Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

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. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


ragnargd

Member
  • Content Count

    269
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Good

About ragnargd

Profile Information

  • OS
    98SE
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

2,854 profile views
  1. ragnargd

    Win9x WebTV Stream

    Nice work with the player (crashes on me, but, heck... maybe i'll test IDA Pro on this... yes?) Still "No Virus No Voulnerability" is a myth, and t's proven wrong here on msfn.org. We found working, actual malware for W9x. And i know what i'm talking about.
  2. ragnargd

    X-Wing game crashing to desktop Win98SE

    I'm slowly building a collection of w9x-games (182 and growing), but unfortunately, this is not among it yet. Can you see a log in the games base directory?
  3. ragnargd

    DirectPlay 9.0c & Intel PRO/1000 GT on 98SE

    Shall i test before you buy? How?
  4. ragnargd

    DirectPlay 9.0c & Intel PRO/1000 GT on 98SE

    I have a lot of the Pro/1000 MT PCI, and never had any problem, using the latest drivers available, on W98SE, XP and W10. I'd send you one for free, but i suspect customs would make this more expensive than buying a used one in the US...
  5. ragnargd

    DirectPlay 9.0c & Intel PRO/1000 GT on 98SE

    Just in case: Where is the difference to the Intel Pro MT 1000? Can't find anything worth mentioning...
  6. ragnargd

    Planning to get this PC for a particular build

    A *much* better card from 2002 would be the ATI 9700 Pro 256MB AGP. DX9 is better than DX8, and the card was just faster. I'd say, the best GPU of that time, and the start for AMD making history. I'd always, unless under dire circumstances, choose a card that supports at least DX 9.0(c)... why settle for less? Same price on ebay anyway... But i had that Dell (long time ago), and found it to be suspectible to thermal damage, as ventilation is pretty bad, and the P4 is generating a lot of heat on its own. Even the GF 4Ti (which i own, as well as the ATI 9700 Pro) might easily prove too much for that case for thermals. As building a W9x-PC might mean long hours of working in a tight space, I'd look for a big-tower case with ample of space, rounded edges, and such, and a PSU at the top to help with ventilating the case, and, of course, a side-window, to show the fruits of your labor. Look for i.e. the venerable Chieftec CS-601 with windows-panel (i have three of them, white, blue and red - call me a fanboy...). Use a Soundblaster sound card, any for PCI will do, but 2002 means Soundblaster Audigy 2. SBs have the lowest CPU-utilization, it helps with games a lot. And at that time, their sound quality was unprecedented. $5 at ebay, there is no reason not to. It has good sound even with Windows 10. If you use just W9x, a P4 is just fine for the 2002 are, as it is reliable, and cheap. For dual-boot with XP, i'd always vote for a dual-core CPU at least (any, AMD or Intel, and a 4-core would be even better), it's just that the first consumer-Dual-Cores came up 2005, not 2002. So P4 it is. I made an excption here, and took the AMD Athlon 64 3200+, fitting Socket 754, from 2003, as it has just a better energy-efficiency than the contemporary P4s (and not even speaking of Athlon XP were we... well... hot... crap... burned away three MoBos of mine), and the boards from 2003 used the more comfortable DDR-400, and already had SATA. And i hate the cabling of IDE, for practical, and thermal reasons... but that's just me... btw.: SATA1 is from 2002, so it's cool here. (In 1999, i bought my first ABit BP6, using a Dual-Celeron, technically Pentium-III-class, but you will have a hard time finding these in working condition for a reasonable price - starts at around $120 atm. Mine are long-gone - i had three. I had the maximum of 3x 256 MB on board, and it rocked with W98se as well as Windows 2000. But that's long before 2002, so don't bother). Well, 2002/2003 WERE good years! :-D
  7. ragnargd

    Puzzle with ASRock ConRoe865PE ...

    Thank you all. Seems my board is FUBAR, and the seller will most probably refund me. I'll have to find out another time...
  8. Hi, the following problem is not related to a specific hardware, this specific setup is just serving as an example... be patient... At the moment, out of boredom, i'm fighting with an ASRock ConRoe865PE. (Just sent it back, as the BIOS does not keep data (even with a new battery), but the trader has spare boards, so i hope to have one running in the next two weeks.) But. The board has a funny IDE/SATA-configuration. You can have a "compatibility-mode", where only IDE-channel1 or 2 with two devices is active, and the two sata-channels are emulated via the other IDE-channel. You can install the intel-driver, all is fine on w98. Then, there is the "enhanced" mode, which means, you have both ide-channels, and can connect four IDE-devices (like, i.e., two IDE-SSDs, and two DVD-Roms), and have the two SATA-channels as well, for, i.e., XP and W10. Unfortunately (and ASRock tells us), the latter config will "not work" (in practive: make w98 hang), once you connect devices to these sata-ports. (So, you *can* use "enhanced mode with w98, with four IDE-devices, as long as you don't connect devices to the sata-ports - the ports don't initialize, and W98 doesn't detect them as a result, and so doesn't hang) So, as a result, if you want to use w98, you can have only four devices, even though you have six ports, and if two are meant for XP and W10, those will necessarily run in IDE-mode, either from IDE-devices, or from SATA-devices. Meh. (If you find this confusing, maybe read the manual of the board. It *is* confusing...) It's just that i *absolutely* *want* to use six devices... and i *want* to connect and use the sata-devices for XP and W10 in sata-mode, *not* in ide-mode... Why can't i make the SATA-ports invisible to w9x, as it is not supposed to use them anyway, while still keeping them activated in BIOS?!? < Ragnar G.D. stomping with both feet onto the ground like Rumpelstilzchen(tm) > So, what can be done? I want to have a solution, that resolves devices making w98 hang during installation, for ALL hardware. I don't know if this can be done, but let's propose a theoretical solution as a Gedankenspiel. Let's assume there is hardware that, when activated in BIOS, makes w9x hang, as, assumed, during driver detection w9x assumes this is a known hardware, errs, applies an init-method that does NOT make sense, and, whoops, the system hangs. Incompatible SATA-ports, incompatible USB-ports, you know the drill. Now, let's assume, that we apply a fix to the windows-installation CD, that is, we create a custom Install-CD. We provide drivers for known *BAD-EVIL-BAD* hardware, which does install NOTHING, or some "dummy-drivers", for these devices when detected, so the installation can continue, and the system lives. And afterwards, the *BAD-EVIL-BAD* hardware doesn't even have a yellow exclamation mark, but a driver named "WeirdDefunctHardwareYouCanTuseThis". Well. Is that even possible?
  9. Hi, i have nice Icons on my Desktop. The blue facing arrows showing NTFS-compression make them fugly. And nooooo, i don't want to disable NTFS-compression to get rid of those Icon-overlays. There was a hack with "implementing" a registry-entry, but since the newest build this is said not to work. Any ideas?
  10. MATD is a game bundle of former arcade games, right? It seems to be dependent on an already installed Windows Media Player - something you cannot necessarily expect on a freshly installed W98SE (and which is also missing on newer versions of Windows 7, the "N"-type without media player for the european market, to be precise, so you would have the same problem there). Maybe just having the file is necessary, but not enough, and the installer of the gamepack has to do some additional DLL-registration when installing the game. I cannot say for sure, but perhaps try to uninstall and reinstall the game now, that is, AFTER you installed WMP. Then, report here.
  11. ragnargd

    WinME bad graphics behavior

    Which is the "latest version"? 81.98? You may try the 77.72 first - it is quite stable, but may or may not widescreen-resolutions. All drivers for w9x: www.nvidia.com/object/win9x_archive.html Given your description, though, there is something else that is not working. Re-installing this more stable driver may solve that problem, without knowing the root-cause, without taking too much time, so it's at least worth a try. If that does not work, we need more info on your system.
  12. ragnargd

    DOS and 9X/ME on Z170 Test

    This item really looks interesting... ...but wait. Well... ....all the pcie-to-pci-adapters i have have another 12V-molex for power. This one doesn't. I wonder, what the additional power was for. Bridge-chip? And how then does this solution work without? Interesting is the EXTERNAL solution, PCI via USB3 so-to-say... I'm really, really tempted, it may solve a problem i have, my Audigy getting grilled between two GPUs, and making strange noises, that relate to movement of the mouse on the screen...
  13. ragnargd

    DOS and 9X/ME on Z170 Test

    Read this:
  14. ragnargd

    Research on AM3+ board and chipsets: Resume

    I joined your discussion on the NVidia-forum, and posted above there as well. Let's see how they react (if at all). Without context, i should appear as boasting, so the fire is lit.
  15. ragnargd

    Research on AM3+ board and chipsets: Resume

    Sorry, you already got any and every screenshot there is. I have the impression, you do not understand what i mean with "Dual GPU stunt". Perhaps my english is not good enough for you to understand. Again: 1. 7900 GTX in primary slot PCIe 2.0 16x slot, DVI-D-port connected to any input-port on the Monitor (here: connected to input-port VGA, with DVI-D-to-VGA-adapter-cable). 2. GTX 970 in secondary PCIe 2.0 16x slot, (DVI-D or HDMI or Displayport) connected to any other input-port on the Monitor (here: DVI-D). I have to switch the input-port on the monitor, to get the picture from the corresponding card. W98SE: 7900 GTX detected, working, inoff. driver installed, working as "primary display"; GTX 970 not recognized, not working, no driver, gives no picture = this all is ok XP: 7900 GTX detected, no driver installed, works as "Basic VGA"; GTX 970 detected, working, driver 368.81 installed, working as "primary display" = this all is ok. 7900 GTX can be disabled, but this is not necessary. W10: 7900 GTX detected, no driver installed, works as "Basic VGA"; GTX 970 detected, working, driver 385.41 installed, working as "primary display" = this all is ok. 7900 GTX can be disabled, but this is not necessary. (In case of need, on XP and W10, the resp. driver for the GTX 970 can be uninstalled, the driver 309.08 then can be installed, then GTX 970 will be "Basic VGA", 7900 GTX will become "primary display". This can be reversed at any time, as often as i want. I have to switch the input-port at the monitor, of course.) What is there you don't understand? How can i help you?
×