How to Install Mozilla Firefox 2.0: Windows95

Gateway Desktops essential 466
June 11, 2010 at 10:52:05
Specs: Windows 95, Pentium III 866 / 512MB / 40GB
After much experimenting, I have finally succeeded in getting Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.20 (the final release of Mozilla Firefox 2.0) to install on my Windows 95 system. As you may know, Firefox 2.0 is only officially supported under the legacy systems Windows NT 4.0 and Windows 98, but because Windows 95 and Windows 98 are so similar I knew there must be a way to hack Windows 95 to run it. This way you can use Firefox without using the bloated interface of Windows 98.

I am sure there is a way to hack Firefox 3.0 as well, as with KernelEX you can run Firefox 3.0 on Windows 98. But I am not here yet. I just finished figuring out how to get 2.0 to run on Windows 95!

Here's how I did it. Follow the procedure below exactly as I have laid out in steps.

ALL of the below files are mandatory for this to work!

1) Download and install Download details: Platform SDK Comctl32 Redistributables 5.80.2614.3600 (x86) (direct link) (50comupd.exe) (September 14, 1999)
--> Select NO when it prompts to restart your computer.

2) Download and install Download details: Platform SDK Redistributable: DCOM95 Redistributables (direct link) (DC95Inst.exe) (June 1, 2001)
--> Select NO when it prompts to restart your computer.

3) Download and install Microsoft Libraries Update (speu.exe) (1999)

4) Download and install Windows Sockets 2.0 for Windows 95 (direct link) (ws2setup.exe) (April 13, 1998)
--> Select YES when it prompts to restart your computer.

5) Upon rebooting, modify your registry as follows. Do not make any other changes to your registry that I have not laid out here! I am not responsible!

(a) Change the "Version" value from "Windows 95" to "Windows 98",

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/SOFTWARE/Microsoft/Windows/CurrentVersion/Version
"Windows 98"]

(b) and change the "VersionNumber" from "4.00.1111" to "4.10.2222" (depending on your release of Windows 95, your original 4.00.xxxx may vary from mine, I have OSR 2.0 from August 1996)

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/SOFTWARE/Microsoft/Windows/CurrentVersion
"4.10.2222"]

6) These two changes to the registry will fool the Mozilla Firefox installer into thinking it is installing on Windows 98, when in fact it is running on Windows 95.

7) Now download the Mozilla Firefox 2.0 installer from Mozilla.org's FTP.

8) Now install Mozilla Firefox. Select Custom Install, and unselect "DOM Inspector" and "Quality Feedback Agent". These are unneeded tools and will cause your computer to crash. I have figured this out from experience!

9) After Mozilla Firefox installs, you will be prompted to finish and automatically run Firefox. Uncheck the box and click finish.

10) You're almost done! Now, go to Start > Find > Files or Folders, and do a search for "nsSearchService.js" and nsSafebrowsingApplication.js". You need to delete both of these files before Firefox will run properly! Firefox will appear to load but is guaranteed to crash if you do not delete these two files before running it! I have figured this out, also from experience!

After deleting these two files, run Firefox. You're all set to go.


See More: How to Install Mozilla Firefox 2.0: Windows95

Report •

#1
June 11, 2010 at 11:33:15
It's 2010, why are you still wasting your time with Win95?

Report •

#2
June 11, 2010 at 11:42:15
"It's 2010, why are you still wasting your time with Win95?"

Because it's 2010 and virus writers and hackers aren't still wasting their time with Win95. And with all the unnecessary services in XP and up, it's no wonder they are so insecure.

I love how everytime a new version of Windows comes out, all of a sudden the previous release is junk, just so Microsoft can make another buck. Thank God for Linux and open-source software.

Windows 7 was barely released and people were already bad-mouthing Windows XP.

I don't need the "Microsoft Upgrade Treadmill" machine to keep the money flowing to Microsoft. If what I have works, why upgrade?

And do you realize just how FAST Win95 is on a Pentium III with 512MB RAM? Blazing!


Report •

#3
June 11, 2010 at 18:19:15
In fairness to "sdfox 7" this is the W95/98 forum so it is to be expected that folk on here will still be working W95 isn't it?.

The comment in #1 could appear on all the forums dedicated to non-current operating systems way back to DOS. It would look a bit odd if there were responses on a vintage car forum suggesting that they were wasting their time with a 1914 vehicle because they could get new car.

I could argue that football (for example) is a waste of time because I have no interest in it, but a lot of folk enjoy it. One persons idea of time wasting is totally different to that of another.

I try to keep my ole W98SE running "because I want to" and the posters information could be well received by other folk doing the same with W95 - so on behalf of them thanks "sdfox 7" for the info!


Google is NOT the only Search Engine!


Report •

Related Solutions

#4
June 11, 2010 at 19:00:58
"I don't need the "Microsoft Upgrade Treadmill" machine to keep the money flowing to Microsoft"

Who pays for software?

"And do you realize just how FAST Win95 is on a Pentium III with 512MB RAM? Blazing!"

Yes I do & I also realize that a P3 w/512 will run Win2K, WinXP & many Linux distros very well too. Maybe not "blazing" but they would run well enough. And I wouldn't have to resort to a boatload of hacks to get software to run on them.


Report •

#5
June 11, 2010 at 19:47:07
Have to agree w/Derek on the "One persons idea of time wasting is totally different to that of another" comment. Obviously, sdfox7 has went to a lot of trouble to accomplish this feat. What I'd really like though is to see someone figuring a way to port it to Win3x (I already know...ain't gonna happen)

"Channeling the spirit of jboy..."


Report •

#6
June 11, 2010 at 19:56:32
Say what you will jam. It's like telling me my 66 Mustang isn't as good as a 2010. If I wanted a 2010 model I would have one.

Also, I see a lot of your posts to others, and you seem many times to be condescending and arrogant. It really doesn't matter to me.

If you feel this material is irrelevant then maybe you are in the wrong forum. This is the Windows 95/98 forum. There are other forums i.e. 2000, XP, etc for you and other people who feel that new is always better.

T-R-A:

It may not be so far fetched to get Firefox to run on Win3x..we need to see if Win32s would accomodate 32-bit Firefox..apparently Win32s enables the use of some 32-bit software on Win3x..if not natively, maybe their is a way to decompile Win32s, etc


Report •

#7
June 17, 2010 at 08:53:20
"It may not be so far fetched to get Firefox to run on Win3x..we need to see if Win32s would accomodate 32-bit Firefox..apparently Win32s enables the use of some 32-bit software on Win3x..if not natively, maybe their is a way to decompile Win32s, etc"

I can see programming isn't your strong suit, either. Win32s is an extremely limited subset of the full 32-bit API, even compared to NT 3.1 (which Firefox does not run on). It does not "enable 32-bit applications to run" per se, it provides a limited API that programmers have to specifically program to. Win32s does not "accommodate" anything; programs are written to accommodate it. What good would decompiling the Win32s subsystem do you? With the amount of work you'd have to hack back into it, you might as well write a Windows 95 clone.


Report •

#8
August 9, 2010 at 11:35:06
hmm, let's see if I can try installing and running Firefox 2 on a Win95c machine (osr2.5) version 4.03.1214 [with usb supplement update installed] using the steps sdfox 7 mentioned.
I'll post my results in a week or two if I get the time.

Report •

#9
August 11, 2010 at 11:56:51
One word, Sweet!

Thanks!

It's 2010, why are you still wasting your time with Win95?

Why am I still wasting my time with System 1.1g on a mac 512K? because I can, what more reason do you need?

I still have a 386 SX16 with WFWG 3.11 installed, running IE 5, why? Cause I can.

PowerMac 9600(1 ghz G4)
512mb RAM
50gb SCSI
ATi 9200 PCI


Report •

#10
August 12, 2010 at 09:27:33
Confirmed. I got the latest Firefox2/Bon Echo 2.0.0.22pre nightly build to install under a Win95 OSR2.5 computer using the tips sdfox 7 mentioned.

Though the very first time launching FF2 on W95 (or when running it with a brand new user profile) will make it crash for sure (but only once). But subsequent launches WILL get it to run under Win95c.


Report •

#11
August 13, 2010 at 21:17:57
"(a) Change the "Version" value from "Windows 95" to "Windows 98",

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/SOFTWARE/Microsoft/Windows/CurrentVersion/Version
"Windows 98"]"

No need to do this at all.

"(b) and change the "VersionNumber" from "4.00.1111" to "4.10.2222" (depending on your release of Windows 95, your original 4.00.xxxx may vary from mine, I have OSR 2.0 from August 1996)

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/SOFTWARE/Microsoft/Windows/CurrentVersion
"4.10.2222"]"

AND no need to change this either.

"6) These two changes to the registry will fool the Mozilla Firefox installer into thinking it is installing on Windows 98, when in fact it is running on Windows 95."

Actually sdfox 7, the Firefox2 setup installer works fine under Win95 WITHOUT making the registry changes to the Windows version. The setup program does not really fail on a Win95 system if you retain the Win95 version number in the registry. I've found out about this myself, tested and verified on an old Win95c computer. Just install the required Win95 patches, run the Firefox2 setup program, do custom install, uncheck the two installation options, finish install, delete the "nsSearchService.js" and "nsSafebrowsingApplication.js" files from the \Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\components\ folder and then launch Firefox 2. Done.


Report •

#12
August 13, 2010 at 23:18:08
Thanks for clarifying.

I do know that Flash Player 8 requires a registry hack to run on Windows 95, as it will refuse to install without it. So it seems that I may have incorrectly assumed the same for Firefox.

Thanks for clearing this up!


Report •

#13
August 13, 2010 at 23:28:49
I would also like to confirm that this procedure will work on ALL versions of Windows 95. There were 8 different versions (I have them all) and have experienced no problems on any of my test systems.

I originally tested this on my desktop with OSR2.0, but I have done this on my Toshiba laptop running the original version of Windows 95 with FAT16 and no patches. No problems. Just make sure you install 50comupd.exe, DC95Inst.exe, speu.exe, and ws2setup.exe.

If you're interested, I'm actually posting from that very laptop right now. It's a Tecra 500CDT with 64MB and is actually quite speedy with Windows 95 and can surprisingly play mp3's with WinPlay3.


Report •

#14
August 14, 2010 at 06:32:50
I assume that putting Firefox on W95 is a matter of personal browser preference. I suppose Firefox 2 might be a tad more secure than the IE that came with W95 but am unsure how much. Both are outdated.

Daylight Saving Time


Report •

#15
August 14, 2010 at 12:23:25
True, both browsers aren't new anymore. However, IE 5.5 seems to work fine for me, I can still use it for online banking, etc. and while it isn't apparent to me now, Firefox 2 will probably outlive IE 5.x as a useful browser since the final release of it is 8 years newer.

Don't forget, there are also other alternatives such as Opera, K-Meleon, etc that will also work. And I find that Opera also seems much faster to load than Firefox.

However, Firefox is a good choice because it is the second most popular choice behind Internet Explorer and is likely to comply with all internet standards


Report •

#16
August 14, 2010 at 12:39:44
I still boot up my old W98SE at times and am using IE6 and Opera latest.
Opera still lists W98SE as an acceptable OS but I didn't think it listed W95.

Did you have to work a fiddle to get Opera onto W95? IMO W98SE is really only the final version of what was marketted early as W95 in order to fill MS's coffers, so compatibility issues shouldn't be "too" tricky.

I won't mention WinME because I regard it largely as W98SE messed up. The WinME defragger was about it's only plus point - way faster than the Win98SE version and simply copied over the same file name in W98SE. It might even run on W95 - never tried.

Daylight Saving Time


Report •

#17
August 14, 2010 at 12:46:11
As of right now, Opera 9.5 DOES run natively on Windows 95.

Just follow the below link:

Opera 9.5 on Windows 95 requires Windows Sockets (Winsock) 2.0 - Opera 9.5 no longer supports Windows Sockets 1.0

As far as Opera 10.x, I will have to try it.


Report •

#18
August 14, 2010 at 12:51:14
LOL. Not sure which version of my #16 you read because I was still editing it when your #17 arrived - doubt it makes much odds tho.

Interesting link, which shows just what can be done.
I gave away my old W95 tho - shame on me!

Daylight Saving Time


Report •

#19
August 14, 2010 at 17:03:08
"WinME defragger was about it's only plus point - way faster than the Win98SE version and simply copied over the same file name in W98SE. It might even run on W95 - never tried."

WinME Defrag mostly works under Win95, Derek. Tested and confirmed to work on uncompressed FAT12, FAT16 and FAT32 formatted partitions. Just don't use WinME Defrag on DriveSpace3 compressed volumes as it may cause problems.

"I gave away my old W95 tho - shame on me!"

Eh no bigggie. If you still have the W95 CD, you can install it on any machine you like (if it can handle it). I have W95 ver. C (osr2.5) installed on my relative's eMachine computer along with the Win2000 OS. Now the eMachine PC is a dual-boot kind that can load either W2k or W95c; I have 2 physical hard drives on there both FAT32 formatted.

"As far as Opera 10.x, I will have to try it."

Update: well sdfox 7, only Opera 10 versions from 10.0 to 10.54 may work under 95 but you will need the WinME version of the msimg32.dll file in order for Opera 10 to work properly. Win95/98 users must replace or install the MSIMG32.DLL file with the ME version for Opera 10 to work.

Opera 10.60 and higher do NOT work under Win95/98/ME, unfortunately, as it will fail to load on startup. However, for those using W98/ME with KernelEx 4.5b2 installed, that version of Kernlex might get Opera 10.60 or higher to work on there.

Btw guys, if you need all the existing non-critical and critical Win95 updates, look no further than MDGx's Software Essentials page (it even mentions the unofficial Win95 OSR2 SPs).


Report •

#20
August 15, 2010 at 06:03:43
Thanks so much for this Firefox 2.0x tip for Win95. Worked like a charm on my Compaq DeskPro Pentium200 with 64mb. However, when I tried it on my 486 DeskPro M machine I kept getting "insufficient hard drive space to install " messages. Yet, I had plenty of free disk space (over 100mb). I finally figured out it was Firefox's crude way of saying I had insufficient memory! I only had 16mb on that machine. I now realize Firefox 2.0x requires 64mb.

Report •

#21
August 15, 2010 at 10:58:27
There is probably an official way to bypass Firefox's system requirement.

However, until I figure that one out, you can use my unofficial method and simply copy the folder over from another working installation and then just execute firefox.exe (of course, the machine you are copying to must have the above files 50comupd.exe, DC95Inst.exe, speu.exe, and ws2setup.exe).

If the desired machine has internet access and a modern browser like IE 5.5 (most e-mail providers require a minimum of IE 5 with 128-bit encryption to access webmail) then you can simply make a copy of the Firefox folder and ZIP it, then e-mail it and download it. Then extract the files to "C:\Mozilla Firefox" (this folder will not exist so you will need to create it).

If no internet access on the desired machine the you can burn the folder to CD (a waste of a CD unless you are also including other items).

You will still need to delete "nsSearchService.js" and nsSafebrowsingApplication.js".

This method is how I got Firefox to run on NT 3.x and NT 3.5x.


Report •

#22
January 9, 2011 at 10:09:02
LoneCrusader

Sorry for posting so late...I didn't realize this post was still open.

Flash 8 will install fine on Windows 95, however, you MUST download the plug-in version for Firefox. There is no tweaking -- registry or otherwise-- required; I've installed on a clean-install system with IE 3.x and no Firefox installed.

The ActiveX Flash version for Internet Explorer

http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/ge...

is generally rejected by most websites including Youtube. However, the plug-in Flash version (posted again below)

http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/ge...

works fine on YouTube with Firefox 1.x and 2.x.


Report •

Ask Question