dencorso

Happy birthday, puntoMX!

Implying i do not have a dynamic IP @Richie: submix8c is right! Cease and desist of acting provocatively. Consider yourself warned.

You should read the Forum Rules, before posting! As it is, you've just violated Rule # 9. Consider yourself warned.

How so? Did you actually read entirely the MSKB Fox Mulder pointed you to, or just a few of the first lines? Yes. It's easy! Just follow the instructions in http://support.microsoft.com/kb/324767, whither Fox Mulder just pointed you. Here, do this first: And then test to see whether the issue was resolved. In any case, post back telling us what happened, OK?

9-17-2009 Added under "Supported Software, Games + Hardware": * How to archive old floppies for access under Win98: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=136856 9-27-2009 Added under "Supported Software, Games + Hardware": * Using big USB HDDs with Win 9x/ME (0.5 TiB or larger HDDs): http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=138283 * Reordered some links for easier reference. Enjoy.

I confirm your findings.Manual update with the "avi" files still works. At least as of 270.13.133/2397, released today. One must keep on the look-out, though, for the moment the next files stop working, as happened before with Ad-Aware SE, Build 1.06r1, at Definitions File SE1R246 09.05.2008... And, of course, to avoid getting the nag files, automatic updates must be and remain disabled. Great find, sleffing! You do rock!

Yes, precisely! Well... Never bump before, at least, a day has elapsed. And in case your post is totally ignored and falls all the way to page 2, that would be the point to bump it, or forget about it. Those are extremes. Things in-between must be decided on a case-by-case, but three to four bumps in a week, if you don't do it every time you post something, would be quite acceptable. It's definitely better to bump, in this case. Or even to ask a mod to move it somewhere better in the reply, instead of posting just "bump". Let's hope so. It depends on the question. When one asks a truly unanswerable question (yes: they do exist!), no amount of bumping will ever get it answered.

But... but... but it isn't enough to fix the MBR partition table format (in which the last two entries, "Sectors Preceding Partition a.k.a. LBA of 1st Sector" and "Number of Sectors in Partition" are both 32-bit numbers, and hence limited to 2 TiB)! You'd have to first fix the PBR (= Boot Record) format, because the last entry in the BPB ("Sector Number", for large volumes) is also a 32-bit number. And while you can have a working disk without a MBR (= "super-floppy"), you cannot have a working disk without a PBR. In any case, your first approach seems safer. But both, to be generally usable for those who multiboot, like me, would require also a Win 2k/XP counterpart, to avoid problems, isn't it so?

1) I think now is the appropriate time to reread the thread "Problems with 1 TB RAID, Format (DOS, Windows) doesn't work properly!" and ponder about it some more. I invite you all to do so. 2) I've just added a link to this thread to my using HDDs larger than 137 GB (128 GiB) with Win 9x/ME thread, for easier reference.

It works, all right! Let me tell you all how it's done: I) Download either GenuineCheck.exe ver. 1.7.36.0 or GenuineCheck.exe ver. 1.7.69.2, as per post #5, and keep it in a convenient directory. It requires no installation. But it does require a registered msxml3.dll (in doubt, refer to post #5). II) Navigate to Validate Windows Using an Alternate Method, as per post #7, and click "Validate Now". It'll offer the download of "legitcheck.hta". Accept it and direct the download of this file to C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM (or whatever the route to the SYSTEM directory in your machine is). Use the other link provided in post #7, in case you're interested in validating Office. III) Go to a Microsoft download page that requires validation and click on the "Continue" button that is beside the "Validation Required" message on the orange ribbon. A box will open and offer to install "Windows Genuine Advantage" and you'll click on the "No" button. Then scroll down the page and click on the link "Genuine Windows Validation, Alternate Method". IV) You'll arrive on a page that has two items: (1) Run the validation tool and (2) Enter your validation code. Do not use the first item because, if you do it, it will download GenuineCheck.exe ver. 1.9.0009.1 or greater, which does not run in Win 9x/ME. I repeat, don't click on "Continue" below the item (1), or select Cancel, in case you've already done it. V) Run GenuineCheck.exe ver. 1.7.36.0 or 1.7.69.2 instead, from the directory you'd saved it to, and use the "Copy to Clipboard" button in it, then close it. If it's the first time you run it, it'll complain it's outdated. Just run it once more, and it'll work. VI) Go back to your navigator and paste the code you just obtained to the approppriate window below the item (2) in the page you were, and then click on the "Validate" button. VII) You'll be automagically taken back to the download page you had originally navigated to in item III of this post, but now, instead of the orange ribbon, there will be a blue one, saying Genuine Microsoft Software, with a "Download" button beside it. Use that button to download normally. Enjoy! P.S.: (i) Thanks are due to Marius '95, who originally reported (link) that GenuineCheck.exe ver. 1.7.36.0 runs OK under Win 9x/ME. He's the real inventor of this procedure, although he did not describe it in so many words. You do rock, Marius '95! : (ii) Thanks are due to jds, for pointing out that GenuineCheck.exe ver. 1.7.69.2 also runs OK under 9x/ME. You do rock too, jds! (iii) Perhaps it's possible to simplify this procedure, by omitting step II above. I'm not positive that "legitcheck.hta" is really needed. If anyone would be willing to test this hypothesis and report, please do so! (iv) And thanks also to loblo, for the info on the next post. Yes, loblo rocks too!

The discussion about Using big USB HDDs with Win 9x/ME (0.5 TiB or larger HDDs), which was started by oc_dt, is now split into it's very own thread, and you all can find it here: link.

It's all right, charly! The problem, for me at least, was *not* your bumping the thread, but the way you did it. And I suspect lightning slinger felt the same. You see, when one bumps a thread with a clear open question, the reason for a one-word bump post is self-evident. When that's not the case some explanation for the bump is needed, and now you provided it. So, here it goes: the link I provided above is to the previous thread on this subject, Microsoft Office 2007 Compatibility Pack doesn't work with Win9x, which has other solutions in it, besides Docx2Rtf v3.8... do read it at lenght, and maybe you'll find something you like there. The last post by Multibooter there provides a particularly interesting solution, BTW.

Read the sticky Disk Imaging Software, and take your pick.

I have THREE of them salvaged from a company gone default. I've also kept one to for my desktop. Does that make us old ? I'm very bad at typing and the clicking is a continuous acknowledgement. No, not old... ancient, please!@jaclaz: Wow! The aviator is awesome! And there's a lot more on that site, too! I *am* impressed.

@DarCath: Read this, please.@charly: I agree with lightning slinger: why bump this thread?

I've sent you a PM, Sfor! Did you receive it?

:blushing: They're now corrected, thanks a lot! You do rock! And thanks for the enlightening info! @all: BTW, perhaps we should open a "Using big USB HDDs thread", as >= 0.5 TiB USB HDDs are becoming affordable. And maybe use these latest posts, from the original oc_dt post as the thread start... If you all find the idea worthwhile I can make it happen. What do you all think?

Well, I use a vintage 1993 IBM model M (1391401) clicky (buckling spring) keyboard. They are sturdy, reliable and heavenly to type in. One can still buy them new as of today, and they usually cost something in between US$ 50 to US$ 90, and are worth every cent of it. They don't have the windows keys and the menu key, however, so they're great for those who, like me, don't miss them. Of course, in matters of taste YMMV widely.

Thanks to BenoitRen, I finally understood why you remained confused. Yes, that was a most unfortunate one letter typo, because it fostered confusion. Sorry! While I'm usually double-careful to revise what I write, there are some typos it takes another pair of eyes to find, because (due to some psycological mechanism I don't even begin to understand) who wrote it will always read what was intended to be written, instead of what actually is set to text. You're most welcome, oc_dt!

Hi, RLoew! Well, since you're reading this, would you be so kind as to tell us a little more about the nature of the VFAT.VxD and about your 1 TiB patch. As I understand, differently from your 2 TiB patch, your 1 TiB patch should work with NUSB, as it just modifies VFAT.VxD... am I right? What happens in a system having an unpatched VFAT.VxD when one writes beyond 1 TiB? Does the system crash, or, worse, VFAT fails silently and renders the FS inconsistent?

Yes. Findable in Maximus-Decim Native USB Drivers, post #1, and also here: Windows 98 USB Mass Storage Device Drivers. It's complicated... FAT-32 uses 28 bits (not 32, mind you), so, yes, that allows for a maximum of 8 TiB... but the system is not just the FAT, there is, at least, also the volume boot record (= VBR a.k.a. partition boot record = PBR), and that structure has a 32-bit field for storing the total number of sectors of the partition, which results in a limit of 2 TiB. Now, that's the true limit of the FAT-32 filesystem, as you can check in the File Allocation Table entry in the Wikipedia, for more details. But, last year, RLoew found out that the VFAT.VxD (which is Win 9x/ME's protected mode filesystem driver) has a flaw that efectively prevents it from working correctly above 1 TiB (and developed a patch to resolve this issue, see the section "PRERELEASE AND BETA SOFTWARE" of RLoew's Homepage). So, to make short a long story, the effective limit of FAT-32, when used under Win 9x/ME is 1 TiB, unless you patch VFAT.VxD. Incidentally, RLoew has other patches relevant here, that permit one to go up to the 8 TiB, but then one will be using a non-standard FAT-32. We're *not* talking about that! We're here talking about FileSystemSize, mind you. The Filesize limit for FAT is 4 GiB - 1 byte or the maximum FileSystemSize, whichever is less. That amouts to 32 MiB for FAT-12, 2 GiB for FAT-16 and, for FAT-32, 4 GiB - 1 byte. That is so because the directory entries in FAT store the Filesize as a 32-bit number. Plug in the USB HDD. It'll just work! Mind you that it takes about 30 sec or a little more to detect and mount so big a HDD. It's not a bug, though. And Win XP Pro SP3 takes just as long. Yet, a single 500 GiB partition works, but is not a good idea, because many of the usual maintenance tools cannot cope well with that. I have one such USB HDD for some years, now, and decided to divide it in two 250 GiB partitions (note that it'll take somewhat less than 1 min. for both partitions to be mounted, after you connect it via USB), which work OK with all usual tools. That's my experience. YMMV, though. But I do believe you're not going to have any troubles with your big USB HDD, as I don't have with mine. The link to using HDDs larger than 137 GB (128 GiB) with Win 9x/ME is at the right side of my signature for a reason: to be easily findable for every member needing it. I strongly recommend that you read it (and all the threads pointed in it) at lenght, after following all the links I provided in this and also in my previous answers to you. You'll say: " but... but... that's *a lot* to read!!!" The answer is: "of course! But when you have digested all that, you'll know about all that we here collectively found out about this matter, along the years!". So brace yourself and start reading! But do remember: your USB HDD will just work with NUSB, no matter whether you have already read or not! So you can start using it *now*, and do all your reading as time permits, OK?

There is no 137GB limit for NUSB. There is no 137GB limit for USB. Period. I'm positive about this. The only limits are those due to the FAT filesystem and to VFAT.VxD (see next answer). It can be FAT-12 (up to 32 MiB, due to the maximum number of sectors allowed in the boot record), FAT-16 (up to 2 GiB due to the FAT having 16 bits) or FAT-32 (up to 1 TiB, due to limitations in VFAT.VxD). It cannot be NTFS or any other FS, unless you add the corresponding third party FS driver.HTH

3: Win XP Pro SP3, Win 98 SE, MS-DOS 7.10. I use Grub4DOS to multiboot.

No. It seems there are some files in it. Maybe hidden files. Look inside it and let us know.

On a hunch? I explicitly told you to do so, in case you already had msxml3.dll! Now that you know GenuineCheck.exe works on your system, go to either: Validate Windows Using an Alternate Method or Validate Microsoft Office Using an Alternate Method And, in either case, when prompted, be sure to select Run this program from its current location. Now you should be able to download what you need to.