BenoitRen

Motherboard: ASRock K7S41GX (SiS 741GX) CPU: AMD Sempron 2800+ (really an Athlon XP in disguise) RAM: 1 GB DDR1 Graphics card: ATI Radeon 9250 Sound chipset: C-Media 9738 (AC97) Network card: SiS 900 I got the network card to work too. Catalyst 6.2 wouldn't run. It says it can't find anything requiring drivers. Catalyst 4.3 seems to be the last Catalyst for Windows 95, and it seems to support Radeon 9250. But it's a b***h to download. I HATE DRIVER SITES! They make something simple a pain in the a**. ATI doesn't provide older versions. archive.org is being a pain (Failed Connection, Data Retrieval Failure). ARRRGH!

Windows 95 boots in 17 seconds! The only change I had made at that point was installing the DCOM 95 update. The "support CD" of ASRock announced that it didn't support the version of the Windows OS. Pfft. The VGA driver setup errorred while it was preparing. I don't think it ever worked on Win98 anyway. I got sound to work. Yay!

Just for kicks, I decided to try installing Windows 95 on my super PC. I formatted the HDD, and ran setup. Worked flawlessly. When the time came to boot, though, it complained about not having enough memory to initialise. A Google search revealed a KB article that instructed to edit system.ini with a MaxPhysPage of 300000. I did so through DOS. Next was a protection error involving IOS. After Googling again and reading some KB articles, I didn't really find a solution, though I figured it would be that timing problem. On the KB article of that issue the error message was similar. Not being able to even boot in Safe Mode (not enough memory, huh?), I copied the necessary files from the AMD-K6 update on a floppy and copied them over manually. Then Windows 95 setup continued, and after a couple reboots Windows 95's desktop appeared in 16-colour glory. Next step is finding/trying some drivers. Still, I'm happy that it even runs. Since my CPU is an AMD Sempron 2800+, I feared that the AMD-K6 update wouldn't be enough, since Windows 98 had another timing problem that occurred with a CPU faster than 2.1 Ghz or so.

Can people please quit this "modern" nonsense? People always use it wrongly.

Windows 95B and C also support flash storage devices.

I read Nathan Lineback's latest feature yesterday: Sick Windows Tricks 2. You can install NT4 on a FAT32 partition, though you'll need a Windows 2000 install CD. Read how.

Ah, that explains why has always been updated shortly after installation without me knowing what did it.

What? That's WinXP's limit for FAT32. Anyway, USB HDDs don't use the same driver.

Boot with the floppy. Do format c: /s Do d: (where d is the letter of your CD-ROM drive) Do cd win98 Do setup

Just fine here in Windows 95 for years. I thought changing those values only mattered when you had a dial-up modem.

There wouldn't be much point in using the old rendering engine if it's only for the sake of Win9x compatibility, especially for a Mozilla project. Never mind they've done a lot of other changes too. That doesn't matter one bit, as the proposed shim library idea was insufficient, and thus no specific code needs to get into the tree. Waiting for beta was actually sort of my intention, because it has to have stabilised first. I didn't look forward to experiencing all sorts of crashes, data loss and other stuff that goes on on the trunk and then figure out if it's because of Win9x patches or a core bug. Considering how anti-Win9x most Mozilla developers are, and that a shim library isn't sufficient, this is laughable.

That's what I already use. Works great for flash sticks, but it doesn't seem to work for USB hard drives. Well, at least not correctly; it installs a USB Mass Storage Port, but the drive doesn't appear. Thanks for the thought, though, and for the info on how to modify it for unrecognised flash sticks. Might come in handy in the future.

I wonder if it does. When I got my super PC and installed Win98 SE, I expected it to boot really fast. Well, it does, but not as fast as I'd hoped. 22 seconds boot time.

Oh, now I know which program you meant. aMSN Messenger. I used it before, but eventually dumped it because it takes a while to start, and it's sluggish. On my system, of course. Seems to work better on GNU/Linux in any case.

Neat. I thought Windows 95 was limited to 256 MB of RAM. AMSN Messenger, eh? Sounds interesting. I'll look it up.

They're not going to. But they do use the same rendering engine, and that's what has become incompatible with Win9x.

I'd like to try these drivers on Windows 95 OSR2, but I'm worried that it will hose my system or not be properly uninstallable. It also seems to depend on the IE shell.

Try doing it through the command line.

Or they could use the latest SeaMonkey.

If you don't use anything DOS, yes. If you type in a DOS virtual machine and are familiar with the Azerty keyboard lay-out, you'll need at least the code tabels and the country.sys initialisation.

DOS is just the bootstrap. After that it's all 32-bit. Even DOS.

You are wrong. Win9x is not 16-bit, it's 32-bit.

Win9x does have a Idle process if you use Process Explorer or WinTop.

Your CPU usage is NOT 100%. Idle is doing nothing, in other words, unused.

So why is Windows 2000 a good upgrade if you get infected as soon as you connect to the Internet? Windows 2000 actually started most of the eye candy, minus Fisher Price theme. Things like mouse cursor shadow. That's still a lot, and much more than an IE-free install which requires 500+ MB.