MSDXM.OCX - invalid page fault

[Franc Zabkar]

I'm experiencing invalid page faults associated with MSDXM.OCX in the
Windows\System directory. My file version is 6.4.09.1120. This file is
the "Windows Media Player 2 ActiveX Control".

MSDXM OCX 843,804 09-05-01 8:00p MSDXM.OCX

The program that is generating these faults is in development and I'm
testing it in Win98SE.

FWIW, my WMP version is 9.00.00.2980 according to the file properties
of wmplayer.exe, but the Help-About screen shows 9.00.00.3008. <shrug>

Is it possible that I have the wrong version of the subject file?

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

 

[... et al.]

Franc Zabkar wrote:

> I'm experiencing invalid page faults associated with MSDXM.OCX in the
> Windows\System directory. My file version is 6.4.09.1120. This file is
> the "Windows Media Player 2 ActiveX Control".
>
> MSDXM OCX 843,804 09-05-01 8:00p MSDXM.OCX

Looks like 6.4.*09*.x is for WinNT, 6.4.*07*.x is for Windows.
See <http://support.microsoft.com/kb/832353/> for info and (i
think) latest versions.


> The program that is generating these faults is in development and I'm
> testing it in Win98SE.
>
> FWIW, my WMP version is 9.00.00.2980 according to the file properties
> of wmplayer.exe, but the Help-About screen shows 9.00.00.3008. <shrug>

(2003-06-07) WM 09.00.00.3008 Update(KB819639) Security(ms03-021)
is probably responsible for that. It includes an updated
[WMP.dll] file.

> Is it possible that I have the wrong version of the subject file?

Looks like.


--
Nah-ah. I'm staying out of this. ... Now, here's my opinion.

Please followup in the newsgroup.
E-mail address is invalid due to spam-control.

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 02:16:43 +0100, "... et al."
<look@sig.bcause.this.is.invalid> put finger to keyboard and composed:

>Franc Zabkar wrote:
>
>> I'm experiencing invalid page faults associated with MSDXM.OCX in the
>> Windows\System directory. My file version is 6.4.09.1120. This file is
>> the "Windows Media Player 2 ActiveX Control".
>>
>> MSDXM OCX 843,804 09-05-01 8:00p MSDXM.OCX
>
>Looks like 6.4.*09*.x is for WinNT, 6.4.*07*.x is for Windows.
>See <http://support.microsoft.com/kb/832353/> for info and (i
>think) latest versions.
>
>
>> The program that is generating these faults is in development and I'm
>> testing it in Win98SE.
>>
>> FWIW, my WMP version is 9.00.00.2980 according to the file properties
>> of wmplayer.exe, but the Help-About screen shows 9.00.00.3008. <shrug>
>
>(2003-06-07) WM 09.00.00.3008 Update(KB819639) Security(ms03-021)
>is probably responsible for that. It includes an updated
>[WMP.dll] file.
>
>> Is it possible that I have the wrong version of the subject file?
>
>Looks like.

Thanks. I downloaded this update ...

http://www.mdgx.com/files/MP832353.EXE

.... and copied the respective files to the Windows\System folder.

The problem is now solved.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

 

[... et al.]

Franc Zabkar wrote:

> "... et al." composed:
>
>> Franc Zabkar wrote:
>>
>>> I'm experiencing invalid page faults associated with MSDXM.OCX in the
>>> Windows\System directory. My file version is 6.4.09.1120. This file is
>>> the "Windows Media Player 2 ActiveX Control".
>>>
>>> MSDXM OCX 843,804 09-05-01 8:00p MSDXM.OCX
>>
>> Looks like 6.4.*09*.x is for WinNT, 6.4.*07*.x is for Windows.
>> See <http://support.microsoft.com/kb/832353/> for info and (i
>> think) latest versions.
>>

Not that it matters for you (or anyone but me) but a correction:
Looks like 6.4.*09*.x is for WinNT 5.x while 6.4.*07*.x is for
the 4.x versions of both Windows and WinNT. msKB#832353 links
probably to the latest version for Windows(98/ME). WinXP got a
higher version with Service Pack 2 (SP2).

> Thanks. I downloaded this update ...
>
> http://www.mdgx.com/files/MP832353.EXE
>
> ... and copied the respective files to the Windows\System folder.
>
> The problem is now solved.

Easy fix then. You're welcome.


--
Nah-ah. I'm staying out of this. ... Now, here's my opinion.

Please followup in the newsgroup.
E-mail address is invalid due to spam-control.

 

[Rick Chauvin]

"Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> wrote in message
news:lrlvn3ltkoc3i5qijh4adt71fds3pj23hn@4ax.com
[....]

> I downloaded this update ...
>
> http://www.mdgx.com/files/MP832353.EXE
>
> ... and copied the respective files to the Windows\System folder.


'files' as in plural? ..I hope not since that old patch is actually a
regression in most all ways I can see with a "current updated"
W98SE WMP v9 install.

msdxm.ocx would be the only one to change if you didn't already have that
v#, unless your setup is old and the other files are newer than yours,
which if that's case your versions are behind what's MS officially
current. Here's my list of updates as of the last time I kept track of it
which is a few years ago now.

1. 816044
2. 822964 & 278960
3. 827560
4. 832353
5. 917734
...codecs would be:
WM9Codecs9x.exe
&
wmv9VCMsetup.exe
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If ever needed a good reference website to put timelines together is:
http://zachd.com/pss/pss.html#wmp9 ..but at this point a pita.

Mine is in order because I used to follow it all from the original MS
releases themselves.

But I just read your testing something unique anyway so maybe I typed this
all for naught.

Rick




>
> The problem is now solved.
>
> - Franc Zabkar
> --
> Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 10:00:58 -0500, "Rick Chauvin"
<justask@nospamz.com> put finger to keyboard and composed:

>"Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> wrote in message
>news:lrlvn3ltkoc3i5qijh4adt71fds3pj23hn@4ax.com
>[....]
>
>> I downloaded this update ...
>>
>> http://www.mdgx.com/files/MP832353.EXE
>>
>> ... and copied the respective files to the Windows\System folder.
>
>
>'files' as in plural? ..I hope not since that old patch is actually a
>regression in most all ways I can see with a "current updated"
>W98SE WMP v9 install.

>msdxm.ocx would be the only one to change if you didn't already have that
>v#, ...

The wmp.dll files remained the same (9.00.00.3093) but my original
wmpcore.dll file was version 9.00.00.2980 (11 December 2002 3:09:24
PM) whereas the patch contained version 7.10.00.3076 (21 November 2003
1:40:42 PM). So maybe I should have left it alone. Anyway, I've
reverted to version 9.00.00.2980 of wmpcore.dll and all is still
working. Thanks.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

 

[letterman@invalid.com]

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 02:16:43 +0100, "... et al."
<look@sig.bcause.this.is.invalid> wrote:

>Franc Zabkar wrote:
>
>> I'm experiencing invalid page faults associated with MSDXM.OCX in the
>> Windows\System directory. My file version is 6.4.09.1120. This file is
>> the "Windows Media Player 2 ActiveX Control".
>>
>> MSDXM OCX 843,804 09-05-01 8:00p MSDXM.OCX
>
>Looks like 6.4.*09*.x is for WinNT, 6.4.*07*.x is for Windows.
>See <http://support.microsoft.com/kb/832353/> for info and (i
>think) latest versions.
>
Yeah, but this file is for Win2K, Win server 2003, and XP, not for
Win98. I just checked into it because I get this error from time to
time also. I downloaded the file and opened it with Winzip (even
though it's a .EXE). Since this is a Win98 group, why would it be of
interest to anyone using 98?

>
>> The program that is generating these faults is in development and I'm
>> testing it in Win98SE.
>>
>> FWIW, my WMP version is 9.00.00.2980 according to the file properties
>> of wmplayer.exe, but the Help-About screen shows 9.00.00.3008. <shrug>
>
>(2003-06-07) WM 09.00.00.3008 Update(KB819639) Security(ms03-021)
>is probably responsible for that. It includes an updated
>[WMP.dll] file.
>
>> Is it possible that I have the wrong version of the subject file?
>
>Looks like.

 

[... et al.]

letterman@invalid.com wrote:

> "... et al." wrote:
>
>> Franc Zabkar wrote:
>>
>>> I'm experiencing invalid page faults associated with MSDXM.OCX in the
>>> Windows\System directory. My file version is 6.4.09.1120. This file is
>>> the "Windows Media Player 2 ActiveX Control".
>>>
>>> MSDXM OCX 843,804 09-05-01 8:00p MSDXM.OCX
>> Looks like 6.4.*09*.x is for WinNT, 6.4.*07*.x is for Windows.
>> See <http://support.microsoft.com/kb/832353/> for info and (i
>> think) latest versions.
>>
> Yeah, but this file is for Win2K, Win server 2003, and XP, not for
> Win98. I just checked into it because I get this error from time to
> time also. I downloaded the file and opened it with Winzip (even
> though it's a .EXE). Since this is a Win98 group, why would it be of
> interest to anyone using 98?

The page you get from the link i gave above, give some info that
explains that [msDXM.ocx] 6.4.09.x versions was intended for them
three WinNT 5.x OS versions, while WinME (and by extension also
Win98xE) was still adviced to use 6.4.07.x versions.

That page has links to three different downloads and even if
Win98 isn't mentioned, if you are using (Win98FE or) Win98SE, you
should download the update-installer said to be for WinME.
'Windows Media 9.x, 7.1 and 6.4 Update(KB832353) (for WinME)':
<http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=0198F4C8-7135-4421-90CA-61C92AD35FB3>
That download, [WindowsMedia-KB832353-x86-ENU.exe], or the
alternate unofficial Win98 update-installer Franc used,
[MP832353.exe], will contain a 6.4.07.x version of [msDXM.ocx]
that will hopefully cure you just like it did Franc.

Since any 6.4.09.x will always be higher then any 6.4.07.y, the
update-installers /hopefully/ *should* refuse to overwrite the
wrong file so you will have a to manually extract and replace the
[msDXM.ocx] files, just like you seemed to be doing.

The updates also contain [WMPCore.dll] (for Windows Media 07),
and [WMP.dll] (for Windows Media 09) files, but like Rick wrote
your current installed versions might be higher and in that case
should not be replaced.


--
Nah-ah. I'm staying out of this. ... Now, here's my opinion.

Please followup in the newsgroup.
E-mail address is invalid due to spam-control.