Home > Archive > Visual Basic > December 2005 > VB Source code in 98 vs. XP
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
VB Source code in 98 vs. XP
|
|
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-14, 3:55 am |
| My problem is with Source code it self and not in installation. I developed
an application using VB6 on Windows XP machine. Later I installed SP6 for
VB6. The Application is running fine.
But now I want to open the Porject on the machine having Windows 98. And
here the problem starts. Its ok if I have problem insatlling a application
developed in XP
and installing on 98 machine. But why it is giving problem for opening the
project it self on 98? On starting the projects the VB crashes and says "An
error has been
occured. The program will terminet." Other projects which I developed on
VB6/98 works fine. Also the project im talking about works fine on XP.
If any one can help?
Amit Mohod
--
Amit Mohod
Nagpur, India
| |
|
| Are you using any APIs which might not exist in '98
Anyway there is no sensible reason to be using let alone developing for '98
as MS will cease paid support (free support ended a while back) at the end
of June '06 so anything developed now will have a maximum life of about a
year. Best to not worry about it and get on with developing for NT
derivatives (2k, XP, 2003 etc) and looking forward to the brave new 64 bit
world.
Best Regards
Dave O.
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:36C25958-DBF3-4578-B8EA-467C6F92B3E3@microsoft.com...
> My problem is with Source code it self and not in installation. I
> developed
> an application using VB6 on Windows XP machine. Later I installed SP6 for
> VB6. The Application is running fine.
> But now I want to open the Porject on the machine having Windows 98. And
> here the problem starts. Its ok if I have problem insatlling a application
> developed in XP
> and installing on 98 machine. But why it is giving problem for opening the
> project it self on 98? On starting the projects the VB crashes and says
> "An
> error has been
> occured. The program will terminet." Other projects which I developed on
> VB6/98 works fine. Also the project im talking about works fine on XP.
>
> If any one can help?
>
>
> Amit Mohod
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
| |
|
| SP6 on Win 98 should be no problem.
> Its ok if I have problem insatlling a application
> developed in XP
> and installing on 98 machine
Be careful, some xp dependency files would crash Win 98,
MFC42.dll is one of them.
>But why it is giving problem for opening the
> project it self on 98?
It should be no problem.
Be sure all dependency are in the Windows\System directory.
Open the project file with Notepad, see if any lines pointing
to a dependency file that is not in the Windows\System directory.
I test my programs in XP after programming them in Win98,
then put them back in Win 98 with no problem.
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:36C25958-DBF3-4578-B8EA-467C6F92B3E3@microsoft.com...
> My problem is with Source code it self and not in installation. I
> developed
> an application using VB6 on Windows XP machine. Later I installed SP6 for
> VB6. The Application is running fine.
> But now I want to open the Porject on the machine having Windows 98. And
> here the problem starts. Its ok if I have problem insatlling a application
> developed in XP
> and installing on 98 machine. But why it is giving problem for opening the
> project it self on 98? On starting the projects the VB crashes and says
> "An
> error has been
> occured. The program will terminet." Other projects which I developed on
> VB6/98 works fine. Also the project im talking about works fine on XP.
>
> If any one can help?
>
>
> Amit Mohod
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
| |
| mayayana 2005-11-14, 6:55 pm |
|
> Are you using any APIs which might not exist in '98
>
> Anyway there is no sensible reason to be using let alone developing for
'98
> as MS will cease paid support (free support ended a while back) at the end
> of June '06 so anything developed now will have a maximum life of about a
> year.
Isn't that a bit extreme? You don't know who his
customers are or what he's writing. The life expectancy
of his software depends on where it's living.
The only notable issue for Win98 that I know of is that it
needs a patch for CPUs over 2 GB. (It won't otherwise suffer
from lack of support because it never needed the drip-feed
of automatic update patches in the first place.)
I use Win98SE and the majority of my non-tech.
aquaintances are on either 98 or ME. The vast majority
of people don't choose to "upgrade". They just use a
computer until it dies. Then they buy another computer,
oblivious to what version of Windows might be on it.
Also, while MS seems to have forgotten their
apparently embarassing release of WinME, there are
still a lot of people using it and it's newer than Win2000.
From what I've read, I get the impression that
business systems are mainly Win2000 with a fair
amount of leftover Win98. In other words, few businesses
moved to ME or XP, and the mix they have currently
often just depends on when they bought the machines.
| |
|
|
"mayayana" <mayayanaXX1a@mindXXspring.com> wrote in message
news:nd2ef.8499$2y.3031@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> '98
>
> Isn't that a bit extreme? You don't know who his
> customers are or what he's writing. The life expectancy
> of his software depends on where it's living.
All development by MS has long ended, there will be no security patches, '98
and it's brethren are not adequately secure for permanent broadband
connection to the Internet and really should be replaced.
As of October/November 2003 about 5.7% of surveyed companies were still
using '98 of those all but 0.3% planned to be rid of it by end 2004.
(http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/0...upport_reprieve)
My main reason for not having anything to do with coding for '98 is
cost-benefit. Is the time and expense of ensuring '98 compatibility going to
be offset by the increase in sales that supporting '98 will yield? For every
instance I have modelled the answer is a resounding NO!
Best Regards
Dave O.
| |
|
| > All development by MS has long ended, there will be no security patches
Most security updates are for IE, they still update IE
for Win 98.
> As of October/November 2003 about 5.7% of surveyed companies were still
> using '98 of those all but 0.3% planned to be rid of it by end 2004.
Above is UK survey:
Globally the picture is quite different. Gartner estimates that 26.7 per
cent of PCs ran 98 or 98 SE at the end of 2003, and that 15.3 per cent will
still do so at the end of 2004.
> My main reason for not having anything to do with coding for '98 is
> cost-benefit.
Give me a break.
What does have to do fixing his problem.
Huge number of government departments still using
Win 95 and Win 98. You just can't turn your back on them.
Any company that dumped Win 98 is hurting, 20% less
in sales is quite a bit.
"Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:OBO%23LVT6FHA.3636@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
> "mayayana" <mayayanaXX1a@mindXXspring.com> wrote in message
> news:nd2ef.8499$2y.3031@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> All development by MS has long ended, there will be no security patches,
> '98 and it's brethren are not adequately secure for permanent broadband
> connection to the Internet and really should be replaced.
>
>
>
> As of October/November 2003 about 5.7% of surveyed companies were still
> using '98 of those all but 0.3% planned to be rid of it by end 2004.
> (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/0...upport_reprieve)
>
>
>
> My main reason for not having anything to do with coding for '98 is
> cost-benefit. Is the time and expense of ensuring '98 compatibility going
> to be offset by the increase in sales that supporting '98 will yield? For
> every instance I have modelled the answer is a resounding NO!
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
> Dave O.
>
>
| |
|
| Please open your VBP files with Notepad and post the lines that begin
with "Object=" and "Reference=" here so we can help you further with this
issue.
Also, what VB SP are you using in Win98?
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:36C25958-DBF3-4578-B8EA-467C6F92B3E3@microsoft.com...
> My problem is with Source code it self and not in installation. I
> developed
> an application using VB6 on Windows XP machine. Later I installed SP6 for
> VB6. The Application is running fine.
> But now I want to open the Porject on the machine having Windows 98. And
> here the problem starts. Its ok if I have problem insatlling a application
> developed in XP
> and installing on 98 machine. But why it is giving problem for opening the
> project it self on 98? On starting the projects the VB crashes and says
> "An
> error has been
> occured. The program will terminet." Other projects which I developed on
> VB6/98 works fine. Also the project im talking about works fine on XP.
>
> If any one can help?
>
>
> Amit Mohod
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
| |
|
| > What does have to do fixing his problem.
Well if he doesn't actually need to support '98 then he does not need to
worry about it.
> Huge number of government departments still using
> Win 95 and Win 98. You just can't turn your back on them.
Of course one can, very little commercial software is produced to support
'98 etc. The company I work for deal with government departments both here
(UK), North and South America and several other countries (Oz, SA, several
European states) and we stopped supporting '98 last year and have not lost a
single sale or had any cancellations.
> Any company that dumped Win 98 is hurting, 20% less
> in sales is quite a bit.
Only if the extra effort is less than 20% of the development & testing
costs. If we were to support them we would need extra testing staff to make
sure everything worked in all operating systems.
Anyway I doubt that 20% figure is current, even if it is it will diminish
quickly.
But of course it depends on ones market, if selling to individuals then
there may be a case for '98 support.
Best Regards
Dave O.
| |
|
| All I can say, that you are dumping Win 98 too soon,
we know it is going to be faded out.
You are going to have many unhappy customers that
will not buy from you, for the simple reason that you
don't support your product long enough for older OS.
90% of the hardware still support Win 9x, you should
follow them.
Personally, I am upgrading my computer with hardware
that is compatible with Win 98. I will keep using
it until it can go no more.
I still test my program and setups on Win 95, NT,
and 2K. From that I learn a lot on how to improve
my setups.
What I do, is install fresh Win 95, copy the contents
of the Windows directory to Windows1.
I test setups, then from the command prompt, I rename
Windows to Windows2, rename Windows1 to Windows,
and restart computer, I get a bare Win 95 again to test
more programs.
I keep another backup in Windows3, just in case I
forget to backup again.
I do the same for Win 98 SE, which I fully support.
By dumping Win 98, that means you are dumping Win NT,
ME, and 2K.
"Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:eIVY0pT6FHA.2576@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> Well if he doesn't actually need to support '98 then he does not need to
> worry about it.
>
>
> Of course one can, very little commercial software is produced to support
> '98 etc. The company I work for deal with government departments both here
> (UK), North and South America and several other countries (Oz, SA, several
> European states) and we stopped supporting '98 last year and have not lost
> a single sale or had any cancellations.
>
>
> Only if the extra effort is less than 20% of the development & testing
> costs. If we were to support them we would need extra testing staff to
> make sure everything worked in all operating systems.
>
> Anyway I doubt that 20% figure is current, even if it is it will diminish
> quickly.
>
> But of course it depends on ones market, if selling to individuals then
> there may be a case for '98 support.
>
> Best Regards
> Dave O.
>
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-15, 3:55 am |
| Thanx all of u.
our customer having both 98 and XP.
So I developed it in XP and now in 98 it is giving problem.
@ vbexp:
Plz refer following lines as u said from .vbp
Reference=*\G{00020430-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}#2.0#0#E:\WINDOWS\system32\stdole2.tlb#OLE Automation
Reference=*\G{00000201-0000-0010-8000-00AA006D2EA4}#2.1#0#E:\Program
Files\Common Files\system\ado\m o21.tlb#Microsoft ActiveX Data Objects 2.1
Library
Reference=*\G{6B263850-900B-11D0-9484-00A0C91110ED}#1.0#0#E:\WINDOWS\system32\Msstdfmt.dll#Microsoft Data Formatting Object Library 6.0 (SP4)
Reference=*\G{6B7E6392-850A-101B-AFC0-4210102A8DA7}#1.3#0#E:\WINDOWS\system32\COMCTL32.OCX#Microsoft Windows Common Controls 5.0 (SP2)
Object={67397AA1-7FB1-11D0-B148-00A0C922E820}#6.0#0; MSADODC.OCX
Object={5E9E78A0-531B-11CF-91F6-C2863C385E30}#1.0#0; MSFLXGRD.OCX
Object={831FDD16-0C5C-11D2-A9FC-0000F8754DA1}#2.0#0; MSCOMCTL.OCX
Object={86CF1D34-0C5F-11D2-A9FC-0000F8754DA1}#2.0#0; MSCOMCT2.OCX
Object={20C62CAE-15DA-101B-B9A8-444553540000}#1.1#0; MSMAPI32.OCX
Reference=*\G{3D5C6BF0-69A3-11D0-B393-00A0C9055D8E}#1.0#0#E:\Program
Files\Common Files\designer\MSDERUN.DLL#Microsoft Data Environment Instance
1.0 (SP4)
Reference=*\G{642AC760-AAB4-11D0-8494-00A0C90DC8A9}#1.0#0#E:\WINDOWS\system32\MSDBRPTR.DLL#Microsoft Data Report Designer v6.0
im not sure about the SP version of VB6 for 98. I know it in XP coz i
installed it thr.
Also plz note: Both my OS are installed on same PC. Win-98 on C: and Win-XP
on E:
thnx n regards,
--
Amit Mohod
Nagpur, India
"vbexp" ने लिखा:
> Please open your VBP files with Notepad and post the lines that begin
> with "Object=" and "Reference=" here so we can help you further with this
> issue.
>
> Also, what VB SP are you using in Win98?
>
>
>
> "Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:36C25958-DBF3-4578-B8EA-467C6F92B3E3@microsoft.com...
>
>
>
| |
|
|
"Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
news:O5baJ%23T6FHA.2036@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> All I can say, that you are dumping Win 98 too soon,
> we know it is going to be faded out.
> You are going to have many unhappy customers that
> will not buy from you, for the simple reason that you
> don't support your product long enough for older OS.
I'm sorry but that's total rubbish, you have no idea of the customers we
deal with. Before we dropped '98 we asked some of our larger customers if it
would be a problem, not a single one said that it would be as they all have
already or had plans to upgrade all the relevant systems. As I said before
it may be an issue with high volume low cost software sold to the public,
but we deal in low volume high cost software for a small market who will
always use the correct equipment for the job.
It is a question of knowing your market and not just going on with redundant
effort regardless.
So you go back to '95 and even 3.1, what about NT3.5 or DOS 2.2 or GEM or
CP/M or OS/2 or George - There is no point except for historical interest in
maintaining redundant operating systems.
Best Regards
Dave.
> 90% of the hardware still support Win 9x, you should
> follow them.
> Personally, I am upgrading my computer with hardware
> that is compatible with Win 98. I will keep using
> it until it can go no more.
> I still test my program and setups on Win 95, NT,
> and 2K. From that I learn a lot on how to improve
> my setups.
> What I do, is install fresh Win 95, copy the contents
> of the Windows directory to Windows1.
> I test setups, then from the command prompt, I rename
> Windows to Windows2, rename Windows1 to Windows,
> and restart computer, I get a bare Win 95 again to test
> more programs.
> I keep another backup in Windows3, just in case I
> forget to backup again.
>
> I do the same for Win 98 SE, which I fully support.
>
> By dumping Win 98, that means you are dumping Win NT,
> ME, and 2K.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:eIVY0pT6FHA.2576@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
>
| |
|
| > im not sure about the SP version of VB6 for 98. I know it in XP coz i
> installed it thr.
> Plz refer following lines as u said from .vbp
> Also plz note: Both my OS are installed on same PC. Win-98 on C: and
> Win-XP
> on E:
I'll bet this is the cause of your problem, you have never installed VB to
'98.
Under '98 install all of VB to the same location and apply the same service
pack as you have in XP, this will ensure that they both have the same system
files to work with.
Best Regards
Dave O.
| |
|
| > I'm sorry but that's total rubbish
I would keep your group preference practices to your self
and not to the public.
You worse than Billy boy, you float on two feet of water.
"Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23lZw6nc6FHA.3544@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> "Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
> news:O5baJ%23T6FHA.2036@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
> I'm sorry but that's total rubbish, you have no idea of the customers we
> deal with. Before we dropped '98 we asked some of our larger customers if
> it would be a problem, not a single one said that it would be as they all
> have already or had plans to upgrade all the relevant systems. As I said
> before it may be an issue with high volume low cost software sold to the
> public, but we deal in low volume high cost software for a small market
> who will always use the correct equipment for the job.
>
>
>
> It is a question of knowing your market and not just going on with
> redundant effort regardless.
>
>
>
> So you go back to '95 and even 3.1, what about NT3.5 or DOS 2.2 or GEM or
> CP/M or OS/2 or George - There is no point except for historical interest
> in maintaining redundant operating systems.
>
>
> Best Regards
> Dave.
>
>
>
| |
| mayayana 2005-11-15, 6:55 pm |
|
>
> So you go back to '95 and even 3.1, what about NT3.5 or DOS 2.2 or GEM or
> CP/M or OS/2 or George - There is no point except for historical interest
in
> maintaining redundant operating systems.
>
If you don't need to support Win9x currently then
I can see why you might want it to disappear. That
will make your job easier in the future. Perhaps you
can keep that in mind next time you go to the local
hardware store to get vacuum cleaner bags for the
vacuum you bought last year, and the clerk tells you
those bags have been discontinued because the
new model is better....
"In fact", the clerk might explain, "highly scientific
research has been done, by both the Gates Vacuum
Company and associated retail outlets, proving
beyond the shadow of a doubt that not only is last year's
vacuum model outdated, it's downright unsafe to use!"
I imagine you'll probably be quite impressed by
the sage advice of that sharp and erudite clerk.
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-16, 3:55 am |
| @ Dave
As u said I installed SP6 for vb6 on 98 but the problem is still thr.
@ VBEXP
did u got any cluse from the lines with OBject= and Refference= ???
Plz help me as deadline for my project is very near.
what the unfortunate situation..for wat the hell i installed SP6 i wonder...
I tried opening the form which I thought probably causing the problem.. I
can open it Code section but as I try to open it for desgine the VB crashes
in 98 (Works fine in XP).
PLA HELP ME..........
--
Amit Mohod
Nagpur, India
"Dave" wrote:
>
>
> I'll bet this is the cause of your problem, you have never installed VB to
> '98.
>
> Under '98 install all of VB to the same location and apply the same service
> pack as you have in XP, this will ensure that they both have the same system
> files to work with.
>
> Best Regards
> Dave O.
>
>
>
| |
|
| This project is missing a lot, maybe corrupt try copy it again from the XP
machine, otherwise.
Start a new project, name some other name than your
project, name the form an odd name, save them
in the project directory.
Add all the controls you used in your project.
Start adding your original forms, modules, etc.
Remove the odd named form
If all is OK, rename project and overwrite corrupt project.
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C3DE9ABD-9371-4BA7-A654-A93A56A9F78F@microsoft.com...[color=darkred]
> Thanx all of u.
> our customer having both 98 and XP.
> So I developed it in XP and now in 98 it is giving problem.
>
> @ vbexp:
>
> Plz refer following lines as u said from .vbp
>
> Reference=*\G{00020430-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}#2.0#0#E:\WINDOWS\system32\stdole2.tlb#OLE
> Automation
> Reference=*\G{00000201-0000-0010-8000-00AA006D2EA4}#2.1#0#E:\Program
> Files\Common Files\system\ado\mo21.tlb#Microsoft ActiveX Data Objects
> 2.1
> Library
> Reference=*\G{6B263850-900B-11D0-9484-00A0C91110ED}#1.0#0#E:\WINDOWS\system32\Msstdfmt.dll#Microsoft
> Data Formatting Object Library 6.0 (SP4)
> Reference=*\G{6B7E6392-850A-101B-AFC0-4210102A8DA7}#1.3#0#E:\WINDOWS\system32\COMCTL32.OCX#Microsoft
> Windows Common Controls 5.0 (SP2)
> Object={67397AA1-7FB1-11D0-B148-00A0C922E820}#6.0#0; MSADODC.OCX
> Object={5E9E78A0-531B-11CF-91F6-C2863C385E30}#1.0#0; MSFLXGRD.OCX
> Object={831FDD16-0C5C-11D2-A9FC-0000F8754DA1}#2.0#0; MSCOMCTL.OCX
> Object={86CF1D34-0C5F-11D2-A9FC-0000F8754DA1}#2.0#0; MSCOMCT2.OCX
>
> Object={20C62CAE-15DA-101B-B9A8-444553540000}#1.1#0; MSMAPI32.OCX
> Reference=*\G{3D5C6BF0-69A3-11D0-B393-00A0C9055D8E}#1.0#0#E:\Program
> Files\Common Files\designer\MSDERUN.DLL#Microsoft Data Environment
> Instance
> 1.0 (SP4)
> Reference=*\G{642AC760-AAB4-11D0-8494-00A0C90DC8A9}#1.0#0#E:\WINDOWS\system32\MSDBRPTR.DLL#Microsoft
> Data Report Designer v6.0
>
> im not sure about the SP version of VB6 for 98. I know it in XP coz i
> installed it thr.
>
> Also plz note: Both my OS are installed on same PC. Win-98 on C: and
> Win-XP
> on E:
>
> thnx n regards,
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
>
>
> "vbexp" ने लिखा:
>
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-16, 3:55 am |
| thnx 4 ur reply. The project is not corrupted as it open in XP (I have both
98 and XP on same machine on different partitions). It gives problem if i
open it on 98.
Also i tried building a new project and then add all the forms, modules an
controls in 98. But it wont work.
--
Amit Mohod
Nagpur, India
"Ted" wrote:
> This project is missing a lot, maybe corrupt try copy it again from the XP
> machine, otherwise.
>
> Start a new project, name some other name than your
> project, name the form an odd name, save them
> in the project directory.
> Add all the controls you used in your project.
> Start adding your original forms, modules, etc.
> Remove the odd named form
>
> If all is OK, rename project and overwrite corrupt project.
>
>
>
>
> "Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C3DE9ABD-9371-4BA7-A654-A93A56A9F78F@microsoft.com...
>
>
>
| |
|
| I am not familiar with the controls you are using
Compare your VB.ini in the Windows directory.
>But it wont work.
Doesn't work in what way ?
Does it crash when adding controls ?
Does it refuse to add controls ?
Does it crash when opening it ?
Doesn't want to start ?
Does it go in a endless loop ?
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05D0E7E0-1A86-49A3-99CF-C8CB3C48DA7B@microsoft.com...[color=darkred]
> thnx 4 ur reply. The project is not corrupted as it open in XP (I have
> both
> 98 and XP on same machine on different partitions). It gives problem if i
> open it on 98.
> Also i tried building a new project and then add all the forms, modules an
> controls in 98. But it wont work.
>
>
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
>
>
> "Ted" wrote:
>
| |
|
| How many controls do you have in the main form ?
Do you have large size text in labels or text boxes ?
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05D0E7E0-1A86-49A3-99CF-C8CB3C48DA7B@microsoft.com...[color=darkred]
> thnx 4 ur reply. The project is not corrupted as it open in XP (I have
> both
> 98 and XP on same machine on different partitions). It gives problem if i
> open it on 98.
> Also i tried building a new project and then add all the forms, modules an
> controls in 98. But it wont work.
>
>
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
>
>
> "Ted" wrote:
>
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-16, 3:55 am |
| The project opens showing the source code. But when i try to open the form
for design (Either by doubleclick on forms name in "Project Group" window or
by clicking on "View Object" icon) , the VB crashes and gives error. Means
Im not able to open the form in designe mode.
--
Amit Mohod
Nagpur, India
"Ted" wrote:
> I am not familiar with the controls you are using
> Compare your VB.ini in the Windows directory.
>
> Doesn't work in what way ?
> Does it crash when adding controls ?
> Does it refuse to add controls ?
> Does it crash when opening it ?
> Doesn't want to start ?
> Does it go in a endless loop ?
>
>
>
>
> "Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:05D0E7E0-1A86-49A3-99CF-C8CB3C48DA7B@microsoft.com...
>
>
>
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-16, 3:55 am |
| I have near about 62 controls (This includes Menus, Mapi conrols, text box,
labels, flexgrids, frames. etc etc.).
> Do you have large size text in labels or text boxes ?
If you mean with Large size in terms of lentgh of text then ans. is no.
But I have one label which displays Title for the form and displays text in
the font "Bookman Old Style", font size 20, Bold.
--
Amit Mohod
Nagpur, India
"Ted" wrote:
> How many controls do you have in the main form ?
> Do you have large size text in labels or text boxes ?
>
>
>
>
>
> "Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:05D0E7E0-1A86-49A3-99CF-C8CB3C48DA7B@microsoft.com...
>
>
>
| |
|
| Close all VB projects and clean your Windows\temp folder.
Try take out the controls one at a time and see if any causing the error.
>"Bookman Old Style"
You shouldn't use this font, if user doesn't have it
then it will reduce to regular font.
You can use Arial, Times New Roman, MS Sans Serif
Courier, Modern.
I would make a .jpg in Bookman Old Style, and load it
in an Image control.
>If you mean with Large size in terms of length of text then ans. is no.
How about large numbers of ToolTips ?
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:56CD4E4A-0254-4E83-9D2B-6935FA76AEC6@microsoft.com...[color=darkred]
> The project opens showing the source code. But when i try to open the form
> for design (Either by doubleclick on forms name in "Project Group" window
> or
> by clicking on "View Object" icon) , the VB crashes and gives error.
> Means
> Im not able to open the form in designe mode.
>
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
>
>
> "Ted" wrote:
>
| |
| J French 2005-11-16, 3:55 am |
| On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 16:45:59 GMT, "mayayana"
<mayayanaXX1a@mindXXspring.com> wrote:
>
>in
>
> If you don't need to support Win9x currently then
>I can see why you might want it to disappear. That
>will make your job easier in the future. Perhaps you
>can keep that in mind next time you go to the local
>hardware store to get vacuum cleaner bags for the
>vacuum you bought last year, and the clerk tells you
>those bags have been discontinued because the
>new model is better....
>
> "In fact", the clerk might explain, "highly scientific
>research has been done, by both the Gates Vacuum
>Company and associated retail outlets, proving
>beyond the shadow of a doubt that not only is last year's
>vacuum model outdated, it's downright unsafe to use!"
> I imagine you'll probably be quite impressed by
>the sage advice of that sharp and erudite clerk.
Nice one
Reminds me of the time I had a dodgy fan on a CPU
The 'highly technical' sales guy in the local computer shop said 'most
people replace the CPU'
- I pointed out that it would involve replacing the motherboard and
then that would probably involve replacing the case
- in short a new machine, just to fix a $5 fan
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-16, 3:55 am |
| > >"Bookman Old Style"
> You shouldn't use this font, if user doesn't have it
> then it will reduce to regular font.
> You can use Arial, Times New Roman, MS Sans Serif
> Courier, Modern.
> I would make a .jpg in Bookman Old Style, and load it
> in an Image control.
Thanks 4 these suggestions.
> Try take out the controls one at a time and see if any causing the error.
If my project is not opening how can i do this??
> How about large numbers of ToolTips ?
No tool tips given till this time. I want to complete the project and then
i'll give tool tip.
Can u explain how the large sized text can crash the project while opening
(Again i'll specify that it work fine on XP)
--
Amit Mohod
Nagpur, India
"Ted" wrote:
> Close all VB projects and clean your Windows\temp folder.
> Try take out the controls one at a time and see if any causing the error.
>
> You shouldn't use this font, if user doesn't have it
> then it will reduce to regular font.
> You can use Arial, Times New Roman, MS Sans Serif
> Courier, Modern.
> I would make a .jpg in Bookman Old Style, and load it
> in an Image control.
>
>
> How about large numbers of ToolTips ?
>
>
>
>
> "Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:56CD4E4A-0254-4E83-9D2B-6935FA76AEC6@microsoft.com...
>
>
>
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-16, 3:55 am |
| Can u help me ted??
--
Regards,
Amit Mohod
AB Softskills, Nashik.
Cell No: 09822939505
Office: +91-253-2382781(255)
"Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
news:uP1tqkn6FHA.1724@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> How many controls do you have in the main form ?
> Do you have large size text in labels or text boxes ?
>
>
>
>
>
> "Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:05D0E7E0-1A86-49A3-99CF-C8CB3C48DA7B@microsoft.com...
>
>
| |
|
| > If my project is not opening how can i do this??
You need to do it in XP and move it over.
Backup your project, use a copy for testing.
> Can u explain how the large sized text can crash the project while opening
> (Again i'll specify that it work fine on XP)
If you load a text box with more than 15 KB of text,
then you will have problems loading, because Win98 can handle
only 16 KB text files, you might not cause problems at times
but it will fail at other times.
ToolTip text is the same way.
As far as controls, you are limited to 162 controls in each form.
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7F17655B-74EC-47C2-BE35-B50EF1832A72@microsoft.com...[color=darkred]
>
> Thanks 4 these suggestions.
>
>
> If my project is not opening how can i do this??
>
> No tool tips given till this time. I want to complete the project and then
> i'll give tool tip.
>
> Can u explain how the large sized text can crash the project while opening
> (Again i'll specify that it work fine on XP)
>
>
>
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
>
>
> "Ted" wrote:
>
| |
|
| Both you and Ted are missing the point:
KNOW YOUR CUSTOMERS!
I know my customers do not use redundant operating systems and thus for me
developing for '98 would be a stupid waste of time and money.
I have repeatedly stated that for some products in some markets it may be
worth bothering.
At some point you will have to drop support for '98 etc, nobody develops for
CP/M, OS/2 etc anymore for exactly that reason. The problem is when?
The answer to that depends mainly on the target market. But MS have a large
influence as their ending support is a powerful indication that the
operating systems have come to the end of their natural lives.
Best Regards
Dave O.
"mayayana" <mayayanaXX1a@mindXXspring.com> wrote in message
news:bhoef.451$wf.122@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> in
>
> If you don't need to support Win9x currently then
> I can see why you might want it to disappear. That
> will make your job easier in the future. Perhaps you
> can keep that in mind next time you go to the local
> hardware store to get vacuum cleaner bags for the
> vacuum you bought last year, and the clerk tells you
> those bags have been discontinued because the
> new model is better....
>
> "In fact", the clerk might explain, "highly scientific
> research has been done, by both the Gates Vacuum
> Company and associated retail outlets, proving
> beyond the shadow of a doubt that not only is last year's
> vacuum model outdated, it's downright unsafe to use!"
>
> I imagine you'll probably be quite impressed by
> the sage advice of that sharp and erudite clerk.
>
>
>
>
| |
| Kasia Muniak 2005-11-16, 7:55 am |
|
U¿ytkownik "Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> napisa³
w wiadomo¶ci news:36C25958-DBF3-4578-B8EA-467C6F92B3E3@microsoft.com..
..
[..]
> But why it is giving problem for opening the
> project it self on 98? On starting the projects the VB crashes and s
ays "An
> error has been
> occured. The program will terminet." Other projects which
> I developed on VB6/98 works fine.
It seems like a subclassing error (i.e. API not handled in Win98).
If you use some subclassing routines - check it out carefully.
Kasia Muniak
| |
| J French 2005-11-16, 7:55 am |
| On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:06:07 -0000, "Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>Both you and Ted are missing the point:
>KNOW YOUR CUSTOMERS!
>I know my customers do not use redundant operating systems and thus for me
>developing for '98 would be a stupid waste of time and money.
But for other people it would be sensible
>I have repeatedly stated that for some products in some markets it may be
>worth bothering.
That makes sense
>At some point you will have to drop support for '98 etc, nobody develops for
>CP/M, OS/2 etc anymore for exactly that reason. The problem is when?
The difference between CP/M and OS/2 and Windows is a heck of a lot
greater than the difference between Win9x and XP
- moving from them was not a simple OS upgrade
Incidentally, I suspect that there is a fair bit of OS/2 out there,
and I would not be surprized to find MSDOS, DR DOS and other flavours
in all sorts of curious places
>The answer to that depends mainly on the target market. But MS have a large
>influence as their ending support is a powerful indication that the
>operating systems have come to the end of their natural lives.
Sometimes lack of 'support' from MS is an advantage
- an OS does not cease working when MS stops tinkering with it
- normally at that stage it is stable
>Best Regards
>Dave O.
>
>"mayayana" <mayayanaXX1a@mindXXspring.com> wrote in message
>news:bhoef.451$wf.122@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>
| |
|
| Do you have any User Controls in your project?
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F47E7298-ABCD-440C-9DDD-550EE592ADF6@microsoft.com...[color=darkred]
>@ Dave
> As u said I installed SP6 for vb6 on 98 but the problem is still thr.
> @ VBEXP
>
> did u got any cluse from the lines with OBject= and Refference= ???
>
>
> Plz help me as deadline for my project is very near.
> what the unfortunate situation..for wat the hell i installed SP6 i
> wonder...
>
> I tried opening the form which I thought probably causing the problem.. I
> can open it Code section but as I try to open it for desgine the VB
> crashes
> in 98 (Works fine in XP).
>
> PLA HELP ME..........
>
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
>
>
> "Dave" wrote:
>
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-16, 7:55 am |
| No, not any user control. But have a refrence to a DLL which i'd created and
use for resizing the form when resolution is changed at runtime.
But it will give the problem as "Reff. not found " or like that. Plz correct
me if I'm wrong..
Also i have using some API functions like
Public Declare Function InitCommonControls _
Lib "comctl32.dll" () As Long
Private Declare Function InitCommonControlsEx Lib "comctl32.dll" _
(iccex As tagInitCommonControlsEx) As Boolean
Private Declare Function GetWindowLong Lib "user32" Alias _
"GetWindowLongA" (ByVal hWnd As Long, ByVal nIndex As Long) As Long
Private Declare Function SetWindowLong Lib "user32" Alias _
"SetWindowLongA" (ByVal hWnd As Long, ByVal nIndex As Long, _
ByVal dwNewLong As Long) As Long
Private Declare Function SetWindowPos Lib "user32" (ByVal hWnd As Long, _
ByVal hWndInsertAfter As Long, ByVal x As Long, ByVal y As Long, _
ByVal CX As Long, ByVal CY As Long, ByVal wFlags As Long) As Long
--
Regards,
Amit Mohod
AB Softskills, Nashik.
Cell No: 09822939505
Office: +91-253-2382781(255)
"vbexp" <nobody@cox.net> wrote in message
news:%23yigOGq6FHA.3648@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Do you have any User Controls in your project?
>
>
> "Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:F47E7298-ABCD-440C-9DDD-550EE592ADF6@microsoft.com...
>
>
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-16, 7:55 am |
| it will give problem if not registered with 98. It will not stop project
from openeing.
Isnt it?
--
Regards,
Amit Mohod
AB Softskills, Nashik.
Cell No: 09822939505
Office: +91-253-2382781(255)
"Amit Mohod" <amitmohod@msn.com> wrote in message
news:eiDUiCr6FHA.476@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> No, not any user control. But have a refrence to a DLL which i'd created
> and use for resizing the form when resolution is changed at runtime.
> But it will give the problem as "Reff. not found " or like that. Plz
> correct me if I'm wrong..
>
> Also i have using some API functions like
>
> Public Declare Function InitCommonControls _
> Lib "comctl32.dll" () As Long
>
> Private Declare Function InitCommonControlsEx Lib "comctl32.dll" _
> (iccex As tagInitCommonControlsEx) As Boolean
>
> Private Declare Function GetWindowLong Lib "user32" Alias _
> "GetWindowLongA" (ByVal hWnd As Long, ByVal nIndex As Long) As Long
>
> Private Declare Function SetWindowLong Lib "user32" Alias _
> "SetWindowLongA" (ByVal hWnd As Long, ByVal nIndex As Long, _
> ByVal dwNewLong As Long) As Long
>
> Private Declare Function SetWindowPos Lib "user32" (ByVal hWnd As Long, _
> ByVal hWndInsertAfter As Long, ByVal x As Long, ByVal y As Long, _
> ByVal CX As Long, ByVal CY As Long, ByVal wFlags As Long) As Long
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Amit Mohod
> AB Softskills, Nashik.
> Cell No: 09822939505
> Office: +91-253-2382781(255)
> "vbexp" <nobody@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:%23yigOGq6FHA.3648@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
>
| |
|
| "Amit Mohod" <amitmohod@msn.com> wrote in message
news:eiDUiCr6FHA.476@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> No, not any user control. But have a refrence to a DLL which i'd created
> and use for resizing the form when resolution is changed at runtime.
> But it will give the problem as "Reff. not found " or like that. Plz
> correct
That's probably your problem. You have a missing reference which could
produce strange errors. Please copy the DLL and register it in Windows 98,
then add it to the project.
> me if I'm wrong..
>
> Also i have using some API functions like
>
> Public Declare Function InitCommonControls _
> Lib "comctl32.dll" () As Long
>
> Private Declare Function InitCommonControlsEx Lib "comctl32.dll" _
> (iccex As tagInitCommonControlsEx) As Boolean
Do not use these 2 functions, the Common Controls will call these for you.
> Private Declare Function GetWindowLong Lib "user32" Alias _
> "GetWindowLongA" (ByVal hWnd As Long, ByVal nIndex As Long) As Long
>
> Private Declare Function SetWindowLong Lib "user32" Alias _
> "SetWindowLongA" (ByVal hWnd As Long, ByVal nIndex As Long, _
> ByVal dwNewLong As Long) As Long
>
> Private Declare Function SetWindowPos Lib "user32" (ByVal hWnd As Long, _
> ByVal hWndInsertAfter As Long, ByVal x As Long, ByVal y As Long, _
> ByVal CX As Long, ByVal CY As Long, ByVal wFlags As Long) As Long
Check all of your other functions to make sure that they work with Windows
95+. Before using any API function or feature, check the system requirements
for it and if you have to use something that doesn't work in Windows 95,
make a note of it because that is the minimum operating system version to
use. Some functions require NT only(NT4/2000/XP/2003), so they will not work
on Windows 95/98/ME.
| |
|
| > Incidentally, I suspect that there is a fair bit of OS/2 out there,
> and I would not be surprized to find MSDOS, DR DOS and other flavours
> in all sorts of curious places
Definitely, I know some IBM tape libraries and some banking systems still
run under OS/2 but these are all legacy systems, the point is that there is
no new development being undertaken for these environments.
> The difference between CP/M and OS/2 and Windows is a heck of a lot
> greater than the difference between Win9x and XP
Yes and no. I would say there is as much if not more in common between NT3.5
& OS/2 then between '98 & XP. '98 & XP may look similar, but so does vintage
Bollinger and fizzy cat pee - appearances can be deceptive.
> Sometimes lack of 'support' from MS is an advantage
> - an OS does not cease working when MS stops tinkering with it
> - normally at that stage it is stable
Whilst true in theory I can't actually think of any instances of this.
The lack of support & ongoing development allows virus writers and other
"black hats" unfettered opportunities to penetrate or compromise these
redundant systems which had poor security to start with.
Best Regards
Dave O.
| |
|
|
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F47E7298-ABCD-440C-9DDD-550EE592ADF6@microsoft.com...
>@ Dave
> As u said I installed SP6 for vb6 on 98 but the problem is still thr.
Yes but did you install VB6 itself to '98 or did you just use the
installation you did under XP?
If you did install under both OS's and to the same location, did you have
exactly the same options selected when you installed it?
If the answer to any of these is no and you have adequate disk space under
'98 I would suggest installing VB6 to a fresh location and trying again.
If you did install VB6 under '98, forget everything I said :-)
Best Regards
Dave O.
| |
|
| > Private Declare Function InitCommonControlsEx Lib "comctl32.dll" _
> (iccex As tagInitCommonControlsEx) As Boolean
>
I presume you are using this in conjunction with a manifest in a resource
file to set the XP themes. Using an app with these on a system that does not
support them can give an out of memory error. It may be all you need to add
is some conditional branching on some declarations.
I think you best course here might be to make a sort of dummy copy. On a
blank form copy at least one of each control from the problem application
one at a time, don't bother with any code, if the "program" runs OK then
start adding API declarations. If the problem does still not manifest itself
start adding code in the order it is executed.
I think this is your best plan to isolate the cause of your problem.
Good Luck
Dave O.
| |
| mayayana 2005-11-16, 6:55 pm |
| >
> The lack of support & ongoing development allows virus writers and other
> "black hats" unfettered opportunities to penetrate or compromise these
> redundant systems which had poor security to start with.
>
That's the kind of logic that makes me reply
to these kind of posts. I can see that some people
don't need to deal with Win9x, but far too many
people accept Microsoft's marketing logic at
face value, making it self-fulfilling. The idea that
a company can decide when their product has outlived
its usefulness is just plain outrageous. And the fact
that MS won't even provide *paid* support for a
system with an installed base that's probably still in
the hundreds of millions is equally outrageuos.
The security issue is a good example of Microsoft's
misleading marketing. The majority of bugs right now,
like the most recent EMF vulnerability (MS05-053), are
not problems for Win9x. And Win9x doesn't have dozens
of poorly documented, potentially vulnerable, services that
never should have been enabled by default. I have Win98SE.
I ignore Microsoft's drip-feed of patches. I use a firewall
and never use IE online. I feel much safer with that configuration
than with XP (which is itself spyware) and it's numerous
unstoppable services. (I don't need the DCOM patch, for
instance, because I removed DCOM, which can't be done
in XP.)
A lot of arguments could be made on both sides
of the security issue, but it's hardly a reason to stop
using Win9x. It's just that MS has strategically kept
the propaganda swirling until people stop thinking
about it and begin to assume it's true. The most well
known, most "press-released" "study" I know of that
determined Win9x is unsafe was done by AssetMetrix.
Their PDF of the study is available for download. Their
evidence for Win9x being unsafe consisted of the fact that
Win9x support is being ended! And AssetMetrix describes
their business as helping businesses transition to WinXP.
In other words, at close reading the "experts" trumpeted
in the widely published AssetMetrix press release turn
out to be salesmen rather than tech. experts.
| |
| mayayana 2005-11-16, 6:55 pm |
|
> Nice one
>
> Reminds me of the time I had a dodgy fan on a CPU
>
> The 'highly technical' sales guy in the local computer shop said 'most
> people replace the CPU'
> - I pointed out that it would involve replacing the motherboard and
> then that would probably involve replacing the case
>
> - in short a new machine, just to fix a $5 fan
Oh, I hardly dare get started on the issue of
how PC companies have managed to render
their products as virtually single-piece
hardware. :)
| |
|
| > Yes and no. I would say there is as much if not more in common between
> NT3.5 & OS/2 then between '98 & XP. '98 & XP may look similar, but so does
> vintage Bollinger and fizzy cat pee - appearances can be deceptive.
You can't compare these OSs.
Users were glad to get rid of NT3.51 and 4.0.
Win 98 is a sweet, beautiful, flexible, and easy OS,
the best OS Microsoft ever put out.
Microsoft are stupid though, you can't follow their footsteps,
they killed DOS while majority would have preferred to keep
DOS around. Now they are killing VB and that is the most
stupid move in history.
"Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:uV8EWMr6FHA.3880@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
> Definitely, I know some IBM tape libraries and some banking systems still
> run under OS/2 but these are all legacy systems, the point is that there
> is no new development being undertaken for these environments.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yes and no. I would say there is as much if not more in common between
> NT3.5 & OS/2 then between '98 & XP. '98 & XP may look similar, but so does
> vintage Bollinger and fizzy cat pee - appearances can be deceptive.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Whilst true in theory I can't actually think of any instances of this.
>
> The lack of support & ongoing development allows virus writers and other
> "black hats" unfettered opportunities to penetrate or compromise these
> redundant systems which had poor security to start with.
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
> Dave O.
>
>
>
| |
|
|
"Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
news:u1oIYis6FHA.3660@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
[color=darkred]
> You can't compare these OSs.
> Users were glad to get rid of NT3.51 and 4.0.
NT4 I thought was quite popular and I know is still chugging away on servers
all over the place
> Win 98 is a sweet, beautiful, flexible, and easy OS,
> the best OS Microsoft ever put out.
Hey what drugs are you on and can I have some please? '98 has lousy
multitasking, no support for multi processors, max of 2Gig RAM, real
problems with large hard drives, FAT32 which although better than FAT16 is
trash compared to NTFS or OS/2s HPFS, the list goes on and on.
I would say that XP is the least bad consumer OS MS have produced to date.
(2003 Server is quite sweet but not really for general consumption)
> Microsoft are stupid though, you can't follow their footsteps,
> they killed DOS while majority would have preferred to keep
> DOS around.
I think most people realized that DOS just couldn't cut the mustard anymore,
the memory addressing problems alone were crippling it. In order to make it
do any useful work you had to load all sorts of memory management TSRs -
remember the fun getting DOS4G to work properly?
> Now they are killing VB and that is the most
> stupid move in (their) history.
I think we can all agree with that sentiment.
Best Regards
Dave O.
| |
|
| >2003 Server
I don't want to even see it.
Much easier to become a medical doctor than
be running this way over engineered OS.
Trust me, go to Medical school, would be much easier,
and you will be a millionaire.
The US rated a programmer equivalent to a construction
worker, get laid off when the job is done after they get the
best out of you, and work small percentage of the year.
Average income to a programmer in the US is 37,000,
don't know the figure after they started out sourcing.
>'98 has lousy multitasking, no support for multi processors,
98 is not a server product.
> max of 2Gig RAM,
512 RAM is plenty to run the OS, faster than 4 GB RAM in XP.
> real problems with large hard drives,
True, I am having hard time using more than 16 GB.
I don't need those large drives
>FAT32 which although better than FAT16 is trash compared to NTFS or OS/2s
>HPFS, the list goes on and on.
FAT32 is the only way to go, NTFS is nothing but pain in the neck.
Without DOS, NTFS can kick you out from accessing Windows
in no time.
XP is nothing but a pile of garbage mingled together.
Windows Restore harbors viruses that can't be cleaned
with the average user or any antivirus programs.
Networking in XP is full of bugs, much sweeter in Win 98.
A share in XP can't be accessed unless you share the
whole hard drive also in some computers.
That problem never existed in Win 98.
> NT4 I thought was quite popular and I know is still chugging away on
> servers all over the place
True, they were glad to get rid of NT3.51.
But big majority migrated to W2K server and now to 2003.
You can't mix and compare public users with server users.
"Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:eBrHC5s6FHA.3660@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> "Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
> news:u1oIYis6FHA.3660@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> NT4 I thought was quite popular and I know is still chugging away on
> servers all over the place
>
> Hey what drugs are you on and can I have some please? '98 has lousy
> multitasking, no support for multi processors, max of 2Gig RAM, real
> problems with large hard drives, FAT32 which although better than FAT16 is
> trash compared to NTFS or OS/2s HPFS, the list goes on and on.
>
> I would say that XP is the least bad consumer OS MS have produced to date.
> (2003 Server is quite sweet but not really for general consumption)
>
>
>
> I think most people realized that DOS just couldn't cut the mustard
> anymore, the memory addressing problems alone were crippling it. In order
> to make it do any useful work you had to load all sorts of memory
> management TSRs - remember the fun getting DOS4G to work properly?
>
>
>
> I think we can all agree with that sentiment.
>
>
> Best Regards
> Dave O.
>
| |
| Stefan Berglund 2005-11-16, 6:55 pm |
| On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:16:55 GMT, "mayayana" <mayayanaXX1a@mindXXspring.com>
wrote:
in <H3Ief.887$wf.263@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>
>
>
> Oh, I hardly dare get started on the issue of
>how PC companies have managed to render
>their products as virtually single-piece
>hardware. :)
Don't think that Microsoft didn't have a hand in forcing that issue as well. All
of my machines are hand built to my specs, but for laptops I'd recommend Dell as
the least troublesome.
---
Stefan Berglund
| |
| Stefan Berglund 2005-11-16, 6:55 pm |
| On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:06:07 -0000, "Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
in <eGo8oVp6FHA.3648@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>
>The answer to that depends mainly on the target market. But MS have a large
>influence as their ending support is a powerful indication that the
>operating systems have come to the end of their natural lives.
Well, I suppose Microsoft is entitled to their opinion. I just have a problem
with being force fed.
I agree that the NT OSes are superior to the 9x OSes and I rarely waste my time
anymore with 98 or the embarrassment known as ME, but there are millions of
computer users out there that are happy as pigs in a poke with their Windows
98/ME boxes and will be until they don't run anymore.
---
Stefan Berglund
| |
| mayayana 2005-11-16, 6:55 pm |
|
> True, I am having hard time using more than 16 GB.
> I don't need those large drives
>
I have two 100 GB drives with Win98. There's
no problem. I think it does have trouble at something
like 130 GB on one drive. I've forgotten the
details but I think there's some kind of patch
for it. If you meant that you're having trouble with
a 160 GB drive then try here:
http://www.mdgx.com/
He probably has the fix.
| |
|
| >for it. If you meant that you're having trouble with
>a 160 GB drive then try here:
What I meant is my whole data is less than 16 MB.
On my programming hard drive I have less than 6 GB.
I had to add large files to the second drive so it will
have less than 32 GB free space, because Virtual
memory reads it as a negative value of over 32 GB.
MS have a fix, you can get it only with paid support they say.
> http://www.mdgx.com/
>
> He probably has the fix.
Thank you very much, I will check it out.
I think MS has a fix also.
"mayayana" <mayayanaXX1a@mindXXspring.com> wrote in message
news:m4Qef.1308$N45.1141@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>
> I have two 100 GB drives with Win98. There's
> no problem. I think it does have trouble at something
> like 130 GB on one drive. I've forgotten the
> details but I think there's some kind of patch
> for it. If you meant that you're having trouble with
> a 160 GB drive then try here:
>
> http://www.mdgx.com/
>
> He probably has the fix.
>
>
| |
|
|
"Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
news:%23D$p7Gt6FHA.636@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
[color=darkred]
> I don't want to even see it.
Fair enough but just because you don't understand does not mean it's crap.
>
> 98 is not a server product.
As I said before, you don't have a clue as to what software I deal with, me
and many other people need the power of a "server" OS and multi processors
have many uses other than in servers.
>
> 512 RAM is plenty to run the OS, faster than 4 GB RAM in XP.
In your dreams, or a really badly set up XP box.
>
> FAT32 is the only way to go, NTFS is nothing but pain in the neck.
> Without DOS, NTFS can kick you out from accessing Windows
> in no time.
FAT32 is a mess, just an extension to FAT16 which was a vague copy up of
even older FS's. NTFS has security built in not tacked on as a poorly
implemented afterthought, that's why if you don't set things up correctly
with NTFS it wont let you in, this is what is called "Fail Secure" this is
not a bug but a design "feature" and is the way it should be, if FAT32 is
not sure it just lets you in, a recipe for disaster.
> Windows Restore harbors viruses that can't be cleaned
> with the average user or any antivirus programs.
That's true, better to keep the buggers away in the first place, XP can do
that a lot better than '98
> Networking in XP is full of bugs, much sweeter in Win 98.
No no no, not NetBEUI please. Slow, buggy and about as secure as a soggy
meringue door.
> A share in XP can't be accessed unless you share the
> whole hard drive also in some computers.
Eh? I have never heard of this but I know how to set things up properly.
> You can't mix and compare public users with server users.
Arrrrg, now you see what I have been saying all along, I do not write for
the public, I write for industry and as such I don't need to develop for
'98. My point is that any developer in a similar situation is wasting his or
her time in developing for '98.
Best Regards etc
Dave O.
| |
|
| >> 512 RAM is plenty to run the OS, faster than 4 GB RAM in XP.
> In your dreams, or a really badly set up XP box.
I have 1 GB in my XP and it flies.
DOS needs less memory than Win 31, Win 31 needs
less memory than Win 95 which needs less memory
than Win 98, which needs less memory than W2K,
which needs less memory than XP. With 256 RAM
2003 small business wouldn't even start.
It is very well know with newer OS you need more
hard disk space and more memory.
>NTFS has security built
Security my as_
All it does is prevent user the ability to fix computer easily.
>
> That's true, better to keep the buggers away in the first place, XP can do
> that a lot better than '98
You don't understand.
There are folder that MS uses for backups, viruses and
worms hide in these folders. Nobody can access these folders
except viruses and worms.
Antivirus program can NOT clean these folders because they
can't access it.
The problem been around since XP was released and MS doing
nothing about it.
>
> No no no, not NetBEUI please. Slow, buggy and about as secure as a soggy
> meringue door.
As long it works constantly none stop is enough for me.
>
> Eh? I have never heard of this but I know how to set things up properly.
You haven't been around as much as I have.
"Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:uL4Up136FHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
> "Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
> news:%23D$p7Gt6FHA.636@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
>
> Fair enough but just because you don't understand does not mean it's crap.
>
> As I said before, you don't have a clue as to what software I deal with,
> me and many other people need the power of a "server" OS and multi
> processors have many uses other than in servers.
>
>
> In your dreams, or a really badly set up XP box.
>
>
> FAT32 is a mess, just an extension to FAT16 which was a vague copy up of
> even older FS's. NTFS has security built in not tacked on as a poorly
> implemented afterthought, that's why if you don't set things up correctly
> with NTFS it wont let you in, this is what is called "Fail Secure" this is
> not a bug but a design "feature" and is the way it should be, if FAT32 is
> not sure it just lets you in, a recipe for disaster.
>
>
>
> That's true, better to keep the buggers away in the first place, XP can do
> that a lot better than '98
>
>
>
> No no no, not NetBEUI please. Slow, buggy and about as secure as a soggy
> meringue door.
>
>
>
> Eh? I have never heard of this but I know how to set things up properly.
>
>
> Arrrrg, now you see what I have been saying all along, I do not write for
> the public, I write for industry and as such I don't need to develop for
> '98. My point is that any developer in a similar situation is wasting his
> or her time in developing for '98.
>
>
> Best Regards etc
> Dave O.
>
| |
|
| > You don't understand.
> There are folder that MS uses for backups, viruses and
> worms hide in these folders. Nobody can access these folders
> except viruses and worms.
> Antivirus program can NOT clean these folders because they
> can't access it.
> The problem been around since XP was released and MS doing
> nothing about it.
Maybe I'm being stupid but if nobody can access these folders (I presume you
are referring to "System Volume Information") how do you 'know' this stuff
is getting in there and how does it manage to get somewhere where nothing
can go and how can it run from somewhere programs can't run?
Yes the system restore will copy files there if you are alredy infected but
no malware can utilize these locations until a user restores them.
If users checked their PCs before installing new software or if they didn't
click on every link on the Net it might not be a problem. I have been on the
net for about 15 years, I don't use any AV (except occasionally on a
temporary basis to check) and I have never, not once, been infected with any
malware, and I get about 1000 spam a w on my older email address so I am
exposed but I DO know what I'm doing so it is not a problem.
>
> You haven't been around as much as I have.
Possibly not, but I have worked on help desks and I do work on a medium
sized network where most PCs use XP and I have a couple of friends who
administer larger networks and I have never heard of this problem. I don't
think you can cite poorly configured PCs as a problem with the underlying
OS.
You attitude to XP reminds me of people who had spent about 3 years getting
95/98 exactly how they liked it and then after trying OS/2 for 2 hours
proclaimed it to be nowhere near as good as 95/98.
Best Regards
Dave.
| |
| mayayana 2005-11-17, 6:55 pm |
| > > FAT32 is the only way to go, NTFS is nothing but pain in the neck.
> FAT32 is a mess, just an extension to FAT16 which was a vague copy up of
> even older FS's. NTFS has security built in not tacked on as a poorly
> implemented afterthought, that's why if you don't set things up correctly
> with NTFS it wont let you in, this is what is called "Fail Secure" this is
> not a bug but a design "feature" and is the way it should be, if FAT32 is
> not sure it just lets you in, a recipe for disaster.
>
Have you heard of Trojan.Comxt.B, the endless WinXP
SP2 download nags when downloading unsigned files
with IE, and alternate data streams?
NTFS is great if you're on a closed, corporate
network and your big worry is that a co-worker might
pry into your system. Aside from that, it's a massive
calamity in the making. It's making a profound change in
the whole concept of the file system, by removing user
access to a virtually unlimited, secondary, hidden file
system - a file system accessible to Microsoft for their
dubious "metadata" "features", and also accessible
to viruses, keystroke loggers, and anyone else who wants
to bypass the owner of the computer; but generally
inaccessible to most Windows users because alternate
data stream files are invisible in Explorer.
| |
| Stefan Berglund 2005-11-17, 6:55 pm |
| On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:46:46 -0000, "Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
in <uL4Up136FHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>
>
>
>Eh? I have never heard of this but I know how to set things up properly.
I think he's referring to Simple File Sharing which is on by default in XP Pro
and can thankfully be turned off unlike in XP Home where it's simply not an
option. And you'd think by its name that it might facilitate file sharing...
---
Stefan Berglund
| |
|
| > If users checked their PCs before installing new software or if they
> didn't click on every link on the Net it might not be a problem.
Antivirus companies will be out business.
It doesn't take much to get a virus by novice users.
The fix for that is disable auto backup and restore,
it deletes the backups and viruses.
Antivirus suppose to do this automatically.
Why doesn't MS release the secret in accessing these
folders so the antivirus can clean them.
> Possibly not, but I have worked on help desks
If you don't know about that viruses hide in the
"System Volume Information", then you don't have
enough experience. 10/10 XP novice users get this problem.
The antivirus can't get into the backup folder to disinfect it.
> You attitude to XP reminds me of people who had spent about 3 years
> getting 95/98 exactly how they liked
I have 7 computers, just gave couple away for free.
I have two computer with Win98, and 5 with WinXP,
I also have Win XP 64 on a Dual Core computer.
All the XPs are FAT32 including the XP 64, I don't need
worthless NTFS security, which is nothing but a bug.
I renew my computers or hard drives and power supplies
every two or three years.
I have ten hard drives with every operating system
that was released since 1995. The hard drives are in mobile racks.
I use them to test software that I make, you probably test
your software on XP and nothing else.
That doesn't work, you have to ground your software and
test it on a bare operating systems.
And yes all the operating systems are legal.
I also have DOS 5, 6.1, 6.2 Win 3.11, Win 3.51 workstation
and server, Linux still boxed.
I also have W2K pro and server.
The only OS I don't have is Win NT 4 with SP4, which I am
going to hunt for and buy.
>I don't use any AV (except occasionally on a temporary basis to check) and
>I have never, not once, been infected
I used to be like you. One time I failed to update my antivirus,
thinking I am a big boy, but then paid the price.
You wonder how people get heart attacks, wait until
you get one of those killer virus. Viruses and Worms
that are going around these days are nothing but a tease.
"Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23qD6%23i46FHA.3172@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Maybe I'm being stupid but if nobody can access these folders (I presume
> you are referring to "System Volume Information") how do you 'know' this
> stuff is getting in there and how does it manage to get somewhere where
> nothing can go and how can it run from somewhere programs can't run?
>
> Yes the system restore will copy files there if you are alredy infected
> but no malware can utilize these locations until a user restores them.
>
> If users checked their PCs before installing new software or if they
> didn't click on every link on the Net it might not be a problem. I have
> been on the net for about 15 years, I don't use any AV (except
> occasionally on a temporary basis to check) and I have never, not once,
> been infected with any malware, and I get about 1000 spam a w on my
> older email address so I am exposed but I DO know what I'm doing so it is
> not a problem.
>
>
> Possibly not, but I have worked on help desks and I do work on a medium
> sized network where most PCs use XP and I have a couple of friends who
> administer larger networks and I have never heard of this problem. I don't
> think you can cite poorly configured PCs as a problem with the underlying
> OS.
>
> You attitude to XP reminds me of people who had spent about 3 years
> getting 95/98 exactly how they liked it and then after trying OS/2 for 2
> hours proclaimed it to be nowhere near as good as 95/98.
>
> Best Regards
> Dave.
>
>
| |
|
| >think you can cite poorly configured PCs
Those were 5 DELL brand new computers, the one
just wouldn't bulge.
The others kept giving errors once in a while until
I had to share the C drive.
"Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23qD6%23i46FHA.3172@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Maybe I'm being stupid but if nobody can access these folders (I presume
> you are referring to "System Volume Information") how do you 'know' this
> stuff is getting in there and how does it manage to get somewhere where
> nothing can go and how can it run from somewhere programs can't run?
>
> Yes the system restore will copy files there if you are alredy infected
> but no malware can utilize these locations until a user restores them.
>
> If users checked their PCs before installing new software or if they
> didn't click on every link on the Net it might not be a problem. I have
> been on the net for about 15 years, I don't use any AV (except
> occasionally on a temporary basis to check) and I have never, not once,
> been infected with any malware, and I get about 1000 spam a w on my
> older email address so I am exposed but I DO know what I'm doing so it is
> not a problem.
>
>
> Possibly not, but I have worked on help desks and I do work on a medium
> sized network where most PCs use XP and I have a couple of friends who
> administer larger networks and I have never heard of this problem. I don't
> think you can cite poorly configured PCs as a problem with the underlying
> OS.
>
> You attitude to XP reminds me of people who had spent about 3 years
> getting 95/98 exactly how they liked it and then after trying OS/2 for 2
> hours proclaimed it to be nowhere near as good as 95/98.
>
> Best Regards
> Dave.
>
>
| |
|
| > Have you heard of Trojan.Comxt.B,
Why didn't they call it Nagging.Billy,
NTFS.NetXP.B (B for Bill) ?
"mayayana" <mayayanaXX1a@mindXXspring.com> wrote in message
news:bD2ff.1558$N45.910@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> Have you heard of Trojan.Comxt.B, the endless WinXP
> SP2 download nags when downloading unsigned files
> with IE, and alternate data streams?
>
> NTFS is great if you're on a closed, corporate
> network and your big worry is that a co-worker might
> pry into your system. Aside from that, it's a massive
> calamity in the making. It's making a profound change in
> the whole concept of the file system, by removing user
> access to a virtually unlimited, secondary, hidden file
> system - a file system accessible to Microsoft for their
> dubious "metadata" "features", and also accessible
> to viruses, keystroke loggers, and anyone else who wants
> to bypass the owner of the computer; but generally
> inaccessible to most Windows users because alternate
> data stream files are invisible in Explorer.
>
>
>
| |
| mayayana 2005-11-18, 3:55 am |
| > > Have you heard of Trojan.Comxt.B,
>
> Why didn't they call it Nagging.Billy,
> NTFS.NetXP.B (B for Bill) ?
>
I imagine there'll probably still be plenty
of chances for that. You might want to get
your vote in now. :)
| |
|
| I also have Win 95c, which most probably you never heard of,
It is identical to Win 98, was released in 1998, that is
when courts were trying to force MS remove IE from Win98.
So they released Win98 with Win95c name.
"Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23qD6%23i46FHA.3172@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Maybe I'm being stupid but if nobody can access these folders (I presume
> you are referring to "System Volume Information") how do you 'know' this
> stuff is getting in there and how does it manage to get somewhere where
> nothing can go and how can it run from somewhere programs can't run?
>
> Yes the system restore will copy files there if you are alredy infected
> but no malware can utilize these locations until a user restores them.
>
> If users checked their PCs before installing new software or if they
> didn't click on every link on the Net it might not be a problem. I have
> been on the net for about 15 years, I don't use any AV (except
> occasionally on a temporary basis to check) and I have never, not once,
> been infected with any malware, and I get about 1000 spam a w on my
> older email address so I am exposed but I DO know what I'm doing so it is
> not a problem.
>
>
> Possibly not, but I have worked on help desks and I do work on a medium
> sized network where most PCs use XP and I have a couple of friends who
> administer larger networks and I have never heard of this problem. I don't
> think you can cite poorly configured PCs as a problem with the underlying
> OS.
>
> You attitude to XP reminds me of people who had spent about 3 years
> getting 95/98 exactly how they liked it and then after trying OS/2 for 2
> hours proclaimed it to be nowhere near as good as 95/98.
>
> Best Regards
> Dave.
>
>
| |
|
| > I use them to test software that I make, you probably test
> your software on XP and nothing else.
> That doesn't work, you have to ground your software and
> test it on a bare operating systems.
Just goes to show how wrong you can be, we have a testing department with a
permanent staff of 4 and we test every change or fix on every supported
operating system then before release we do regreession testing and retest
most aspects.
It is not sensible to use developers for testing, they are too familier with
the way the program is written to give objective opinions, but I realize not
everybody has the infrastructure for such a procedure.
Best Regards
Dave O.
| |
|
|
"Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
news:%23jz2wV$6FHA.2092@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
> Those were 5 DELL brand new computers, the one
> just wouldn't bulge.
> The others kept giving errors once in a while until
> I had to share the C drive.
>
That would be about right, we have had several new PCs from Dell which have
benefited from some reconfiguration work.
Regards
Dave O.
| |
|
|
"Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
news:uNdyi8$6FHA.3592@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I also have Win 95c, which most probably you never heard of,
> It is identical to Win 98, was released in 1998, that is
> when courts were trying to force MS remove IE from Win98.
> So they released Win98 with Win95c name.
Gosh, wow, I'm so impressed.
Your point being?
Look, it's nearly the wend, I've had about enough of this, let's agree to
differ and call it a day.
It's been fun.
Dave O.
| |
|
| Adios
"Dave" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%236mpZNC7FHA.2888@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
> "Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
> news:uNdyi8$6FHA.3592@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
> Gosh, wow, I'm so impressed.
>
> Your point being?
>
>
> Look, it's nearly the wend, I've had about enough of this, let's agree
> to differ and call it a day.
>
> It's been fun.
>
> Dave O.
>
| |
|
| You need to step through form load and see
what is giving the error.
I didn't suggest this earlier because I though you would
know.
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7F17655B-74EC-47C2-BE35-B50EF1832A72@microsoft.com...[color=darkred]
>
> Thanks 4 these suggestions.
>
>
> If my project is not opening how can i do this??
>
> No tool tips given till this time. I want to complete the project and then
> i'll give tool tip.
>
> Can u explain how the large sized text can crash the project while opening
> (Again i'll specify that it work fine on XP)
>
>
>
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
>
>
> "Ted" wrote:
>
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-11-19, 3:55 am |
| I did it..but it didnt help.
I can open the project. I've 6 form among them only one form is giving
problem in 98. Even i can see code for this form. but when i try to open it
in design mode, the VB crashes. I've even checked for each object in this
form by removing one by one, commented all API calls and definitions,
registering on custom dll which is used for resolution settings etc. but it
dosnt help..
The common control on the form which were ok and this form were frames and
image control. I removed both but still not solved.
I also installed SP6 for vb6 in win98 but invain..
:(
Now I am redesigning the form on win 98 and will use code from old
form....no other option found.
--
Regards,
Amit Mohod
AB Softskills, Nashik.
Cell No: 09822939505
Office: +91-253-2382781(255)
"Ted" <2000@xxxmsn.com> wrote in message
news:e4G0O3I7FHA.268@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> You need to step through form load and see
> what is giving the error.
> I didn't suggest this earlier because I though you would
> know.
>
>
> "Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7F17655B-74EC-47C2-BE35-B50EF1832A72@microsoft.com...
>
>
| |
| Amit Mohod 2005-12-14, 3:55 am |
| hi all,
I got the thing which was giving problem. the project was using GIF images
with high resolution. I replaced those with low resolution copies and it
worked.
(Although I found solution after redesigned the form again in 98. My elder
say that "Nothing happens untill the right time comes..."
It seems to be very true ;)
--
Regards,
Amit Mohod
AB Softskills, Nashik.
Cell No: 09822939505
Office: +91-253-2382781(255)
"Amit Mohod" <AmitMohod@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05D0E7E0-1A86-49A3-99CF-C8CB3C48DA7B@microsoft.com...[color=darkred]
> thnx 4 ur reply. The project is not corrupted as it open in XP (I have
> both
> 98 and XP on same machine on different partitions). It gives problem if i
> open it on 98.
> Also i tried building a new project and then add all the forms, modules an
> controls in 98. But it wont work.
>
>
> --
> Amit Mohod
> Nagpur, India
>
>
> "Ted" wrote:
>
|
|
|
|
|