Nomen

Just throwing this out there: What is the version of PCI slots that your motherboard has, and is it fully compatible with your SATA card?

If you are in the USA, you can go to any CompUSA store and you should be able to buy this: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/PNY+-+2-Channel+SATA+II+RAID+PCI+Card/8552327.p?id=1188562133392&skuId=8552327#tab=specifications PNY - 2-Channel SATA II RAID PCI Card (Model: P-DSA150-PCI-RF) - Cost is $20. This card uses SII3112 controller. Driver file can be downloaded from here: http://www3.pny.com/support/media/Files%5C0ee7791f-c567-442b-8dd6-b99d459578b2/Sata%20Raid_v1.zip That file contains SATAraid drivers for Windows 98. Tigerdirect.com is showing this card for $15: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4662523&CatId=1455 That's a 4-port SATA pci card - it even lists win-98 compatibility.

You should be able to boot into DOS from a SATA drive with DOS installed on it when the drive is set to native/SATA or SATA/RAID mode in the bios. I usually start a fresh win-98 install by connecting a new SATA drive to a new system, setting the BIOS to native/SATA mode, and boot DOS from a floppy and then run fdisk and format on the C drive and run SYS to transfer DOS and make it bootable. I will then check and make sure I can boot into DOS from the SATA drive. I will then remove the drive from the new system and slave it to another system where I will copy a win-98 install CD to the new drive, then take the new drive and re-install it back to the new system and then boot the system into DOS, where I will then launch the win-98 install from the drive. Unlike an NT-based OS, Win-98 will use bios/compatibility mode to access the drive during installation and beyond until the SATA driver is installed. The 648FX7MF-S board has SiS 648FX+964 chipset. I have searched the web for a win-98 SATA driver and I don't think there is one. I've downloaded these files: motherboard_driver_sis_964sata.exe motherboard_driver_raid_sis_964.exe SIS SATA Raid user manual.doc motherboard_driver_raid_sis964.exe motherboard_driver_raid_sis_964_xp64.exe SiS_RAID301.zip Unless I'm mistaken, I don't see anything in those files that could be a win-98 SATA driver for the 964 chipset. In doing this search, I keep coming across references to this: (Gigabyte SiS 964 SATA Beta Driver v 3.04C) - which claims to be for various versions of windows (including 98) but when I download it, the only win-98 component seems to be an IDE raid driver. I've also poked around here:ftp://ftp.albacomp.hu/DOWNLOAD/DRIVERS/ALAPLAPOK/Foxconn/ Specifically here:ftp://ftp.albacomp.hu/DOWNLOAD/DRIVERS/ALAPLAPOK/Foxconn/SIS661M04-MX-6L/ChipDrv/SISRaid And also here:http://217.6.37.131/treiber/PC/Archiv_Mainboard/Gigabyte_GA-8S661FXM-775/ But again I didn't see anything that could be a win-98 SATA driver. The OP is advised to disable the SATA interface on that board (if possible) through the BIOS setup and obtain an SiL3112 dual-port SATA PCI card and use that to connect to his SATA drives.

Now if only there was malware circulating on the internet that actually runs on win-98 without crashing - there would actually be something you need protection from!

I'm having a bit of trouble following this thread. Is the OP trying to get SATA drives working in native sata mode on a 848P Neo2-V motherboard running win-98? If so - I don't see what the problem is, or why he would need custom drivers. The board has Intel 848P/ICH5 Chipset and MSI is listing drivers available for win-98.

Can someone tell me if this "lanman" thing is the root issue here? http://www.troubleshooters.com/linux/win9x_samba.htm ---------- Samba version 3.2.0 turned off lanman support by default, both on the client (client lanman auth=) and the server (lanman auth=). 3.2.0 also turned off the default for client plaintext auth=. Before 3.2.0 all three were turned on by default. Windows 9x can only work with lanman support, so unless a corresponding modification of smb.conf is done before the first login, there will be Win9x access failures. ---------- This (and other stuff I find on the web) talks about win-98 and SMB in the context of a client - not a server. I'd like to find something that talks about SMB/Samba in the context of win-98 being the server, and android being the client. And android is just another form of linux - yes?

I have enabled a directory to be shared on my win-98 system with full-access and no password. I have a Polaroid tablet running android 4.0.4 and I have absolutely no problems using ES file browser to locate the win-98 machine and browse the directory structure of the shared folder. Image files (like album cover-art jpg files) are rendered perfectly. I can copy, cut and paste files between the two devices. But I can't play/stream any content from the win-98 shared folder!!! I've installed about 1/2 dozen different audio players on the tablet, and from ES file-explorer when I click on any given file on the share, I am prompted to choose a player, and when I do, the player seems to try to play the file (and I can hear a brief burst of hard-drive activity on the win-98 machine) but the operation fails - either by telling me that it's trying to connect to "127.0.0.1" or that the file-type is somehow incompatible. I've been able to stream media files from an XP machine to the tablet, so I know this _can_ work. Any idea why it doesn't work on win-98? Is there a difference in the SMB that win-98 implements vs XP? Edit: I believe (and I need to check this) that ES File Explorer can't or doesn't discover the win-98 machine on it's own during a search - I have to enter the IP address of the win-98 PC and then it persistently shows up in ES-fe from that point onwards as an IP address (not as machine-name or host-name, etc). I don't know how to remove it from ES-fe and see if I can replicate this.

Any or all PCI sata cards will come with SATA/Raid drivers for win-9x/me. The card will most likely be based on SiL3112 and be a 2-port card. You install the SATA drivers for Win-98 and connect SATA drives and use them as native/Sata mode (not IDE or legacy mode). Any store selling computer parts will have these PCI-sata cards for sale, should cost under $20 USD or equivalent. Buy the 2-port SATA card - the 4-port cards might not work properly (no DMA). You will not need any special or third-party software to get this to work. I currently have a 750 gb and 1.5 tb drive connected to my win-98 system - they are each formatted as single partition. My 750 gb drive has run out of space many times, and I have transfered stuff over the the 1.5 tb drive to compensate. I have been downloading many 500 mb and 1gb files lately...

I am not insisting that RLoew's "Yes/No" answers are wrong.I'm trying to get more detailed answers than Yes/No, otherwise I can't put forward an argument (in another forum) to counter those claims. Not looking for pages and pages of explanations - a few sentences would do it. It looks like I won't get those answer here.

Most of these questions and issues seems to hint at win-9x/me being little different than win-3.x in terms of what role DOS plays in the structural configuration, operation or functionality once windows has booted and is up and running. I'd like to explore the following points and get answers as to: - DOS, as it exists during the boot process in system RAM, is not cleared away during the transition of the CPU from real to protected mode. What significance this has to the dependency of Win-9x/me on DOS is not clear. - As has been mentioned before, some say that the 9x/me kernel is nothing more than a DPMI-based DOS extender with a preeptive task scheduler. From a technical POV, why is this not true? What would be the basis of claiming that: - for a large percentage (> 50%) of CPU time, the CPU is running in real-mode, and that this applies (equally?) to win-3.x/9x/me. Under 9x/me, can/does the CPU really switch between protected and real mode? Why would it need to do that? - Some say that Win 3.1/3.11/9x/me offered direct 32-bit access for a limited subset of I/O operations (filesystem/swapping), but practically ALL of the other I/O operations were still happening via DOS-style real mode access and legacy bios calls. There was no protected mode abstraction layer for the underlying hardware, and the virtual device drivers were all hooks into the underlying DOS and it's interface with the system BIOS. I find this hard to believe, especially in conjunction with device I/O such as video, network, audio, USB, etc. If the above is not true when it comes to 9x/me, then how would you explain 9x/me relationship with (or use of) 32-bit I/O operations vs 16-bit operations (and relying on DOS for those operations)?

Would it be correct (or incorrect) to say that the win-9x/me kernel is a DPMI-based DOS extender - with the addition of a pre-emptive task scheduler? Is it true (or false) that most device I/O that happens in 9x/me does so using real-mode via the "underlying" DOS? Is it true (or false) that 60% (or some similar large percentage) of all code execution in 9x/me is done in real mode? Does KernelEx make use of ring-3 in order to emulate or allow NT-based code to run (if so, is the use of ring-3 necessary for KernelEx to do it's job?)

I've condensed your ideas into a handful of points. In some ways, what you are thinking about applies to the computer as we know it - the desktop or laptop computer - regardless which version of windows it has. Sales of this type of information appliance or productivity tool are falling each year. I have a 15-year-old toaster. I can toast a small variety of items with it. I can't do anything new with it any more. Does that concern me? Does that make me consider replacing it with something else? A toaster-oven that's bigger, requires more space, more complicated to use? No. Looking at your points above, regarding USB 2 media (for me, USB 2 media = thumb drives), I have no worries that USB 2 thumb drives will get cheaper over the next 5 years, and if I don't already have a "lifetime supply" of them now, I certainly will soon enough. You mention a "safe" browser. I've hit many malicious websites that try to perform browser exploits with my win-98/Kex/FF-2 systems, usually on purpose, and watch as those exploits fail to execute properly. For the past 3 years at least, I have no concerns at all about my systems being vulnerable to web-based exploits, and I run no AV/AM software at all. You know there has been a spam campaign for months now, giving links to "fedex delivery receipts" or "american airlines ticket" receipts. The spam contains links to .zip files. I download the files, unzip the contents (ticket_receipt.exe) -> AND I've RUN THE PROGRAMS on my system. Guess what - they fail with "illegal operation". You mention various software. For me, every win-98 system has MS Office 2k premium SR1, Coreldraw 9, VLC, Firefox 2, uTorrent, and a few others. I have hundreds of programs that I've downloaded and installed, used once or twice, and have never used again. As much as I use my systems for office and personal productivity, I also need them to work as internet-access appliances. In that regard I will be concerned when FF2 fails to render the majority of websites I visit. So far, FF2 works perfectly fine.

Put your computer up for sale here: http://milwaukee.ebayclassifieds.com/ List it as zero dollars. You don't need to register in order to post, but you do need to give a working e-mail address. Most likely, it will be someone that will strip out the large metal parts for recycle value, so the machine will be trashed one way or another. submix8c wrote: >13. No user shall, by any means: > 1 - Sell, trade, or give away hardware, software, or any other goods whatsoever. I seem to recall that some of that does indeed happen here once in a while - customized $oftware that gives win98 certain abilities to access large amounts of ram, advanced chipset and sata drivers, etc.

If more of us participated in the win-98 usenet newsgroups, we wouldn't have this problem where posts get lost forever...

Packet radio? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packet_radio

I'm not familiar at all with nForce motherboards, but for the record here's the nvidia download page for what is probably the last version of nForce 3 drivers for win-9x: Version: 4.27 / Release Date: July 19, 2004 http://www.nvidia.com/object/nforce_udp_win9x_4.27.html I can't tell if this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NForce applies to nForce 2 or 3 or higher. Performance problems are mentioned. nForce3 seems to have been made only for AMD CPU's, whereas intel and AMD versions exist for nForce4. The nForce3 chipset was introduced between Sept. 2003 and June 2004 - so Win-98 support is not unexpected given those dates. In comparison, Via PT880 Pro and Ultra and PT894 were released in January 2005 and are probably superior to nForce3 in terms of speed and features. Does anyone know of a board based on PT894 ? The PT890 (released April 2006) does indeed seem to have Win-9x drivers. The MSI PT890 Neo versions F and V have win-98 drivers available for download. I downloaded a couple different nForce4 driver packages to look for "chicago" inf files, and found some only in LAN and audio driver section.

Here's another option: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Asrock-P4i65G-S478-P4-IV-SATA-AGP-DDR-/281112855545?pt=AU_Components&hash=item4173a1c3f9#ht_1752wt_1153 Asrock P4i65G S478 P4 IV SATA AGP DDR ($20) Asrock webpage: http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/P4i65G/

Looks like I'm too late to tell you to buy this board: http://www.ebay.com/itm/ASRock-775i65GV-Motherboard-Socket-775-/111076487638?pt=AU_Components&hash=item19dcacb1d6 $30. The vendor says 3 available. If I lived in Australia, I'd buy all three. I've never seen a socket 775 motherboard with i865 chipset. Perfect for Win-98. It would beat the pants off the Athlon board you did buy. You can still buy this one, you know... ================ http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=775i65GV - Intel® 865GV chipset - Supports LGA 775 FSB800/533MHz processor, Prescott Ready and H-T Technology - Support Intel® Dual Core Processors, including Pentium® D and Extreme Edition - Supports DDR400 and Dual Channel Technology - Int. Intel® Extreme Graphics 2, ASRock AGI8X - VGA upgrade interface - Advanced storage interface SATA 1.5Gb/s - 5.1 channel Audio, 10/100 PCI Ethernet LAN - ASRock I/O Plus: 6 ready-to-use USB 2.0 ports - Supports DDR400/333/266 non-ECC, un-buffered memory - DIMM slots: 2 - Max. capacity of system memory: 2GB - ASRock A.G.I.8X graphics upgrade slot (AGP8X/4X compatible) - 3 x PCI slots( PCI 2.2 compliance) - 1 x AMR slot OS - Microsoft® Windows® 98SE / ME / 2000 / XP compliant

Unless I'm mistaken, all USB-3 expansion cards are PCI express (just like SATA 2 and 3). Does anyone here know of any motherboard with working win-98 drivers for the PCI express bus?

My advice is for you to go down to your local municipal e-waste recycling depot and pick out a mini-tower PC that someone has given up for scrap. You'll probably find that the hard drive has been removed (by the previous owner) but you'll probably find one in good condition with cpu and video card and ram all intact. Yes - people are throwing away 2ghz Pentium-4 mini-towers with 1 or 2 gig's installed ram. Find one of those and install win-98 on it. What you have now should have been junked 10 years ago. I can't imagine that you use it as a portable computer - your battery is surely dead and it has no wifi capability.

When it comes to the VIA chipsets, I imagine that the VIA PT880 Pro/Ultra is the highest / last chipset with win-9x/me drivers. A popular (and probably one of the last) motherboards based on that chipset is several ASROCK Dual boards, in particular the Dual VSTA. There is one on ebay for sale for $30. It has AGP and PCIe slots, and also has both DDR and DDR2 ram slots. It takes Intel socket 775 CPU. If you can find any 775's still NOS (new, old stock) then great, but most likely the ram and CPU will be e-bay purchases as well. When it comes to intel chipsets, there is i845 - i875 (and the older P4 CPU's), and I keep thinking that some version of the 910 or 915 chipset might have 9x/me drivers.

If WindowsUpdate was still functional, and if I started with a base install of 98se from the CD, does SP3 include everything that I would get from WU except for IE6 - but still include all the IE6-related patches ?

I was testing a malware link recently on my win-98 system (with Kex) with Firefox 2.0.0.20, Adobe reader 6.0.2, and Java 1.6.0_43. This is what happened: The link ends up causing my system to load the Java engine and process some java code, which in turn tries to invoke acrord32.exe and render some sort of pdf file. Java and Acrord32 displayed these error messages: ------ Application Error General Exception (!) java.lang.NullPointerException (ok) (Details) ------- And this: ------- Acrobat plug-in ! This operation is not allowed (ok) ------- Looking at the Details for the Java error: ------- java.lang.NullPointerException at sun.net.www.ParseUtil.encodePath(Unknown Source) at sun.misc.URLClassPath$Loader.getResource(Unknown Source) at sun.misc.URLClassPath.getResource(Unknown Source) at sun.applet.AppletClassLoader.getResourceAsResource(Unknown Source) at sun.applet.AppletPanel$7.run(Unknown Source) at sun.applet.AppletPanel$7.run(Unknown Source) at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) at sun.applet.AppletPanel.createSerialApplet(Unknown Source) at sun.applet.AppletPanel.createApplet(Unknown Source) at sun.plugin.AppletViewer.createApplet(Unknown Source) at sun.applet.AppletPanel.runLoader(Unknown Source) at sun.applet.AppletPanel.run(Unknown Source) at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source) ------- Before I dismiss these error messages, I do a search for all recently-created files. I find these in windows/temp: Acr6392.TMP Acr6390.TMP Acr639C.TMP Small, useless PDF files. I can't find anywhere on the web to verify this, but I believe that Adobe reader must create these temp files during it's normal operation, so these are harmless. AV scan on them turns up nothing. I find this file in windows/application data/sun/java/deployment/cache/6.0/host: 31ba0019-40d9db35.hst It's a text file that contains this: 184.82.108.82 I have this file in my firefox cache directory: 10D13CC8d01. It contained comma separated decimal representations of ASCII characters for the <applet>some stuff</applet> container. Also contained period separated values represent the ASCII characters for JavaScript for downloading of the malicious PDF, Java jar, and Shockwave flash object. The malicious PDF contained stream object (111) which is a compressed obfuscated JavaScript which works on yet another blob which is the PDF heapspray/exploit code which also has two shellcode variables. The shellcodes had URLs that were not encrypted. VirusTotal identified that file as containing: JS/Exploit-Blacole.ld - but only 2 out of 46 AV programs flagged the file as malicious. I dismiss the java error, and then the adobe error. Immediately another Acrord error pops up (same as the first). I dismiss it. Firefox then comes back to life and displays this page: www.google.com/search?q=404%20error And at this point we seem to be done, with no lasting effects. This lame attempt at a browser/java/pdf exploit just bounced off my win-98 system. I have yet to find a pdf exploit that can work correctly on the combination of win-98/Acrobat Reader 6. And the heap/spray exploits seem not to work correctly on win-98 systems as well. And many of the malware files that I seek out (as a result of following recent spam links) turn out to have a very low rate of being identified by antivirus programs - at least during their first day of circulation.

There's a lot about the technical differences between win-95 and win-98 that I don't know. Technical differences that have an impact on usability and stability. I would be eager to learn about perhaps the most important of these differences so that I (and perhaps others) would have a basis to switch over from win-98 to win-95 during a future OS re-installation. (I do not mean to question the subjective feelings that people may have for one OS or another).

I don't know why the OP would be wanting to "get win-95 running" on this particular machine vs win-98 (he could explain that if he wants) but I'd like to know, in a general sense, what advantages there would be for system tweakers like ourselves in running win-95 vs win-98, given that either OS was leveraged to the max with any available files and settings from all sources. Is there a case that can be made that if you are going to run win-9x/me on a given (older) system, and if maximum usability and stability are your goals, that win-95 can meet that goal better than (or even equal to) win-98 or ME?