j7n

Partition Magic allows to create another partition in the unused space, or divide the disk into 2 big partitions. What it can't do is format a whole 250 GB (decimal gigabyte) hard drive with a single FAT32 partition. So far I have not tried bigger than 250 GB drives.

It has already been mentioned that GA-8I915P works with Radeon R3xx. At least one Nvidia model (6200) did not. Some said its because of "Turbo Cache".

Regular CDs and DVDs (ISO 9660) have 2 GB limit for each file due to signed 32-bits values. One can use UDF if large files have to be written and they can't be kept split.

There are also VIA controllers for Parallel ATA, no just SATA. I'm not sure how many devices VT6410 can take but it can surely serve four PATA harddisks with its own driver. I do not understand your configuration, risk_reversal, how it is possible to have 2 BIOSes for the same HDD ports. But you are most likely safe. The hard disk should appear in Device Manager under the "scsi" controller (when viewed by connection).

Has anybody experienced a VIA RAID controller corrupting data in pure DOS (or win98 without the driver installed)?

Oh my... You don't need 2 hard disks. Here I wrote step by step instructions how to install both Win98 and WinXP on the same computer. http://www.msfn.org/board/instal-2-systems...140#entry736140 You can install Win98 after WinXp, but two boot sectors (1024 bytes) and the boot.ini have to be updated. To update the boot sector I use... WinXP installer. Quite inefficient way to work with 512 bytes of data, but it gets the job done.

Have you patched the hanging explorer bug? Explorer would hang as soon as the number of deleted file in the session reaches certain value.

I solved the problem. It turned out there is a standard button cell battery in the computer. I took it out and the machine forgot that keyboard error had occurred. Got really freaked out as this computer was not mine.

Is there a good reason why Partition Magic limits FAT32 sizes to 19x Gigs? Are you sure about the 15%? I though it had hard limit, not a percentage of total drive capacity.

What resolution are you using now? HDMI (Type A) is the same DVI over a different cable. I'd say its rather the television incompatible with DVI.

I have an old IBM laptop – model number 560E "Type 2640-40U". It worked fine until I tried to access the BIOS. To do that I tried to press random key combinations. At one point the computer displayed three icons, supposedly meaning Keyboard Not OK Report IBM. I made no big deal out of this, as keyboard errors 301 are common if you press keys during boot. The problem is that the keyboard does not work after that. I finally managed to access BIOS setup, the Fn keys work, but I can't interact with the operating system. Problem is not with the OS. I tried booting from a diskette, and can't even press Ctrl-Alt-Del. How to fix this? The computer has no means of attaching a keyboard. It has only one PS2 port for a mouse.

Don't take my words for it, as I do not own a flat television. But there was a discussion on Doom9 where a person was searching for best way to encode exactly 1080 pixels vertically (not divisable by 16). In the end the search turned out pointless as the display was always resampling. Let's hope that Wide equals 16:10. What was the resolution at that moment? You should be able to see when resolution is matched exactly. The goal is not better quality, but perfect match. A Google search on [VGA LCD Calibration] will return a bunch of test pictures that will help. But they are not really needed for DVI. There is this possibility.

I have an old brandname computer with built-in speaker. But it's different from PC speaker and does not work without drivers installed.

I would not be surprised if you can't drive this monitor at its actual resolution. No surprise if it is intended as "TV".

What is needed to have LCD display without scaling? Is the display adapter doing the scaling (if DVI used), or the display? LCDs have only one resolution and many applications such as DOS, or older games look unacceptable. I am configuring an old laptop now. It's LCD pixels are perfectly matched to the OEM textmode output resolution. Also 640*480 during Windows installation work properly. The smaller pictures are centered on the display. How come we cannot have this on modern screens? I would prefer res <=640*512 with doubled pixels, maybe with some scanline simulation thrown in.

Matroska (mkv) format: VirtualDub can't take these files as input, and VDM does not support all codecs. You can do disable unneeded streams (languages) and cut a specific part of the video using MkvMerge (part of MkvToolNix).

If you are bound to an XP version because of a license and therefore cannot use Win2000, nLite is a tool for you. You can greatly decrease memory requirements by selectively installing only features you really need.

In what increments? Available resolutions are determined by the display adapter, period. Monitor may limit the range with proper DDC signals, but not reprogram the display adapter.

I did. DVI does not need/have any auto adjustment. You are in better luck with NVidia that you would with an ATI adapter. Some (recent?) NVidia's can be set to custom resolutions in control panel.

http://j7n.sytes.net/www/TCP-IP_Network_Pr...g_for_Win9x.exe A bloated InstallShield installer. But it works and I decided not to take it apart.

Can you drive this monitor at its real and only resolution? You did not say what it was. On the fly resampling is a no-no.

There is a difference. X800 (Radeon 430) is supported, while X1550 (Radeon 515) is not.

So we are left with full bloated windows in a corporate environment? I'd expect these restrictions form Microsoft, not Dino Nuhagic. <rant> It appears it is very ineficient to have computers in a company and everybody are better working outside the office premises on their own property. There's licenses everywhere. </rant>

I found this motherboard picture on the web (Abit AB9): http://www.overclock3d.net/gfx/articles/20...8195652256l.jpg If there are only four SATA ports then this must be a different model. I have not heard of a board w/o any ICHx ports, so they must be all ICH9. JMicron is used to provide PATA interface on modern Intel southbridges. It's 2 SATA ports are located in another group, or are different color. Is SATA in "IDE compatibility" mode? Edit: Then I got nothing to add, sorry. I did not notice you were not the original poster. Of course you have a different motherboard.

The motherboard should need no drivers if the SATA controller is set to IDE compatibility mode in BIOS. I think this setting only makes difference for the ICH9 ports, not the ones next to the legacy Parallel ATA connector (JMicron).