ppgrainbow
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ppgrainbow
-
-
Hey there. I'm having a bit of a problem with the IBM Travelstar 8E running under Windows Vista Home Premium (32-bit).
I used the USB 1.1 port in one of the USB slots on the back of the ASUS G1S laptop and at first Windows Vista couldn't recognise the drive. So, I used the Databook drivers that came with the Travelstar 8E unit which has a 8.1 GB ATA/33 3 1/2" IDE hard disk. The laptop unit lacks PCMCIA slots as it uses a PCI Express card instead. Windows Vista treated the IBM Travelstar 8E as a removal drive.
Here are some certain issues that I have found when using the external unit:
1. The Travelstar 8E unit does not get recognised when viewing the Disk Management section of Computer Management. Only drives C and D are recognised. The Travelstar 8E is listed as drive E. The unit was recognised when it was used on the Toshiba Tecra 720CDT laptop with Windows 95 and Windows NT 4.0 as well as the Compaq TC1000 tablet computer that I recently got. Also, I do not have the ability to change the drive letter of the portable USB device like I did in earlier versions of Windows.
2. When using the Event Viewer to troubleshoot errors, Events 6 and 8 are detected referencing to the Virtual Disk Service. Throwing error codes 80070032@0200000F for Event 6 and Error code: 32@02000017 for Event 8.
3. Looking at the Device Manager, listed under "Portable Devices", a yellow exclamation point is shown meaning that there is something wrong with the Microsoft WPC FileSystem Driver. When I click on the non-functioning device, I get this in the Device Status:
This device cannot start. (Code 10)
Click 'Check for solutions' to send data about this device to Microsoft and to see if there is a solution available.4. Lastly, when looking at the device properties for the IBM-DYLA-28100 USB device, attempting to populate the volume of the device throws this error:
Volume
Volume information for this disk cannot be found.Sorry for the information being unreadable, but for some reason, I uploaded these screenshots via Twitpic and it wouldn't let me view the original size of the image. Plus, I was also viewing the issue via the TightVNC client on my Windows 2000 machine.
I have tried to provide as much information as possible, but is there a way to correct this issue? If so, how would I do it?
0 -
I really don't know what they used to compile Skype 6.1 to be honest, that's a little bit beyond my expertise. In case you don't know, tomasz86 uses blackwingcat's kernel extension in his UURollup packs. So the one to speak to here about getting compatibility issues resolved would be blackwingcat himself. He's the one that got 6.0 to somewhat work and I told tomasz about it and so he put the new extensions in his pack. I believe it is included in 12-15-12 and above. Skype 6.0 does work nearly flawlessly except for the fact that you can't send text messages for whatever reason. So it might be worth sending blackwingcat a message and ask him if there's a way he can get Skype 6.1 to work.
Let me ask this. What does Skype 6.1 offer above 6.0?
I'm gonna try to ask blackwingcat via notes this weekend to see if there is a way to get Skype 6.1 working under Windows 2000.
0 -
Unfortunately Silverlight 5.1 still doesn't work if you use Korean or Chinese locale. You can test it just by enabling it in the Regional Options, rebooting and then trying to open a Silverlight based web content (you can switch the locale back later).
I can confirm that Skype 6.1 doesn't work here either. I get the same error message as ppgrainbow. Skype 6.0 does work but sending messages is broken (already mentioned before).
@Tommy This seems to be a very nice way to uninstall updates when the system doesn't boot. Frankly speaking, I didn't know about it
I don't either. That's why I'm staying on the 2013-01-05 update to UURollup v11 until further notice. The English locale works properly under Silverlight 5.1 and without any problems.
I was also wondering if there are any hacks and workarounds to make Skype 6.1 work under Win2k. If there are or aren't right now, let me know.
I wondering if developers might have removed the remains of the dead support code that made Skype work under Windows 2000 after Skype 6.0. I'm also wondering if developers compiled Skype 6.1 with Visual Studio 2012 or not. I sure hope that this is not the case.
As far as I know Skype 4.2.0.187 is the last version to officially support Windows 2000 and Skype 5.3.0.111 is the last version to fully work. Unofficially, the last stable versions of Skype shown to partially work are versions 5.10 and 6.0 as you pointed out here.
0 -
Good news to report...the latest version of Microsoft Silverlight (version 5.1) works without problems now.
However, for some reason, I still can't get Skype 6.1 to work as I'm still getting Runtime errors. @tomasz86, I sure hope that everything will improve after you move out next week. I'm sorry that you have to go through this.
@Tommy, I will try this out in a VMware virtual machine soon to see what happens. We'll probably investigate to see what DLL is causing Windows 2000 to not boot correctly with daily 2013-01-11 update for UURollup v11.
0 -
@ppgrainbow All versions of UURollup are available in my Windows 2000 Download Archive. Just navigate to Windows2000/UnofficialUpdatesRollup.
I will try the 2013-01-11 update of UURollup to see if Skype 6.1 and Microsoft Silverlight works. I will report back for the results.
Be very very careful with that one! I couldn't get a logon prompt when I installed that package. I reported it to @tomasz86 but he hasn't gotten back with me yet so I'm assuming he's probably really bogged down with work. It happens sometimes. It might even just be my problem, I'm not sure. But to be extra safe, I'd suggest the earlier 01-05-13 version. That one works perfectly for me.
We'll see if tomasz gets back with us and see if he has any issues with that pack.What problems are you getting when you use the 2013-01-11 update when you couldn't even get a logo prompt when installing the package?
By following your suggestion, I'll use the 2013-01-05 UURollup v11 update just to be safe.
0 -
@ppgrainbow All versions of UURollup are available in my Windows 2000 Download Archive. Just navigate to Windows2000/UnofficialUpdatesRollup.
I will try the 2013-01-11 update of UURollup to see if Skype 6.1 and Microsoft Silverlight works. I will report back for the results.
0 -
I also can't send any messages.
That's terrible. I haven't been able to test Skype 6.1 on this PC, because I'm still stuck on the weekly version of UURollup v11 from 2012-11-18.
0 -
The current version is the weekly version of UURollup v11 with the update from 2012-11-18. I got it from the DropBox website and as far as I know, the weekly version of UURollup v11 has not been updated on that site seven weeks ago and I'm unable to find a new weekly or daily version of UURollup v11 at the moment.
Is there a way to investigate what issues are causing Skype to not send messages?
0 -
Okay, I recently installed Skype 6.1 on this Windows 2000 machine and it turned out that the installation quit unexpectedly. When I attempted to execute Skype 6.1, I get this error message:
ErrorRuntime error 217 0053CE85
The last time that I updated UURollup v11 was on 19 November 2012. Is there a way to update UURollup in order to fix this?
0 -
I never said everything would work perfectly or not require Patching, but it is doable.
Indeed, it is.
0 -
The Bootstrap Code is a separate issue. It only limits the C: Partition to 2GB in the first 8GB. Other Partitions are not affected.
I have written a Bootstrap for DOS 7 that has no limits on C:. It should be adaptable to DOS 6.22.
A DDO is required for more than 8GB total on a single Hard Drive as DOS 6.22 uses CHS which can only address 8GB with standard Sector sizes.
The DDO I wrote is small enough that I embedded it within IO.SYS 6.22.
Thanks again for telling me. It's clear to know that DOS 5 through 6.22 has no support for Logical Block Addressing which indeed limits the size of the hard disk (and other media) to 8,025 MB.
The limit for normal Logical Hard Drives is 8GB but the limit of other media can be higher. CD/DVD/BD Media use 2KB Sectors so 32GB can be accessed via CHS.
Thanks again! I bet that MS-DOS might be capable of accessing DVD-ROM drives, but I don't know they'll be able to recongise DVDs above 2 GB due to MS-DOS using signed 32-bit values to calculate total disk space in bytes. Probably not.
0 -
The Bootstrap Code is a separate issue. It only limits the C: Partition to 2GB in the first 8GB. Other Partitions are not affected.
I have written a Bootstrap for DOS 7 that has no limits on C:. It should be adaptable to DOS 6.22.
A DDO is required for more than 8GB total on a single Hard Drive as DOS 6.22 uses CHS which can only address 8GB with standard Sector sizes.
The DDO I wrote is small enough that I embedded it within IO.SYS 6.22.
Thanks again for telling me. It's clear to know that DOS 5 through 6.22 has no support for Logical Block Addressing which indeed limits the size of the hard disk (and other media) to 8,025 MB.
0 -
WOW! That would be a lot of hard work wouldn't it?
Not sure. I already did the hard work patching DOS 7. I mainly would have to port the existing patches over.
I also would have to combine my drive splitter DDO with my BOOTMAN2 DDO.
Of course without FAT-32 it will never support PetaByte Drives as DOS 7 can.
I found that MS-DOS 6.22 has a lot of bugs when it comes to recognising hard drives with partitions beyond the 2 GB barrier, wouldn't it?
The only bug in IO.SYS 6.22, other than the design limitations, is in it's bootstrap code. I have designed a replacement Boot Loader for DOS 7 that could probably be adapted.
The bugs are in COMMAND.COM and elsewhere.
Would the IO.SYS found in DOS 6.22 be hex-edit in order for it to work? If so, can you find the code inside IO.SYS to determine how Type 0x0F partitions would be recongised?
For this purpose DOS 6.22 only needs to accept Type 0xF Partitions as if they were Type 5. This is needed for DOS 7 compatability.
DOS 6.22 only supports CHS so it cannot treat the two Partition types differently.
I have already done this with a small snippet of code.
Thank you for telling me. I have a feeling that the bootstrap code inside IO.SYS in MS-DOS 6.22 is something that can't overcome. So, I have a feeling that I would have to use an appropriate drive overlay to work with hard disks larger than 8,025 MB under DOS 6.22.
0 -
I tested a 4,000 MB partition under Windows NT 4.0 and when MS-DOS attempted to access a hard disk that large, the size of the files on that drive got truncated to zero. Any attempts to format a whole partition larger than 2 GB results in a Divide Overflow error and the process can't continue.
I ran some tests. I did not see any data corruption. CHKDSK will report corruption. DOS SCANDISK with not run. Windows ME SCANDISK shows no corruption.
Some utilities will think there is no free disk space such as DIR and DEBUG.
I used my own Formatter (RFORMAT) to format the Partition.
Also, how did you patch IO.SYS in MS-DOS 6.22 to recognise Type 0x0F partitions which were first introduced in MS-DOS 7? I'm also wondering if there is a way for DOS 6.22 to recognise Type 0x0E partitions with FAT16X support also?
I patched it to think that a type 0xF Partition was a Type 5 Partition. There is no need to recognize Type 0xE Partitions unless you need multiple Primary Partitions in DOS 7.
I presume that unofficially, the largest drive that MS-DOS 6.22 can accept with the patched IO.SYS is up to 32 GB due to data corruption concerns.
With my existing Patches, 48GB is the limit, for all normal Partitions combined, due to Drive Letter limits.
The limit is 96GB with the NT Format, 94GB if booted from the C: Partition.
If I ported all of my Terabyte Plus Patches from DOS 7 to DOS 6.22, and wrote a new DDO, the limit could be pushed to between 8TB and 12TB.
WOW! That would be a lot of hard work wouldn't it?
I found that MS-DOS 6.22 has a lot of bugs when it comes to recognising hard drives with partitions beyond the 2 GB barrier, wouldn't it? Would the IO.SYS found in DOS 6.22 be hex-edit in order for it to work? If so, can you find the code inside IO.SYS to determine how Type 0x0F partitions would be recongised?
Or is that something different here...
0 -
I tested a 4,000 MB partition under Windows NT 4.0 and when MS-DOS attempted to access a hard disk that large, the size of the files on that drive got truncated to zero. Any attempts to format a whole partition larger than 2 GB results in a Divide Overflow error and the process can't continue.
Also, how did you patch IO.SYS in MS-DOS 6.22 to recognise Type 0x0F partitions which were first introduced in MS-DOS 7? I'm also wondering if there is a way for DOS 6.22 to recognise Type 0x0E partitions with FAT16X support also?
I presume that unofficially, the largest drive that MS-DOS 6.22 can accept with the patched IO.SYS is up to 32 GB due to data corruption concerns.
0 -
Well...anyways, I am stumped trying to find a good DOS or Win16 utility that will resize the partition without destroying the data on the hard drive.
PartitionGuru 4.x can resize a partition via its bootable FreeDOS utility bootdisk.
Downoad the full app here:
http://www.eassos.com/partitionguru/download.php
Download just the FreeDOS boot image here for use in a bootloader such as Grub4Dos:
http://sites.google.com/site/webuploads7373/PartitionGuru420FreeDOS.ima.gz
Grub4DOS menu.lst entry:
title PartitionGuru420FreeDOS.ima.gz [inmemory]
map --mem /iso/PartitionGuru420FreeDOS.ima.gz (fd0)
map --hook
root (fd0)
chainloader /kernel.sysI already split the drive in half using FIPS and created a logical drive in the DOS partition using FDISK. Thanks for the help, btw. I should also try that with with a MS-DOS boot image for use in a bootloader also.
0 -
Also, MS-DOS has no support for hard disks and other media larger than 8,025 MB (including primary and logical DOS partitions), it was released before INT13 extensions were implemented in 1998. There is no fix for this issue as it cannot be corrected by a BIOS upgrade or extension. If a hard disk or other media is found to be larger than 8,025 MB and is partitioned with FDISK, any additional disk space beyond this limit will be truncated.
There is a way to use more than 8GB with DOS 6.22. I created a DDO that made a 64GB Hard Drive look like 8 8GB Hard Drives. By careful arrangement, I was able to setup 8 2GB Partitions for DOS 6.22 and DOS 7 as well as 8GB Partitions for DOS 7 only.
Really? How do dynamic drive overlays to get around the 8,025 MB limit work in MS-DOS 6.22?
I created a 16 GB dynamically sized partition under MS-DOS 7.0 by splitting the drive up into one 2,047 MB partition and 7 logical partitions in the extended DOS partition as follows:
Display Partition Information
Current fixed disk drive: 1
Partition Status Type Volume Label Mbytes System Usage
C: 1 A PRI DOS 2047 FAT16 12%
2 EXT DOS 14331 87%FDISK reports that the 16 GB drive has a total disk space capacity of 16,379 MB with 14,331 MB (or 87% of the hard drive) has been allocated to a extended DOS partition containing 7 logical DOS drives. The output are as follows:
Display Logical DOS Drive Information
Drv Volume Label Mbytes System Usage
D: 2047 FAT16 14%
E: 2047 FAT16 14%
F: 2047 FAT16 14%
G: 2047 FAT16 14%
H: 2047 FAT16 14%
I: 2047 FAT16 14%
J: 2047 FAT16 14%The 7 2 GB partitions actually total 14,329 MB as opposed to 14,331 MB.
All of the partitions of the hard drive larger than 8,025 MB under MS-DOS 7 and MS-DOS 8 are properly recognised.
Under MS-DOS 6.22 guess what happens to the remaining 6,306 MB of disk space on the 16 GB drive?
Display Partition Information
Current fixed disk drive: 1
Partition Status Type Volume Label Mbytes System Usage
C: 1 A PRI DOS 2047 FAT16 26%
2 Non-DOS 1433 100%The drive capacity of 16,379 MB is reported as 8,025 MB thus truncating the remaining 6,306 MB under MS-DOS 6.22 and below. Also, the logical DOS drives in the extended DOS partition are treated as a non-DOS partition. Any attempts to access drives D through J throw a "invalid drive specification" error message.
Also, under DOS 6.22 and below, there will be no way to access the logical drives in the extended DOS partition without having to delete the non-DOS partition and re-create them. If it is done, the maximum amount of space available for the extended DOS partition will be no more than 5,977 MB.
However, with dynamic drive overlays that are capable of going beyond 8,025 MB. DDOs such as Ontrack Disk Manager version 9.50 and higher can do that. However, there are consequences when creating a hard disk partition larger than 8,025 MB with a DDO for MS-DOS 5.0 through 6.22 - the drive will have to be re-partitioned and formatted, resulting in data loss.
With some DDOs, it will only accept hard disks and other media up to 31.5 GB enough to extend the drive letter all the way up to drive R. MS-DOS 5.0 through 7.0 can't handle hard disks larger than 48 GB due to the 2 GB FAT16 limitation and A to Z drive lettering scheme.
0 -
Thanks for the help, jaclaz. I appreciate it.
Gere's what I did. For testing purposes, I created a hard disk image of 2,070 MB in capacity and here's what the partition table currently looks like:
Partition table:
| | Start | | End | Start |Number of|
Part.|bootable|Head Cyl. Sector|System|Head Cyl. Sector| Sector |Sectors | MB
-----+--------+----------------+------+----------------+--------+---------+----
1 | yes | 1 0 1| 06h| 127 519 63| 63| 4193217|2047
2 | no | 0 0 0| 00h| 0 0 0| 0| 0| 0
3 | no | 0 0 0| 00h| 0 0 0| 0| 0| 0
4 | no | 0 0 0| 00h| 0 0 0| 0| 0| 0
Checking root sector ... OKThe size of the drive is reported as 2,063 MB and DOS used 2,047 MB for which it is the maximum that MS-DOS 6.22 can hold per partition. Here's the output of what the boot sector informatio looks like:
Boot sector:
Bytes per sector: 512
Sectors per cluster: 64
Reserved sectors: 1
Number of FATs: 2
Number of rootdirectory entries: 512
Number of sectors (short): 0
Media descriptor byte: F8h
Sectors per FAT: 256
Sectors per track: 63
Drive heads: 128
Hidden sectors: 63
Number of sectors (long): 4193217
Physical drive number: 80h
Signature: 29h
Checking boot sector ... OK
Checking FAT ... OK
Searching for free space ... OKBecause the Point 510 has no floppy drive, I've decided to NOT make a backup copy of the original root and boot sector prior to proceeding.
Prior to splitting the drive, here's what the output is going to look like:
Enter start cylinder for new partition (33 - 519):
Use the cursor keys to choose the cylinder, <enter> to continue
Old partition Cylinder New Partition
129.9 MB 33 1917.6 MBI want the size of the partitions on the 2.16 GB hard drive to be as even as possible. So, I entered 262 cylinders and a new partition size of 1,015.9 MB. Here's the final output of what it looks like:
Old partition Cylinder New Partition
1031.6 MB 262 1015.9 MB
First Cluster: 33004
Last Cluster: 65511
Testing if empty ... OK
New partition table:
| | Start | | End | Start |Number of|
Part.|bootable|Head Cyl. Sector|System|Head Cyl. Sector| Sector |Sectors | MB
-----+--------+----------------+------+----------------+--------+---------+----
1 | yes | 1 0 1| 06h| 127 261 63| 63| 2112705|1031
2 | no | 0 262 1| 06h| 127 519 63| 2112768| 2080512|1015
3 | no | 0 0 0| 00h| 0 0 0| 0| 0| 0
4 | no | 0 0 0| 00h| 0 0 0| 0| 0| 0
Checking root sector ... OK
Do you want to continue or reedit the partition table (c/r)?If I press C, I get this:
Checking root sector ... OK
Do you want to continue or reedit the partition table (c/r)? c
New boot sector:
Bytes per sector: 512
Sectors per cluster: 64
Reserved sectors: 1
Number of FATs: 2
Number of rootdirectory entries: 512
Number of sectors (short): 0
Media descriptor byte: F8h
Sectors per FAT: 256
Sectors per track: 63
Drive heads: 128
Hidden sectors: 63
Number of sectors (long): 2112705
Physical drive number: 80h
Signature: 29h
Checking boot sector ... OK
Ready to write new partition scheme to disk
Do you want to proceed (y/n)?If I press R, the process will halt and I will have to start all over again. When FIPS is ready to write the new partition scheme to disk, it asks if it wants to proceed or not. And if I do, I get this:
Repartitioning complete
Bye!
Memory allocation error
Cannot load COMMAND, system haltedAfter I reboot, I run FDISK, press 4 to display partition information and get this output:
Display Partition Information
Current fixed disk drive: 1
Partition Status Type Volume Label Mbytes System Usage
C: 1 A PRI DOS 1032 FAT16 50%
D: 2 PRI DOS 1016 UNKNOWN 49%What's odd is that FIPS, shrank the size of drive C to 1,032 MB and created a unformatted second primary partition, drive D of 1,016 MB. To fix this, I will have to delete the second primary DOS partition and recreate it as a logical DOS drive in the extended DOS partition.
I select option 3 to delete the primary DOS partition and what I want to do is to select the unformatted drive D, prior to doing this, I get this warning:
WARNING! Data in the deleted Primary DOS Partition will be lost.
What primary partition do you want to delete..? [1]The primary partition that I want to delete is 2, Drive D. I enter the current volume label, which is blank and tells that I'm sure that I want to delete the second primary DOS partition. When that's done, the primary DOS partition gets deleted.
Now, I will need to create a extended DOS partition first and a logical DOS drive in the extended DOS partition by selection option 1 and in Create DOS Partition or Logical DOS Drive, I select 2, Create Extended DOS partition. Here's the output:
Create Extended DOS Partition
Current fixed disk drive: 1
Partition Status Type Volume Label Mbytes System Usage
C: 1 A PRI DOS 1032 FAT16 50%
Total disk space is 2063 Mbytes (1 Mbyte = 1048576 bytes)
Maximum space available for partition is 1032 Mbytes (50%)
Enter partition size in Mbytes or percent of disk space (%) to
create an Extended DOS Partition..............................: [1032]The value 1032 is correct which will split the 2.02 GB partition in two. As a result, an extended DOS partition of 1,032 MB gets created. Now, it's time to create a logical DOS drive in the extended DOS partition. So far, so good. No logical DOS drive have been defined yet. FDISK then asks me this question in this output:
Total Extended DOS Partition size is 1032 Mbytes (1 MByte = 1048576 bytes)
Maximum space available for logical drive is 1032 Mbytes (100%)
Enter logical drive size in Mbytes or percent of disk space (%)...[1032]This figure is correct, I want FDISK to use all of the extended DOS partition space of 1,032 MB. When I hit enter, drive D gets created. However, FDISK tells me that "all available space in the Extended DOS Partition is assigned to logical drives".
I'm all finished deleting the second primary DOS partition, creating an extended DOS partition and a logical drive in the extended partition. Now, I get to restart.
After I restart, I must format the logical drive and I will end up receiving this warning if I format drive D:
WARNING: ALL DATA ON NON-REMOVABLE DISK
DRIVE D: WILL BE LOST!
Proceed with Format (Y/N)?The actual formatted capacity of the logical drive, drifve D will be 1,031.59 MB. At 32 KB per cluster, that's 33,006 clusters. Drive C, the boot drive will have 33,002 clusters instead of 65,510.
This procedure was performed in Virtual PC 2004. The real thing was done on the Fujitsu Point 510. When I completed the procedure as described above, the drive letter for the PCMCIA partition was changed from drive D to drive E.
By using FIPS to split the drive into one primary partition and one logical partition in the extended drive, MS-DOS can use all of the disk space this way.
On hard drives that have a capacity greater than 2,048 MB and up to 8,025 MB, the drive will have to be split into multiple partitions as stand alone MS-DOS can't handle drives larger than 2,047 MB.
Also, MS-DOS has no support for hard disks and other media larger than 8,025 MB (including primary and logical DOS partitions), it was released before INT13 extensions were implemented in 1998. There is no fix for this issue as it cannot be corrected by a BIOS upgrade or extension. If a hard disk or other media is found to be larger than 8,025 MB and is partitioned with FDISK, any additional disk space beyond this limit will be truncated.
0 -
Thank you for the help. I edited this thread before you posted here.
Well...anyways, I am stumped trying to find a good DOS or Win16 utility that will resize the partition without destroying the data on the hard drive. I mean, if there was data corruption on the drive, the tablet PC would be useless unless it is taken in for repairs.
0 -
Hello!
I recently scored a used Fujitsu Point 510 tablet PC from eBay for Christmas. The price for the used product was $149.95.
Manufactured in July 1998, it features a AMD 5x86 processor running at 100 MHz with a 2.16 GB hard drive and only 8 MB of EDO RAM, upgradable to 56 MB with 1 MB of VRAM.
The problem with the Fujitsu Point 510 is this ... the unit does NOT have a floppy drive and data can ONLY be transferred via a 2 GB compact flash drive when the PCMCIA drivers are installed. I'm looking to get a Portable Port Expander (model number FMW26CR5) and a external floppy disk drive (FMWFD2).
Furthermore, the Point 510 came with MS-DOS 6.2 and Windows for Workgroups 3.11 pre-installed, before I installed MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1. The Point 510 is one of the last tablet PC and other portable computers to support MS-DOS and Windows 3.1x before it was dropped due to architectural limitations.
Unfortunately, MS-DOS can't recognise all of the disk space, because the maximum amount of disk space that it can use is 2 GB or 65,510 clusters at 32 kilobytes per cluster. The hard disk that has 4,200 cylinders, 16 heads and 63 sectors per track...that totals 2,167,603,200 bytes or almost 2.02 GB which is pushing over the MS-DOS limitations. When I ran FDISK the other day, when I was considering creating a logical DOS partition, only 16 MB of disk space was usable on what was going to be Drive D.
Since the unit only has 8 MB of memory installed, can you recommend me some utilities that will perform non-destructive hard disk resizing under MS-DOS or FreeDOS? I want to be able to shrink the drive to 1,032 MB for the primary DOS partition and create a 1,031 MB logical partition in the extended DOS partition.
Also, is there anyway to purchase a portable port expander and external floppy disk drive for the Point 510 unit if I can try to find one?
If so, how would it be done?
0 -
I don't think Smith Micro Poser 8 (2009) and Smith Micro Poser 9 (2011) works with Windows 2000 even with UURollup, due to OS checks and the fact that the product might not even work correctly under Windows 2000, if not at all.
Also, Windows 2000 support was dropped when Smith Micro released Poser Pro in 2008.
I've just tried to install a trial version of Smith Micro Poser 9 using Application Compatibility Launcher (included in the newest daily release of UURollup-v11) and it installed without any problems. I can't check whether the program runs or not because you've got to enter your credit card information in order to be able to use the 30-day trial.
If you do use the program then I think that you should try to install it yourself using your credit card info. If you're afraid about installing the daily release then you can wait until a new weekly release is ready this weekend. Application Compatibility Launcher is going to be included in it too.
That sounds wonderful! I'm wondering if the full version (including Poser Pro 2012) works though.
0 -
You guys for got to mention, e-Frontier Poser 7 (2006) which required a 700 MHz processor and 512 MB of memory and nearly up to 2.5 GB of disk space. I bought it from eBay for Christmas under $35 (including shipping) and it was originally sold for $199. What a bargain!
Poser 7 was the last release under the e-Frontier name before it was acquired by Smith Micro and it was also the last release that worked under Windows 2000. Updating to Smith Micro Poser 7.0.4 (Service Release 3) had no effect on the system requirements.
Prior to that, I had Curious Labs Poser 5 (2003) installed on this computer.. I don't think Smith Micro Poser 8 (2009) and Smith Micro Poser 9 (2011) works with Windows 2000 even with UURollup, due to OS checks and the fact that the product might not even work correctly under Windows 2000, if not at all.
Also, Windows 2000 support was dropped when Smith Micro released Poser Pro in 2008.
0 -
So... you're trying to do a VPC Share under DOS AND you have a problem with the CD-ROM at the same time?
I use a couple of DOS Ghost floppies and don't use vmadd386.sys or an EMM. But here's a write-up on it (for my own ref also) -
http://www.winvistatips.com/vmadd386-sys-t514852.html
MS info on other modules (lacks VMADD info) -
I had a problem with VPC Share under MS-DOS and used the SHSUCDX driver at the same time, not the MSCDEX driver supplied by Microsoft.
I also looked at Ben Armstrong's comment regarding FSHARE and EMM386 and the changes that makes the folder sharing TSR not work at all is not true. I used version 4.95 of the Windows Expanded Memory Manager. As a result, the folder sharing, the MSCDEX CD-ROM driver and EMM386 all work, however this tatic is unsupported and I cannot guarentee that it will work correctly with other alternate memory managers or CD-ROM drivers.
0 -
There are at least two branches of the SHSUCDX CD-ROM Driver: Jack Ellis' and Jason Hood's, besides the original by John McCoy, and there are various versions of each of them. I'd try, at least, the latest version by each of those authors.
Thank you for pointing these links out. I tried the original version of the SHSUCDX driver by John McCoy and the current version, but it seems that it didn't work.
Both current versions? Jack Ellis' latest version v. 3.03F (or the previous one, v. 3.03E) is, IMHO, far superior, to Jason Hood's latest (V. 3.05). They are quite different, nowadays, so it's perfectly possible that one works where the other fails. Then you have Jack Ellis' XMGR. Then there is Japheth's Jemm... If one has time for experimenting (of which I regretably have very little, nowadays), there're many variations to try, before giving up.
Now, that said, I'm not familiar with FSHARE to advise you specifically about it.
Whatever or not they're different or not, these variants of SHSUCDX CD-ROM driver wouldn't work correctly with the FSHARE driver. So, in order to use the MSCDEX CD-ROM driver, I had to enter this command in the CONFIG.SYS file on line 30:
device=c:\dos\emm386.exe noems novcpi i=b100-b7ff i=c600-c7ff i=cc00-cfff i=e600-efff frame=d000 /v
The end result is that I earned up to 150 KB of upper memory upon bootup:
Windows Expanded Memory Driver Version 4.95
Copyright 1988-1995 Microsoft Corp.
EMM386 successfully installed.
Expanded memory services unavailable.
Total upper memory available . . . . . . 150 KB
Largest Upper Memory Block available . . 79 KB
Upper memory starting address . . . . . . B100 H
EMM386 Active.I had to settle with up to 625 KB available with the largest executable being no more than 596 KB available.
0
However, for some reason, I still can't get Skype 6.1 to work as I'm still getting Runtime errors. 
IBM Travelstar 8E and Windows Vista
in Windows Vista
Posted
Anyone? If I can't find a way to do it, I may have to give up.