vick1111

Thanks for help! The rloew patch is very useful to start windows in safe mode with a lot of ram! (2Gb in my case) I tried almost all possible combination restarting windows98 and reinstalling drivers. I had no succes to make this hard disk work in Windows 98. On this PC I have an IDE disk and another Sata disk 250 Gb that works perfectly and it is recognized as "Sata" by bios instead of "Sata 2" . My motherboard is Asrock 4coredual-Sata2 and the hard disk giving me problem is a Seagate Barracuda 1Tb model 7200.11 (code ST310000333AS). Hope this information can be useful for who is planning to buy a Sata hard disk on this motherboard. Reading the hard disk manual it states that the jumper can be used on motherboards that are not able to negotiate the transfer speed with the disk. I imagine that my attempt must have failed cause the bios sees this hard disk as sata2 and the motherboard automatically negotiate the transfer speed with the disk without taking care of the jumper. Moreover I imagine that the win 98 sata drivers of the motherboard must be defective. I believe that the fact that BIOS Sata mode must be set to Raid to make Sata disks work on win98 shows that the VIA drivers for w98 are far from beeing perfect. Many thanks again to RLoew and Dencorso

I could not log in in safe mode cause I have 2 Gb Ram on the motherboard and I did not want to mess with the ram settings and configuration that works so great now. I simply removed both the ide drivers and the sata drivers from the hardware devices and did reboot with the sata2 disk attached. I had the same problem again.... windows does load just to the point it shows a low resolution screen with only the mouse pointer working. (to restore the working system all I had to do was to remove the sata2 connector and reboot and I was able to restart in normal mode and reinstall the drivers easily at request of the OS.) I assume it is not the VIA Sata driver the problem cause I removed them. I guess there must be some kind of incompatibility between some other module of my windows98 and SATA2 disks? Can anyone give information on that ? Working in safe mode could help to solve the problem? (P.s. to Rloew) How could I obtain this patch? and how would it work around the problem?

I have windows 98 running on Asrock 4coredual-sata2 motherboard in multiboot. All seemed to be working perfectly. Recently I bought a new hardisk 1Tb (actually I was able to format it in 10 Fat32 partitions fora total of 931Gb). The hard disk also seems to work perfectly when I boot in windows xp or linux. When I boot in Windows 98 the OS stops at the booting sequence just after showing a low resolution screen. My sata drivers should be ok as I already have another sata hard disk that windows 98 can easily access. Can anyone tell me what could be the problem? The bios shows the new hard disk as "Sata II" hard disk in contrast with the old sata hard disk which is recognized just with as "Sata". I figured out that this could be the problem so I have put the jumper on this new seagate hard disk to make it behave like a normal sata and it did not work (bios is set in raid mode). The bios still shows it as sata II and windows 98 does not boot. any suggestion?

Thanks for information. I checked with a benchmark program Windows XP and Windows 98 and you are right! Office shows exactly a factor of two in XP over Windows 98. May be the "perceived" speed I have of WIndows 98 is biased due to my preference.

" Well, if you're so happy with 98, then would you care to donate your quad core CPU to someone who can actually put it to some worthwhile use? I'd gladly trade you a single core CPU for it... since that's all you know how to use anyway newwink.gif What a horrendous waste. By the way, Linux is not an acronym. It should not be capitalized." Well I appreciate you reading in such details my post. And thanks for telling me that LINUX should be written "Linux" even if your accurate reading effort was not enough to read between the lines and understand that I do actually use the Quad core CPU in Linux. My point is that Windows 98 on a single core shows to be still faster than using the full quad core CPU with Windows XP clean and without spyware (did I spell it right?) . The O.S. seems to count more than the CPU in the overall performance of applications what do you think ?

I have both Windows 98 and xp on a quad core pc (together with LINUX UBUNTU+ KDE and Linux MEPIS). The motherboard is on sale in every country and is the Asrock 4CoreDual-SATAII with 2 GB of RAM Windows 98 is able to use only one core of the quad core CPU. Xp and LInux make full use of the Ram and the CPU. I use the PC mainly for desktop activities and for Internet use and I find much more fast and safe to use Windows98 for my activities. I hate to waste cumulative hours waiting for the pc doing stuff that I would not approve ( if ever informed about what the hell is happening). I was able to do amost everything you would ever like to do on a PC with Win98. And I believe it takes considerably more effort to safely surf the net with XP (if it is at all possible) than just learning how to install win98 on a new motherboard. Just my opinion! By the way if someone wants to dual boot WIN98 and XP on a SATA enabled motherboard I suggest to buy a small ATA disk for WIN98 and use the SATA disk for xp and for a FAT32 data partition that can be used to exchange data between the systems. Sata disk with proper drivers do not have any space limitation under win98. ___________________________________________________________________________________________ I would suggest in any case to avoid using the same Hard disk for both WIn98 and XP!!! ____________________________________________________________________________________________ so if you have an enough big ATA disk make the first partition as FAT32 for WIN98 and use the rest of the disk to experiment LINUX. You are going to need LINUX to fix your PC sooner or later! A good live LINUX distribution can be also useful. Especially to make partitions at first install and to repair any boot up problem. HAve fun !

Rloew Memory patch _____________________ I have tried the memory patch of Rloew without success. I have a windows98SE italian version. It works only on english version? CORRECTION __________________ Ok after reading the post (following this one) of rloew I tried the demo patch again in the new version and it allowed me to see 2Gb of RAM on win98se. I started some programs in the 10 minutes and everythings seemed to work fine. I am not buyng now this patch cause 1 GB of Ram is enough to cover all my memory needs for now in win98. I encourage rloew to write some documentation about how he solved the problem. This documentation could be more valuable than the code in itself. (Anyway I guess there can be a way of making monney out of it for him if he decide to give out code as open source. Any suggestion or comment? )

Looking for a LAPTOP that could run windows 98. ---------------------------------------------------------------- I have found the information that follows in the news. I understand that this PC will be able to some extent to run WINDOWS98 (beeing able to use the Hyperion Pro drivers). Any comment? http://news.idg.no/cw/art.cfm?id=29FC1D81-...1A58B504148B4B9 _________________________________________________________________________________ "Via releases laptop design as open source Via Technologies released the hardware design for a low-cost laptop with WiMax support under an open-source license on Tuesday, a move intended to make customization easier and shorten design cycles for system makers." "he OpenBook is based on Via's 1.6 GHz C7-M processor and VX800 chipset. The design includes an 8.9-inch screen with a resolution of 1,024 pixels by 600 pixels and calls for a hard disk with a capacity of 80G bytes or more. The basic wireless module included in the design supports Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. Optional modules include Assisted GPS (AGPS), WiMax, and support for high-speed cellular networks based on EV-DO (Evolution Data Optimized), HSPA (High-Speed Packet Access), and WCDMA (Wideband Code Division Multiple Access). Other features of the 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) OpenBook include a full-size keyboard, up to 2G bytes of DDR (double data rate) memory, a 2-megapixel camera, a memory-card reader, and a 4-cell battery that offers up to three hours of life. The laptop is designed to run Windows Vista, Windows XP, or Linux, including G/OS, SuSE Linux, and Ubuntu." ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

THIS WAS POSTED BY MISTAKE UNDER THE WRONG TOPIC. SOMEONE CAN DELETE THIS?

I have had same problem with Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII - My Mainboard has VIa chipset and it appears that if I do not set in the BIOS the sata driver as RAid the system does not boot. So if you got also Via chipset the simple solution is to abilitate Raid in the BIOs. LEt us know if you solved problem

Laptops and Windows 98 ____________________ Any one here knows if it is possible to buy a new laptop that can be used with windows 98?

Thanks again for xrayer I have just installed HimemX.exe on Windosws 98 SE on an Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII - My win98's modify steps are just as above 1. Download HimemX from http://japheth.de/Jemm.html 2. Copy himemx.exe to win98 directory 3. Add the line in config.sys DEVICE=C:\WIN98\HIMEMX.EXE I am now able to put a maxfilecache of 44000 (48000 did not work for me) while before I was only able to get as high as 40000. And the most important thing is that I completely solved problems with dos boxes. I can now start an almost unlimited number of dos windows instances while before (without the himemx) I was unable to run more than 3 dos boxes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Has anyone in this forum used with success Loewe patch complete version?

nForce3 Chipset is not good for Win98… No benefits of Phenom Quad Core under Win98, either You should not mess up with this MB under 98, I suppose… its not worth spending money for hardware, you cannot take advantage of… A guess, the best option for the time being is a cheap ECS P4M800Pro-M2 or Foxconn P4M9007MB with Celeron Conroe-L, which can handle BSEL mod too. The combo price should be around $100 From the point of view of multiboot users I guess the point is not what is: "the best MB tailored for Win98" In fact for me and other users it is all about: "the best Mb for Linux and XP (or Vista) still compatible with WIn98" ! (By the way I do not even understand your point of view : If I had to run a simple Win98 OS on a cheap PC I would look directly at the used market.)

"6. AGP cards???? can be directed to use other memory I just forget where to. In most cases you need to tell it in the settings and it can see the extra memory it just has to reach it." Anyone has a clue on how to do this and if it could be possible to address the memory problem by changing the video card memory usage?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Compatibility report for Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have now windows 98 up and running fast. I was not able to make the on board sound card to work with the Via driver: (Hardware not recognized). I have upgraded to service pack 2 for 98 SE english Version over the Windows98Se italian Version without problems. The problems I have had installing Windows 98 are related to the use of 2 Gb of ram and possibly with The ATi RAdeon 9600 card I am using on this board (Even if I believe that the use of another graphic card would not solve problems): (take a look at: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showto...109574&st=0 ) I can use 1022 Mb of Ram even if the system does not behave perfectly cause this small problems are present: I cannot install XMSDSK. I am able to start 2 (only two) fresh dos windows before I get the out of memory at the 3rd dos istance. Sometime when many programs are already open I cannot just start DOS. I believe that a wiser installation could have solved this small problems, unfortunatly I Have found the only useful piece of information in russian and too late : http://www.ixbt.com/soft/windows9x-memory.shtml using Google translation I was able to understand a way to install windows 98 on new motherboards with large memory. Maybe someone on here can experiment this and tell us if it works: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Windows 98 Installation tip on system with large memory (above 1Gb) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- after formatting and before installation put in the disk the windows directory and the system.ini file with the following entry: [386Enh] MaxPhysPage=10000 This would limit the amount of memory that windows sees from the very start and possibly give a better installation. Only after installation of all phisical devices and virtual disks (XMSDSK) remove this entry and substitute with the maximum value that can still make the system boot normally. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ It is now too late for me to try this attempts cause I have now an almost full functional and fast windows 98 system that satisfies me. I plan to still use this pc and windows 98 in the next 5 or 6 years. next month I am going to get a second Sata disk (the first Sata disk I have is dedicated to Linux) and will experiment Fat32 on it with the use of VIa drivers. Happy new Year to everyone!

Thanks Dencorso, I am going to use your suggestions. The russian page seems to contain useful concepts (too bad it is not in english) ! In the Mean while Happy new year and Best wishes for a better 2008 to everyone in this forum!!!

Well I have tried everything that was possible (given my knowledge of the problem) and I have not been able to make XMSDSK work without problems. I have Windosws 98 SE installed on an Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII - I have developed the idea that the MaxFileCache entry does not solve definetely the out of memory error. In some cases no matter what the entry for the MaxFileCache or for MaxPhysPage I got an out of memory error when starting dos. (I have verified memory values with system monitor) --------------------- My failed attempts --------------------- Even in the most favourable situation after starting 6 instances of dos windows, the out of memory error appears again. At one point I was able to make XMSDSk work without problem with: c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 500000 z: /T /Y (in autoexec.bat.) At that point I did loose completely the use of Dos window. (It is like some important memory resources are taken by the video card or something else and I have no clue about what is it! even if I have developed the idea that the solution is not in the maxfilecache settings : the solution must be in some kind of wise memory management I cannot find) ----------------------------------- My present configuration (without XMSDSK) ---------------------------------- I have upgraded to service pack 2 for 98 SE. and my present settings are: autoexec.bat mode con codepage prepare=((850) C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\ega.cpi) mode con codepage select=850 keyb it,,C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\keyboard.sys LH /L:2 C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\DOSKEY /INSERT PROMPT $p$g SET DIRCMD=/P /A system.ini [386Enh] MaxPhysPage=40000 ebios=*ebios mouse=*vmouse, msmouse.vxd device=*dynapage device=*vcd device=*vpd device=*int13 woafont=app850.fon keyboard=*vkd MinSPs=16 ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1 DMABufferSize=64 [vcache] MinFileCache=3000 MaxFileCache=393216 (rest is omitted) config.sys DEVICE=C:\WINDOWS\HIMEM.SYS /TESTMEM:OFF /Q DOS=HIGH,UMB DEVICE=C:\WINDOWS\EMM386.EXE NOEMS X=A000-F7FF DEVICE=C:\WINDOWS\setver.exe device=C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\display.sys con=(ega,,1) Country=039,850,C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\country.sys (I have tried and cannot use UMBPCI.SYS at the place of EMM386 cause my motherboard is not supported) EMM386.exe did work only with the setting: X=A000-F7FF . I do not think that EGOvoruhk either has solved the problem???? In this configuration I am able to start 2 (two) fresh dos windows before I get the out of memory at the 3rd dos istance. ----------------------------------- XMSDSK Failure ------------------------------------- Whenever XMSDSK succesfully creates a ram drive then my dos windows become unavailable for the "out of memory error" MOREOVER XMSDSK does not work properly: when I start the scandisk, to check the sectors into the ramdrive Z, the write attempt fails after a while. A more simple copy write attempts fails too. The failure happens not at a specific point. what happens is that I got a blue screen with not recoverable error sayng things like: "An exception 0E has occurred at 0028:C0004D6D in VxD Vmm(01) + 00003D6D. This was called from 0028:C19359C4 in Vxd Rmm(01) + 00000254" I have tried many different settings for XMSDSK. (Some example : c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 1800000 z: /T /Y c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 1100000 z: /c1 /T /Y c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 500000 z: /T /Y c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 500000 z: /c64 /T /Y c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 500000 z: /c1 /T /Y )

Thanks to dencorso for the help and suggestion. I will give a try LLXX 48-bit LBA patch after some other experimentations with my new system in the search of a stable configuration. Even if I remain with the convinction that the 120 Mb Fat 32 first partition used by windows 98 and the rest of the disk used by Linux or XP gives me a safe environment into a 250 Gb hard disk drive. Dencorso states:" an entry on Add/Remove can be useful if ever it causes you any problem" . So the point is about what is more safe: 1) the patch which could contain some bugs 2) the use of a simple disk partition as the one I have for Windows 98 ?

Well it would be great to receive more information on how to install the virtual memory on the ramdrive. I have just installed Windosws 98 SE on an Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII - I believe that many new installation of windows 98 will be on a multiboot O.S. PC like mine and the one that started this post. In a multi boot system new windows 98 users may have around 2 Gb of memory or may be even more. The problem is what to do with this excess memory in windows 98. Presently in my installation I have limited the memory used by windows 98 to 1Gb with the maxphispage (in system.ini) and to make the system work I had to reduce the MaxFileCache to 30000 (yes just 30000 cause more would not allow the start of dos window). I am not very happy of the solution I have adopted and if possible I will try to put the Virtual memory on a ram drive. I suspect that there can be some advantages and some disadvantages. 1 Disadvantage : using 1Gb of virtual memory on ramdrive and one Gb of memory can bring the risk of locking the system when the virtual memory is not enough for the system. 1 Advantage: It would solve the problems of the memory management bugs and a MaxFileCache enter would not be anymore necessary. I would appreciate comments on this and also an explanation of why 1.8 Gb would be a good choice for virtual memory on ram drive in a system with 2Gb memory? Infact i was thinking of something around 1 Gb for virtual memory on ramdrive in a 2Gb system. 1.8 Gb would leave just 200Mb of memory which seems not to be enough even for the agp video card memory needs. With that setting I seriously doubt the system could work with my ATi Radeon 9600 using 256 Mb of memory. So if someone could add some comments on how much memory give to the virtual memory ramdisk in a 2 Gb system or similar system it would be very welcome. Also it would be appreciated some comments on how to avoid the lock up of the system after filling all the virtual memory. Is 1 Gb of virtual memory enough to avoid any risk of lockup of the system?? Merry xmas to everyone and thanks to all the wise posters

Many thanks!! And this I guess allows me to configure my Pc by cloning (and using) windows 98 directly on the Sata disk. In the meanwhile I have installed windows 98 on the ide disk in a 120 gb Partition and I feel quite sure that leaving the remaining space unused I am going to be completely safe? What if I use the space for a big XP or Linux Partition? Reading the posts I have understood that I would be still safe having windows 98 on the first 120 Gb partition and using the remaining space of the disk with another big partition (Nfts or Ext3) not accessible by windows 98. I understand that in such a case all the partition tables of the disk would be under the 137 Gb limit? Many thanks again to dencorso for the fast answer and thanks for all the useful posts in this forum.

I have just installed Windosws 98 SE on an Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII - and I have used a 120Gb partition inside a 250 Gb IDE disk drive. When installing I was quite convinced that the 137 Gb limit applies to the partition dimension. Now I am quite aware that the limit applies to the disk size no matter how it is partitioned ! If this is the case at some point my installation is going to fail? Or may be that on this mboard (Asrock 4coredual-sata2) the Via Arena drivers are capable of breaking the 137 Gb barrier? If the drivers Via Arena can break the 137Gb limit, when does this applies? Does it apply only to Sata disks? Does it apply to both Ide and Sata disks?

Compatibility update for Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII -and windows98 I solved the problem with the disk drive. I can read DVD now. Sorry for my last post. it was not very informative. I went to panic cause my system went into compatibility mode and I did not realize what was happening. I have solved the memory problem by reducing even more the MaxFileCache entry. I warn everyone wanting to install Windows 98 on this board that it is going to be a very delicate task. Sata disks need to be put into Raid mode in the bios or else Windows 98 can enter into compatibility mode and also hide the cd disk. Only problem I seem to have now is that I am experiencing problems with an usb memory stick (8 Gb dimension): System locks completely when tryng to write. For Dual booters: I was able to install Linux Mepis on this board without any problem from the last 2007 distribution CD. (Ubuntu did not work) Will post after some time an update of how my system is behaving. Thanks to Rjecina (always very informative) about suggestions on the graphic card.

Compatibility update for Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII -and windows98 I have been able to use the disk drive only with the generic dos drive on the windows 98 disk following a microsoft installation procedure. No way to read DVD for now. And I got a new problem that did show up only after I started to install programs someone on here may be able to help: It is not anymore possible to start dos under windows 98 cause I get out of memory message. - I have limited the size of [vcache] in system.ini with this : [vcache] MinFileCache=40000 MaxFileCache=40000 and the memory with this in system.ini: [386Enh] MaxPhysPage=2CFFF and I have tried various other settings for this entries with no results.

Thanks to Rjecina and all the helpful posters on this forum. I have now a system based on Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII - The problem was and still is to find a suitable compatible graphic card and I have it partially solved it by using an old (used and noisy) Ati Radeon 9600 on Agp. Windows 98 seems running perfectly even if I am still at the beginning and I have not configured any vcache limit yet, only added "MaxPhysPage=40000" in system.ini under 386E nh, also got some problem in recognizing the dvd disk which is placed on the secondary Master Ide. (of course I am speaking about windows 98 - The DVD disk works in other Operating systems - for this reason it does not seem to be a problem due to a bad hardware configuration in the jumper or connections) I will give a new post when I have solved my problems or/and (hopefully) after some time to inform how the motherboard is dealing with windows 98. p.s If anyone has had and did solve a similar problem in dvd disk recognition under w98 or knows about a post in this forum about this kind of problem please let me know.