past 5 years.

[thanatoid]

98 Guy > wrote in :

> thanatoid wrote:

<SNIP>

>> Firefox - IE for people who like to proudly say they
>> "don't use IE".
>
> No.
>
> Firefox - a browser that actually works better than IE 6
> has for the past 5 years.

ALL other browsers work better than IE.



--
You know, that women never really faint
And that villains always blink their eyes
And that, you know, children are the only ones who blush
And that life is just to die
- Lou Reed

[Ed[_2_]]

On 07/08/10 01:57, thanatoid wrote:
> 98 Guy > wrote in :
>
>> thanatoid wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>
>>> Firefox - IE for people who like to proudly say they
>>> "don't use IE".
>> No.
>>
>> Firefox - a browser that actually works better than IE 6
>> has for the past 5 years.
>
> ALL other browsers work better than IE.
>
>
>
What versions of Firefox and Opera are you running on Windows 98SE?

[thanatoid]

Ed <ex@directory> wrote in news:4C5D6845.3020000@directory:

> On 07/08/10 01:57, thanatoid wrote:
>> 98 Guy > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> thanatoid wrote:
>>
>> <SNIP>
>>
>>>> Firefox - IE for people who like to proudly say they
>>>> "don't use IE".
>>> No.
>>>
>>> Firefox - a browser that actually works better than IE 6
>>> has for the past 5 years.
>>
>> ALL other browsers work better than IE.
>>
>>
>>
> What versions of Firefox and Opera are you running on
> Windows 98SE?

I don't like Firefox - its interface and the fact you need 15
plugins (many lowering its security) to make it do what it
should out of the box make it unacceptable. Cute firegirl in the
logo, though.

I use Opera@10USB. Installs by unzipping into a USB drive OR
your HD (which is how I use it). Runs perfectly right off the
bat. I had no problems with the Flash ver 9 rejection that many
people reported, but the "see ver 9 as ver 10" (after upgrading
to the Adobe- provided security release of 9) hack (recently
mentioned here) seems to take care of it in 99% of the cases.

http://www.opera-usb.com/operausben.htm

I have not tried the 10.60 version. If something is perfect, why
bother with "upgrades"? I used Opera 7.23 until half a year ago
or so, because it was just fine, and even the new versions did
NOT fix the Flash plug-in crash problem. Opera USB /DID/ fix it.


--

Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to
reality.

[98 Guy]

Ed wrote:

> >> Firefox - a browser that actually works better than IE 6
> >> has for the past 5 years.
> >
> > ALL other browsers work better than IE.
>
> What versions of Firefox and Opera are you running on
> Windows 98SE?

I don't use Opera - never have.

Firefox version 2.0.0.20 was the last version that can run on a standard
installation of win-98. I think it's about 1.5 years old.

If you install KernelEx, you can install newer versions of Firefox like
3.what-ever. KernelEx is a shell/API helper that gives windows 98 the
ability to handle some software that normally requires Windows 2K or
XP. It can be downloaded from here:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/kernelex/

And no, you don't need a lot of plugins to use firefox. Anyone who says
that is a hemorrhoid.

But I find that Firefox 2.0.0.20 works just fine on 99% of the sites I
surf.

[Esra Sdrawkcab]

On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 21:49:01 +0100, 98 Guy > wrote:

> Ed wrote:
>
>> >> Firefox - a browser that actually works better than IE 6
>> >> has for the past 5 years.
>> >
>> > ALL other browsers work better than IE.
>>
>> What versions of Firefox and Opera are you running on
>> Windows 98SE?
>
> I don't use Opera - never have.
Why not? at least for comparison?

>
> Firefox version 2.0.0.20 was the last version that can run on a standard
> installation of win-98. I think it's about 1.5 years old.
>
> If you install KernelEx, you can install newer versions of Firefox like
> 3.what-ever. KernelEx is a shell/API helper that gives windows 98 the
> ability to handle some software that normally requires Windows 2K or
> XP. It can be downloaded from here:
>
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/kernelex/
>
> And no, you don't need a lot of plugins to use firefox. Anyone who says
> that is a hemorrhoid.

Pre-emptive abuse? Llap goch!

>
> But I find that Firefox 2.0.0.20 works just fine on 99% of the sites I
> surf.

Yup, Off-by-one is a bit limited these days.

Chrome is super, but sadly OT as it's not w98 compatible.

--
"Nuns! NUNS! Reverse! Reverse!"

[thanatoid]

"Esra Sdrawkcab" > wrote in
news:op.vg4s3utkhswpfo@dell3100:

> On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 21:49:01 +0100, 98 Guy >
> wrote:

<SNIP>

>> I don't use Opera - never have.

> Why not? at least for comparison?

He's a bit of a retard.

>> Firefox version 2.0.0.20 was the last version that can run
>> on a standard installation of win-98. I think it's about
>> 1.5 years old.

<SNIP>

>> And no, you don't need a lot of plugins to use firefox.
>> Anyone who says that is a hemorrhoid.
>
> Pre-emptive abuse? Llap goch!

A favorite weapon of the mentally challenged. Check out the
innovative modification of my nick.

>> But I find that Firefox 2.0.0.20 works just fine on 99% of
>> the sites I surf.
>
> Yup, Off-by-one is a bit limited these days.

Yes, to the actual worthwhile content. It is a great pity most
peoploids consider web design the equivalent of what people went
to art galleries and read books for.

> Chrome is super, but sadly OT as it's not w98 compatible.

Maybe. O and O rule.



--
Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to
reality.

[98 Guy]

Esra Sdrawkcab wrote:

> > I don't use Opera - never have.

> Why not? at least for comparison?

What does Opera do differently, or better, then Firefox?

I've never said Opera was bad, but I will say that back when IE6 was
officially ****-canned by web developers (2006 give or take) Firefox was
the only viable alternative - at least for win-98 users. I've just
stuck with it.

You people that have put up with IE6 up until maybe 6 months to a year
ago as your primary browser and decided to go straight to Opera - well
good for you. I don't know why you think it's the hottest **** since
sliced bread.

> Yup, Off-by-one is a bit limited these days.

Another browser I've never used, and which never got much press.

> Chrome is super, but sadly OT as it's not w98 compatible.

Have never tried or seen chrome in action.

[thanatoid]

98 Guy > wrote in :

> Esra Sdrawkcab wrote:
>
>> > I don't use Opera - never have.
>
>> Why not? at least for comparison?
>
> What does Opera do differently, or better, then Firefox?
>
> I've never said Opera was bad, but I will say that back
> when IE6 was officially ****-canned by web developers (2006
> give or take) Firefox was the only viable alternative - at
> least for win-98 users. I've just stuck with it.

(I keep on forgetting to reinstate my KF.)

Opera has been around for nearly 10 years, IIRC, and was the
first browser to offer tabs and an /intelligent/ customizable
interface.

> You people that have put up with IE6 up until maybe 6
> months to a year ago as your primary browser and decided to
> go straight to Opera - well good for you. I don't know why
> you think it's the hottest **** since sliced bread.

You should try it and /then/ speak.


--
Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to
reality.

[98 Guy]

thanatoid wrote:

> You should try it and /then/ speak.

Same goes for you.

Or - can't you answer this question:

> > What does Opera do differently, or better, then Firefox?

Well?

[Esra Sdrawkcab]

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:14:52 +0100, 98 Guy > wrote:

> thanatoid wrote:
>
>> You should try it and /then/ speak.
>
> Same goes for you.
>
> Or - can't you answer this question:
>
>> > What does Opera do differently, or better, then Firefox?
>
> Well?

It seems that this is all a well-trodden path descending to flames.
Why not compare available browsers and then have an informed discussion?


Oh, I missed Safari on Macs or under XP. and there's Mozilla Seamonkey.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_browsers

shows only 1 browser where the latest version works on W98.


--
"Nuns! NUNS! Reverse! Reverse!"

[98 Guy]

Esra Sdrawkcab wrote:

> >> > What does Opera do differently, or better, then Firefox?
> >
> > Well?
>
> It seems that this is all a well-trodden path descending to
> flames. Why not compare available browsers and then have an
> informed discussion?

Because any comparison will still end up in flames.

Because so many aspects of browser functionality is subjective.

I'm not saying that Firefox (version 2.0.0.20 or higher) is better (or
worse) then Opera (current version) for win-9x/me users.

I will say that:

- Firefox 2.0.0.20 *IS STILL* a valid option for win-98 users
- Firefox should have been used by Win-9x/me users instead of
IE6 for the past 4 years
- If not Firefox, then I don't know what. Perhaps some version
of Netscape Navigator 7/8/9.
- It's my impression that Opera as a browser wasn't very good
4 years ago.

Anyone running win-9x/me and just now moving away from IE6 today could
go to Firefox 2.0.0.20 or what-ever version of Opera will run on
win-9x/me. Or they could install KernelEx and run Firefox 3.x.

[thanatoid]

98 Guy > wrote in :

<SNIP>

> I will say that:
>
> - Firefox 2.0.0.20 *IS STILL* a valid option for win-98
> users - Firefox should have been used by Win-9x/me users
> instead of
> IE6 for the past 4 years

Totally agreed.

> - If not Firefox, then I don't know what. Perhaps some
> version of Netscape Navigator 7/8/9.

I like Opera, you don't. Fine.

> - It's my impression that Opera as a browser wasn't very
> good 4 years ago.

Perhaps you should try a current (10.00 or above version and
then criticize it.

> Anyone running win-9x/me and just now moving away from IE6
> today could go to Firefox 2.0.0.20 or what-ever version of
> Opera will run on win-9x/me. Or they could install
> KernelEx and run Firefox 3.x.

Correct. And IMHO, Opera is the best option.

Now, back to the KF you go, buddy. Cheers.


--
Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to
reality.

[Esra Sdrawkcab]

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 05:39:49 +0100, thanatoid >
wrote:

> 98 Guy > wrote in :
>
> <SNIP>
>
>> I will say that:
>>
>> - Firefox 2.0.0.20 *IS STILL* a valid option for win-98
>> users - Firefox should have been used by Win-9x/me users
>> instead of
>> IE6 for the past 4 years
>
> Totally agreed.
>
>> - If not Firefox, then I don't know what. Perhaps some
>> version of Netscape Navigator 7/8/9.
>
> I like Opera, you don't. Fine.
>
>> - It's my impression that Opera as a browser wasn't very
>> good 4 years ago.
>
> Perhaps you should try a current (10.00 or above version and
> then criticize it.
>
>> Anyone running win-9x/me and just now moving away from IE6
>> today could go to Firefox 2.0.0.20 or what-ever version of
>> Opera will run on win-9x/me. Or they could install
>> KernelEx and run Firefox 3.x.
>
> Correct. And IMHO, Opera is the best option.
>
> Now, back to the KF you go, buddy. Cheers.
>

Why? he responded without any antagonism that I spotted.
He favours Firefox 2 over IE6, and I won't disagree there.
He seems unwilling to look at Opera, but that's his loss.

>


--
"Nuns! NUNS! Reverse! Reverse!"

[thanatoid]

"Esra Sdrawkcab" > wrote in
news:op.vg9vxktehswpfo@dell3100:

> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 05:39:49 +0100, thanatoid
> > wrote:

<SNIP>

>> Now, back to the KF you go, buddy. Cheers.
>>
>
> Why? he responded without any antagonism that I spotted.
> He favours Firefox 2 over IE6, and I won't disagree there.
> He seems unwilling to look at Opera, but that's his loss.

Read the last two years of posts in this group.
And learn to snip.

--
Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to
reality.

[Esra Sdrawkcab]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 03:56:12 +0100, thanatoid >
wrote:

> "Esra Sdrawkcab" > wrote in
> news:op.vg9vxktehswpfo@dell3100:
>
>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 05:39:49 +0100, thanatoid
>> > wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>
>>> Now, back to the KF you go, buddy. Cheers.
>>>
>>
>> Why? he responded without any antagonism that I spotted.
>> He favours Firefox 2 over IE6, and I won't disagree there.
>> He seems unwilling to look at Opera, but that's his loss.
>
> Read the last two years of posts in this group.
> And learn to snip.

Ok, I now realise there's been a lot of grief between you two, but there
seems to be very few folk posting about W98 these days. Live & let live I
say.

On topic: Winimp was my favourite extractor.


>


--
"Nuns! NUNS! Reverse! Reverse!"

[thanatoid]

"Esra Sdrawkcab" > wrote in
news:op.vhbd4112hswpfo@dell3100:

<SNIP>

> Ok, I now realise there's been a lot of grief between you
> two, but there seems to be very few folk posting about W98
> these days. Live & let live I say.

In general, I agree, but putting him in the KF is not /killing
him/, even though it sounds like it. I have about 150 people in
my KF.

It was his comments on my comments on the Gary Terhune thread
about 6 months ago that did it. Before that I thought he was
basically OK. But regrettably he's also an asshole.

> On topic: Winimp was my favorite extractor.

NF. I use WinRAR.

And /please/ learn to <SNIP>.

New topic:

So HOW is Opera with mail and Usenet?????
I have never seen anyone use it for this before...

--
Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to
reality.

[Esra Sdrawkcab]

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:31:05 +0100, thanatoid >
wrote:


<SNIP>
>
> New topic:
no, it's back to thread title!
>
> So HOW is Opera with mail and Usenet?????
> I have never seen anyone use it for this before...
>
Seems OK to me, obviously!
only minor gripe is that it doesn't display x-face

you need a newer dll for transparency - I installed it and it stopped
complaining - I don't remember what it was now.

Ah scroogle on "opera windows 98 missing dll"
shows it's msmsgs.dll

here's a handy writeup:
http://www.lotterypost.com/help/195898

or support snipping (smiley face)
I haven't used it's newer features (Unite, torrent client) so can't
comment on them (other than hey, I didn't ask for new features!)

--
"Nuns! NUNS! Reverse! Reverse!"

[thanatoid]

"Esra Sdrawkcab" > wrote in
news:op.vhdac6o6hswpfo@dell3100:

> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:31:05 +0100, thanatoid
> > wrote:

<SNIP>

>> So HOW is Opera with mail and Usenet?????
> Seems OK to me, obviously!
> only minor gripe is that it doesn't display x-face

Who cares. If you want an Xface you really need a life.

> you need a newer dll for transparency - I installed it and
> it stopped complaining - I don't remember what it was now.

I don't care about transparency.

> Ah scroogle on "opera windows 98 missing dll"
> shows it's msmsgs.dll
>
> here's a handy writeup:
> http://www.lotterypost.com/help/195898

"lottery post"???

> or support snipping (smiley face)

Sigh. Google for 'netiquette "Usenet posts" snip'. ALL Usenet
clients "support" snipping, but the user must take appropriate
action.

> I haven't used it's

its

> newer features (Unite, torrent client)
> so can't comment on them (other than hey, I didn't ask for
> new features!)

No one does. It's a plot.

Thanks for the info.



--
Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to
reality.

[Lostgallifreyan]

"Esra Sdrawkcab" > wrote in news:op.vg4s3utkhswpfo@dell3100:

> "Nuns! NUNS! Reverse! Reverse!"
>

Jack Hackett?

[Esra Sdrawkcab]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 05:59:05 +0100, Lostgallifreyan >
wrote:

> "Esra Sdrawkcab" > wrote in
> news:op.vg4s3utkhswpfo@dell3100:
>
>> "Nuns! NUNS! Reverse! Reverse!"
>>
>
> Jack Hackett?

Father Jack to you y'scally!

--
"Nuns! NUNS! Reverse! Reverse!"

[Lostgallifreyan]

"Esra Sdrawkcab" > wrote in news:op.vujlpntjhswpfo@dell3100:

> On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 05:59:05 +0100, Lostgallifreyan >
> wrote:
>
>> "Esra Sdrawkcab" > wrote in
>> news:op.vg4s3utkhswpfo@dell3100:
>>
>>> "Nuns! NUNS! Reverse! Reverse!"
>>>
>>
>> Jack Hackett?
>
> Father Jack to you y'scally!
>

Aye! And thrice feck!

[Dude111]

Not to mention you are too stupid to use Opera. Firefox - IE for people who like to proudly say they "don't use IE".There is NO REASON to attack someone personally like this.... Please be kind!