joe tweaker

I ran some experiments on OnTrack and was unable to get it properly support 48-Bit LBA. As you found out the hard way, it is not safe to test 48-Bit LBA support on a Hard Drive by writing test files above the 137GB Limit while having important files below the limit. BIOS issues, bad DDOs and Windows XP RTM, and to a lesser extent Windows 9X, will write data intended to go above the 137GB limit to other locations below the limit destroying the data you thought was safe. The new files are probably mostly still OK. You would have to read them with the same bad driver and get around the probably corrupted partition table. You will need the help of the CIA to get back any of your old data. Re: Safety of 48bitLBA patch Do I understand correctly that the 48bitLBA patch for 98SE is safe to use, provided you also have a 48bitLBA enabled BIOS, no partitions over 128GB, AND have NOT installed a third party manager like OnTrack? No manufacturer sells drives with OnTrack pre-installed, right? They might furnish a CD containing OnTrack, but if you have the BIOS support, no partition over 128GB, install ONLY the 48bitLBA patch, and NEVER install the OnTrack manager, then your data is safe, right? That is, the problem exists ONLY when using OnTrack and 48bitLBA patch together, and is due more to a failure in OnTrack than in the 48bitLBA patch? I've always been wary of using products like OnTrack. Based on this info, it appears my instincts were correct. I don't currently have any hard disks over 120GB, but someday I might, so this is good info to know in advance.

Have a look at these threads: http://www.msfn.org/board/Updates_Win98SE_t103184.html http://www.msfn.org/board/correct_order_t88646.html http://www.msfn.org/board/98se_service_pac...eed_t73810.html This is not necessarily the final word, or a complete index of threads on this subject. Just a few I found and bookmarked. There may be others. Feel free to add your favorites. This question gets asked so often, I think it would be a good candidate for a 'sticky'.

Same here (fully Auto-patched 98SE). How much free space on your hard drive? I've got 10 GB free where I put my swap file, and mine just kept growing (until I deleted it). Cacheman showed usage going up and down, but file size only went up. I wonder if one of the unofficial patches or updates causes the behavior to change? I've no idea which files are involved.

First, I am running 98SE, not ME. Second, I have NOT limited the swap file. I have simply moved it to a different physical drive than the one the OS is installed on. Third, I HAVE limited vcache (to 96MB) to prevent it from using too much address space. And fourth, Firefox works fine for me. YMMV. BTW, I did search for the advice of the MS-MVPs you mentioned, and their advice is helpful. Basically, I took the easy route, and let Cacheman recommend settings for [386Enh] and [vcache]. Cacheman recommended MinFileCache=16384, MaxFileCache=98304, and Chunksize=512. So I allowed it to put those settings in system.ini. Cacheman also recommended unloading inactive DLLs from memory, ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1, and limiting available Ram to 512MB. After allowing those changes, I found MaxPhysPage=40000 (1GB) had been changed to 1FFFF (512MB). So system.ini now has pretty good settings. I found helpful info at http://aumha.org/win4/a/memmgmt.htm, http://www.computing.net/windows95/wwwboard/forum/74807.html, and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/179191/en-us. Apparently, Win95 created a new swap file at each boot, but to save time during restarts, Win98/ME just reuses the existing swap file, regardless of size. If any of your apps are causing runaway growth of your swap file, you are stuck with an oversized swap file until you FORCE windows to create a new one. Basically, in 98/ME, you can reboot to a command prompt and delete your swap file manually, use a custom wininit.ini as eidenk described, or live with an oversized swap file. If you let windows manage it (recommended) the only 'management' windows does is to make it bigger when the existing size isn't big enough. That's preferable to crashing the OS, but leaves you with a HUGE swap file forever, whether you need it that size again or not. So if you want it to shrink, under 98/ME, you've got to FORCE it to happen (by deleting the old swap file). Under Win95, all you had to do was reboot your system.

I'd used Cacheman to tweak some settings ages ago, but never noticed it had monitoring abilities (by selecting INFO, then Overview). So I let Cacheman monitor my memory usage all day today. I never once used all my ram, or more than 80MB of my swap file. Despite many reboots, my swap remained at 1.7 gigabytes. So I finally deleted win386.swp, and it has remained at zero ever since! Now I'm certain it knows it is being watched, and it's planning a huge growth spurt the moment I stop watching it!

I already have ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1 in System.ini. I often run nothing but Explorer2 and Eudora at the same time. These programs shouldn't even be using a fraction of my RAM. Even if I load up other programs once in a blue moon, shouldn't windows shrink the swapfile when RAM is available again? Does windows NEVER decrease the swap file, even if I don't use all my ram? (I've tried rebooting 3x in a row without loading ANY programs, yet I've still got a 1.7 GB swap file.) How would I find out what program is reserving so much ram? Is Eudora 5.2 known to request more than 512MB?

I have no minimum and no maximum setting. It stays at zero until something triggers it. It is often static many days between growth spurts, but never shrinks. What puzzles me is why it never shrinks, never gives any space back? I thought it only used hard disk space until ram was free again? Isn't all ram free again each time I boot?

I'm running fully patched 98SE with 512MB ram, letting windows manage virtual memory, but I moved my swap file to the first partition of my second physical hard drive. For some reason my swap file is constantly growing, and never shrinks. It is now over 1.7 GIGABYTES in size. I'm not running that many programs. I reboot at least once or twice daily. Sometimes much more. I've tried deleting it from DOS and sometimes it will stay at zero for up to a week, and then suddenly its over 1GB and nothing short of deleting it will reduce its size. Why does it grow so large with 512MB of ram installed, and never shrink? I have tried limiting vcache to amounts between 16384 and 128KB (1/4 of ram), but win386.swp seems to keep increasing in size no matter what I do. I have never seen windows shrink this file. Shouldn't windows resize win386.swp to a smaller size when I reboot, or haven't used all my ram? Why does it only keep growing until I intervene and delete it?

I need more time to study this, as this is completely new to me. I can state that I did all burning with this drive in 98SE only. The last burning software installed on the 98 partition was ECDC 3.5b, at a time when a different burner (plextor 412) was installed. When I replaced the 412 with the 712A, I installed ECDC 6.0 on the 98SE partition and used that until I discovered it had major issues (date/time stamps being shifted by 5 hours). At that point I removed ECDC and installed Nero 6.6.1.15 on the 98SE partition. I never removed ECDC 3.5b from the 98 partition, but never used it to write any media in the new drive either. Essentially I only used the 712A as a reader in the older OS. I don't recall ever trying to read any CD media since removing ECDC 6.0 and installing Nero. I'm almost certain the last time I successfully loaded CD media, I was still using ECDC 6.0 and still had older firmware in the 712A drive. Not sure if it's been updated, but I already have an old version of aspichk.exe [dated 1999] and it says my aspi layer is version 4.60 (1021), and is properly installed and fully operational on the 98SE partition. I believe it would give me the same result on the 98 partition, but I'd have to reboot to that OS to be certain. Is radified.com the new site for adaptec products? If my [1999] version of aspichk is outdated, just let me know. I never burn from the HD on the second IDE channel. I always create an 'image' in a defragged or empty partition on the first IDE channel, then burn that image. However, you raise an interesting point about the HD on the second IDE channel. Maybe the HD is what's forcing the writer to use PIO 0? Since I thought both devices were designed for UDMA mode 2, it never occurred to me to disconnect the HD when I was investigating the poor transfer rates. (The writer is properly jumpered to use UDMA2, but the HD has no such jumper.) I should retest the 'AUTO' setting in the BIOS with nothing on the second channel except the 712A writer. Still, if transfer rate increased when I set the BIOS to PIO 4, doesn't that mean that the slowest device on the second channel is at least PIO 4? So why would transfer rate drop to PIO 0 with two devices present and both set to AUTO in BIOS? As for the cables, I have brand new 80pin cables on both IDE channels. They came with the 120GB hard drives, and have been in use since the 712A was installed. In fact, I think I've gotten new 80-pin cables with every hard drive over 60GB, and must have a half dozen like new spares laying around. DMA is checked on all three HDs in the device manager, and on the 712A writer as well. Even so, Nero CD-DVD Speed was measuring only PIO 0 thruput on the 712A with the IDE channels set to AUTO in the BIOS. I think I left all the BIOS settings on AUTO except for the master on the second channel, which I set to PIO 4, but I'd have to reboot and check the BIOS again to be sure. I think the next step is to retest with the BIOS reset to AUTO and nothing on channel 2 except for the writer. If removing the third hard drive increases thruput, then I'll leave the BIOS on AUTO. If not, then back to PIO 4. I do, however, need data stored on the third hard drive. It's there because the two 120's were full. If it's presence is forcing the writer to use PIO 0 instead of UDMA mode 2, then I need to move more data to DVD's, or put even bigger hard drives on the first IDE channel. I'd like to thank both you and puntoMX for mentioning other forums that might be helpful. Haven't been there yet, but hope to soon. Out of curiosity, since you recalled seeing other cases like mine in that forum, do you recall whether any of them eventually succeeded in restoring the non-working component?

Nothing will happen when you carefully touch the lens with a Q-tip and alcohol. Some people smoke, have computers close to the kitchen so sticky stuff can get to the lens. Like you clean your mirror reflex camera only with air . First, I am the only occupant in my residence, and I do not smoke. Never have. Second, the computer is in a bedroom. Third, I am not inclined toward opening the drive and putting alcohol on any lens until said drive fails with ALL media and all other potential causes have been ruled out. I had to laugh at the stories mentioned by LiquidSage as they reminded me of the many horror stories I used to hear when I worked (2 years) in a US based windows support call center. I was reminded of other stories, such as people using their CD tray as a 'coffee' holder, etc. As an aside, I once used rubbing alcohol on a Q-tip to clean the lens in a door peephole. Bad idea. The lens turned out to be plastic, and the alcohol fogged the lens so badly I had to replace the entire peephole. Fortunately a new peephole only cost me a few dollars, so it was an inexpensive lesson for me about the effect alchohol can have on plastic lenses. FWIW, it is even possible to melt platics with compressed air if you spray it too long and get it cold enough. Better to use short bursts than a continuous spray. If you see frost appear on what you're spraying, then you're doing it wrong.

Are there two separate lasers and lenses in combo drives? One for CD media and one for DVD media? Opening the drive to clean a lens prior to total failure with all types of media sounds risky. Obviously, if it didn't read any media there would be nothing to lose. But it is still working fine with DVD media. Is it worth the risk of losing both in order to fix only one? And how would others in the windows 98 section discern which burners work in 98/SE? By trial and error? Are there other boards where people are more knowledgable about burners compatible with an older OS?

I only have one computer to test it in, but that computer does have a dual boot configuration, and the symptoms were the same in both configurations (98 and 98se). I am not sure what is meant by 'cleaning the laser.' Plextor recommends against using disks that brush the lens. In addition, at this point it is still working fine with DVD media. So it is not a total loss... yet. Where could I find a list of current 'state of the art' drives, and how does one know from the drive specs whether it will work with 98/SE or not?

Further testing reveals that the same problem exists in both boot partitions, ie, 98 and 98se both read all DVD media placed in the drive, and both fail to recognize all CD media. Therefore I think I can rule out OS corruption. That leaves either the firmware update, the BIOS settings, or the failure of a laser inside the drive as the remaining alternatives.

My plextor 712A DVD writer stopped recognizing all CD media, but still reads/writes DVDs. When I place any CD media (CDRs, factory pressed audio CDs) in the drive, it tries to ID the media for about a minute, then flashes amber twice, pauses, and repeats. According to plextor support this means "Auto Adjustment Failed - Cannot read a stamped disc or initialize a CD-R/RW disc because the drive cannot properly configure the focus and track adjustment settings." Does this mean the drive has separate lasers for CD and DVD media, and only one of them has failed (because DVDs still read perfectly)? Or could something else cause a plextor to only fail when CD media is involved? This drive burned a full spindle of CDR media when it was new. However I burned mainly DVD media for the past year. During that time I flashed the firmware to 1.09, changed the IDE controllers in the BIOS from AUTO to PIO mode 4 (because AUTO was causing the controllers to use PIO mode 0, the worst possible transfer rate), ditched ECDC for Nero, and fully patched Windows 98SE using the 98SE AutoPatcher project. Also I just opened a new spindle of CDR media which is at least a year old (I bought two spindles of 50 when they were on sale). But the drive fails to recognize previously burned CDRs and factory pressed audio CDs in addition to blank media. The 712A is about 3 years old, and was the last writer Plextor sold which was compatible with Windows 98SE. It seems to be working fine with Sony DVD+R media. CDR media created in the 712A more than a year ago are still readable in other drives, but not in the 712A which created them. (If I hadn't needed to burn a bootable CDR today, I probably would have continued to burn DVDs in this drive for years before discovering it had stopped recognizing CDs. But now that I'm aware it won't read/write CDs any more, I'm very unhappy.) System Specs: InWin Q500A tower case Sparkle Power Intl. FSP300-60GT power supply Abit BM6 ATX motherboard, BX chipset (BIOS version PQ) Intel Socket 370 Celeron-300A CPU (464 MHz at 2.0 volts) 512MB (2x256MB) Crucial PC133 CL=2 non-parity SDRAM AGP slot = ASUS AGP-V3400TNT-TV with 16MB 128-bit SGRAM (BIOS ver 2.04.20) PCI1 = Empty (to allow space for AGP video card) PCI2 = Linksys LNE100TX Fast Ethernet (version 2) PCI3 = Diamond Fireport 40 SCSI Controller (BIOS ver 4.05.00.00d) PCI4 = Sound Blaster Live! Value (model SB4670) PCI5 = Empty (shares IRQ with PCI4) IDE0 Master = WD1200 120GB Hard Disk IDE0 Slave = WD1200 120GB Hard Disk IDE1 Master = Plextor PX-712A CD/DVD-R/RW (firmware 1.09) IDE1 Slave = WD600 60GB Hard Disk SCSI3 = Plextor Ultraplex 40X CD-ROM (firmware 1.02) SCSI5 = Iomega 100MB Zip Drive FDD A = Mitsumi D359T6 Dual Boot Windows 98 and 98SE with Bootit NG Each OS has its own primary partition on HD0 Verizon ADSL 768/128 with Orckit modem Recording Media: Sony Japan 1-8x DVD+R (YUDEN000 T02) - still works Sony Taiwan 1-40x CD-R (unknown) - used to work 712A drive will no longer recognize any CD media, not even factory pressed audio CDs, but works fine with DVD+R. 712A has Disconnect, Auto-Insert, and DMA settings checked, and uses drive letter 'W' (for 'writer') in Device Manager.

Thanks for the new silent installer. I grabbed it just before burning my first UBCD!

I am happy to report that the problem with the cursor disappeared after the next reboot, and has not returned. I reinstalled the ASUS video driver 6.31c and am using it now. Like version 2.17, it skewed the image quite a bit to the top and right side of the screen at all refresh rates except for 75Mhz. At 75Mhz it was slightly off, but within my ability to set it perfectly with the ASUS horizontal and vertical display controls. Everything looked fine at 75Mhz... until I rebooted. After the next boot, the screen was slightly skewed to the right again, but far far less at 75Mhz than at any other refresh rate. This time I used the Hitachi 630 monitor's OnScreenDisplay menu to adjust the image slightly to the left. Once it was perfect I pressed the save button on the monitor. Then I rebooted again. This time the display was still perfectly centered even after the next reboot. I don't know why the screen skews so much to the top and right at other refresh rates. All I know is it seems to be more than the monitor and ASUS display controls can correct, even when added together. At 75Mhz I can center the image onscreen with the ASUS controls set at default, and the Hitachi monitor controls all set between 40-60%. I made notes on the display driver details in 2.17 before swapping, and 6.31c afterwards. The date stamp on the 6.31c driver has a later date (10-31-2000) than the 2.17 driver (05-04-1999), but the 2.17 driver has a higher version number (4.11.01.0216) than the version 6.31c driver (4.10.01.1001-990609). The ASUS Display Controls have an extra tab, howver, in version 6.31c. The title of the extra tab is 'Advanced'. It has four tabs of its own labeled Direct3D VR, Direct 3D, OpenGL VR, and OpenGL. Several of these tabs mention something called 'Stereoscopic Mode.' I have no idea what this means, but these extra tabs are the only difference I can see between versions 2.17 and 6.31c. As I noted earlier, version 31.40H would not even load. All it did was complain that 'No ASUS Graphics Card was found' and exit. So, except for the internal version number, it looks like 6.31c was the last driver that supported my ASUS V3400TNT graphics card. I guess the next thing I need to learn is how to add 6.31c to the driver packs. I have all the files in their own folder, can I just add them to the UBCD as is, or do they need to be merged into an existing driver pack? The readme in the drivers folder describes how to modify the INF file. The folder where WinRar is installed has Rar.exe, UnRar.exe, and WinRar.exe. The only one I'm familiar with is WinRar. Is Rar.exe the DOS version? Do I just put all these files for 6.31c in the drivers\packs folder, open a dos window and type 'Rar a DP_w98_1.01.exe' (without the quotes)? What if existing files have the same filename? Does the command need other switches to maintain a 'self-extracting' format? Thanks. Again, my apologies for not testing these drivers earlier, but a job interview and a broken vehicle set me back a little. I got back to testing drivers as soon as I could.

Sorry I didn't see this reply sooner. I'd moved on to the UBCD thread and forgotten I'd posted here! Is there some way to tell these forums to notify me when I have a reply so this doesn't happen again? Anyway, after building the UBCD project on my hard drive, I noticed the new driver packs were out and downloaded the full update (7 packs) into my project folders. The index informed me that v31.40H had been added to pack #1. So I decided to bite the bullet and test 6.31c and 31.40H on my active partition before burning the project. I unpacked the files for each driver to separate folders, then looked at the INF and readme files in each folder. Both readme files recommended that I uninstall the current driver (2.17) from Control Panel Add/Remove first, reboot, then run the setup file to install the new driver, then reboot again to finish. While viewing the INF for each of the new drivers, I noticed each have sections titled [Mfg] and [strings] where all the graphics cards supported by each driver appear to be enumerated. The string for my graphics card appears to be "V3400&VEN_10DE&DEV_0020." This string ONLY appears in the INF for the 6.31c driver. The lowest string in the 31.40H driver is "V3800&VEN_10DE&DEV_0028". This was my first clue that 31.40H might not install correctly. My next step was to remove 2.17, reboot, then run the setup file in the folder where I unpacked 31.40H. When I ran this setup file, the following message appeared on my screen: "No Asus Graphics Card found, or Windows boots in safe mode. Please reboot and try again." Needless to say, my graphics card was properly seated and working before this exercise, and rebooting did not help. I assume it will not install because the vendor string does not appear in the [Mfg] or [strings] sections of this driver. I also assume just adding more strings to these two sections is a bad idea. If this driver worked with my adapter, its vendor string (V3400TNT) should already be there. The fact that it isn't suggests to me that I should not bother trying to edit this driver. Having gotten nowhere with 31.40H, I moved on to testing 6.31c. This one installed without a hitch, but after rebooting my screen had moved about 1/2 inch off center, up and to the left. It looked like there were a few new tweaks in the ASUS Display Controls, but nothing I know how to use. There was a tab that allowed horizontal and vertical adjustments, but I maxed the controls out before my screen was centered. I noticed another tab said the adapter had automatically chosen to use the "Optimum" refresh rate which sounded good, so I didn't try any others. Not wanting to live with my screen image still slightly off-center, I decided to unload 6.31c and go back to 2.17. This went fine until I rebooted my system, whereupon my screen image was even more off-center (about 3/4 inch this time)! However, the tab that displayed the refresh rate now said "Adapter Default" rather than "Optimum". Before using the tab with the vertical/horizontal adjustment controls, I tried setting the refresh rate to "Optimum". This too looked pretty off-center. So I tried other values until I came to the refresh rate of 75Mhz. This setting put my image dead center again, extending all the way out to the very edges. Perfecto! No need to make any other horizontal/vertical adjustments! (This might have worked with 6.31c, too, but in my haste I'd already unloaded it without testing other refresh rates.) So, both 2.17 and 6.31c will install, but 31.40H will not. And neither 2.17 or 6.31c default to a refresh rate which produces a centered image. 6.31c has more tweaks in the ASUS Display Controls, but the screen was off center with the refresh rate set to "Optimum". Assuming "Optimum" was the best choice, I failed to test other refresh rates while 6.31c was loaded. Since I had to set 2.17 to 75Mhz to get a screen image to center, I should retest 6.31c at other refresh rates to see if it too has a "better" setting than "Optimum." One final note, since returning to v2.17 and 75Mhz, my cursor has been doing things it did not do before. When moved over text, links, input boxes, etc, it now changes from the normal pointer to a large square containing dense hash marks, sort of like what you'd see on the inside of a security envelope. It blocks out any text below it, making it impossible to position the cursor with any precision. I did not notice this behavior while 6.31c was installed, which was not very long, but immediately after 2.17 was reinstalled. To be honest, I've only rebooted once since reverting to 2.17, so maybe it will go away on the next reboot. I'll try that first, then go back to 6.31c to determine whether modifying the refresh rate there has the same effect (on centering the display) that it does in 2.17.

Hats off to MDGX for how to create a ram disk for browser cache, cookies, and history files! Also for clear directions to the actual keys where the 'Shell Folders' are stored in the registry. After reviewing the data stored on my 8.0 GB boot drive, here's what I have learned: Two applications, Eudora and Thunderbird, have consumed over 70% of my boot drive. Like Eudora, Forte Agent also consumed many GBs before I archived its folders to CDR. Being mostly text, they compressed easily, but in compressed form they are not readable. Eudora and Forte Agent store their data in the same folders the apps are installed to. To keep them from consuming the boot drive, it seems best to install them elsewhere. Eudora is also known to occasionally drop files in the TIF folders used to cache IE6. I noticed this one day when I received some emails containing links to a photo gallery. Afterwards, all the photos from the gallery were in the TIF folders, even though IE6 was never opened. Because of this, I'll probably move the TIF folders off the boot drive, too. Thunderbird stores its data in C:\Windows\Application Data. This location can be modified via Tools, Account Settings, Local Folders, Message Storage, Local Directory. Therefore, modifying Thunderbird in this way may be better than modifying the 'Shell Folder' key (which would affect every app in that folder, not just Thunderbird). Firefox also stores files in C:\Windows\Application Data, but I couldn't find any menu option to move the cache folders in Firefox 1.07. Hopefully Firefox has that ability in newer versions, but until I update, I won't know for certain. Until then, I plan to clear the cache manually (Tools/Options/Privacy/Cache) each time I close the browser. CD Creator 6.0, which I haven't used since I switched to Nero, uses 8% of my boot drive. Therefore, removing Roxio CD Creater should free up another 8%. I just hope Nero isn't damaged when Roxio is uninstalled. After these changes are made, my boot drive should be 75-80% empty. And hopefully, with Eudora, Agent, Thunderbird, and IE's TIF folders on other drives, it won't fill up again.

I found an ASUS mirror that still has version 2.17 here: http://public.www.planetmirror.com/pub/asu...400/3400drv.exe I still haven't tested the newer drivers yet. On ASUS website if you choose 'show all drivers' it says 31.40H works with 98/SE/ME, but if you choose 'show only drivers for 9x' it only shows 6.31c. I think this is the reason I originally stayed with 2.17. I know 2.17 works. And their website is as clear as mud.

Have you patched the COMPNTS.BAT module to install Scripting Update 5.6.0.8832 yet? If you have, can we download just that patch now w/o having to download the entire project again? (I'm assuming we'd only need to replace COMPNTS.BAT for that single fix.) Or would you prefer that we wait til the next full release?

LOL... your confidence in my ability to read your mind underwhelms me! I am confident in my ability to manually edit my registry with REGEDIT - IF I KNEW WHERE to find these 'Shell Folder' keys you wrote about. The registry is a large place to those of us who don't know where every feature is located, and you gave no hint where to find 'Shell Folder' keys in your reply. Do I search for 'Shell Folders'? Or for each application I want to modify? Could you point me to the precise (or general) location of the keys I need to edit? (ie, Local Machine/Software/etc?) I have TweakUI 1.33 installed, and I looked at every tab in it. I didn't see any mention of 'Shell Folders' on any tab. Could you be more specific as to where this function is located in TweakUI? Perhaps it is worded differently, or maybe I am blind, but I could not find it. I had better luck with the Internet Options. The setting there is on the General Tab, TIF, Settings, Move Folder. Done. Now if some kind person would be willing to be as precise about TweakUI, or where the 'Shell Folder' keys are located...

Ah. I have so much to learn in the registry. I guess email is my biggest problem right now, but I see other apps heading in the same direction if I don't change something soon. I use Eudora for one mail account and Thunderbird for another. Both store their message archives on the boot drive. I set Eudora to send email attachments to a folder on a bigger drive, but embedded pictures still end up in a subfolder within the Eudora app on the boot drive. That folder is getting huge and I can't figure out how to make it use a different drive. It seems to be hard coded to store them in a subfolder where the app was installed. If I simply empty that folder, the embeded pics disappear when the original email is displayed. I had the same problem when I was using Forte Agent for viewing newsgroups. I finally backed up all the message archives to CDR and then deleted them from the boot drive. But now I can't read those messages without reinstalling them to the same drive again. And that drive has no space left to reinstall them... If only all these archives could be stored on other drives. They're just too large to store on C:!!!

I don't recall 98SE finding a native driver for this graphics card, but it's been a while since I installed 98SE. I bought the card around 1999-2000, so it may be newer than 98SE, but not by much. <g> It seems they don't have 2.17 on the ASUS site any more, or if it is there I'm not able to find it. However, I did find 6.31c and 31.40H, so I will test what they have, and post my results with a link (probably tomorrow). PS You are still the man! <g>

One of the biggest problems I face on a daily basis is applications filling my boot drive with files I would rather store elsewhere, but they seem determined to fill up the boot drive no matter how I configure them. I'm talking about saved email messages, newsgroup archives, bookmarks, "temporary" internet files, cookies, internet browser cache folders, email cache folders, etc. These files consume tons of space, and on small boot drives a shortage of free disk space can cause major problems. Is it possible to safely reinstall these "space-hungry" apps on a larger drive, where they can have all the space they want, and not consume every last byte of my boot partition? I presume one just points to another drive during setup, instead of allowing the default location of "C:\Program Files\Vendor\App\Etc". But is this asking for trouble if I have to wipe my OS and reinstall it again, and these apps are on a different (larger) drive? I mean, they would not get wiped, which is good, but they would have to be reinstalled to recreate the necessary registry entries, correct? Would renaming the top folder before reinstalling these apps protect the existing data? ie, rename D:\Appname to D:\OldApp, reinstall (creating a new D:\Appname), then move the existing data from D:\Oldapp to the new D:\Appname? Would the same idea work for moving apps from drive C: to D:? (ie, Can I remove apps from the registry via the Control Panel after renaming the folder on C: to preserve the data, reinstall the app on D:, then move the preserved data to D:? Or does renaming the folder on C: prevent removing the registry entries?) Are there any reasons I haven't considered why these apps need to remain on the boot partition? I've tried reconfiguring these apps to store their data elsewhere, but that hasn't stopped them from consuming the boot drive as well. It seems the only option to stop these apps from consuming all of the boot drive is to install them elsewhere. What I'm worried about is if installing something like IE6 to another drive has a negative impact on the O/S? With other apps I don't think it would, but with IE6 being integrated into the O/S, I'm not sure it could be safely moved. Has anyone ever tried installing IE6 on a drive other than C:? Is it possible without bad effects on the O/S, applying patches, etc?

I have a very old video card, an ASUS V3400TNT (1X AGP) which came with driver version 1.02. I later upgraded to 2.17 from the ASUS website. I've seen versions 6.31c and 31.40H elsewhere, but it wasn't clear if those are ASUS upgrades. Would I get better performance with 6.31c or 31.40H? Are these too old for your driver pack? Does this pack install the video driver automatically with UBCD?