in my opinion it is original ... this is msdn 111 version if you extract the PRECOPY2 file it gives the same error as many other originals anyway all pre Windows 2000 / NT iso files are very hard to know ... you can never be 100% sure
... and Covid 19 is not contagious ... and nobody landed on the moon Ignore facts is so easy - do you have original Microsoft Shipment CD's for Windows 98 a (first edition) with msdn 111 PRECOPY2.cab ? i have original CD's for similar all languages (this shipment CD's are all mastered by MS with AutoCRC and they are all valid) all this 111 PRECOPY2.cab files for all languages can be extracted without errors !!!! languages i have [ARA], [CAT], [CHS], [CHT], [CSY], [DAN] [DEU], [ELL], [ESN], [EUQ], [FIN], [FRA] [HEB], [HUN], [ITA], [JPN], [KOR], [NLD] [NOR], [PLK], [PTB], [PTG], [RUS], [SKY] [SLV], [SVE], [THA], [TRK]
en_win98_a_111_msdn_cd_19980511 0a1bed3d0d0f1b4798e839b00e92bd54c335a5d2 identical mistakes! I know very well how you get all the iso files ... you have taken almost all the files from the user Thread and many others, you have published them in order and then one day you have deleted all the links and made believe that you are a guru ... just read all the posts well to understand your story ... if you are honest you should put them all back in here like others have done for you before ... but you are just a charlatan!
don't worry, I have them all too .. maybe you're right and it's not original ... however the reasons you have given do not give any certainty if it is homemade ... I would say it was done very, very well ...
Very suspicious setupx.dll file in precopy2.cab... I'm sure -- this file is different from the original. Can you check? But I do not know how to pack the precopy2.cab so similar to the original
the cd is exactly the same as the CD MSDN INTL-1998-CD75-10 the only thing that differs is the SHA1 of the file "setupx.dll" even if it has the exact same date the only thing that makes you think of a fake is how the cd was created ... with CDIMAGE V2.11 (11/10/95 TM) however certainty cannot be known exactly ... also because you create a perfect copy and only edit that file?
your mentioned original CD has sha1 a7bc2b427763d622e65ea89c28459a85ce7aa4dd *INTL-1998-CD75-10.iso AutoCRL log for this iso Code: MSCDCRC 4.11 CD-ROM Disc Verification Utility Copyright (C) Microsoft, 1992-2001 MSCDCRC: Verifying file ...\INTL-1998-CD75-10.iso (448,339,968 bytes) 100% complete MSCDCRC: AutoCRC is 0x57FE2DBE MSCDCRC: This file contains a VALID computed CRC indicating the contents of the file are correct. original sha1 894B44C8DCDB9353FABD9F8A7A52C1E524AE9F07 *INTL-1998-CD75-10.iso\RUSSIAN\WIN98\PRECOPY2.CAB fake from 6b0ca732310fa6503e29cd21bc5f52f9420cf06a *4.10.1998__x86fre_Win98_ru-ru-rtm-MSDN.iso\WIN98\PRECOPY2.CAB obviously you have - either non original INTL-1998-CD75-10 shipment cd - or you lie coz you say the cd is exactly the same as the CD MSDN INTL-1998-CD75-10 please stop publishing you nonsense and keep this thread serious by the way: nobody can remake a original iso with CDIMAGE V2.11 (11/10/95 TM) coz - afaik an original CDIMAGE V2.11.EXE never leaked - the original CDIMAGE V2.11.EXE has bugs wich create non ISO9006 confome Iso header (independend from the used switches) - all patched CDIMAGE versions create different iso header (for 98-a.iso the header is always 1 sector smaler than isos masered by Microsoft wit CDIMAGE V2.11 (11/10/95 TM) -> thats why nobody can recreate valid isos with CDIMAGE V2.11 and that aso a reason why 4.10.1998__x86fre_Win98_ru-ru-rtm-MSDN.iso is fake please stop to insult me
homebrew isos a forbidden on MDL please read the rules we can discuss about hombrew or original but images but not publishing homebrew's the www is full of faks (homebrew) < xp (felt about more then 90%) we need not more here
OK. I just want to understand if these are originals, and immediately remove the links to them, if it is fake.
A0D4507C1E133CA71D9615087B55EDC63D9107B3 *[RUS] win98_a_101_rtl-setup_cd1_19980515.iso this seems to be a valid ISO mastered by Microsoft with original CDIMAGE V2.11 (11/10/95 TM) -> afaik nobody can remake this iso with patched CDIMAGE versions (see my post above about bugs / non ISO9006 conforme iso header) yep exact
only some rare win98_a use CDIMAGE V2.11 e.g. Code: BF4E15ADF8B223CD3EFA2C1DD4B8396FE59027A8 *[CSY] win98_a_101_rtl-setup_cd1_19980515.iso EDB403F24F4F0E7105CD32435FF08AC2CD9EBAAC *[CSY] win98_a_102_upgrade___cd1_19980515.iso 291AF3B1987BB6433812B8091E608CB5EDF95107 *[NLD] win98_a_102_upgrade___cd1_19980515.iso 21A9A464C15294805770925D6AC76C93772F481B *[PLK] win98_a_102_upgrade___cd1_19980515.iso A0D4507C1E133CA71D9615087B55EDC63D9107B3 *[RUS] win98_a_101_rtl-setup_cd1_19980515.iso most other iso mastered ISO9006 conform with CDIMAGE 2.38 (08/27/97 TM) but with different switches (some with -o some without, some with joliet extension some without)
... very, very interesting... I made a 1:1 copy of the A0D4507C1E133CA71D9615087B55EDC63D9107B3 *[RUS] win98_a_101_rtl-setup_cd1_19980515.iso with cdimage 2.27 by patching the version string and timezone. It means -- -- or [RUS] win98_a_101_rtl-setup_cd1_19980515.iso is fake too, -- or cdimage 2.27 has same bugs and 2.11 images can be remade.
PS It just surprises me that the 115 and 101 images are made by different versions of the sdimage, although they are made on same day...
I still agree with the view of "vanelle", of course, this is just my personal or a certain circle of people's views. There is no need to argue about this topic. some people are not worth sharing, I told you a long time ago