dencorso

Now, *that* I can believe in, for sure. Of course it might be good for your case. Electric mains voltage is much easier to deal with than lightning bolts (which may be extremely high voltage vs. ground and really very short). If it truly lets 5 - 1000 MHz, it really might be a good idea. It's not secure to keep your whole machine (or part of it, at least) 80 V or more above ground, for sure.

Well, I, for one, don't, and I really doubt it. It'd make no sense to actually power a TV cable with 220 V AC at all, IMO. ... unless you're a BPL (Broadband over Power Lines) user, of course, but that's not a cable TV cable, anyway.

So it's a VT82C686B (manufactured in the 16th week of 2001, version 13B(?)). As with all 686B Southbridges, it has got no USB 2.0, so this settles it, in what regards your original question. See: Via Southbridge Chips. However the KT*133* are the most problematic of all VIA's chipsetes, especially when using 686B Southbridges, so I feel I have to suggest you consider an upgrade of motherboard, and if you decide to remain using a VIA chipset based motherboard, I do strongly recommend those based on the VIA KT 600, which is the best chipset VIA made in that epoch. Now, if you intend to keep your current motherboard, make sure you are using the VIA 4in1 v. 4.56 driverset (or the VIA 4in1 v. 4.43 driverset, or any other one higher than v. 4.32, but lower than 4.60), since these driversets were created for working around the bugs described below. Of course, you may find out which version of the drivers you're already using, by looking at the string value "PACKAGE_VERSION", under "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\VIA Technologies, Inc", in the registry. For more info read these pages: Crash Test: DMA Problems with VIA's 686B Southbridge: Part I, Part II, Part III, Parte IV. Crash Test: Problems with VIA's KT133/KT133A (later, shorter but more general version in two parts of that same page above): Part I, Part II. George Breese's Homepage

Pentium D means nVidia 4 series chipset... there are no Win 9x/ME Ethernet drivers at all for that chipset family, AFAIK, I regret to say. You're on a wild goose chase.

And, before anything, which motherboard, processor, video card and how much RAM?

Forget the motherboard itself for a moment: look just at the southbridge... is it a VIA VT82C686B? If in doubt, post a zipped good quality pic of the actual southbridge.

Yay! @submix8c: Great how-to, thanks! I've added some info, because the date selected in step 3 must fall in between the vallid dates of the certificate.

One idea: look for and delete the key HKLM\Software\SYMNRT and all subkeys and values under it. Then disconnect the internet, reset the bios date and try again.

That may well be the case. If so, provided you have an image of the partition from before your 1st attempt, I'd suggest you redeploy the said image and try again as per your latest trial, which sure does comply in every aspect with my own experiment. The rationale for this present suggestion is that if it stored somewhere the info the certificate is expired, that place must be either the registry or (less probably) some other file inside the same partition... which an image redeployment would perforce remove. Good luck!

@Phaenius: Look at the flag... nitroshift is in Romania, too.

It's the same file. The MD5 is the same (and the SHA1 is BC6F1C1EB7DCD4FA88A2F8C861A492F36A73C047). The key-points in my method are changing the date in the BIOS to a date later than PE Timestamp of the NRT_9x, but before its certificate's expiry date, and then rebooting with the internet cable disconnected. There remains no way the NRT_9x can ascertain the true date, but it can check it's later than the BIOS default date, so it accepts it as the true date, IMO. You're right: I deliberately use NDD, so there is a 'scandisk.alt' which is another copy of NDD. I had forgotten the "invalid date"is an NDD thing, though. Please do give it another try, just in case. Good luck!

Adele - SkyFall

Sez who?

Huh? Really? Hot dates? No. Delivery chinese food.

That statement put me in action. And I have good news: the following procedure works. I have just tested it for you. Disconnect the machine physically from the internet. Reset the machine date to some day (I used 19) in January, 2009. Turn off the machine. Wait 10 minutes. Turn it on and boot Win 9x (if it runs Scandisk or NDD, abort the scan or it'll find many "wrong dated" files). Once at the desktop, run Norton_Removal_Tool_9x.exe and it'll run OK. Nothing will be installed, the Norton_Removal_Tool_9x.exe is stand-alone. It removed all Norton products all right, except the Norton CrashGuard, which it didn't touch (then again, I'm possibly the last user of the much maligned CrashGuard, but it works all right for me)! Sure. And in the present case they actually are.

Congratulations!

There's no sense in trying to save a first install gone wrong, particularly when it never exactly reached the point of working decently. Reinstall from scratch, you've had just installed anyway. Before the first reboot add MaxPhysPage=40000 and, under [vcache], MaxFileCache=393216 to both SYSTEM.INI and SYSTEM.CB. Let's see how it behaves afterwards.

@tomasz86: You'll have to hunt all those tags and correct them by hand, I'm sorry to say. On the bright side, people here at MSFN change usernames very rarely, so you won't be having to do it often.

Reminds me of Marathon Man... link...

Ditto. Welcome to MSFN!

It took me some time, because there's no KL133 that I can find mention of, so there must be a mistake in HP's documentation: the KLE133, however, is well known and documented. Only UHCI USB is mentioned, hence USB 1.1.

If I'm not mistaken, the HP Pavilion XT934 has no hardware support for USB 2.0...

The link I gave then still works...

Well, I think the thread is in the right forum now. But I did remember to add it to the Important "Stickified" [Pinned] 95/98/98 SE/ME Topics sticky list... it's now the 1st link in the "Supported Hardware, Software + Games" section. So I think all bases are covered. Long time 9xers know well where to look for important threads, so a pointer in the Important "Stickified" [Pinned] 95/98/98 SE/ME Topics list is the best way to move the thread to this forum while keeping it connected with the 9x/ME forum, IMO.

Source:This post at "Defensive Computing"