The man credited with finding one of the Internet's "fatal flaws" claims that his discovery has been hyped by British security experts. Read more
El Paso (Texas) - The United States Air Force has grounded its supersonic T-38C training jet after its second fatal crash in eight days. Read more
A mysterious Playstation 3 error has reporedly caused problems for some users during faulty firmware installations, but Sony has said it isn't "aware of this issue." Read more
Effective June 1, the Redmond, Wash.-based software company has added a provision to its Software Assurance maintenance program that entitles customers to install a server software product on a "cold" server at no charge in a disaster scenario, such as a fatal server crash. Read more
Three dramatically different builds face off in show of performance, defining the real value of each. Our mainstream system is designed to meet the needs of most users. Who should spend more and who can live with less? Read more
On this, the second to last day of our System Builder Marathon series, we add a $500 gaming PC to the mix. It's not going to be as quick as our other two builds, but we think Paul was able to get some serious value from this thing. Read more
We're following up yesterday's $4,500 behemoth with a more affordable $1,500 mid-range build. Let's see what sort of performance (and overclocking headroom) you can get when you spend one third of the money. Read more
This month's System Builder Marathon spreads the system prices out even further to $4,500, $1,500, and $500. Is today’s $4,500 system really worth three times as much as an upper-mainstream performance machine? Read more
Tom's Hardware UK and Ireland Forums »
Windows 95/98/ME
»
Windows 95/98/Me General Discussion »
Fatal exception 0E at 0028:C027E799 in VXD VMM (06)...
| Bottom | |
|---|---|
| Author |
Thread : Fatal exception 0E at 0028:C027E799 in VXD VMM (06)...
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) Does anyone have any idea about this one:
|
|
Related Product
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) http://search.support.microsoft.co [...] &spid=1139 MSKB
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) OK, I did scanreg /opt /fix, we'll see what happens. I don't think it's the size, though, becasue my current values are:
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) OK, thanks for that, but none of this seems to quite apply to my case. Searching Google for the "0028:C027E799" string only returns one match. I suppose I'll have to search user forums on some websites?
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) OK, scanreg /opt /fix has not fixed the issue...
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) If you can't find your exact numbers, try the solutions to similar "VXD
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) Yeah, I've gotten a couple of hits for "0028:C027E799" in google newsgroups, but that didn't really help me out. As for other VMM (06) errors - people get them in all kinds of situations, most of which don't apply to this case. I haven't been able to find anything very helpful.
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) Uhuh. That is a tough one. Colorado is always looking for peccadilloes
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote:
|
|
More Information
|
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?) It seems I've found a workaround for the problem. The workaround is, instead of going through the Start Menu and logging off, to create a shortcut on the desktop that executes the logoff through the following command:
|
