Jump to content
MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. ×

98-Guy

Member
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

    $0.00 

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About 98-Guy

  1. I was originally asking if there was anything posted on Microsoft.com that would answer these questions. You would think that the precise legality of what is allowable would be spelled out somewhere. But I'm still not sure what the consensus is here. Given that someone (say, person A) wants to re-install win-98, and knows what their original product-key is, but they don't have a win-98 CD, then does it matter how they get their hands on a win-98 CD - even if they download it from a torrent? Or is the person who *provides* the CD (either physically or electronically) violating the EULA or copyr
  2. With regard to copyright law and the windows-98 EULA, I'm asking if there is a specific Microsoft white-paper or document that can answer the following question(s). Does the law (or Microsoft) deem it illegal to: a) copy a windows-98 CD and give it to someone else, or b) to actually _use_ a copied CD to install windows-98 (even if you are using a product-key that is yours or that you purchased at one point or another) I'm asking because it's come up in other forums where someone has a product-key (or knows what the product-key is on their current PC) but they don't have an actual win-98 CD, so
  3. OK, so let me get this straight. Vista uses a proprietary file format for burning files to recordable optical media, and is not offering a driver for XP to be able to read them????? Is this common knowledge? Is it similar to Roxio's Direct-CD or Nero's IN-CD ??? Is there really no driver for XP?
  4. Buddy of mine told me this today. A friend comes to his place over the weekend. He's got a fancy SLR camera and a Vista laptop. Buddy takes a bunch of pictures, then hands him a generic CD-R. Friend connects the camera to his laptop to transfer the pictures and then burns them on the CD-R. Buddy takes CD to his XP computer, but it comes up like it's a blank CD-R. Brings the CD back to the friend, put it back into the vista laptop, and images are there. Brings the CD into the office today, and none of our systems (all XP) can see any files on it. Drive Properties shows a reduced disk capa
  5. The fact that it's a multi-OS system is irrelevant. The fact that win-98 is installed and used on it is relevant. The argument about AMD "price/performance" is bogus. You simply have something against Intel, so that's why you chose that motherboard, and you now have to deal with some win-98 incompatabilities because of it. So to summarize, under win-98, you can't get a SATA hard drive to work in anything other than compatibility mode, and you (probably) can't get the nic to work. I'd throw that board on the trash heap. Your experience is faulty: ------------------------ Subject: Update 4:
  6. Why did you choose that board, and not the Intel-based Asrock Dual or 4-core VSTA boards? Based on what you wrote further down, I'm not sure if you're saying that the Creative drivers don't support win-98 at all, or that they do but the ktproject drivers work better. Is your optical drive also SATA? That could be why win-98 wouldn't see it as you describe. I've used fdisk to partition 160, 250 and 500 gb SATA hard drives, so I don't know what you're talking about here. Again, this is wrong. A couple of years ago I installed XP-pro on a 250 gb hard drive formatted 100% as a single FAT-32
  7. Well, for one thing, IDE = PATA. When you say "installing (win-98) on an IDE drive and setting up SATA afterwards", do you mean installing win-98 on an IDE (PATA) drive, and then *cloning* the image to a SATA drive? Because (otherwise) you can't wave a magic wand and turn an IDE/PATA drive into a SATA drive. And yes, I do mean installing win-98 directly onto a SATA drive. There is only ONE thing to watch: In the bios, RAID must be turned on. This prevents the SATA drive from appearing as an ordinary IDE drive to win-98 when it's installing itself. Windows will use compatibility mode (BIOS i
  8. Please explain that statement. In my experience, getting SATA to work on a fresh win-98 install (on an Asrock motherboard) was easier than doing the same with XP. There was basically nothing special to be done. After installation, win-98 will be running in compatibility mode until you run the Via Arena driver install. The great thing about using SATA drives in NON-IDE compatibility mode is that you can use drives larger than 137 gb.
  9. Honestly, I doubt a 6600GT is faster than a 8400GS. I have both a 6800Xt (AGP) and a 8600GT (PCIe), and the 8600 beats the 6800 like a train vs a toy car: I can run Overlord in 1440x900, high settings, with the 8600 with good constant fps, I can only run with my 6800 in 960x720, Medium settings and I have bad fps drops in intense scenes. Peak pixel fill rate: 6600 GT -> 2.0 giga-pixels/sec 8400 GS -> 3.6 giga-pixels/sec Peak texture fill rate: 6600 GT -> 4.0 texel/s 8400 GS -> 3.6 texel/s Bandwidth: 6600 GT -> 16.0 GB/s 8400 GS -> 6.4 GB/s Number of texturing units: 6600 GT
  10. I guess the best info regarding how to decode the various Nvidia model numbers is by looking here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_8_Series http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_9_Series Question: If I don't intend on playing any games, should I care how many pixel shader units or vertex pipelines my video card has? If I want on-screen video playback to be smooth, and for other aspects of desktop computing to be fast, are there benefits in getting, say, a 7600 GT or 7800 GTX vs a 6600 GT?
  11. I don't particularly care if the drivers are official or not. I care that I get a board that has known-working win-98 drivers - and the drivers are not a pain to obtain. And I take it that there is still nothing definative as to whether or not an Nvidia PCIe board will work with win-98 given the most modded or hacked driver available at this time. Tiger direct is offering these AGP: GeForce 6600 GT - 256MB DDR3, AGP 8x, DVI, VGA, TV Out ($68) XFX GeForce 6200 - Ultrasilent Cooling, 512MB DDR2, AGP 8x, DVI, VGA, TV Out ($74) EVGA GeForce 7600 GT Superclocked / 512MB DDR2 / AGP 8x / DVI / VGA /
  12. I'm going to build several Asrock-based win-98 systems and was wondering what Nvidia-based video card should I be trying to obtain for them. I'm thinking nothing less than a 6200 with 128 or 256 mb of memory (likely DDR-2). Board must have dual monitor support (this is probably standard). The Asrock motherboards have both PCIe and AGP. My concern is that I'm not likely to find a 7xxx-based Nvidia card that's AGP, and PCIe is (in my experience) problematic for win-98. I'm also hazy on the LE/GS/GX/what-ever when it comes to nvidia. If someone could explain the differences between the various
  13. That list has already been posted to this forum. It's a sticky right near the top of the list. Don't you see it? http://www.msfn.org/board/Modern-motherboa...-wi-t97588.html
  14. I'm thinking that the last functional definition file dated back to April or May, and would have been available via this link: http://download.lavasoft.com/public/defs.zip What was the last version of the Ad Aware (se) reference or definition file that functioned correctly on win-98 - and is this reference file available anywhere?
  15. Cluster size and exploring the limits of FAT-32 http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.p...f15325586abfa68 or try this: http://tinyurl.com/4dxdcz ------------------ Windows 98 large file-count tests on large volume (500 gb hard drive) http://tinyurl.com/3p285h
×
×
  • Create New...