Jump to content

LoneCrusader

Moderator
  • Posts

    1,450
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7
  • Donations

    $1,225.00 
  • Country

    United States

Everything posted by LoneCrusader

  1. Ok Guys, thanks for all your help so far. I'm going to be needing my flash drive at college the next couple of days, and it's all a WinXP environment there, so I'm not going to run any more experiments just yet. As soon as that's over, Ill resume the quest to figure out what's going on with it. @jaclaz I have a question that's semi-related to this, but probably more appropriate in this thread. Will post there. Flash Drives Wearing Out ?
  2. Ok, I used HDHacker and got the Logical Drive no problem. (Text output had Kingston in it). The Physical Drive output I'm not 100% sure of, I couldn't select it by drive letter or type, just had numbers 0-9. Numbers 0, 1, 2 returned a sector output. The first one (0) was obviously my primary hdd because i saw some text in the output that obviously was my boot loader. The second (1) I assumed to be my second hdd, and the third (2) output must be the flash drive. Hope this is what you needed. MBRPBR.zip
  3. Ok, tried the KB240075 UHCD.SYS hotfix, didn't change anything. Here's the readout from ChipGenius: While in XP to run ChipGenius, I verified again that the drive was read/writable in XP, no data loss or problems of any kind. I remember when I first put the new blank drive in Win 98, it showed up with 14.(xxx something) GB free, so I assumed there wouldn't be any problems, guess I was wrong.
  4. I'm having a strange problem with one of my flash drives. Running Win98SE, NUSB 3.3 installed. (also verified this same error on 2 other computers running NUSB) I have 2 flash drives, one is 256mb and the other is a new Kingston 16gb Data Traveler. When I first installed NUSB, they both worked fine, and I could read/write to/from both of them. A few days ago, I tried to use the 16gb disk and it is recognized properly as a disk drive, but when I click on it in Windows Explorer it says "The disk in drive G is not formatted. Would you like to format it?" The other (256mb) flash disk is not affected. The 16gb disk shows up fine in Windows XP and in openSUSE 11, is read/writable and shows as being formatted with FAT32. Any ideas on why this disk is suddenly not recognized properly by Win98? On a last note, I did notice that the 16gb disk now has over 2gb of data on it. Could this be causing some sort of error based on the 2gb file size limit (the data is NOT in one file though) ?? I know that the size of DVDs are incorrectly reported as 1.99GB, but all of their data still shows up and is accessible. Thought this info might be of assistance.
  5. Thanks bristols, the User Agent Switcher solved the problem Setting the User Agent to: "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ; rv:1.9.0.14) Gecko/2009082707 Firefox/3.0.14" solves the problem if anyone else runs into this. I emailed MySpace support about it whenever it first happened, (wasn't expecting much, haha) and of course they were extremely helpful , here's the garbage they sent me: Quite ridiculous since as I mentioned before, the page loads perfectly in IE6, which is certainly much more outdated than Firefox 2. @rainyd - You must be using KernelEx to have Flash Player 10, I'm just running straight 98SE w/ RAM Patch.
  6. Tried to go to MySpace this evening, and got this error: Running 98SE, Firefox 2.0.0.20, IE6 SP1 installed, Flash Player 9. No mods except rloew's RAM patch. What's idiotic about this, is that MySpace will load in IE6!!! Saw an earlier topic about spoofing the User Agent to make sites display in IE6, is there a way to use the same principle to have Firefox report a newer version?
  7. I would be interested, but I also don't have a 512MB card. I might look into buying one if I can find one that I like. I prefer ATI cards, does anyone know of an ATI 512MB AGP card that has 98 drivers? I am already using the Catalyst 6.2 driver pack with my 9800 XT, and if I go into my adapter driver settings and view all hardware, the newest card listed is the x800 XT Platinum Edition which only came in 256MB versions.
  8. Look in the "Important / "Stickified" / Pinned Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE/ME Topics" thread and go down to "Comprehensive Packs" and take a look at soporific's Auto Patcher and Unattended Boot CD. I have not used either of these myself, but I remember reading about them and it sounds like it might be what you're looking for.
  9. (Repeat of a post made in another topic, but I felt it was relevant here as well as this is a compatibility thread.) I'm not saying you're wrong, but I recently installed 95C on a P4 2.0GHz machine and had to use the amdk6upd patch. Probably even the Intel processors at some point above the processor you used hit a limit where the patch is needed.
  10. I know for a fact that there are Win95 Drivers for a 128MB Radeon 8500 - I have the disk and have installed them recently. As far as Radeons after that, I am almost certain there are vxd drivers for them, but I can't remember right at the moment.
  11. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I recently installed 95C on a P4 2.0GHz machine and had to use the amdk6upd patch. Probably even the Intel processors at some point above the processor you used hit a limit where the patch is needed.
  12. There is a patch that corrects this error in 95. However, with a 1GHz processor and 256 RAM, 98SE will run fine. It's really up to you to decide whether or not you need the newer software & hardware support that 98SE can give you.
  13. Ahh... I can make my first post in a thread that I know something about.. heh. Windows 95 does have problems with many CPU's higher than 350 MHz. (Windows Protection Error in IOS.VXD) However, Microsoft and AMD issued a fix for this (amdk6upd.exe - remember when K6-2 Super Socket 7's were the screaming processor? lol ) This patch fixes the problem with processors up to 2.1 GHz, where a second problem occurs. (Windows Protection Error in NDIS.VXD) I spent many hours trying to get around this problem. This problem also affects 98FE, and M$ issued a hotfix for 98FE. The hotfix will not work on Windows 95.. I tried pulling files out of it and installing them manually, etc etc, it did not work. Here's what happens: 95 will install properly, then on the reboot you will get the first (IOS) error. After patching this error, you will get the second one (NDIS). I tried copying versions of ndis.vxd from the 98FE hotfix and from 98SE and putting them into 95, but this was unsuccessful. Being exasperated at this point, I just went and deleted ndis.vxd and then it gave another error concerning nwredir.vxd so I deleted it as well. Then - lo and behold, it said those two files were missing, press a key to continue.. and 95 loaded up. Only one more error message was displayed, "The NetWare compatible shell is unavailable." then, 95 went happily about its business. All this was done on a 3.06 GHz P4 HT machine. So - other than networking functions, 95 will run on processors faster than 2.1GHz. Getting there is rough, and the lack of networking (dial up, broadband, etc) effectively kills a lot of usefulness; but it CAN be done. (I'll bet Rudolph Loew could fix it ) As far as I know, Windows 98 SE does not have a limit on the speed of processor it can use (or at least it hasn't been hit yet).


×
×
  • Create New...