Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. but miss of classic theme is still a big problem to me. forcing windows to use classic theme by using w8classic.exe will cause other applications look strange.
  3. Today
  4. Since the 56k dial-up days I have used Speed Guide TCP Optimizer (now v3.0.8) on Windows 98. Recently discovered i was doing it wrong for high speed ethernet. Quick selecting 'optimal' and applying changes results in improvement but is not comparable to the same hardware on a modern OS. For high speed connections recommend clicking optimal then adjusting the General Settings -> Connection Speed slider towards max. This is the key to triggering DefaultRvcWindow changes, a huge performance bottleneck. When adjusting the slider and applying changes, the confirmation table pop-up should indicate a significantly larger DefaultRvcWindow setting. So for modern broadband, if it goes to 10 set it for 11 :) Not a sophisticated benchmarker, just downloaded a large file to test and am now matching the ~750 MB/second speed this same hardware gets from my particular ISP on a more modern OS.
  5. Quite interesting to read what everyone used over the years, or in some cases decades. Wish I kept every computer I had in the past, some where Win 95, 98SE and 2000.
  6. @Dave-H : A check of "cote.co.uk" on SSL Labs Server test page https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=www.cote.co.uk confirms what has already been reported; just scroll down to the Handshake Simulation section: ... and see that IE11 only works on Win10 ! As to why, I think I have some clues: I couldn't help noticing how that server was configured: Only TLS 1.2 version is enabled, and only 3 cipher suites for that protocol version: Now, IE11 uses the cipher suites available in the OS's Microsoft SChannel Provider library; however, different Windows versions support different sets of cipher suites: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/secauthn/cipher-suites-in-schannel If one checks the available suites on Win7: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/secauthn/tls-cipher-suites-in-windows-7 one cannot find any of the three cipher suites needed for connection to the server in question... OTOH, checking the available cipher suites on Win10 v1903: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/secauthn/tls-cipher-suites-in-windows-10-v1903 one can find the first preferred (by the server) cipher suite, TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256, as available, hence the TLS 1.2 handshake succeeds and the site loads in IE11/Win10! However, I don't have answers as to why Chrome 49/WinXP also succeeds, unless, of course, ProxyHTTPProxy is used with it... BTW, Chrome 49 does open the site successfully here, Vista SP2 32-bit, but I do have installed WinServer 2008 updates that enable TLS 1.2 support: Perhaps Chrome 49 has native support for that cipher suite and only uses the Windows Store for certificates, NOT using Schannel like IE does (I'm sorry, my Chrome related knowledge is limited, have only been a Firefox fan from the start!) ... Cheers
  7. My first PC I bought second hand from my sister in the early 1990s. It was a clone 80286 12 MHz CPU, a 40 MB IDE drive, 1 MB of RAM and a Trident 256 KB ISA video adapter. She originally had MS-DOS 4.01 on it, but I replaced it with MS-DOS 5.00 and used DOS Shell on it. Now my second PC was an 80486 DX/2 66 MHz machine with 8 MB of 72 pin RAM, a 540 MB SCSI drive and an Adaptec ISA adapter. I eventually added a 2 GB SCSI disk to it. I had a Trident VESA 512 KB adapter, and a VESA controller. I also added a Mitsumi 2x CD-ROM drive, and a 14.4 modem. I never added a sound card to that machine, until I switched the motherboard. On one primary partition i had MS-DOS 6.2 and Windows 3.1 installed. On the second primary partition, I had OS/2 Warp 3.0, which was my primary OS for three years. I did add a Vibra 16 sound card after I switched the motherboard to a PCI capable one with a Cyrix 5x86/100 MHz and a Cirrus Logic 1 MB PCI video adapter. I also went with 16 MB of RAM.
  8. I described about it. http://blog.livedoor.jp/blackwingcat/archives/1990650.html
  9. UPDATE! I have discovered that the two parameters below: apz.frame_delay.enabled set to True apz.relative-update.enabled set to False contribute to improve the smoothness during scrolling. This, at least on the RDD, has contributed to reduce the infamous stuttering issue that affects Mozilla browsers, regardless of their rendering engine. I have updated all the versions of the UOC Patch to reflect the changes above. Please update to the latest version of the UOC Patch! Thanks!
  10. Yesterday
  11. Hi. So, the extended kernel version cmd.exe was customized from XP version :3
  12. @jaclaz Thank´s a lot for elaborating. As far I can judge your first mapping gives same result like mine, only mapped to (hd2). And a corroboration of mine, isn't it. Your second mapping gives a memdrive with two partitions, second active. Give also very interesting testing-possibilities! Grub4Dos readme states (in update 4): "Here win98.img is a partition image without the leading MBR and partition table in it. Surely GRUB for DOS will build an MBR and partition table for the memdrive (hd0)". I admit I could find my desired mapping nowhere, but by trial-and-error it was a very easy job in comparison to other parts of my project. Can you explain the MBR copy-part? The bootcode-part (before partition table) of my MBR-dump of the Memdrive looks different to the original (but I can't read MBR-code).
  13. Please fix AeroGlass for Windows 10 1909
  14. Thanks for the replies guys! I will check out that alternative task manager. One other thing I forgot to mention was that I also used taskmanager to view the virtual memory as well...It still didn't add up to what the RAM usage was showing as. It doesn't make sense why it is giving such a high reading, yet nothing us using even close to all of the physical RAM and not much virtual memory either.
  15. IMO yes; it's safe. Older, "weaker" encryption is used between the browser (IE or Chrome) and the so-called "front" server, and data is unencrypted between the "front" and "back" servers; but all this takes place within your own PC. No unencrypted or weakly-encrypted data ever leaves the PC. Thus, the connection between your PC and the Web server you're using will be as secure as the Web server is configured to make it. It's conceivable that malware could be written to exploit ProxHTTPSProxy, but the number of folks using it is pretty tiny, so I doubt anyone would bother.
  16. Hello! Thanks for your reply! I will try his nvidia patch, though I do not intend to use this modern video card as the primary video device for Windows 98. My goal is to get it working and then swap in compatible PCI extension cards to make it usable. I have a working PS/2 keyboard and mouse attached. It works flawlessly. On a bare x86 Windows XP install, I get about 904 MB of RAM. (I guess onboard devices such as the Intel HD Graphics and my main GPU reserve the rest of 3.25 GB) I just wonder how all of this is related to VCACHE. I was unable to find any similar crashes online that were not due to faulty drivers on an already installed system. Cheers, schreiberstein
  17. > EVGA nVidia GeForce 780 GTX (3 GB of VRAM) 3 GB of VRAM worries me, even with rloew's ram patch. Try also his nVidea patch or use an old video card until W98 is installed. How are the keyboard and mouse connected? The USB3.1 might be a problem if basic USB1 drivers don't work with it.
  18. Hello there! My machine: GIGABYTE Z390 Designare motherboard Intel Core i9 9900K 32 GB Dual Channel DDR4 memory kit EVGA nVidia GeForce 780 GTX (3 GB of VRAM) 1 TB SSD attached via internal Intel SATA AHCI controller --> CSM Mode enabled --> 4 External PCI slots via Exsys EX-1010 extension box -----> Currently Creative Audigy 2 ZS installed Currently, MS-DOS 7.1 standalone (from Windows 98 SE) works, but I needed to replace himem.sys with himemx.exe from FreeDOS, otherwise EMM386.EXE would not work properly and booting would take a long time. (Something like Machine type unknown occurred when running regular himem.sys) I am trying to get Windows 98 SE working on this machine, but I am hitting a major roadblock. I was able to complete the first stage of installation (before the first reboot) by doing the following: - Creating a new FAT32 partition using the aforementioned MS-DOS install (format /Q /S /V:WIN98 D:) - Adding himemx.exe into a new CONFIG.SYS file - Adding EMM386.EXE into a new CONFIG.SYS file - Starting setup from disk via setup.exe /is /pi (NO ACPI) After the first reboot, I was told that there is not enough memory to initialize the system. I worked around that by installing the RLOEW memory patch onto the system. (I bought it a couple months before he deceased.) I also tried adding the MaxPhysPages parameter to SYSTEM.INI, restricting maximum memory to 512 MB via burnmem.sys, and some other workarounds. Before that, I also checked that HIMEMX is actually being loaded. I deleted himem.sys from the Windows directory just to be sure. The AHCI patcher from RLOEW did not seem to make any difference on my system. Perhaps the legacy mode is not supported anymore. However, no matter what I do, with both Windows ME and Windows 98 SE I get the following black screen message: While initializing device VCACHE: Windows protection error. You need to restart your computer. Windows 3.11 also freezes when starting via win.exe. Not even the splashscreen is displayed. Do you have any idea how I could fix this and get Windows 98 to boot? Or how to troubleshoot this problem further? This is so strange. Usually, Windows 98 "just works" on any x86 compatible machine, from my experience. I guess a lot of things have changed since Skylake and Z170... I would be happy if anyone on here could give me an advise on this. Thanks a lot. Cheers, schreiberstein (PS: It's my first post on this forum, but I have been lurking on here for years and appreciate this place a lot!)
  19. Ah right, that explains the apparent anomaly! I guess they are assuming that anyone still now using XP would be bound to have SP3, so didn't see the need to specify it.
  20. ... However MS states that the offending function ("GetLogicalProcessorInformation") IS supported under Windows XP SP3: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/sysinfoapi/nf-sysinfoapi-getlogicalprocessorinformation#requirements EDIT: @jaclaz : I was notified of your newer post just when I was about to submit this ; submitting regardless, hope you don't mind... EDIT2: It seems the app is compiled using QT Framework 5.6.2; 5.6 is the last version to be XP+Vista compatible, so it appears they knowingly made the effort to keep compatibility with those "legacy" OSes (the same is true for SMPlayer, a GUI for mplayer/mpv - but I think the dev there had different reasons for sticking to QT5.6 ...) ...
  21. >> Works for Windows 10, Windows 8.1/7/Vista/XP 32-bit and 64-bit Should say "XP (sp3)". > it won't work - at least here - on XP (Major/Minor are 5.1 just fine) throwing an error on missing entry point "GetLogicalProcessorInformation" in KERNEL32.DLL Should say "on XP (sp2)".
  22. I haven't used Windows XP's task manger for years, and that's one of the reasons why! I use DTaskManager by Dimio (I'm not associated with him I hasten to add!) It's very good, gives a lot more information, including accurate RAM usage data. It can be set to automatically replace the Windows Task Manager.
  23. So the portable version of Partition Magic 11.5 doesn't work on XP, but the full installer version of Partition Wizard 11.5 does? How strange!
  24. My first computer was a Sony Vaio running Windows XP
  25. Welcome Grease! what's up? hopefully you'll enjoy this forum!
  26. That one is an issue with the installer. BUT get the portable version here, instead: https://www.partitionwizard.com/partitionmagic/portable-partition-magic.html And discover that - notwithstanding what the guys say on their page - : it won't work - at least here - on XP (Major/Minor are 5.1 just fine) throwing an error on missing entry point "GetLogicalProcessorInformation" in KERNEL32.DLL Everything is normal (in this world), in a perfect world people would write good software, document it properly, respect other people's IP (and licenses, and time, and ... ), jaclaz
  27. Grease

    Hello

    Totally agree and yes regardless its one of many rabbit holes i seem to put myself threw lol.
  28. I just remembered the speedtest was cited on Vogons (don't know why). https://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=12102 One of the links should work.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...