Jump to content

E-66

Member
  • Posts

    327
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 
  • Country

    United States

Everything posted by E-66

  1. Andromeda, maybe you can answer this for me, I see you've posted about Ghost 2003 in a couple threads today. I have an older version of Ghost from 2000, not even sure what it's called, maybe 'Personal Edition.' It doesn't work with XP so I got Ghost 2003 from a friend who never used it. The problem is, I can't get a boot floppy made. I'm feeling kind of dumb that I can't figure it out, but I can't. When I start the Boot Wizard and try to make a 'standard' boot disk I run into 2 problems. If I try to use the PC-DOS option I can get to the screen where it shows you what the Autoexec.bat & Config.sys files are going to look like, but if I try to go to the next step I get an error message pop-up box: Cannot read the bootsector information - the file bootsect.dat is missing or corrupt. The Ghost Boot Wizard may need to be re-installed. If I try to use the MS-DOS option, I put a formatted floppy in and get the message An error occured while trying to create the directory "COMMON\MSDOS" Frustrated, I tried copying Ghost 2003's ghost.exe to a bootable floppy with Ghost 2000 and overwriting the 2000 version of ghost.exe. That didn't work - I ended up getting a message that "this copy of Ghost was unable to register." Ugh! What do I need to do to get 2003 working?
  2. It was kind of frustrating to go to my list of several subscribed topics just now and see only ONE of them left. Then I saw the message at the bottom of the page - "Note: Subscriptions are pruned if there is no reply to the topic after 5 days." What's the point of pruning them like that? There were several threads I was following and others that had information in them that I subscribed to so I could read them at my leisure, and now they're gone. I guess I could bookmark the threads and access them directly through my browser, but it's nice to be able to see an organized list of topics within my Control Panel area here on the site. Am I overlooking something or do I have a right to be ticked off?
  3. This is how I did it: With only HD #1 connected I used the drive letter assigner program to "lock in" the names of the 3 partitions as C, D, & E. Then I connected HD #2 and installed XP. Early in the install process you come to the screen where you can check the option "I want to choose the installation drive letter and partition during setup." I checked that, and then later when I was presented with choices it showed C, D, & E as already being used so F was the first drive letter available to use for XP.I'm not sure if that answers your question or not. It seems that the XP installer is able to "see" what the drive letter installer program did, and acts accordingly.
  4. From Win98's point of view it doesn't assign a drive letter to the NTFS partition because it doesn't see it. From XP's point of view, and without using the drive letter assigning program, XP would assign D: to the primary partition on HD #2 and I'd end up with this: Drive 1: C: Primary, Win 9x E: Logical F: Logical Drive 2: D: Primary, XP (NTFS)
  5. I've read thru the thread again including the links Jaclaz posted, and it all makes sense now. My mistake was creating multiple primary partitions on HD #1. One question still remains however. After re-reading Jaclaz's post in the other thread: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showto...mp;#entry463153 I see that it was his post where I read I could put XP on a logical partition and boot to it as long as the boot files are on a primary partition elsewhere. Currently I have my system set up this way by using the drive letter assigning program shown in post #2: Drive 1: C: Primary, Win 9x D: Logical E: Logical Drive 2: F: Primary, XP (NTFS) Since XP can be put on a logical drive, I guess I could also set my system up this way: Drive 1: C: Primary, Win 9x D: Logical E: Logical Drive 2: F: Logical, XP (NTFS) Either way, the F partition isn't seen by Win9x since it's NTFS. My question is, which way is "better" ? On the one hand, putting XP on a logical partition means I wouldn't have to use the drive letter assigning program, but if I ever had a problem with HD #1 I wouldn't be able to boot to XP on HD #2 because it's on a logical drive, correct? On the other hand, the drive letter assigning program seems to be working just fine, and by having XP on a primary partition I could still boot to it if I had a problem with HD #1. Again, correct? Just trying to figure out which way is the best way to set things up.
  6. If you partitioned the disk first does that mean you installed XP on a FAT 32 partition? I'm certainly no expert but from what I've read it seems that NTFS is wholeheartedly recommended for XP. Or are there partition utilities out there that can create NTFS partitions?
  7. You are correct. That ended up being a very short experiment on my part. I've since switched back to a primary and 2 logicals on the first HD. I need a bit of clarification here, and I'll also clarify something I said in my first post. I originally said that I added a 2nd HD with one logical partition. I did that, but only as part of the experiment. What I think I need is to have a primary partition on the 2nd HD to install XP on (Win9x is on the first HD). Now if I do indeed need a primary partition for XP on HD #2, then that's the reason for my interest in the drive letter assigning program, because I'd like to keep the partitions on HD #1 named C, D, & E and then have the primary partition for XP on HD #2 be named F. I actually have the system set up that way right now and everything is working fine.However, last night I believe I read on here or another forum that in a dual boot setup you don't have to have both OS's on primary partitions, just the first OS, and that as long as the bootloader program is located on the primary partition of HD #1 you can install the 2nd OS on a logical partition on HD #2 and still successfully boot to it. Unfortunately I forgot to bookmark that information when I read it last night and I don't have it handy right now. If that's true, then I guess I could dispense with the drive letter assigner program and just make a logical partition on HD #2 for XP. So my question is, is it true that I don't need a primary partition on HD #2 for XP? If I don't, am I able to create an extended & logical partition during XP setup? I've only installed XP a couple times and I don't remember if I saw the option to create extended/logical partitions.
  8. Eidenk, that drive letter assigner program worked great, thanks for posting the link to it. I've just recently started messing around with XP and dual booting and with the help of that program I was able to keep my main HD partitions named C, D, & E (instead of C, E, & F) while installing XP on the 2nd HD on the first partition named F (instead of D).
  9. I've just recently started playing around with XP (I know, a little late), and I was wondering what the best way is to share programs between it and Win9x in a dual boot system with each OS on its own HD. For whatever reason the idea of sharing programs never even occured to me until I got XP installed and was ready to install my first program... I guess I just assumed I'd install all the programs from the Win9x system on the XP system too, but it all of a sudden dawned on me that I could simply copy all the shortcuts over from my Win9x system and try running them that way. I have no idea if that's a common way to do it or just plain stupid or what, so that's why I'm posting. I haven't tried all my programs yet, but the 3 or 4 I've tried all worked fine (Winamp, Firefox & Opera, AIM). If it continues on that way the only thing I'd have installed on the NTFS partition is XP itself. I know I can't do the reverse of what I'm currently doing - that is, install the programs on XP and then copy the shortcuts over to Win9x, because Win9x won't be able to see the NTFS partition, but I'm not smart enough to know if what I'm doing at the moment makes the most sense or not. Maybe I shouldn't even be sharing the programs to begin with? Hell, I don't know - please educate me!
  10. The article I linked to in my original post is incorrect if what LLXX says is true.
  11. Ah, ok, maybe someone else will chime in. I've since changed my main HD back to how I had it before - 1 primary, 2 logical, and am going to try using the drive letter assigner program that eidenk linked to in post #2.
  12. I've never had more than 1 primary partition on a HD before until I tried this experiment, but what is the reason you shouldn't have more than 1 per HD in Win98? I use GDISK instead of FDISK so it wasn't a problem for me to create them, and I have no problem changing things back to the way they were before (1 primary and 2 logicals instead of the current 3 primaries), but I'd like to understand why.Eidenk, that drive letter assigner program worked perfectly. I think I might use it once I set my HD back to the way I had it before.
  13. Kinda confused as to why this is happening and could use an explanation. My main HD normally has 3 partitions - the primary and two logicals, so C, D, & E. I know if I add a 2nd HD with a primary partition that partition becomes the new D, so my main HD would then become C, E, & F. Just as an experiment I made 3 partitions on my main HD, but made all of them primary partitions. I then added a 2nd HD to the system that contained one logical partition. I thought this would keep my drive letters as they were, with the 2nd HD becoming F, but that's not what happened. The drive letters shifted exactly as they did in my first example and I don't understand why. I was reading on the PC Guide about the way drive letters are assigned (link below), and according to what I read there my drive letters shouldn't have shifted. Can someone explain why they did? http://pcguide.com/ref/hdd/file/partLetter-c.html
  14. Probably sounds like an odd request, huh? All the sites I've looked at that sell computer chairs just have 'regular' computer chairs. I know it probably sounds silly but I'd like to get something like a chaise lounge that sits very low to the ground or some kind of chair where you're sitting in an upright to semi-reclined position with your legs out in front of you, like you would be if you were sitting up against a wall or a tree outside. If anyone has ever seen something like that please post a link. Edit: Something like this, but about $4900 cheaper! http://www.branchhome.com/index.php?main_p...3364aa6bad4b491
  15. How do you determine which INF files you need for the specific things you'd like to add to the 'base' Mindows installation? I never though I'd say this, but the base Mindows install is too barebones for me, and I don't know how to add the things I'd like.
  16. Thanks for the additonal info. Another question - what makes someone choose ATI over Nvidia and vice-versa? I've been looking on Newegg and there are roughly 6-8 cards featuring GPUs from each manufacturer that will work with Win98. How does one choose? Price-wise they're all within $10 of each other. I'd like to order something this weekend but am undecided at this point because there are so many choices. Any help would be appreciated.
  17. I'd like to ask a question about a new video card for Win98 as well. I'm not sure if I'm understanding everything in the AGP specification with regard to voltage and backwards compatability so I would appreciate some input from those here that know more about this than I do (read: pretty much everyone!) My current AGP card is an ATI Xpert 2000 (I believe with 32MB RAM) based on the Rage chipset and I'd like to get something better. I just replaced my dying ECS socket-A mobo with a PC Chips board I got from Newegg for $20. Model M811LU v3.1, based on the VIA KT266A chipset, and it has a universal AGP slot (2.0). http://www.pcchips.com.tw/PCCWeb/Products/...e=Specification I've read through this thread, especially what Petr posted with regard to the various Radeon & Nvidia series cards that should work with Win98. Onto my questions... 1. Is the Radeon chipset significantly better than the Rage chipset I have now? 2. There's a wide range of Radeon series cards that are apparently compatible with Win98. I saw what Petr said about the 7000 series cards being a good choice, but from looking on Newegg there's not much of a price difference between the cards so should I try to find something in the 9000 series (assuming that means newer/better/more RAM)? 3. If an AGP video card is "4x/8x" does that automatically mean it's an AGP 3.0 spec card? If so, if it's "double-slotted" does that make it a Universal AGP 3.0 Card? if both those statements are true, I should be able to use a Universal AGP 3.0 Card with my board's universal 2.0 slot, correct? The only limitation being that it would work at 4x speed at 1.5v only? That's the way I understand it from reading the AGP info from the playtool.com link that was posted earlier (http://www.playtool.com/pages/agpcompat/agp.html). 4. I've gotten used to shopping at Newegg and haven't explored other reliable options. I'm open to suggestions. Thanks.
  18. Man, that sounds like a lot of work.... I just cross my fingers. Kidding of course. If you've never been to MDGx's website before you owe it to yourself to spend a few months there poking around. There's a massive amount of great info there.
  19. Well good for me then - the replacement motherboard I just ordered is based on the VIA KT266A & VT8235 chipsets.
  20. Yes, PETR was a big contributer to that thread I mentioned about the best video card for 98SE. I'm good for now, my question was more geared towards what do you do 2+ years from now when you need a new mobo or video card or what-have-you?
  21. Don't get me wrong, I have no desire to see Win98 fade into obscurity. It's the OS I use, and I just ordered a replacement socket-A motherboard for my dying ECS K7S5A board about an hour ago. I love 98, and can't even count the number of times I've gone to AXCEL/MDGx's website and tried different tweaks and such. I guess what prompts my question is seeing how few choices I had available when I ordered my replacement mobo. I'm far from a computer expert, so maybe it's my ignorance that makes me inquire about this, but I guess I'm thinking about future hardware issues. My current and replacement motherboards both have AGP slots on them, but from what I understand AGP is being phased out in favor of PCI Express. There's a thread in this forum right now - "Best graphics card for 98SE?" where the discussion talks about how some current cards have dropped support for Win98. So let's say a year or two from now someone who wants to run Win95/98/ME needs a new mobo and their only video choice is PCIe. Then what? The PCIe cards available then aren't going to have some legacy Win98 driver, are they? So I guess what I'm asking is, what is the limiting factor in keeping Win98 going?
  22. Really? I like the sound of that. Thanks for the info.
  23. I kinda figured that the bundled software wasn't anything special, but how do I know which players will let me copy files manually?
  24. I'd like to get an MP3/DAP player but the specs for the newer/better ones always say they require Windows XP. I use a customized version of Win98SE on the last computer I built because it's extremely stable, fast, and a small install (OS under 30 MB). None of the software I use requires XP, and I'm not a fan of its bloated size or 'product activation.' So when these newer players say they 'require' XP, is that because of the bundled software that comes with them for transferring the files to the player? Is that software even necessary? If the players included a simple Win98 driver couldn't you just drag & drop files to the player using Windows Explorer like you would with a flash memory drive or card reader? What do Linux users do for MP3/DAP players? Have a backup system that runs Windows? What are my options?
  25. Thanks, I'll give that a try.
×
×
  • Create New...