Sfor

What size is your HDD? Let's say you have a 250GB drive. 137/250=0,548. Enter up to 54% as the size of the first partition, then.

Have you tried to tell the Fdisk to make a partition in % of the drive. Fdisk does not work correctly when using capacity as the input. But, when using % it works quite good. It just displays wrong data. It is possible to use bigger partitions than 137GB. But, some OS functions will not work properly, then. I had a lot of problems with Windows 95 and a 160GB HDD. Windows 98 can work very good with the drives exceeding 137GB depending on the IDE drivers used. DOS is working fine if BIOS supports the LBA48.

I replaced the explorer by a simple files replacement. I did not touched any registry settings, so it's quite possible the solution is somewhere there. LiteStep looks like something very interesting. Unfortunately the site was not fully recovered after the HDD crash. So, I was unable to find out what language versions are available there. --------------- I just took a look at the Revenge of Mozilla. Unfortunately it will work with English language windows versions, only. So, it is useless, to me.

I've encountered a BIG problem with Windows 95 explorer. I copied, then deleted a few thousand files. The files were deleted completely, without putting them to the recycle bin. The explorer was working as usual. But then I deleted a single file to the recycle bin. The explorer froze for good. It's quite possible this problem does not exists in the 98lite. But, it makes such an explorer replacement in an working system a bit useless. So, back to the drawing boards.

Well. Not from there, but I did. First of all, the amount of unofficial updates available to me is limited, because I do use a Polish language Windows 98 SE. There is a Polish language version of USP 2.1 available, so I'm using it. I've been working both with IE 5.5 SP2, and later with IE 6 SP1 with the Browseui.dll and Browselc.dll fix. I used updates from the Microsoft, as well. The .dll fix does help, indeed. But, the explorer locks without IE 6, as well. The Explorer with IE 5.5 locks for shorter amount of time, then it works fine. In case of IE 6 the explorer is unstable till the system reboot (with the dll fix it works just like with IE 5.5). (A note. Explorer locks are related to file operations on a large amount of files. A few thousand, at least) Windows 95 explorer is faster and locks for short amount of time only after deleting files to the recycle bin. Windows 98 explorer version locks after all file related operations (copying, moving, deleting without a difference with recycle bin or without it).

I'm not sure if it is a good idea. The 98 explorer is the one responsible for the most annoying problems. So, bringing the 98 dll's back can bring the 98 explorer problems back, as well. Well. I decided I went a bit too far during my experiments, so I restored the system from the copy I made before this whole system shell replacement. I did everything from the beginning, but this time I left IE 6, as it was. And, the PopTray closes correctly, now. I do not know what was the cause. Perhaps this problem was related to IE uninstall, or perhaps it was not. I encountered yet another strange problem. This particular system was clonned from another computer. Then I changed network name and a license number (all my Windows 9x systems are legal, I have a few certificates of athenticity). Anyways, there was a .LNK file created when the computer had a different network name. It appears at the first run of the Windows 95 explorer the links in the start menu were processed in some strange way. One of the links was changed to point on the original file on the computer with the old network name. In other words the link was changed to the original file it was created from, so it points at the file on the other computer in my LAN. Then I replaced the link with the one I extracted from the system copy. And, it remained unchanged from that time. Looks like the Windows 95 explorer at first run does believe it is the first system start after an upgrade or installation. So it does some sort of the Start menu link conversion (or something). It is a little low possible someone else will encounter a similiar problem as I did, but this particular case gives some information about what is going on in the system. I think it should be possible to persuade the Explorer to not to do the "first run conversion". But, is it a good idea? Will it work better without it? Perhaps it will, but perhaps not.

i thought this had something to do with shell32.dll and broswseui.dll v6 but it doesnt matter too much. Well. I'm copying and deleting files quite often. This particular bug is what made me hate the Windows 98 system shell. The problem does exist with the IE 5.5, as well. It is not as irritating, as the explorer returns resources to the system, after a while. In case of IE 6 the resources are never released. Windows 95 does it much faster. The only problem is deleting files to the recycle bin (It takes some time to recover in such a case). In Windows 98 deleting a lot of files files always locks explorer (no matter deleting to recycle bin, or not). that can be fixed by using reshack to change the bmp in explorer.exe Done. The Reshack worked like a charm. I've noticed the notepad is not working, so I relpaced it with the Windows 95 vesrsion, as well. Also, It appears PopTray 3.2 does not want to close itself during the system shutdown. All other applications are working correctly, I think. Another side effect is the Suspend option. It was possible to remove this option from the Start menu. Windows 95 controll pannel had a proper checkox for it. Now the Suspend option is useless, and it can not be hidden. Yet another problem: IE does not see the favourite links. The folder the links are kept in has a System attribute enabled. I removed the system attribute with a disk editor. But, it would be simpler to make a copy of the folder before switching to Windows 95 shell, then delete it and create a new folder with the same name. As, it is a bit difficult to remove a system attribute from a folder. Anyways, without the system attribute, the favourite links are working fine.

I went a bit further. I made a backup copy of the whole system. I replaced the 3 files with Windows 95 versions. The result is, it works. The side effects I found so far: - Start menu displays Windows 95, instead of Windows 98 Second Edition. - Internet links in Outlook Express 6 stopped working. (After switching the default browser to Firefox, and then back to IE links are working correctly) - The Firefox does not switch itself to default browser, correctly. - Explorer does display the folder navigation column, only. (the column width was exceeding the screen width. Woks fine, after adjusting) - File display preferences were set to the default values. - The "What's new in Windows 98" presentation is launched at every Windows boot. I'm unable to swith it off in the Msconfig. (looks, like the system shell thinks it is the first system boot after the setup. I deleted the C:\Windows\Welcome.exe and the problem is gone) - It is not possible to go to the suspend power mode. - After copying or deleting large amount of files the system works fine. Absolutely no Explorer freezing.

I started digging in the Internet looking for the informations about the 98lite. It looks like, the language versions provided by 98lite are just the installer language versions. Files used in the process are provided by user, so it should be possible to use 98lite with any language Windows 98 version. Also, 98lite takes 3 files from Windows 95 in order to replace the system shell: explorer.exe, shell32.dll i comdlg32.dll. I'm curious, if I will be able to replace the shell a by simple replace of these files in an working Windows 98 SE USP2.1.

Well, I do like the Windows 95 explorer. It's seems to be more reliable, than 98 one. There is a problem with the file set size calculation (exceeding 4GB). Yet, it seems to be a good one. But, I have a problem with 98lite. It is not available in the Polish language version. I have a few doubts in Windows 98 without IE, as well. Some software, including drivers, requires IE to be installed. It should be possible to tweak with the shell leaving the IE unused, but still available if necesary.

After playing a bit with Windows 98 and IE 6, I've started to consider switching to Windows 2000. Why?... Because it copies and deletes files without any additional effects (like desktop freezing, explorer locking and other system resources related problems). Then I started to think about how to make the Windows 98 better. The conclusion is the worst components of the Windows 98 system are the system shell (explorer.exe) and the Internet Explorer. But, it is possible to replace the system shell with any application. Well,... it is possible to do it, all right. But, it would be good to retain the system shell functionality, in the same time. Writing a completely new system shell is a bit complicated task. Is there any replacement available, already?

So, we are facing a law related problem, possibly. Is it legal to add a multicore support to Windows 98?

The greatest advantage of a Windows 9x OS is the simplicity. It's easier to backup, restore, move to other hard drive and so on. The DOS included is not without a meaning, as well. The system performance is not the most important parameter for many users. It is possible to buy a better computer with a newer OS, if the performance is necesary. That's why I do believe multi CPU support is unnecesary. A much more important task would be to remove some of the Windows 98 old issues.

Almost correct. But there is no bootstrap file in the first sector of the hard drive. This sector is called Master Boot Record. There is a partition table there, and a program responsible for selection of the partition and further boot actions. It is not a file, certainly. That's right. To be more specific, the code from MBR calls code from boot sector of some active partition. Then the system files are loaded. The code located in boot sector is put there during the OS installation. So, the code loading system files is different for each OS.

I can not remind a recycle bin related issue. I've been experimenting with the msvcrt.dll problem. It does not always happen at the first attempt. But, when it starts, all folders with msvcrt file are affected till computer is restarted.

So does the Windows say with the error message. But, this is not possible. I can move the same folder by copying it, then deleting the source files. I would not be able to delete a file used by Windows, isn't it? Also, how on earth Windows would lock all the msvcrt.dll files in all folders on all hard drives? I was testing the issue copying around the folder found on the Windows 98 SE CD: add-ons\pws. But, the same effect gives an attempt to move any folder with an msvcrt.dll file in it. I can move the same folders around without any problems, if the operation is made on the same partition.

I'm experiencing problems while trying to move folders to some other HDD partition. If there is a msvcrt.dll named file in the folder, the move operation stops on this file. I'm not sure how to translate the error message to english, anyways, it says the file is locked. In the target directory a msvcrt.dll file name is created (file is empty). Moving files operation stops at that moment. The work around procedure is to copy the folder, then to delete the source. Why the Windows 98 SE USP 2.1 (IE 6 SP1) acts so strangely? The effect is not limited to msvcrt.dll files. It happens in some other cases, as well.

Well. I've found a nice way to detect windows kernel running. %windir% enviroment variable is created when Windows kernel starts. Checking if such a variable exists is quite a good way to test the Windows GUI presence. But, there is an exception. During the windows boot WINSTART.BAT script runs before the GUI, yet the %windir% variable exists, already.

Check, if the CardBus devices are sharing the same IRQ line with the sound card.

Well, it should not solve the problem. The Windows 9x kernel takes direct controll over the hardware. So, the DOS layer can not do multi CPU support. If the DOS would support multi CPU cores, the support would stop in the moment the Windows 9x kernel is started.

I've been observing problems when some device shared IRQ with the ACPI controller. Looks like some devices do not want to share IRQ with others. Also, it is a good habbit to not to use IRQ 9 (ACPI controller is using it) if not necesary. Besides that, ACPI was not causing problems to me. My Windows 98 computers were working days without a crash, quite often. I do believe some boards or devices do have problems with ACPI or APM. But, I'm using Intel based boards mostly. The last ACPI related conflict was caused by using the same IRQ 9 by Intel hardware monitoring software and TV tunner card. It happened on Windows 95, as far as I remember. I moved the TV tunner to the other slot, and everything was working fine. The SCSI controller was working correctly on the same IRQ 9 line.

Checking for %windir% enviroment variable is woking quite good. It does have just one weak point. The %windir% variable is set during winstart.bat call. The Windows kernel works, but the GUI is still down, then. So, it is not possible to run a WIN32 application, then. It's a very good solution, anyway.

I never cared to check if the CD writing software handles the non OEM translatable ANSI characters correctly.

I'm looking for the best way to test a DOS real mode application is runing Windows GUI. I've been testing for DOS LFN extension services, so far. But, with the presence of the LFNDOS driver, it is possible to have LFN support without Windows GUI running. My application is a core of a backup/restore system and it should be aware if the GUI is present, before running any windows GUI utility. It is possible to run a WIN32 application waiting for an error result, but such a methode looks a bit crude. Some iterrupt based solution should be much more effective, I think.

It will not help. It is not possible to translate the ANSI table to DOS OEM table. Windows can not do it. Only Windows native applications are able to open files with such characters. A DOS application is not able to open such a file, so it will not be able to back it up, as well. The characters affected by national code pages are handled correctly by LFNDOS, apparently. The Windows and LFNDOS are translating them to OEM and BAC without loosing any information. But, some characters not covered by national conversion tables are converted in one direction only. An example: The ® character converted to OEM by windows will be R (LFNDOS will convert it to _). Conversion from OEM to ANSI of the R is also R (LFNDOS will also convert it to _). So after restoring the file name Might and Magic® IX will be: Might and MagicR IX - in Windows Might and Magic_ IX - in LFNDOS There is another difference between Windows and LFNDOS. Windows will not let ARJ to open "Might and MagicR IX" file. As it does not exist in the system. The LFNDOS will let to open "Might and Magic_ IX" and to make a copy of it. But, the proper name will be lost in the process. ------ edit ------- I've been playing with the backup utility supplied with the Windows 98SE. And, guess what it did,... it left some files behind. After restoring some files were missing, of course. ARJ is much better.