Tip: Run a free scan for common Windows errors ad

USB web cam suddenly doesn't work (was: installation cd) Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 11:49 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) It's obvious that you made an effort, but here's how your post looks: http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1250748341 The first 2 paragraphs here are worth reading: http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/1217046552 Adele wrote: |usb web camera was working for about 3 mths. |Uploaded new Firefox and [then?] cam has not been [working] since. | I think the correlation is just a coincidence. ...and I don't think "uploading" means what you think it does: http://google.com/search?q=define:upload When you have a problem with a *device*, you should look in Device Manager. A yellow mark indicates a problem. (...and sometimes a device driver is broken and Windoze doesn't flag it.) The first step is to Remove the old driver (using Device Manager) and restart the computer. |I have the installation cd but when I put it in the drive nothing happens. |Thought I would try to re install it again... that might help. | You have to be more careful when you say "it". Do you mean the camera? It sounds like you might be talking about reinstalling Windoze. That is unlikely to help. Windoze doesn't include USB drivers in its default install. Do be specific. |Does not have instructions on how to install it. |Nothing happens when I put it in the drive. | Ah. A Windoze user expecting everything to magically just work. 8-) Surely you know how to navigate about in your file manager (Windows Explorer). Find the CD-ROM drive there--probably D: or E: What files/folders do you see there? Make sure that file extensions are displayed--not the stupid M$ default. Examples of file extensions: .exe .inf .txt [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: RE: installation cd Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 9:31 am Posted by Ed (741 messages posted) If you are talking about the installation CD that came with your web camera, you need to be aware that Windows 98 will not run the installation program on that CD automatically. To run a data CD's start up software simply by inserting the CD in the drive, you have to set an option in Windows to auto-run the CD. However, it's probably easier for you - in this case - to just open Windows Explorer (go to START > PROGRAMS > WINDOWS EXPLORER) (or go to START > RUN then type EXPLORER in the box that opens and click OK), and navigate to the CD directory (if you only have one hard disk, the CD drive is probably drive D:). You should see a program (a file) called SETUP (or perhaps SETUP.EXE) in the top (root) folder of the CD, if the CD is for use with Windows 98 only. Double click on that file to run the setup program. But if it's a CD for several types of Windows, you might find that the Windows 98 setup program (called SETUP.EXE usually) is somewhere else on the CD - probably in a sub-folder called Windows98 or Windows 9x or Win9x. Double click on that program file, wherever it is, to run the setup program for your camera. You can, if you need to, search the entire CD (all sub-folders) for that file: go to START > SEARCH > FOR FILES AND FOLDERS. Type the file name SETUP.EXE in the box "Searxch for files and folders named", and select drive D: - and then click the SEARCH NOW button. Ed On Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 11:05 pm, Adele wrote: >usb web camera was working for about 3 mths. Uploaded new Firefox and than cam has >not been workin since. > >I have the installation cd but when I put it in the drive nothing happens. Thought >I would try to re install it again... that might help. > >Does not have instructions on how to install it. Nothing happens when I put it in >the drive. thank you [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: RE: installation cd Sunday, August 23, 2009 at 4:08 pm Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) Did you install the last version of FF that is compatible with Win 9X? Because if you downloaded the latest version, it may or may not (on most machines) install, but it is incompatible with Win 9X [Reply or follow-up to this message] FireFox and Windows 98 (was: installation cd) Wednesday, August 26, 2009 at 8:42 pm Posted by Ed (741 messages posted) FireFox 2.0 will run on Windows 98, but FireFox 3 will not. Even if it appears to install correctly, FireFox 3 will NOT run. However, your VERY BEST option is to install the version of FireFox which you were originally running. And the VERY BEST source to get that from is the CD which came with your computer (or whatever other CD you originally got it on). That's the version which is most likely to be 100% compatible with everything else in your computer, and is thus your best choice. Ed On Sunday, August 23, 2009 at 4:08 pm, C K wrote: >Did you install the last version of FF that is compatible with Win 9X? Because if >you downloaded the latest version, it may or may not (on most machines) install, >but it is incompatible with Win 9X [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: FireFox and Windows 98 (was: installation cd) Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 10:08 am Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) Ed wrote: |FireFox 2.0 will run on Windows 98, but FireFox 3 will not. |Even if it appears to install correctly, FireFox 3 will NOT run. | This is true for Plain-Jane Win9x. There is, however, a 3rd-party kernel extension for Win98/WinME that permits running not only Firefox 3, but OpenOffice 3, Flash 10, and more. http://google.com/search?q=KernelEx&filter=0 (Note the item for MSFN's "App Compatibility Database".) |However, your VERY BEST option |is to install the version of FireFox which you were originally running. | That depends on whether you can stand Firefox 3's "AwesomeBar" --or know that it can be reconfigured. Previously you had to figure out how to turn off that obnoxious PoS. http://google.com/search?q=AwesomeBar+maxRichResults This has been made a tickable option with FF3.5. ...and IMO, Firefox's big brother (the SeaMonkey suite)[1] is superior to either of these choices: all the goodness of the Mozilla browser PLUS MORE (e.g. an integrated HTML editor and--optionally--integrated email[2] plus an optional chat client and an integrated DOM inspector). |And the VERY BEST source to get that from |is the CD which came with your computer[...] | Since when did Firefox come on the same CD as Windoze 98? M$ doesn't put competing non-M$ software on their CDs (which has gotten them into hot water with the European Union --and SHOULD have done the same with the gutless US Department of Justice). ...and Firefox wasn't available any time during W98's marketing lifetime --though its antecedent (the Mozilla suite) was (just barely). [1] SeaMonkey's basic release (1.x) is fully W9x-compatible. A pre-release 2.x version (which uses the same core as FF3) is also available. [2] If the (wise) reason for getting Firefox was better security, SeaMonkey Mail[3] completes that paradigm with an app that is orders of magnitude more secure than what comes with Windoze. [3] There is also Mozilla Thunderbird if you want a separate mail app but the truth is that FF+TB takes up more resources than SeaMonkey does (With the suite, code is shared--not repeated). [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: FireFox and Windows 98 (was: installation cd) Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 10:17 am Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) gewg_ wrote: |[...]a 3rd-party kernel extension for Win98/WinME |that permits running not only Firefox 3, but OpenOffice 3, Flash 10, and more. |http://google.com/search?q=KernelEx&filter=0 |(Note the item for MSFN's "App Compatibility Database".) D'oh. My Google preferences give a different display from the basic return. Try this to see the database listed: http://google.com/search?q=KernelEx&filter=0&num=100 [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: FireFox and Windows 98 (was: installation cd) Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 1:45 pm Posted by Ed (741 messages posted) Are we trying to help the original poster? If so, it is of no use to her to put additional problems in her way. As her system was originally working properly, with the software she had originally installed, the best course of action for her is to try to get back to that condition, by installing ONLY the software that she was previously running. Since she was plainly not running the KernelEx software (hardly any Win98 users have ever heard of it), her problem can have nothing to do with that software, and she should therefore NOT be invited to install it. Ed On Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 10:17 am, gewg_ wrote: >gewg_ wrote: >|[...]a 3rd-party kernel extension for Win98/WinME >|that permits running not only Firefox 3, but OpenOffice 3, Flash 10, and more. >|http://google.com/search?q=KernelEx&filter=0 >|(Note the item for MSFN's "App Compatibility Database".) > >D'oh. My Google preferences give a different display from the basic return. >Try this to see the database listed: >http://google.com/search?q=KernelEx&filter=0&num=100 [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: FireFox and Windows 98 Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 2:52 pm Posted by gewg_ (4444 messages posted) Ed wrote: |Are we trying to help the original poster? | Each in his own way. |If so, it is of no use to her to put additional problems in her way. | I was rebutting your blanket statement about Firefox and W9x. See also "at a later point in time", below. |As her system was originally working properly, |with the software she had originally installed, | ...and as I pointed out, the correlation is in all likelyhood coincidental ...or haven't you ever had something in a M$ ecosystem *just break* without doing something to cause it? |the best course of action for her is to try to get back to that condition, |by installing ONLY the software that she was previously running. | I'm failing to see how the application is causing a broken device driver. The logical action is to address the driver directly. ...and simply uninstalling the suspect app will clarify any doubts. Software 101. |Since she was plainly not running the KernelEx software |(hardly any Win98 users have ever heard of it), |her problem can have nothing to do with that software, | Your point about *that software* echos my point about *the application* (i.e. not connected). |and she should therefore NOT be invited to install it. | I continue to point out that M$ **isn't** the _only_ source of code. I continue to offer choices. Folks are free to embrace that information now or at a later point in time. Folks are also free to ignore what I say and remain mired only in Redmond's payware from 1999. With the OP's interest in Firefox 3, I'd say she's interested in real improvement. [Reply or follow-up to this message] Tip: Use one of the [Reply or follow-up to this message] links above to add a message to this thread Search this forum Start a new thread on a different subject Report abuse of the forum Return to the Windows 98 Discussion Forum