Multibooter

Even older FlashGet v1.65 could cause eMule to crash shortly after Flashget started downloading.Is v1.96.1073 better than v1.73, or just more never-used-features?

Flashget works fine, I had no reason yet to upgrade from old v1.65 of Sept.2004. I just checked their old website www.amazesoft.com it's dead, also www.flashget.com. Maybe it's time to look for their last good version without ads http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashget Which version/build of FlashGet would you recommend?

The best solution is running eMule on a dedicated old computer. I gave up on Azureus & uTorrent because they don't provide additional downloads and conflict with eMule, under Win98 at least. Uptime >3 days is helpful for downloading rare files, sources are not always online, and queues may be very long. eMulePlus had an option to save/load sources, but not eMule, as far as I know, but since Kademlia has become the major network, eMulePlus is out.

My experience has been a minimum of 30 minutes and about 2-3 hours to get the mule going, but with a large download list (about 1200 files). I just checked, uptime is currently 1 day 5hrs and the system clock is 24 minutes late.Added: uptime is currently 2 days 8 hours, system clock is 26 minutes late, very little download activity, maybe 0.5GB in last 24hrs Added: uptime is currently 4 days 1hr, system clock is 33 min late

I'll be in Europe until September. After that I'll run a test of the uptime of eMule under Win98 with 512MB, then with 1150MB of available RAM. If the increase in available memory from 512 to 1150MB indicates a significant increase in eMule uptime under Win98, I'll buy your patch. By the way, for getting a quick look at the uptime of a dedicated computer running only eMule, I am using a nice little piece of freeware by Donald Leavitt called Uptime http://home1.gte.net/dgl1/uptime/uptime.html I am not sure a large RAMDISK would help eMule. The critical directory is that of the temporary files, which is huge. I have put the Temp files onto a separate 2nd internal 80 GB HDD. The size of this directory is currently around 60GB. eMule can get around the 127GB HDD limit, it lets you define multiple harddisks for temporary files http://www.emule-project.net/home/perl/hel...mp;topic_id=112 An old dedicated eMule laptop of mine (Inspiron 7500) can have up to 3 internal HDDs, so a max. of 240-360 GB of space for temporary files should be enough for the next couple of years.

Microsoft had a lot of problems with the Arabic version. If I remember right, there are 3 families of Windows 98: Western, Arabic and Chinese. WinXP is superior to Win98 in these areas. Other areas where WinXP applications are preferrable include burning CDs/DVDs (better burn quality); defragmentation of FAT-cum-NTSF disks. Eventually most of my Win98 applications will migrate to WinXP, with one general exception: applications which access the Internet will stay with Win98. Under Win98 a heavily loaded mule (e.g. 1200-1700 files in the download list, max 99 simultaneous connections, max 400 sources, max 5000 sharers in the queue) uses all system resources to the extreme. Running a second application will very often cause the mule under Win98 to crash within a couple of hours, otherwise it runs from 3 to 10 days before crashing. I remember increasing RAM from 256 to 512MB made the mule run days longer under Win98 before crashing (there is a memory leakage problem) and allowed substantial increases in the number of files in the download list and of the max.number of sources, effectively increasing the GBs/day.The mule is running day and night, so using an old laptop which doesn't make any noise seems the best choice. Desktops are just too noisy and too energy-inefficient. This raises the next question: Does anybody have Win98 running on a LAPTOP with 2GB of RAM? Which make and model?

Yes. In a multiboot-system it is essential that the older opsys can function with the newer hardware. Whether Win98 actually can use the additional memory is of secondary importance.

First of all, congratulations to rloew that the patch has become more generic. The real test that it works with international versions of Windows 98 would be if it also works with Arabic Win98. Here a question to rloew: Which Win98 applications or combinations of applications benefit particularly by having 2GB rather than 1GB of RAM? What's the benefit of having 2GB of RAM available? How about some benchmarks? How does eMule on Win98 run under heavy load with 2GB vs 1GB?

Dr Octagon reported about the transmissions by Tiny v2.0.15 to a Polish server http://board.protecus.de/t22085.htm , and recommended Kerio v2.1.5 instead.But Kerio v2.1.5 is the next software version of Tiny v2.0.15A. There are 2 versions of Tiny 2.0.15: an initial one (without the A) released on Oct.12, 2001, 30 days after 9/11, and a final one ("A version") released 10 days later on Oct 22, 2001. Somebody paranoid might hear voices: "You've got 30 days..." In my experience the second-to-the-last version of a piece of software is often the best version, the last version often contains lots of issues/bugs, which nobody cared to resolve anymore. Which versions of Proxomitron and System Safety Monitor can you recommend?

Very well expressed. It was already revealed in 1999 that "special access codes prepared by the US National Security Agency have been secretly built into Windows" http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/5/5263/1.html People at the Moscow Institute of Technology in Dolgoprudny were saying in 1997 that the raison-d'être of PTS-DOS was that you "cannot have an American operating system in Russian tanks."IE 6.0 was released on Aug.27, 2001. Microsoft was very vulnerable at that time, "The DOJ announced on September 6, 2001 that it was no longer seeking to break up Microsoft and would instead seek a lesser antitrust penalty. On November 2, 2001, [52 days after 9/11] the DOJ reached an agreement with Microsoft to settle the case." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft My suspicion is that the problem of the sluggish deletes covered in the forum under http://www.msfn.org/board/98-FE-98-SP1-98-...fix-t84451.html may have something to do with it, together with the Active Desktop introduced in IE 5.5 SP2. I am currently setting up a fresh Win98 system and have decided to install only IE 5.5 SP1, released on Nov.4, 2000, together with the latest Opera (preferred, from Norway) and FireFox.IE 5.5 is sufficient for wireless cards with WPA encryption, even Adobe Flash Player ActiveX v9.0.115 can be installed with a trick (Adobe's last supported version for IE 5.5 is Flash Player 8). I came across a few rare nasties when using IE 5.5: Adobe's website crashes IE 5.5 when going to http://www.adobe.com/go/EN_US-H-GET-FLASH; CSPAN at http://www.youtube.com/user/CSPAN doesn't show anything, possibly because of some server-side exclusion of IE 5.5, otherwise no major browsing problems with IE 5.5. De facto, however, I have decided to give up IE for the sake of a better working, and a hopefully more secure, Win98. In any case, my principal use of IE was only as one alternative for printing tricky-to-print web pages. And Opera and Firefox will hopefully improve their printing. Thanks for your long and interesting posting. I'll continue with my reply tomorrow.

Very interesting. Under what names are these malware files known? Yes. For this reason I was not convinced of WinME. Kerio 2.1.5 was released after 12 Sept 2001 ("post"-software) and is based on Tiny v2.0.15. Here the translation of the German text quoted in my previous post: "Tiny 2.15 transmits intermittently to a server in Poland" compare: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantle...nce_controversy The only malware infection during the last 9 years on one of my Win98 machines was 4 years ago with the trojan spooner.c, then described by Kaspersky with the short comment "9/11", currently no more description by Kaspersky. SWIFT, for example, representing the 2500 largest banks worldwide, has decided to move by the end of 2009 the data processing of their international transactions away from the US to neutral Switzerland http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/zuerich/ein_...e_1.695602.htmlI like the easy settings for peer-to-peer networks by Tiny 2.0.15 and Kerio 2.1.5, but they are "post"-software.

I used to think this as well, but it's not true. You can hide rootkits with FAT32 from the kernel as well. Which root kits work Ok under Win98?The Kaspersky on-demand scanner detects about 3-10 virii per day in my downloads under Win98, and after having read your posting I was hoping to have caught a rootkit under Win98 With the method indicated in "Detecting Rootkits in Windows 98/ME" http://abuibrahim.castlecops.com/archives/...in_windows.html I checked my HDD (leaving out the /b parameter in the dir statement, because Beyond Compare isn't good at comparing/aligning long & short file names). Great disappointment, no rootkit detected. Did ANYBODY in the Forum ever catch a rootkit under Win98? "Windows 98 rootkits are rare since malware writers like to spend their time coding for OS that will get them the most bang for their buck. Because the Windows 98 design is very different from Windows NT based operating systems, rootkits that run on Windows NT cannot be successfully ported to Windows 98. That ensures some type of protection." http://www.castlecops.com/postx166220-0-15.html posted on Apr 23, 2007 "Mit einem Rootkit kann man u.a. Prozesse verstecken. Das sind dann Prozesse von der Art, wie sie in WinNT/2k/XP benutzt werden. Win98 arbeitet anders. Man muss da nichts verstecken, weil es gar keine solche Prozesse gibt. Außerdem gibt es in Win98 nur den Benutzer Admin und Software hat auch alle Rechte. Win98 hacken ist unter der Würde der meisten Hacker, weil es sich nicht wirksam schützen lässt, sozusagern ist es keine Herausforderung dort einzubrechen." http://www.pcwelt.de/forum/sicherheit-vire...tkit-win98.html posted on 22.12.2005

Windows 98 is a much safer system than WinXP: no vulnerability to root kits, for example. How much of the new malware is Windows98 compatible? The only infection on my Win98 system during the last 10 years was with the trojan spooner.c 4 years ago, quickly detected - because the printer wouldn't work anymore i.e. not enough testing by the malware authors with legacy software and legacy operating systems.

The Advanced Troubleshooting Settings page of the MS System Configuration Utility msconfig.exe is problematic with 2GB of RAM: If you make ANY changes on this page [e.g. about ScanDisk] & then click Apply - Ok: If the entry "Limiting memory to (max.possible:) 999MB" was selected: this will cause a change in System.ini - the previous entry for MaxPhysPage will be remmed out: ;Rem TShoot MaxPhysPage=48000 - a new entry will be put into System.ini, e.g. MaxPhysPage=3E6FF - there is NO notification by the system about the change in available memory, RAM will be reduced to 999MB and a week later you may ask yourself: "Why did the additional 250MB of RAM disappear?" If the entry "Limiting memory to (max.possible:) 999MB" was NOT selected - in System.ini the previous entry for MaxPhysPage=48000 will be deleted by the system - you will not be able to boot into Win98 anymore [until you re-enter under DOS the value of MaxPhysPage in System.ini] LIST OF SOFTWARE WITH ISSUES WHEN 2GB OF MEMORY ARE INSTALLED: Fast Defrag v2.30 [by AMS] cannot use automatic memory cleanup because of 2 err msgs after each cleanup msconfig.exe changes in Advanced Troubleshooting Settings either delete MaxPhysPage entry or replaces it with 999MB, without notification xmsdsk [RAMdisk software] when using the RAMdisk for the swapfile; when running programs from RAMdisk (e.g. games)

Tiny Personal Firewall v2.0.15 may be something special, I would NOT put it on my list of recommendable last versions."die TINY 2.15 hat einen derben Nachteil/Fehler, der aber in der vorherigen Version von TINY 2.14 (!) nicht ist. Als ich damals die TINY 2.15 genutzt habe, bin ich aus diesem Grund *erstmal* zurück zur TINY 2.14 gegangen. Hier der Grund: Die TINY 2.15 sendet munter (ab und zu) an einen Server in Polen, auch bei "Alles blocken" kann diese Verbindung durch die FW [=firewall] hergestellt werden." Dr Octagon on Feb.26, 2006 in http://board.protecus.de/t22085.htm (Weren't there secret vacation places in Poland?) TINY v2.0.15 and v2.0.15A have been removed from the web archive http://web.archive.org/web/20011217155449/...zyklon/tpf.html but NOT v2.0.14 which can still be downloaded there. This web archive page is listed in Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiny_Software as footnote 7 TINY v2.0.14 is "pre"-software (June 5,2001) while v2.0.15/A is "post"-software (Oct.12 and 22,2001). Tiny's software developers "would continue to work on the software under the Kerio brand... Kerio Technologies Inc was incorporated on 11 September 2001." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerio_Technologies I wouldn't trust Kerio v2.1.5 either. Old Tiny Personal Firewall v2.0.14 ("pre"-software) is still highly recommended.

I have shelved xmsdsk, at least for the moment. It looks like HimemX, 2GB of memory, Win98 & xmsdsk don't get along well together.After I ran a modded standalone version of the 250MB game PokemonPlayIt!2 (2001) on the xmsdsk RAM-disk, the Nvidia Display selection had disappeared from the menu of the Nvidia system tray icon. After checking with Norton Disk Doctor, it indicated an error in the Extended partition table. After verifying with Partition Table Doctor, I decided to wipe the 750GB disk and restored a backup. I never had an Extended partition table error before, I was just afraid that the logical NTSF partitions in the Extended partition might also have been affected.

The real limitation on disk/partition size under Win98 is the disk checking software which works under Win98 plus the number of free drive letters.About 2 years ago I shelved V-Com's DiskFixer v6 because when checking a 250GB HDD I got "Error occurred accessing disk" followed by a phony msg "session cancelled by user", terminating after nearly completing the File Allocation Table check. MS ScanDisk has a 127GB limit, beyond that it refuses with the misleading err msg: Not enough memory available. Norton Disk Doctor 2004 works Ok under Win98 with 750GB disks with partitions up to a maximum of 240GB [=258.177.794.048 bytes; 240.5GB partition size results in a blue screen when running NDD]. NDD 2005 I don't care about because it has a problem with large fonts. Any other reliable disk checking software for 1TB HDDs under Win98? The next major hurdle to overcome for Win98 aficionados is not that much 52TB of HDDs, but rather the 4GB FAT32 file size limit. About 2 years ago I looked at WriteDVD! Pro http://www.softarch.com/us/products/wdvdpro.html but it didn't convince me. If I remember right, this software, or maybe it was another UDF/DVD-RAM software, could also format HDDs with UDF, which doesn't have the 4GB file size limit. Files >4GB are not uncommon with eMule, because of some inconsiderate uploaders. One possible solution to circumvent the 4GB file size limitation might be to set eMule's download directory to a 9.4GB DVD-RAM drive http://computers.search.ebay.com/DVD-RAM-9...ters-Networking but the heavy disk access during eMule downloads may damage the expensive DVD-RAM drive quickly. Maybe the SCSI drives don't need a special Win98 driver. Here a good link re FAT16/32, NTSF & UDF http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/b.../LocFileSys.doc The ideal solution might be to format a 64GB USB stick with UDF and use it for the download directory of eMule, but this is another project ...

You're right, I didn't read critically enough Mosaddique's otherwise excellent article "Working with large hard drives - the issues and the limits"By the way, Win98 CAN access an EXTENDED partition >128GB (e.g. on a 750GB HDD an extended partition of 695.5GB, consisting of a 126GB FAT32 logical partition D: and an (invisible) logical 569.6GB NTSF partition E:). Also, the 128GB limit doesn't apply to USB HDDs.

This matter you'll have to investigate further once you solve the one above. This is fully unexplored land. But do tell me: if you put the swapfile elsewhere, do these problems again disappear?I have found no solution to the shutdown problems when the swap file is located on RAM drive Z: There are NO shutdown problems when the swap file is located on another drive. Software does not function properly when the swap file is on RAM drive Z:. For example, Sims2 when mounted on virtual Alcohol drive V: hangs after the logo comes up. On the other hand, when the swap file is located on a hard drive Sims2 functions as usual. I would therefore not recommend to put the swap file onto the RAM drive. It is interesting to note that the memory defragmentation software Fast Defrag 2 http://www.amsn.ro/ gets confused by the memory between 1150MB & 2048MB. With 2GB of memory installed, it reports: Total Physical Memory: 1150MB Virtual Memory Size: 898MB (2048-1150=898!!) [actual size of win386.swp: 0 bytes] BTW Performance - Virtual Memory - Hard Disk D [location of the swap file] is indicated as "D:\-9480MB" (negative sign!) even if the actual size is 130017MB =about 126GB. ScanDisk has a 127 GB limit, the ATA protocol a 137GB limit, is there any limitation of the Win98 swap file? Win98 has chosen by itself to use the D: partition (FAT32, 126GB) instead of the C: partition (FAT16, 1.99GB) All the above questionmarks regarding the Win98 swap file would suggest that when using 2GBs of memory it's best not to enter unknown territory with the swap file, and under no circumstance put it onto a RAM drive. Fast Defrag 2 seems to defrag memory ok with 2GB installed, although an annoying error msg "AMS specific__debuginteger function", displaying the value 10, comes up everytime after memory is deframented: displayed once when there is no RAM drive installed, displayed twice when there is a RAM drive Z: installed. Did anybody find 2GB-memory-bugs in other Win98 software? It might be useful to set up a list of software running bug-free, and software which is buggy/unreliable with 2GB.

Thanks dencorso,removing the /MAX switch from himem.exe in config.sys solved the problem of the disappearing RAM. config.sys with device=\...\himem.exe /NUMHANDLES=64 /VERBOSE is sufficient, /MAX is not needed autoexec.bat WITH the /t parameter \...\xmsdsk.exe 655360 z: /t /y /c1 give RAM 1150MB and RAM drive 639MB autoexec.bat WITHOUT the /t parameter \...\xmsdsk.exe 655360 z: /y /c1 give only RAM 512MB and RAM drive 639MB The /t parameter is therefore necessary when 2GB of memory are installed.

No, /c1 parameter only set cluster size I don't care about it let it set automatically. Parameter /t is important.Well, I think you didn't get my point... I can run XMSDSK with or without the /T switch, and Win 98SE doesn't care. Older versions of Win refused to run without the /T parameter (which loads XMSDSK at the top of XMS, as farther away from HMA as possible), for sure. As I said, Win 98SE does not care whether XMSDSK is at the top or at the bottom (close to the HMA) of XMS, in my experience, so the /T parameter in not fundamental anymore. However, there is a legend that XMSDSK has a bug that prevents it from loading at the top with 2 GB or more of RAM. Since you are able to load and run XMSDSK OK, having 2 GB of RAM, you either demonstrated it is just a baseless legend, or, more probably, have found out yet another strange quirk related to HYMEM.SYS, for it works for you but you are using HIMEMX.EXE. Curiouser and curioser... 1) I have 2Gb of RAM, of which 1150.0 MB are available as per System Properties WITHOUT xmsdsk.exe, io.sys patched with w98iopat.exe (many thanks to xrayer!)device=c:\...\himem.exe /MAX=1178624 /NUMHANDLES=64 /VERBOSE MaxPhysPage=48000 DMABufferSize=64 EMMExclude=C000-CFFF MinFileCache=32768 MaxFileCache=261120 ChunkSize=4096 AGP aperture=64MB The parameters are a modification of xrayer's device=c:\...\himem.exe /MAX=1048576 /NUMHANDLES=64 /VERBOSE MaxPhysPage=40000 PCI-graphics card (NO AGP aperture) When I run with C:\...\xmsdsk.exe 524288 z: /c1 /t /y in autoexec.bat, a RAMdisk z: of 512MB is created, BUT: System Properties now shows ONLY 640.0MB RAM (before: 1150.0MB) With xrayer's parameters I had pre-RAMdisk 1022.0MB, post-RAMdisk only 513.0MB The /t switch appearantly did NOT work for me - maybe because I use an AGP card? (xrayer uses a PCI graphics card) The readme.txt of xmsdsk says about the /t switch: "Parameter /t can be used to tell the driver to allocate XMS memory from the top addresses instead of lower ones. Some machines under Win95 hang up when there's no free memory under 16 MBytes. It can be used too if you have problem playing sounds under Windows. These 2 issues seem to be related to DMA buffering." Any idea of how to set the parameters with a 64MB AGP aperture? 2) After setting the swapfile to RAMdrive z: with PagingDrive=Z: I got shutdown problems: - Win98SE hangs after selecting either Shut Down, Restart or Restart in MS-DOS mode, with a blinking cursor on a black screen - the selection Standby is not displayed in the Shut Down Windows menu anymore xrayer possibly didn't notice, since the GeForce driver series 80 always has shutdown problems anyway with newer GeForce cards 3) I have seen in several system.ini files here the use of ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1. Does this really do anything under Win98SE? Microsoft only lists Windows 98 Standard Edition, NOT Windows Second Edition http://support.microsoft.com/kb/223294 4) Has anybody tried any memory defragmentation software with 2GB RAM plus io.sys patched with w98iopat.exe, plus xmsdsk, plus swapfile location=ramdisk, with AGP vs PCI graphics card?