dencorso

Use HDD Health v. 2.1: (direct download link). Don't try to use the newer v. 3.x, because they'll mess up your system.

You mean "RECYCLED", not "RECYCLER", of course! An easy alternative is NirSoft's free NIRCMD. At the command prompt or using Start -> Run, just type: NIRCMD.EXE emptybin <enter>

GRUB4DOS. Ain't no other.

It may work. But do use Regshot on XP to find out which registry changes the installer does, because you'll certaily have to transfer them to the 98 installation, too. I've read around there is a version of RegShot that already creates the necessary .reg file, but I don't have a link for it, sorry. Google for it, it may save you a lot of time. Good luck!

. Sure. I misread your question. Sorry! What you are seeking isn't easy to find at all. I'm sorry I cannot help you. You should PM MDGx about this thread just to be sure he'll read it as soon as he logs in.

Not right now. Only Deep Purple today.

Google is your friend... DOS Config.sys/Autoexec.bat Menu. When you use the [Menu] constructs in config.sys, DOS automagically sets a %CONFIG% variable in the master environment, so as to let you know, from AUTOEXEC.BAT, which option was selected during CONFIG.SYS execution and react accordingly.

It seems you've removed both ACPI and APM. If so, then the OS has no means to turn itself off...

Do you all know it's possible to share the same swap file between Win XP and Win 9x? Here's how: common swap! I have been using a Shared Swap File for a long time, now, and it never gave me grief. And if you find this interesting, look around the rest of Nienhuis' Win 98 & 2k Pro page, which has lots of good info. While it's about 98 and 2k, most, if not all of it applies "as is" to XP also.

No, I didn't. Read again the quoted text in your own post. It's RLoew's patch we're talking about. I just quoted him here because his original post about it was in the Compatible Hardware with Windows 9x, and I thought it belonged here also. In that I was right, because you noticed it here, not there. Now, I have 3 GiB of RAM in my machine, but only a Geforce2 MX 400 32MB VRAM. So I've never encoutered the issue myself. But you can find it referenced along this selfsame thread, many times. AFAIK, what happens is the system does not finish booting up. Now, if you're willing to test the patch, you'll need to add more RAM. And I think this issue is not related to the hanging shut-down. In any case, to test the patch you should contact RLoew either by PM or by e-mail to the address indicated in his original post.

Great! Great find, geek!

Way to go, Tihiy!!!

It might be identical but I doubt it.Welcome to MSFN, phelum!You misunderstood the sense of os2fan2's statement: She meant that the patched file you offer is based in the IO.SYS file from KB311561 (or, in other words, that you patched the KB311561 Win 98SE IO.SYS). This was of importance for her point because, inside the hotfix KB311561, there are two versions of IO.SYS, one meant to be used in 98SE, and the other for 98FE, but both those two files are in fact identical. Hence she concluded that your patched file must work OK also with Win 98FE.

I'm cross-quoting this post because I think it may help solve some of the problems reported in this thread. I don't have a suitable video card either, if I did I'd be quite glad to test the patch myself.

Hi, glocK_94! It's still available for download here: KB162500.

It depends on how aggressively you use the registry cleaner... on one hand, it is quite hard to get any real performance improvement, on the other it's quite easy to mess up your system beyond all recognition. If you really want to do it be sure to create a restore point you can fall back to before doing it.

The day LLXX was banned is a day best forgotten. She is very bright and gifted, but unfortunately has also the unfortunate and incontrollable ability to get herself banned from forums, this one not being the only one she managed to get banned from. This said, I'd like to point out that her patches are, by now, time proven to work flawlessly. I, myself, have been using the one for esdi_506.pdr v. 4.10.2225 for quite a long time now, without any issues. On the other hand, I do use and value very highly RLoew's patches and non XMS-ramdisks. He also solved the general case of the SATA problem, for which there are no free drivers available, except for Via and Intel chipsets. So, in my view, we're fortunate to have both LLXX's and RLoew's patches available to the community. I do wish RLoew remains active and available to us for many years. And I do lament LLXX is not available anymore (in fact, she now seems to have fully disappeared from the English language web, as far as I can ascertain).

This discussion about who is on top of whom isn't going anywhere. As I stated before, Windows bootstraps itself using DOS and can then work pretty much on it's own. Eidenk's engine analogy is valid. Of course a diesel engine without a starter is pretty much useless. The point is that Windows 95, 98 and ME are all the SAME with respect to this issue, so it doesn't help answer the question that started this thread. I personally didn't like the DOS restrictions in ME so I concentrated my attention on Windows 98SE. I agree. The main point is there are only two multitasking OS families originated at MS: 9x/ME and NT. And within each family, the differences are mostly in the details. And, yes, I prefer 98SE over ME for the same reason I do prefer raspberries over strawberries. Both, with some good tweaking, are rock solid. Yes, it does. And it's quite elegant. But just for the sake of completeness, let me remember the valuable Reines' patch: Real DOS-Mode Patch for Win ME v. 1.3, which works beautifully. It uses the EBD IO.SYS instead of the default one,and ought to be applied after update Q311561, which updates both versions of IO.SYS.

The 137GB limit is real all right. Much has been discussed about it. Please refer to the index topic about it that I've compiled, to which there is a link below, in the signature part of this message:

Thanks seaweed! This topic is not itself pinned but threre is a pinned pointer to it... If you go to Important / "Stickified" / Pinned Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME Topics, you'll find a pointer to it as the last item in section "Supported Software, Games + Hardware". And I've put a pointer to it on my own signature file also, to make it even easier to find. I know it's not perfect, but it's the best I was able to do, up to now.

Windows ME runs on top of DOS 8.00. IO.SYS is the DOS kernel (hence, much more than a simple OS loader), and the ME version of IO.SYS contains an embedded HIMEM.SYS, and loads IFSHLP.SYS by itself. That's DOS. It, however, can load Win ME (viz.: VMM.VxD) without ever loading COMMAND.COM. So you can say Win ME runs without the DOS *shell*. That's the main difference it has, when compared to 98SE. HTH.

In posts #2, 3 and 4 I had reproduced, as quotations, the now lost, original resources thread, from what I had saved myself. All posts between Oct 19 2007 and Nov 20 2007 were then lost. Now, thanks to RetroOS, who sent me a copy of the part I was missing, I have been able to complete the recovery of the original thread. So, now, the quoted thread in posts #2, 3 and 4 is complete. Thanks a whole lot, RetroOS! You do rock!

steelbytes. Google for it or seach the forum.

Get and install NirSoftware Current Process (google for it). With it running, start Open Office and navigate to the point where the missing toolbar is. Let it open and go to Current Process and do a refresh and click on the Open Office process, and there you'll see all the .exes and .dll it relies on. Jot them down and substitute one by one of these files by the ones you had before 98SE2ME. You'll have to go to DOS and back for each substitution. In this way you can find the file that's causing the issue. Good luck!

Way to go, Tihiy! I shall test it as soon as you release it!