Logitech E-Mail Video Files Don't Play on 64-Bit Windows 8

[Mystere]

I'm wondering if I install an older version of Windows on my computer through Virtual Box or some other emulator, maybe I could view the files that way.

The problem here is probably not Windows 8, but rather because it's 64 bit. The x64 architecture does not allow 16 bit apps to run from a 64 bit OS mode. You could probably run a 32 bit version of Windows 8 and view it, although installing an earlier version of Windows would probably be more certain to work.

Just make sure to configure virtual box for a 32 bit VM.

You also have to expect that video playback may not be ideal, but since it's so old that is probably not an issue. I'm not sure if Virtual Box allows this, but I know other VM software allows you to record a session, so you may be able to record the video playback and then view it normally in windows.

 

[DavidY]

This may not help you to see the files, but it seems from the Logitech Forum page below that the software used was Quickcam 5.6.1 (or some earlier version, presumably).

logitech .exe video files - Logitech Forums

Edit: If you're trying a VM, and you wanted to see if it works in Windows 8 (ish) you could try installing the 32-bit ISO version of Windows 8.1 Preview in VirtualBox/ VMWare/etc.. It will only work until the middle of January 2014, but you will be able to test it and that may give you time to find a way to work around it.

http://www.eightforums.com/tutorials/27188-windows-8-1-preview-download-install.html

Download Windows 8.1 Preview ISO files - Microsoft Windows

 

[XweAponX]

I'm wondering if I install an older version of Windows on my computer through Virtual Box or some other emulator, maybe I could view the files that way.

I'm using Parallels for Windows. It might work, I'm sure windows XP will allow you to open it. You have no other machines in your house or maybe friends with XP?

I always keep a few machines with XP for stuff like this, mostly loaded with conversion software of all kinds, Video converters, Sound Taxi, and every file compression format in existence that I can find. And Image file formats, there are all kinds of odd ISO image formats that need specific software to open.

 

[XweAponX]

David- I don't think that software can open an EXE video file, they are made to run by themselves. I don't know if the quickcam program can edit them or open already made videos. Also, I did a search for that exact program, did not find it. I'll look again.


I found a copy of it, but it may be a virus. Checking it. OK it is good! Here is the link:

https://a5-downloads.phpnuke.org/en/c149126/logitech-quickcam-express-free-download-full-review/

Click the top "Free Download" button and on the next page, click the "Mirror 1" link.

The Mirror 1 Link is blocked by ESET, so the site that is holding the file may be malicious, the file itself is, however, clean.

 

[fafhrd]

ftp://ftp.logitech.com/pub/techsupport/quickcam/qc561enu.exe

Here's the link for logitech QuickCam Express 5.6.1 executable - I guess enu means en(glish)u(SA) - dated 07/11/2001, so it should be ok in XP at least, and it should be a win32 program, and Lo! - it does run in 64-bit Windows 8 with compatiblity settings for XP, installs the webcam support program, but fails to install the cam driver due to not knowing anything about Windows versions beyond XP Sp3.

There's still a load of stuff for d/l at

ftp://ftp.logitech.com/pub/techsupport/quickcam/

So on this experience, why not right-click the executables, and run the compatibility troubleshooter, and it will hopefully try to run these self-playing .exe movies as if in XP Sp3*? You can specify to run in that mode if it does not do it automatically. Good luck!

*This was suggested in post #3 by XweAponX

​

 

[Hopachi]

The other issue, is do you have your 16-bit support turned on? If this is not available in 64 bit Windows 8, then you'll have to use 32 bit Windows 8. It';s just mroe argument as to the flexibility that 32 bit OSes still have over 64. A 64 bit OS should ENCOMPASS all previous instruction sets, 4 bit, 8 bit, 16-bit - NOT lock them out.

64-bit versions of Windows do not support 16-bit components, 16-bit processes, or 16-bit applications

4bit?
8bit?
-> that's a bit exaggerated don't you think...

16bit on x64:
VM's will help out, the easy way: just use Win98 or XP.

 

[fafhrd]

God knows where this 16-bit meme came from in this thread - the Win32 API has been around for 20 years now, since it arrived with NT 3.1. The OP stated that the files were about a dozen years old - that takes us back to Windows Me and Win2k, with XP arriving in October 2001 all win32 based.
In 1993, we didn't have the Web, let alone WebCams! If you were able to attach a camera to your PC under Windows 3.1, it would have to be by parallel port - Serial ports could not transmit fast enough, and USB support did not arrive until after 1995.

 

[XweAponX]

real 32 bit processing was in Windows for Workgroups 3.1.1, there was a setting in the Control Panel to turn it on. It wasn't there in Windows 3.1.1. Windows 95 had 32 bit on by default, but could handle 16 bit. The point is, if the processor can handle 16 bit, there is no reason to clip the OS to not allow the CPU to handle 16 bit apps. Which is my complaint with 64 bit OSes used in Work environments and why I always install 32 bit OSes for Offices. If said Office was going to do Digital Animation, then it would be 64 bit, no argument.

I only tossed in the 4 and 8 bit scenarios, I don't remember if my original IBM PC XT did 4 bit, it was an 8 bit processor in a 4 bit bus or was a 16 bit processor in an 8 bit bus? The point was that all Intel processors from the 80486 down, had the instruction sets from all previous processors built in.

The Pentium stepped away from that right? Able to handle 16 bit processes but made for 32 bit? But all of the processors I've used both Intel and AMD with both 32 bit and 64 bit bus, have all been able to handle 16 bit.

But all of this argument is not going to get this guy's video's to play, he needs a PC with the 16 bit subsystem working in order to play the EXE files.

 

[fafhrd]

What did they used to say about Windows - something like:

- a 32-bit shell on a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit OS written for a 4-bit processor by a 2-bit company that does not care 1 bit about its customers.

Still, that does not take away the fact that Logitech QuickCam video emails from 2001 run on 64-bit Windows 8 (which does not support 16-bit Windows executables) with XP Sp3 compatibility settings:

 

[XweAponX]

You got that to work using Compatibility?

We need to find out if the OP tried that. If he can't It may be that the EXE video file may have gotten corrupted over the years. Apparently it is important he gets it opened.

I thought I had read on a Logitech discussion site that some of those Logitech Video Files are 16 bit - That's why I suggested it.

 

[fafhrd]

The Logitech support guru got it wrong - by 2000, no companies were producing 16-bit Windows apps, commercially, at any rate.

The OP has apparently moved on to Logitech support forums to be helped there instead. Re: Logitech Video E-Mail Made from Old Webcam Doe... - Logitech Forums

It may be that the Quickcam webcam software needs to be installed (also in compatibility mode, as I have done) to supply various dlls and ocxs that are not necessarily around now in Windows 8. I gave the links to the Logitech FTP site above.

It has all been "Virtual machines" since Windows 3.11 and NT 3.1 anyway - I agree that it is pointless censoring 64-bit systems so they cannot run a 16-bit VM natively within the OS, like they run a 32-bit VM, but Microsoft tends to be spiteful like that.

Windows 8 even has an 11kB win32hlp.exe file in %windir% that has been written to inform the user that Windows 8 does not open old format windows.hlp files any more. If this system file is replaced by the XP win32hlp.exe file (261kB), old windows.hlp files open perfectly in Windows 8 - how puerile is that?!

 

[Mystere]

.hlp file support was removed for security reasons. It's really old, and has very little support anymore. If you need it, you can download it directly from Microsoft. I would not suggest replacing it with the XP version:

Download Windows Help program (WinHlp32.exe) for Windows 8 from Official Microsoft Download Center

This is what they say:

"Windows Help (WinHlp32.exe) is a Help program that has been included with Microsoft Windows versions starting with the Microsoft Windows 3.1 operating system. However, the Windows Help program has not had a major update for many releases and no longer meets Microsoft's standards. Therefore, starting with the release of Windows Vista and continuing in Windows 8, the Windows Help program will not ship as a feature of Windows."

 

[fafhrd]

.hlp file support was removed for security reasons. It's really old, and has very little support anymore. If you need it, you can download it directly from Microsoft. I would not suggest replacing it with the XP version:

Download Windows Help program (WinHlp32.exe) for Windows 8 from Official Microsoft Download Center

This is what they say:

"Windows Help (WinHlp32.exe) is a Help program that has been included with Microsoft Windows versions starting with the Microsoft Windows 3.1 operating system. However, the Windows Help program has not had a major update for many releases and no longer meets Microsoft's standards. Therefore, starting with the release of Windows Vista and continuing in Windows 8, the Windows Help program will not ship as a feature of Windows."

Unfortunately, the installer from Microsoft does not work, neither for me nor some other users - it fails with the useful message - "This update is not applicable to your computer":

Installing WinHelp32.exe on Windows 8 Pro - Microsoft Community

It's worth reading IMO.

Fortunately the easy answer was given on Eightforums, by SIW2 (http://www.eightforums.com/software...e-legacy-windows-help-system-windows-8-a.html), in reply to a question by myself, some time ago, before a Windows 8 installer for this had been released, as noted in the Microsoft Community link above.

The hard way to install the Windows8-RT-KB917607-x64.msu is described thus:

Alternatively - use Control Panel/Add language to install & enable English (US) - took ages, required reboot, showed error message (failure configuring Windows) but finally worked. (NB. Before rebooting, ensure you know how to enter any special characters in your login password on a US English keyboard.)
Then with US English enabled, Windows8-RT-KB917607-x64.msu installs and you get a more up to date version of winhlp32.exe.
Is Windows8-RT-KB917607-x64.msu enabled only for users of English (US)? It looks like Microsoft's quality control has seriously slipped with Windows 8, particularly with updates.

Security reasons? What security reasons? That Microsoft does not want people running legacy programs that used .hlp files, perhaps? Only for US citizens, perhaps (I have UK English on mine)?

As I suggested earlier, "Sheer bloodymindedness" comes to mind.

 

[Mystere]

Here is information regarding the security issues:

How a malicious help file can install a spyware keylogger | Naked Security

Microsoft has "fixed" this in the most recent help file viewer, but only by disabling a lot of functionality. You can read about what that is in the knowledgebase article under Known issues:

I cannot open Help that was created in the Windows Help format (WinHlp32.exe)

Essentially, .hlp files have a lot of power that can be exploited by malware, which is why MS has removed it from Windows. They still allow you to install, but it's better to have the few people that need it install it, rather than having it enabled by everyone by default.

You really need to stop thinking that everything Microsoft does is to annoy you. They have very real reasons for doing the things they do.

 

[fafhrd]

So .hlp files from a spurious source may hold a trojan. They may be subverted by dark hackers to exploit your system. So can .dll files and every other executable. And so can .chm* files, the currently favoured way of delivering help to windows applications.
*https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=c...&ie=UTF-8#es_sm=122&psj=1&q=chm+file+exploits

I have antimalware programs to handle exploits, and regular updates. I do not expect to have valid programs nannied out of usefulness when Microsoft policy decides the old format is no longer supported, even though they actively develop a safe version of that program as a Windows update! I like to receive updates, it gives me a safe feeling - but to have a fake stub program to tell me that an old version is not supported, when the back room boys do update the very same program - it is a lie. I am annoyed when lied to. Should I not be?

 

[Mystere]

Yes, chm files can also have exploits, but not to the level that .hlp files can, and .chm files are already handled by the existing MSHTML zone blocking mechanism, while .hlp files are not.

They don't need two vulnerable formats to maintain.

Windows, since Windows 2003 has been about reducing the attack surface. Things are not installed by default that aren't needed. Why not just run a free program to convert from .hlp to .chm? I mean, come on... seriously?

 

[fafhrd]

Seriously - I have the same vulnerability to rampantly dangerous .hlp files as I had for 12 years in XP without incident, correct that, that I still have in XP when I use it occasionally, and I do not want to open .hlp files from unknown sources - just my old applications, and then just occasionally.

Why oh why should I make more work for myself? Why should Microsoft want me to? And why do you want me to?

If I screw my system up, I don't go complaining to Microsoft I fix it myself, with a little help if necessary from like-minded individuals who also do not want to reinvent the wheel if there is some convenient repair method.

The fact is that by creating - Windows8-RT-KB917607-x64.msu and Windows8-RT-KB917607-x86.msu, Microsoft does want to have two vulnerable formats to maintain. It could have just said to the user base that it would not continue to support this format.

As such, the %windir%\winhlp32.exe stub that appears in Windows 8 is probably just a little worse for Microsoft than updating it via the normal Windows update channel would be, since idiots like myself use old working versions of the file rather than the official update, thus giving the black hats a better chance to exploit me (as if they would).

And if I do get my visual basic for applications help files converted to CHM and my ancient, cherished copy of Publisher 98 fails to render them in context properly, are you going to help me sort it out? I thought not! Are Microsoft?

 

[Mystere]

Whatever, dude.

You have to accept that this is a general purpose OS designed for the vast majority of users, not the tiny percentage of people like you. Most people don't know how to protect their systems. Most people don't know to do the things you do. MS feels that power users are smart enough to make the OS do what they want, while non-power users should be given the more secure configuration.

When you're in the minority, you can't expect to find exactly what you want. For instance, i'm wiring my house for Ethernet, and I've been looking for a bundled 2RG6/2Cat6/2Fiber with jacketing, and this seems impossible to find. I can find it without jacket, I can find cat 5e with jacketing.. but oh well... I have to live with it.

 

[fafhrd]

Perhaps it is an impossible dream, but just because 5e cannot be certified for Gigabit ethernet like cat 6 can, in your home, you will probably get it (Gb) anyway, since a) you will not be cabling huge distances, b) you will take care not to run your cable carelessly, or in proximity to other electrics with strong EMFs. If you were CERN or NASA, or the Pentagon, you might expect to get exactly what you want - you could source your own jacketing plant to bundle your cables.

I'll come and do the cabling for you if you like - I could do with a vacation.

 

[Mystere]

I'm cabling for 10GbE, not 1GbE. I figure that 10GbE will be cost effective in a couple of years, as might Fiber... which is why i'm looking to do both at once, just in case. I'd rather not have to do new drops in a couple of years.