AlexaD
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by AlexaD
-
-
It's common knowledge among techs, at least, that every PC running the old cluggy Win-98 should be upgraded to Win-98/SE. The USB and printer support is greatly enhanced and many other problems in 98 are fixed.
Yep and then my scanner doesn't work. And that's a USB scanner. Spent several days on the phone with the manufacturer before I gave up, formatted the drive and dumped 98 on it, where the scanner works perfectly. They fixed that one till it broke.
I'd never before found any reason to pick one over the other but after that BS, I destroyed my copy of 98SE to make sure I never used it again. I'm sure it works fine for other people, but 98 works fine for me and is probably faster (just a guess, but every upgrade I've ever seen is bigger and slower).
Copies of the 98/SE Upgrade CD are as common as can be and even a 98/SE OEM install CD can be made to work if you first rename 'win.com' to something else (like, win.old) so the setup.exe program on the CD can't see it. Then the upgrade to SE goes off without a hitch. The old registry, drivers and all data is preserved.In my experience, renaming win.com has never confused the setup program. It's been awhile since I "played", but it seems to me that it looks for the registry and those are the files you'd have to rename, but then you'd get no import from them.
Just my opinion...,
Alexa
0 -
Not knowing how the CD is set up but guessing that it's similar to 98, here's my guess: Navigate into the Win98SE folder and launch setup from there.
Flash drive should work with 98 though it's possible that the driver-writers crippled it (zero reason why any 32bit driver shouldn't work from 95 to XP). I've got one that's only supported back to 98SE and it works fine on 98.
Good luck!
0 -
The use of the word 'shell' needs to defined here I believe, and then you may both be right? Erpdude8 is technically right to start with, perhaps win 3.1 could run without a shell but no other Windows can. What you call a shell does not come solely from the shell32.dll file, so swapping shell files, which I assume you mean to be swapping shells, is in fact only swapping shell files. I am considering explorer.exe to be a part of swapping shell files here just for the sake of the argument.
When you swap shell files, you also swap some shell behaviors (imagine that!), but the actual shell remains a core of the version of Windows you are running and that can't be swapped as far as I know. Unless you want to consider a reboot to a different OS the same thing as a swap, which I don't. It doesn't help when MS themselves freely drop the name shell at such a rate, no one can know what they really mean by the term exactly.
Umm.... To me, as examples, the shell is Program Manager from Win3.1x or the desktop process of Explorer from everything later. I even made a crude one once that had three buttons (Scandisk, Defrag, Reboot). It's the program responsible for giving one initial access to everything. It's a bit more than that, but I'm having trouble putting it into words. If I'm right, all versions of Windows will run without it, though most, if not all, won't start without it. Also, 98lite could replace 98's copy of Explorer (and related files) with 95's thereby replacing the shell. If I'm wrong, I wouldn't be surprised.
0 -
how can i add Windows 95b shell as an optional component during setup?
you can't. the win95b shell is required in order for win95b to work; otherwise, win95b won't run at all. so there is no option to add it during win95b setup
I hate reviving threads, but I have to ask: Are you sure? I used to regularly change shells to run scandisk and defrag. Theoretically, you should be able to remove those files and Windows still run though I'd expect a lot of other things to act differently or not at all.
0 -
kristobal's right, but since I use Win98 I can explain it better:
If, when booting, you don't have the startup menu appearing you'll need to either enable it or hold down the Ctrl key at the right time (too soon and BIOS will b***h about a stuck key, too late and you'll miss it).
To enable it, open a DOS prompt, switch to C:\ and run the following commands:
attrib -r msdos.sys
notepad msdos.sys
It uses a standard ini format. Under [Options], find and edit the line:
BootMenu=1
If it's not there, add it. You can also add:
BootDelay=2
BootMenuDelay=2
to shorten the wait so it's not annoying if you leave it enabled. Seems that one line works some places and the other in other places, but having both won't hurt.
Save. Close.
You can also use TweakUI to enable this much more easily.
Reboot.
Whichever way you do it, choose "Command Prompt Only". When it gets to the prompt, type:
win /d:m
Optionally, before you start Windows, you can launch SmartDrv which will help with disk-intensive tasks.
0
Is it possible in Safe Mode
in Windows 9x/ME
Posted
If you want to execute autoexec.bat and config.sys during a safe-mode boot without showing the menu, then you can't.
You can, however, execute a normal boot that forces windows into safe mode. While the end result would be the same, this method would cause it to always go into safe mode (whether it needs it or not) which is, IMO, stupid:
Add a line at the end of autoexec.bat which reads simply "win /d:m".
There's a HUGE world of difference between running Windows normally and running it in safe-mode and using an in-between option such as executing the DOS boot files but running Windows itself in safe mode.