dencorso

I'm now looking at the old threads, so I've singled out that relevant old post by RLoew to quote here just for easier reference for everybody involved. That said, the existing unsolved problems are: (1) There is no known driver for 9x/ME that supports any Series 8 or higher nVidia Cards (which is not relevant here). and (2) No one has ever got any nVidia Cards having more than 256 MiB to work with 9x/ME. To solve problem (1) would require other yet unknown unofficial drivers to surface (very unlikely) or extensive reverse engineering of the extant XP and 9x drivers, followed by the correct porting of the new capabilities to the 82.69 driver (a possible but substantial work, even more unlikely to ever be undertaken). Problem (2) may require more intensive testing, but still seems to be possible to solve completely, either by relocating memory or by somehow reversibly disabling part of it before loading windows 9x/ME (hence making it behave as a 256 MiB VRAM card, only for 9x/ME).

Patch patterns are always allowed, since they cannot be construed, in any way, to be part of the proprietary files they're used to patch.

Way to go, wsxedcrfv! Redistributing files by Adobe isn't allowed, be they modded or not (Rule #1b). But you can create a patch pattern and redistribute the patch pattern, like I've done in this analogous case... All you need is patch.exe, from KanastaCorp, for which is there is a link in the post I've just pointed to. Patch.exe can be used both to apply a patch pattern and to create it.

Let me understand this right: The NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GT AGP with 512 MiB RAM would normally take 512 MiB in the System Arena (i. e., somewhere at adresses comprised between 0xC0000000 and 0xFFFFFFFF). Using the /A switch would move this AGP addresses to the Shared Arena, uncluttering the System Arena. Do you envisage problems due to a half-full Shared Arena? I cannot right now reread those old threads (but will do so soon)... did you reinvestigate the 512 MiB video problem since then?

You might find the Partition Type List useful. Also do read the MBR and EBR Wikipedia entries.

Or he can use one of Craig's PCI programs to get Device ID in DOS or Win 2k, directly from the PCI Bus.

So am I. No. It is *the* problem. How comes your VMM32.VXD is not recognized by his patch? Were it badly corrupt, your system wouldn't even start windows OK, so it is not... In fact, unless we can understand fully why the RAM Limitation Patch didn't like your VMM32.VXD, and the nature of the kludge you used, your case can hardly be considered an instance of the video card not working with RLoew's patch. Moreover, as Dave-H just pointed out, only the very latest versions of the patch cater for the 512 MiB video card issue, did you use one of the right versions (6.1 or 7.0 only)? With all due respect, it's frivolous to affirm for a fact something doesn't work, when it was tested outside the conditions it was designed to work in, as seems to be what happened in your case... How can you be sure your kludge was enough for having the patch fully working?

BTW, going back to what I said about the CMOS battery discharging when the PC is unplugged, and losing its settings -- does that count as a reset, or only if I initiate the process?Sure. The point is it's lost the configuration it should have and returned to the default. The main purpose of the CMOSSave/CMOSRest is to obviate the need of having to enter them all again by hand. It's fast and clean: you configure the CMOS once by hand, the save with CMOSSave the already configured contents of the CMOS to a floppy or the HDD and then, after the CMOS forgets, just use CMOSRest to put them back, all at once, from the saved file.

Point taken.

Well, there is a simple adapter that connects to the disk on one side and to both the data and power cables on the other. Another option is a kit that contains a standalone power source and a SATA/3.5IDE/2.5IDE three-way connector to USB... with the latter you may connect the HDD to the tower without openeing the tower... and it may prove useful again in the future, as it works with any HDD and also with CD/DVD burners and/or players... Think of it as a universal USB to other interfaces, without an enclosure. I'm too sleepy right now to find you photos of them, but I'm sure jaclaz has links to them somewhere, since I remember he posted about such adapters way back when. Sure you can use FDISK, but were I you, I'd use the Ranish Partiton Manager, v. 2.40 or 2.43 beta (my own favorite). It's more powerful and very reliable, unless your HDD were SATA (with which it has some quircks).

Well, this being the case, I'd flash the BIOS before anything...

The adapter would go between the data cable and the drive. And sure, you'd need a power cable or an Y power-cable duplicator, unless, which is very possible, you have one idle power cable from those comming from the power supply.

@Dave-H: Since you're going to reinstall anyway, ask RLoew for the latest version, which I think is 7.0, although I believe he may already have sent it to you. It's always best to upgrade to the newest possible codebase, IMHO.

Those are famous last words! And you're banned on Rule #1.

If I remember right, RLoew did indeed solve the 512 MiB Video Card issue (PATCHMEM /A), for most if not all cases. I think you'll have to remove, then reinstall the patch and perhaps also upgrade (I don't remember whether v. 6.0 already recognized the /A switch).

And you can use the freeware CMOSSave/CMOSRest to automate the resetting of the CMOS contents. It's much faster than reentering them by hand.

My friends, that's why the Important / "Stickified" / Pinned Windows 95/98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME Topics sticky exists! By looking into it you'd've found this link to nVidia GeForce and Win 9x/ME - Relevant Threads which points to the thread rainyd already pointed to, besides some shorter but no less interesting threads... It's always worth remembering to look up there, when starting to search on any 9x/ME related subject. HTH

VIA doesn't give any trouble, either, if, after NUSB 3.3, one updates the 2.0 drivers with VIA's own.

For further info about RLoew software, look here. HTH.

Easiest way: Open her up and pluck two memory sticks for installation purposes only (leave just 1 GiB). Then follow one of these procedures. Then set MaxPhysPage=40000 ; (1 GiB) MaxFileCache=131072 ; (128 MiB) in system.ini. Then put those two memory sticks back, and it should work reasonably. Then you may delve deep into the two threads linked from my signature, in order to tweal 98SE until it becomes working great (of course it would be best if you did this before starting, but it may take a long time to get acquainted with their huge contents, so the above is a possible way to actually start by getting it to work).

Which DNS logger do you use? Is it another of your programs? So far, cookie tracking has done the job fine for me, but if it's possible to be more thorough, I'm always interested.

External USB HDDs should work nicely too, AFAIK.

Try Japheth's VWin32 Memory Status. But observe that increasing the RAM above 512 MiB should not increase the internet or overal speed noticeably. It'll widen your ability to handle large bmps and other graphics, and large data files in general. But it oughtn't harm your speed either... To establish it for sure, define or select some benchmarks of your choice, run them, then pluck out one of the RAM sticks and run them again. Compare the benchmarks results, if nothing changes, then it's not the RAM. Observe that you don't need to reconfigure the OS, since it'll work OK with less RAM, with the same settings used for more RAM. After you're conviced it's not the RAM, then put back the temporarily removed stick. Note: Link's now fixed, thanks to Dave-H!

Count to ten before opening a new thread. And actually use the help received, or you'll start to be ignored. Threads merged. Since VideoRipper already said what had to be said, I only have to add: consider yourself warned!

I was about to post just this, when I read your post! Way to go! I must add, however, that I don't actually use MDGx's HOSTS files myself, because I find them way too much restrictive. I prefer the one I linked to some posts above, as the basis of my HOSTS file, and have been adding to it more addresses slowly. But for the in-depth explanation, MDGx's page is the best resource on the web, for sure. @wsxedcrfv: one sure way of determining which cookies' URL's are needed for a specific site is to disable the HOSTS file, then use NirSoft's IECookesView to destroy all cookies, then access the desired site and do whatever you want to do there, and then return to IECookesView and jot down what was added. Then comment out those url's in the hosts file, enable it back again, test, and finally uncomment each url alone, to find out which are really needed. With patience you can determine precisely which urls are needed for that site and decide whether to leave them commented-out or not. I'm not sure whether IECookesView works with 9x/ME, because I've been doing this in XP, so this procedure needs to be tested under 9x/ME.