Tommy

Title changed to "Running Windows 2000 on modern motherboards - USB issue" Topic Pinned

I'm an old hardware fanatic, so I already use a Dell AT101w keyboard. (: Are there drivers present online that someone has placed in an archive since I can't yet get online with it?

This might be it for my Windows 2000 journey sadly. Not quite sure yet though. I built a new (to me) system and it's quite sweet. I'm running a Gigabyte Z68P-DS3 motherboard and the problem is lying in the SMBus driver along with the USB drivers. While browsing Blackwingcat's site on it last night, some of the stuff I'm finding doesn't seem to pertain to the issue I'm having. Essentially, none of the USB items work, nothing at all. And with the SMBus driver (chipset) not seemingly working correctly, I can't get the network driver working either. The stuff is detected but I end up with yellow circles with the black exclamation point. Not the way to start a new system build! With all that, I tried Windows XP Pro x64 bit edition, especially because I have 16GBs of RAM installed in the system and it's working just fine and flying like a top. I'm tempted to try the latest HFSLIP disk with Windows 2000 and see if it works by unplugging my XP drive and installing it to my future Windows 7 drive before I actually install Windows 7 to see if it happens. But I'm almost tempted not to try it because even if it worked, I still can't properly use Windows 2000 with all the RAM in my system and therefor it's sort of a waste of money. So I'm very stuck on what I'm going to do. Windows 2000 has always been my favorite and if it's not going to work properly on the system, I can't use it. I'm not even sure if getting a separate USB card/network card would help either so I'm quite stuck indeed! I've used Windows 2000 for over 15 years and almost 10 years after it left support of Microsoft. It's been a great run, I'm hoping it's not quite over but it just might be unfortunately.

So I decided to make a general thread about Linux, and your thoughts and opinions on it. I've been trying out many Linux distros over the past couple of years and while most of them are the same outside, the insides can be quite different which is why I make sure to give them a fair going over before judging them. After months of testing Debian Linux, I can safely say that I understand why Linux has not taken over the Windows market. I consider myself a very advance Windows user, I'm even certified in A+, and even I find Linux somewhat clunky and unpleasant to use. It's possible I'm not looking for information in the right places, but there are just so many things that I do not like about Linux in general, but then there are a few things I do like. So I'll start with the things I do like. Things I like -Almost all versions of Linux are free -There are MANY versions of free software alternatives to everyday Windows programs, I especially love KolourPaint, it's essentially MSPaint XP on steroids -You can own a current OS for nothing -Stability is quite good, security is awesome -Drivers are often times fully included right out of the box and you don't need to chase a bunch down to make things work -Even very old hardware can be supported just fine, unlike Windows which fabricates old hardware as unusable, if Linux can support old hardware, so can you Windows. You just don't want to. Things I don't like -Hard to update certain software, especially browsers like Firefox that are somewhat integrated into the OS itself, aka ESR versions, and change them to mainstream versions -Does not play as nice with Windows via networking. I do not care for how complicated Samba can be sometimes -I hate the desktop, I want shortcuts on my desktop, I do not what them going into a folder called desktop but they never show up on the desktop -I definitely don't like all the stupid little folders that are obscure. Windows has Users, Program Files, Windows, System32, etc. What is var, lib, srv, proc, etc? Those mean nothing to me. -Updating programs can be complicated if you don't get command line down. It's not horrible but somewhat inconvenient -It's very easy to break something, even while updating, and literally ruin your entire installation -I don't find the support communities very friendly most of the time With the last one, I'm sure they get tired of hear the same questions asked over and over again, especially ones that they deem easy to figure out. But at the same time, if you want people to jump ship to your software, you need to be willing to help them out. Most of the world relies on Windows and Linux is a very different beast. Although some distros exist like Q4OS, which is by far my favorite so far, they can mimic Windows, but underneath they are still totally different creatures. Do I hate Linux? Of course not! I think it's a pretty cool platform but as I see it, there are two types of users for it. Advanced programmers/developers, and hardcore geeks/nerds. I don't mean the latter in a bad way at all of course since I consider myself somewhat of a nerd. But Linux just isn't ready for primetime use for most people. Heck, some people here at work have a hard time understanding what you mean when you tell them to click on the "Big Blue E", or using "the slash above the enter key". There's no way they'd comprehend terminals and shells and command line, etc. How do you feel about Linux, what are your likes/dislikes? Where do you see strengths or weaknesses? I'd like to know your thoughts!

There's no point to this. Thread Locked

I already tried both of these, placing the dependency below was just ignored and changing version numbers on the drivers just resulted in a "problem". I'm not sure if I missed anything but I was sure to change what I could find in the driver files. I think you're right, Blackwingcat could probably get to the bottom of this. I'm quite sure that not many people run a dual monitor setup, especially in a Win2k environment, so it probably wasn't that critical to get that running. This is the replacement card I got, I was looking for performance but on a cost effective basis since I've already sunk enough money into this new build that I can't build yet since I'm still waiting on the motherboard. https://www.ebay.com/itm/EVGA-GeForce-GTX-275-1-7GB-DDR3-PCIe-x16-Dual-DVI-S-Video-Card-017-P3-1175-AR/401760219453?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649

Hmm, I liked this idea but unless I did something wrong, it didn't work out. Actually, dropping it in caused a lot of issues including explorer.exe crashes when I'd right click. I'm guessing maybe because other dependancy addresses weren't properly updated like they needed to be. Does the software you use in your screenshot automatically recalculate pointers or are pointers more reserved for video game hacking and whatnot? I know what I'd hack around with Zelda: Ocarina of Time, fixing pointers was a huge issue when it came to adding new stuff into the game and having to tell the game engine where stuff was located. I also played around with nView a lot last night like you suggested just now with no luck, and mainly that's because of driver mismatches. The one other thing I could possibly try is lying about what version the driver is in the INF file. Not sure if other DLL files have the driver version hardcoded in somewhere or not, I'm sure they do. I could probably hex edit those to make nView happy and see what happens and see if not only it eliminates those mismatch errors but to see if it'll work and play nice together.

I did even more digging last night on this subject matter and I think I'm starting to understand what is wrong. I think the problem is nView itself. As the driver gets newer and newer and I'm sure a bit more polished up, Windows 2000 is slowly moved more out of the picture. This is further supported by the fact that win2k shows up in some important nView files, especially those that suggest dual monitor support. EnableWin2kdualmonitor is one of the big ones. (give or take the name itself). It even shows up in some drivers as recent as 295.xx, but blackwingcat's 310.xx and higher drivers, Win2k is 100% completely absent in nView files, therefor I'm thinking when you try switching over to dual monitor support, the program has no idea what to do. In order for dual monitor support to work, I believe it would have to be programed back into nView somehow so that Windows 2000 knows how to handle its request. I probably jumped ship a bit too fast but I went ahead and just ordered a different video card, an EVGA GeForce GTX 275, which is supported by driver 190.38, which still has drivers for Windows 2000 and should work just fine. It's still decent and better than what I originally had so we'll see what happens when it comes in the mail. But unless someone knows how to program these commands back into nView, I'm thinking dual monitor support for newer cards via Windows 2000 is impossible.

I haven't, but thanks for the tip, jumper! I don't know a lot about those sort of things so I shall give it a try since my computer is sort of a sandbox right now.

So while I'm waiting for blackwingcat to reply, I've been doing a bit of digging on my own. I've dug into the drivers and discovered between and official Windows 2000 driver file and blackwingcat's unofficial Windows XP 3xx.xx files, there's a difference in how it handles dual view when it comes to later versions of Windows. First, Windows 2000 uses hardware ID driver\w2kdualview whereas it seems that XP uses driver\multiview, therefor dualview seems to be completely absent when it comes to later drivers even though the registry keys are there. I added the missing dualview hardware ID to the driver file, so now it is found and "appears" to be fine with it, but when I try to enable dualview, it seems that it still won't change over. I still get the error code 106 when trying via the systray icon and when I try the control panel, it just does nothing at all. Clone seems to work just fine, so does the extend either horizontal or vertical. But when it comes to dual view and configuring the displays independantly, it just will not work no matter what I do to it. I've even compared it to a later driver file that is compatible with Windows 2000 and it seems like everything I need for this to work is there. Unless someone else has any ideas, I'm probably going to try to use my old video card as a secondary card to extend my monitor in the new system. I can't try that with the current one since I only have 1 PCI-E x16 port whereas the new board will have two of them. I hate to go that route but if it has to be done, it has to be done. In Windows 98, I don't even remember dualview having to be installed, I thought on many NVIDIA cards, it just worked as soon as you installed the drivers.

This one is mostly for @blackwingcat but if anyone else knows how to fix this, please chime in! I bought a newer card, a Gigabyte GeForce GTX 650. It's detected just fine and mostly all works as well as it should, except for one thing. The darn issue with the NVIDIA Control Panel not working. I downloaded several versions of 3xx.xx modded by blackwingcat that have the control panel included in it but when I install the drivers and whatnot and reboot, I'm constantly greeted with a NVIDIA Control Panel Extension cannot be created, possible reason version mismatch whenever I go to advanced display properties or I try to launch it from it's location in Program Files. I've even followed these instructions and still have gotten nowhere I don't even really care about the control panel itself. But without it, I don't really see a way to enable dual monitors, which is a deal breaker for me. Currently running Extended Kernel v3.0a ENG with GameGuard fix and Extended Core v14b. This is essentially just a test installation before I put my new computer together so if I break this install, I don't care, I'll just reinstall and try again. But if I can somehow create a dual monitor setup via regedit instead of worrying about the control panel, then I'll be happy enough. Most games have their own separate settings that allow you to adjust graphic settings as needed.

I have Windows 2000 reinstalled but same issue. I'm using extended core v14b, I believe the higher ones caused issues with dual monitor support. Enabled PAE and I could see all 6GBs of RAM that I have right now, but there was no sound at all. It didn't look like it was "disabled", but it just didn't work, you couldn't hear anything. Once I removed the /pae switch and rebooted, it started working again.

I don't really think so, but I cannot recall for sure. I'm working on getting my stuff backed up right now and making a new install disk with the newest HFSLIP package and even though I wasn't going to worry about wiping the drive and reinstalling, I may just do it anyway so I can sort of practice up and know what I'm doing when I build my new computer. I do know though that when I returned from enabling PAE, I tried playing music via Windows Media Player and it completely froze the computer so I'm thinking it's the sound driver that caused the issue. I honestly forgot about my smaller SSD hard drive with the same installation of Windows 2000 on it until today. Even though it's not "up to date", I could've hooked it up and restored the registry that way since when I changed to a bigger hard drive, I cloned the original and then expanded it, that was probably last year sometime, maybe around September. But as long as I have access to my files and can back it all up, that's all I really care about. I'd rather try all these new drivers on a clean system anyway. But I will definitely make sure that I always restart after every single update, especially kernel and core.

I made a thread on this a very long time ago, I think it was before BlackWingCat even made the RAM patch for the extended core, that or it was in extremely early stages. Advanced Server gave me issues with PAE whereas I didn't have sound afterwards. Just for fun, I decided to try PAE again along with my new video card, a Gigabyte GeForce GTX 650, that I received in the mail yesterday for my new computer build. Well, disaster struck, big time. It was probably partially my fault too but it went so far as to corrupt my registry. system once again somehow decided to go bang and I was unbootable. No problem, I thought! Yeah, I thought. NTBackup backs up my registry twice a week so I should be able to just open it up in NTBackup and restore via Windows 7. WRONG! It backed my stuff up alright, but it did not back up the registry files. I'm assuming because they were "in use" possibly, they were just skipped over. So my disaster plan failed and I have learned my lesson. I'm debating on what steps to take now because I want to ensure I always have recent registry backups. I used the backups in the repair folder but that's just a big mess but at least I was able to get into the OS again. I've just about got all my files backed up and since I have barebones and the internet works, I'm just going to leave it as is until my new stuff comes and I can build my new computer and then I'll wipe the drive and start over again. On the plus side, the video card works great! If it's not too much trouble, what are your hardware specs, at least your video/sound card. I'm assuming you and bluebolt have no problems with any of it. I ordered a new (used) SoundBlaster X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty so I'm hoping that it'll be able to use the unofficial drivers and therefor will have no issues when it comes to PAE vs the official Creative drivers.

Yep, you have to manually set setup.exe to Windows XP compatibility using fcwin2k. Then try launching setup again. However, Outlook 2007 still doesn't operate properly so you cannot use it. But the main programs like Word, Excel, and PowerPoint work without a hitch that I'm aware of. I'd also recommend uninstalling your extended kernel and first install Gurgelmeyer's SP5.1 if you never installed it before. https://mega.nz/#F!SlACALYL!9eek__QpDtB4CIqLR_hUDQ!Oghn2b4T Then I usually grab the latest version of tomasz86's UURollup package, I think it's daily 2014 and install that. https://mega.nz/#F!SlACALYL!9eek__QpDtB4CIqLR_hUDQ!m94lnCrB Then I go ahead and install BlackWingCat's extended kernel and extended core updates. The former two will ensure other things are updated as well so you have a bit more of a completed system. There may be some that say they're not needed, but when they're not installed, it feels that several things that worked on an older compilation that had those updates don't work as expected on the newer compilations.

Just so I and everyone else can be clear on this. Does this apply to all versions of Windows 2000? Obviously different versions support different amounts of RAM. So if I use the /PAE switch on Windows 2000 Professional, I can still use Physical Address Extension with no issues? I'm building a different system soon and will be starting out with 8GBs of RAM but the motherboard can support up to 32GBs.

Welcome to the forums! You'll find lots of great folks here who have great knowledge and there are still some diehard Vista users on here.

I find it interesting that Microsoft would even back-port Edge to something like Windows 7 considering the death clock is ticking, but perhaps there's a bit of an agenda behind it, to try and get people to like Edge and convince them that upgrading to Windows 10 won't be as horrible as others say.

Welcome to MSFN, Eric! I'd say I have close to 20 years too, give or take. Started out even more stupid than a box of rocks and then I started learning from my mistakes and then wanting to learn how to do even more, and here I am today! You'll find we have a great community with a lot of smart cookies!

I seem to be up and running again too. Actually, I was only running FF 51 ESR on my Windows 2000 install but still didn't have my extensions working, even after I did the whole setting signatures setting to false, but I just happened to install FF 52 ESR over it and when it launched, then it all seemed to be okay. Even though my Debian laptop that I'm using right now seems to still have an issue, saying to proceed with caution because my extensions haven't been verified to work with FF. Very strange!

I tried that too, doesn't work. Apparently it has something to do with signatures of some sort. I'm surprised though that even older Firefox versions are affected this way.

Just so that everyone on this browser platform is wondering what in the heck is going on and why their add on extensions are being blocked, it is nothing you did. https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/03/a-glitch-is-breaking-all-firefox-extensions/

The flags show up on user profiles, but under actual posts, it just shows up as letters. I thought it was just me at first but at least I know now that it isn't.

Also, please keep in mind that profanity here is not tolerated. Once Dencorso decides to reopen this thread for debate, let's keep it clean and respectful towards each other. We can have discussions on here without swearing or bashing each other to bits.

See, one thing I was concerned about was that I wasn't sure exactly how integrated it was with Steam. Now...I bought a used copy on eBay without realizing that it required activation and it was one of those "One time uses" activation and it still wanted to work with Steam. Even the retail copy installed Steam on my machine and since Steam won't even think about working on XP anymore, I figured that even though it was an XP game, that it would no longer be relevant because Steam and XP are no longer a thing. But unfortunately since the activation key was already used by the previous owner, the game was completely useless. Hence why I bought the Steam version. But then a bit ago I discovered GOG and noticed just yesterday that it had such a good sale going on it that I decided to try it out, since their games don't rely on Steam and also have an Offline installer that doesn't require to be online or hitched to anything to install and run. But then I was really concerned how much the game would run if PhysX wasn't fully compatible with Windows 2000. With some minor tweaking and version downgrading, I managed to get it going. I played it for a while last night on my Windows 2000 install and I had no problems at all. I did noticed that when you first launched into your save file that it can seem a bit choppy for a second or two, but that could be driver related as well. I'm not really against activation per se, even though I think it's sort of useless because if someone wants to pirate a game, they'll find a way. But what I am against is something like Steam that will render your XP games unplayable because their stupid software all of a sudden decides that it's no longer going to work on XP since XP users no longer dominated their servers anymore and that everytime you launch Steam, it always wants to update itself. I thought I read that you can prevent that from happening but if you can't even get it to launch, then that's a problem in itself.