JorgeA

Very neat -- thank you! I'll put WordStar and InfoStar on the CD and see what happens. --JorgeA

jaclaz, Another interesting possibility. I'll have to look into how to create such a CD. Grazie! --JorgeA

dencorso, This is all very good to know! In a way, it's reassuring to learn that it's still possible to boot a fairly recent machine with DOS 1. Sorry I didn't get to reply sooner. It was a hectic week, capped by a Saturday snowstorm that felled trees and cut our power. --JorgeA

The easiest way is to create a 1.2MB or 1.44MB Bootable Floppy Disk, make an Image of it and burn a CD using the Floppy Image as a Boot Image. rloew, Great idea, thank you! I'll try that as soon as I get the chance. If I add (for example) WordStar to this floppy image, can I then launch WordStar from the same CD? --JorgeA

tain, That's a fair question. After reading this, you won't be able anymore to say that you've heard nothing but good things about IE9 from users. I tried IE9 last year and hated it. It had the least informative UI that I'd ever seen on a browser: no page title across the top for quick verification of the page; no permanent menu bar; no status bar (and if you do manage to bring it back, it has lost most of its functionality); no indication of progress for individual downloads; a ridiculously short address bar that cuts off the end of URLs from view. In addition, there were a number of (IMO) needless changes to the visual design, such as the lopsidedly large Back button and the relocation of buttons, tabs, and the Favorites. I use the Internet mostly for work and research, and it's annoying to have to discover where all the commands are all over again -- to what end? I'm aware that tweaks and hacks have been found or developed for many of these issues, but even then you don't end up with a useful status bar, which I rely on to keep me posted on safety matters (SmartScreen filter, protected zone, blocked items, privacy report). I know that you can call these up, but the point is that I'm no longer getting this information at a glance while I'm working, rather I have to stop what I'm doing and take time to click on something to get the information. Incidentally, anyone inclined to think that my reaction to IE9 was strong, should have seen my wife's reaction. I gave it a shot for three days; she uninstalled her IE9 after 20 seconds. Afterwards, I came across this list of features that were removed from IE9 relative to IE8. I don't know about some of the more technical issues discussed there, but I can vouch for the decreased functionality. So it looks like we'll be staying with IE8 for a while. --JorgeA

Wow, what a great bunch of informative replies! That's why this Forum is so marvelous. @ScrewUpgrading: The original idea was to create a bootable CD out of an '80s-era DOS disk, and boot from there. The thinking was that since modern computers don't have floppy drives, maybe it was possible to get the old DOS files onto a newer PC in order to burn a CD that could then boot a current PC into DOS. Later on, pondering the complexities involved in doing that, I started to wonder if it would be possible, instead, to hook up a floppy disk drive on a modern PC and boot it into DOS. (I have one Pentium I computer with both a 3.5" FDD and a 5.25" FDD, so I could format a 3.5" floppy and transfer the system to it from an older 5.25" floppy using FORMAT A: /S.) Either way, the intention wasn't to do any serious work with the setup. I just thought it would be neat to see if it would run, that's all. @jaclaz -- Thanks for the warning, and for the information. I wouldn't be trying (necessarily) to do anything that involved reading or writing to the HDD. My main goal was to get the "real" MS-DOS 3 up on the screen. Writing to/reading from the HDD would be "icing on the cake," but it sounds like that's better left alone. @CoffeeFiend -- That's quite a find regarding the CRT runtime error! Another issue diminishing the prospects of this whole idea. @allen2: OK, this kills the notion of reading/writing the HDD. If I can even get this to work at all, I'll keep strictly to the floppy drive and/or the CD. @rloew -- A ray of hope. How do we get a usable IO.SYS and MSDOS.SYS from DOS 3.x onto a CD? Thanks, guys! --JorgeA

Two questions for which I'm hoping that someone(s) can provide an answer: I. If I install a floppy drive on a modern computer and put an MS-DOS boot disk in it, then power cycle the PC -- will the computer boot into DOS? And supposing that it does, is it safe to try to get it to read from and write to an NTFS hard disk? I know that DOS doesn't know anything about NTFS, but the question is: will it screw up the hard disk if I try? II. As an alternative, just for the fun of it I've been toying with the idea of copying some of my old MS-DOS 3.1 or 3.3 5.25" floppies over to a computer that can take, for example, COMMAND.COM and CONFIG.SYS to create and burn a bootable ISO on a CD. The trouble might be porting the hidden system files (IO.SYS and MSDOS.SYS) so that they can become part of the ISO and boot the system. Is this possible, or is it a pipe dream? Then there is the fact that these are 16-bit operating systems, whereas modern PCs will be 32- or 64-bit systems. *** Of course, if I want the authentic "retro" experience, I can simply fire up my still-functional Sanyo MBC-550 , load MS-DOS, and launch WordStar. But I'm curious to see if the same thing is possible on a current computer without resorting to something like DOSbox. All insights are welcome! --JorgeA

Yeah, each time I've installed an OS fresh, I've taken a very cautious approach, doing every single update separately, even on different days or after rebooting so that the system would be stable before the next hit. Never felt real comfortable with doing a whole slew of updates (at least from different dates) all at once, as I suspected that the chances of modifications interfering with each other might rise exponentially with the number of simultaneous updates. Thanks, by the way, to you and PROBLEMCHYLD for doing this work! --JorgeA

I have the same reaction to MDGx's site -- it's wonderful to have this available, but the impression I get when I go there is that there are far too many choices, each one seemingly telling me that it contains "all" of the latest "essential" updates, hotfixes, etc., plus unofficial updates. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that I'm wrong about the facts, but I am not wrong about the impression I get when I visit the site. It's just confusing -- there is a lot to sort out, and I don't know what's what. Personally, I'd like to see one single pack that would take Win98 and/or Win98SE (I use both, on different computers) from its fresh-install state to the end of the official Microsoft Updates in July 2006 -- and then a completely separate single pack that contains whatever improvements and fixes that people outside Microsoft have come up with since then. (For all I know, these are already available there, but I can't tell for sure. Maybe the site just needs to be reorganized in an easier-to-follow manner.) Ideally, the "up till 2006" pack would enable the user to selectively install updates, just the like original MS page did. (For example, I'm not necessarily interested in installing the Turkish or Korean language help packs.) But the most important thing is to have the official MS updates clearly labeled and kept separate from the unofficial updates. --JorgeA

Count me in as one who's interested! We never know when we'll have to reinstall the OS. It'll be helpful if all of the files in the package are in the same language and materials in other languages are separated out, to avoid surprises.

dencorso, Here are the ones I use: Panda SafeCD Bootable Disc Acronis Antimalware CD (they use a version of Bit Defender) The Ultimate Boot CD contains the Avira AntiVir scanner (at least it did when I downloaded it several months ago, the CD contents on their website seem to change often). Spybot Search & Destroy Personal Edition is a Windows 7 PE CD, but you have to pay some $$$ to get it. It comes in the mail "ready to wear," in a nice CD case Seems to work well, though. Finally, if you have a subscription to a Norton product you're entitled to download and burn the Norton Bootable Recovery Tool, which includes a malware scanner. The first three of these work off Linux live CDs. I also have an ISO for AVG, but haven't gotten around to burning and trying it. Note: The Panda and UBCD scanners even work on my Windows 98 tower! B) Hope this helps! In appreciation of all that you've done for me, I'm glad to be able to be the one supplying you with an answer for a change. --JorgeA

Hello, Has anybody else had this problem? Ever since I downloaded and installed this week's Windows Updates, the tab function on my Internet Explorer 8 hasn't worked properly. I can open new tabs just fine, but when I try to close any one of them, the tab won't close, and eventually IE stops responding and the screen takes on a whitish hue. In that case the only way to close IE is to go into Task Manager and kill the program. Any idea what's going on, and what one might do to solve it? This is on Vista x64; the IE version is 32-bit. Thanks! --JorgeA UPDATE: Never mind, I found the fix here. Other websites gave the first solution only -- that's what I tried and IE tabs are working again (knock on wood).

Foxbat, An excellent and informative reply, thanks very much! BTW, I checked in msconfig and I saw the two KB files you discussed, in the Win98 fresh install I did this summer. --JorgeA

Foxbat, What is the URL for Windows 98 manual updating? Does that page contain all the updates that used to be available through the (formerly) normal Windows Update process? I'm not sure what this means. Can you give more details? Thanks! --JorgeA

Tripredacus, Nope, I haven't done anything as fancy as that. The only tinkering i've ever done with the desktop look is to the screensaver and the wallpaper (I settled on "black" for my background). But now I've learned of a new way to customize the look (WindowBlinds) -- thanks! The mystery continues... --JorgeA

Tripredacus, ResHack looks like a pretty cool program (thanks!), but I can't tell how to analyze the desktop icon for, say, SpeedFan. Selecting to open the icon in ResHack has no result. I can open SpeedFan.exe, but the only references to icons there lead to the famous "spiral" themed logo, but without any shortcut arrow or MFC blocks associated with it. Where does one go to look for what the desktop shortcut icon is supposed to look like? Doing a search, within ResHack, of "MFC" or "Microsoft Foundation Class" yielded zero results. I'm not sure how to tell whether SpeedFan (for example) is an MFC application or not. Hope this info helps to guide us. --JorgeA EDIT: How bizarre. I decided to reboot to see what happened... and all the little arrows came back, and everything is fine again! Well, at least this served to introduce me to ResHack, which could come in VERY handy sometime. Thanks. Still, if you have a theory as to what may have been going on (I sure don't), I'd be curious to hear it!

Tripredacus, Thanks for the link. How bizarre! Maybe the programs whose desktop icons changed to MFC were written in that environment? (Examples: Spybot, CrystalDiskMark, Usbview, SpeedFan.) Even if we don't know the exact cause -- what sorts of things could cause this change in some icons? --JorgeA

Hello, Today, after installing my Windows and Adobe updates for Vista and restarting the computer, some of my desktop icons came back with a new look. Instead of the previous little arrow in the lower left corner, they're now showing up with a set of three colored blocks that read "MFC" in capital letters. They look like this. (Hopefully it'll show up correctly.) Does anybody know what the heck this is, and (just as important) why all of a sudden it showed up on my desktop today?? Any insights will be appreciated. --JorgeA

Just go to the 9x Sub-Forum and look around. That particular link (along with many others) is in the "Stickified" topic.BTW, you might note that the "Complete List" was last updated Dec. 15, 2008, well past the "dropped support date" of 2007. The only thing that might be beyond that would be IE6 "unofficial" and (possibly) other contributed/purchased "unofficial" fixes. It probably won't get much better than that. submix8c, I looked in both the 9x sub-forum and in the "member projects" sub-sub-forum and did not find this particular thread in the stickies (the ones with the green boxes before the thread title). Are you sure it's a sticky? In a sense, it's good to know that there may not be much more to keep track of after 12/2008 -- that simplifies matters. On the other hand, that would tie in with what the OP was saying, that there's little new work being done on Win98. --JorgeA

Oh yeah, this is great -- very close to what I had in mind. Thanks for the link. I'm adding this one, too, to my Favorites. Too bad it's not being kept up to date any longer! --JorgeA

Fredledingue, Your page is a great idea! I love MDGx's website, but I find it a bit overwhelming and somewhat confusing to wade through. Instead of trying to agree on the exact upgrade path, how about a Sticky that simply collects and lists all the available updates/upgrades and their respective purposes? That way the user could browse in one place (one-stop shopping) and pick and choose what he needs. It would also help to include information on the order of upgrades -- "install X before Y," or "make sure NOT to install C if you install B," that sort of thing. The trouble with a sticky thread is that it can grow to such enormous proportions that no one can read it all to get all the information relevant to their goals. So it would also require frequent "pruning" to keep it to a manageable level -- maybe a single master post to which improvements and suggestions are regularly incorporated and then the new posts deleted. Other than that, we could have frequent postings with a link to your page. --JorgeA

Being on dial-up is, IMO, the source of the bulk of your Internet slowness problems. I was on dial-up with my Windows 98FE computer as late as December 2008. Having never used any other way to connect to the 'Net, I had nothing to compare it to. But then the PC got sick and I had to run out and get a modern computer with an Ethernet card, and the difference was like night and day. When I fixed my Win98 I even went back and installed a NIC in it. It doesn't load Web pages nearly as fast as my Vista, but it's SOOOOO much faster than it used to be. (That PC uses IE6.) Mind you, this is Windows 98 as intended by Bill -- I haven't tried any of the fancier Win98 modifications such as KernelEx. Just reinstalled the OS a few weeks ago and the machine works great, just as if it were 2005... or 1998. --JorgeA

Thanks, Tripredacus. I'll hide the update and, umm, "monitor" the situation... --JorgeA

jaclaz, Well, I guess that I am not so lucky. I downloaded the PLoP ZIP file and the RawWriteWin.exe program, extracted the IMG file, inserted a blank (and pre-formatted) 1.44MB floppy in A:, launched RawWriteWin in Windows 98, entered the path and name for the file to be written to the A: drive, and... I keep getting an error message that says, "LoadLibrary16 failed!" Whatever the **** that means. Better success was to be had with the DISKIMG.COM program working in a DOS box. I created the image and booted the old PC with this floppy in it, and I got the first screen. When I selected USB (other options included the two HDDs), there was a sequence of messages saying: LOADING EHCI DRIVER SEARCHING ON HOSTS DRIVER REMOVED LOADING UHCI DRIVER SEARCHING ON HOSTS DRIVER REMOVED LOADING OHCI DRIVER SEARCHING ON HOSTS DRIVER REMOVED Then there was a very faint (black letters on a dark blue background) message saying, BOOT ERROR NO BOOT DEVICE FOUND, PLEASE RETRY IT I do have a USB stick in the port, but of course there's no OS on it -- I'm trying to activate USB precisely in order to put an OS on a stick. Still, does the first sequence of messages mean that it DID detect the USB card, or not really? Never used this program before, so I don' t know if the drivers were "removed" because they're supposed to be removed, or because it didn't find a USB device. --JorgeA

Hello, I have a spanking new PNY GeForce GT 430 card in my (almost as new) Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit HP Slimline PC, and I have a question about the video card driver updates. When setting up the video card, instead of using the installation CD I went directly to PNY's website for the latest and greatest drivers. They installed fine. If I remember correctly, the driver version is 280.26, dated August 9(?), 2011. However, now Windows Update is pushing an NVIDIA driver update dated July 26, 2011. This would appear to be older than the drivers I just installed, but unfortunately the WU "more information" link for this update doesn't provide any details at all, so I can't tell what it is. So my question is -- should I install this Windows Update, or should I ignore/hide it? I'd rather not waste time downloading and installing an older driver that's just going to have to get uninstalled and replaced by the one I just installed. One note: this update MAY have come in during the time that the NVIDIA card was in place but the PC was still operating in low-resolution mode as no drivers had yet been installed (but were in the process of getting downloaded). I wasn't watching the monitor continuously, so I'm not certain of the sequence of events. When the installation finished, I had to reboot the computer, but the WU is still showing up. I'm leaning toward ignoring this update, but I want to check here with folks who have more experience with this sort of thing. Thanks! --JorgeA P.S. The Slimline is now sharing a Hannspree LCD monitor with an old XP desktop (a real, horizontal-orientation desktop PC). The XP is connected via VGA and the Win7 through the DVI port. All I have to do to see one or the other display is to switch the input, like on a TV. Very cool.