98SE

Strange. I never had any problems getting into 98SE with SATA drives. I will have to check if AHCI or IDE mode makes any difference. What is the name of the BIOS Disk Driver replacement that can switch off AHCI if AHCI is being used for other OSes? Does this come with your SATA patch?

You can use a USB floppy drive since FDC are now missing on modern motherboards so you don't need an internal floppy to boot 98SE. You can also format a USB stick for 98SE and boot on that and edit the config.sys and add the himem.sys into it and other sys files to load into high memory rather than burning a new CD rom for each 98SE modified boot test. I've been using this method to partition all my drives in MultiOS setups. I also noticed another problem on Z170 Skylake. 98SE DOS Format /S and SYS no longer function. Can you test these 98SE DOS Commands on your Z87 to FORMAT/S and then try a regular FORMAT and use SYS later on a USB flash drive if you have no USB floppy drive? Z77 has no issues I can confirm. If you can create a Windows XMS Ramdisk version with GUI that can create multiple Ramdrive(s) that can by dynamically be removed and added without rebooting the the system it would be a huge asset. It should remember the last Ramdrive settings whenever booting into Windows 9x/ME. If you can make that Ramdrive stable for a swapfile it would be an added benefit. I would buy that version from you if you can create it and I think others would too. Any reason why your XMS Ramdrive is not stable for swapfile or is there an alternative Ramdrive program to store the swapfile? So at the moment you mentioned the 32/64bit contiguous XMS Ramdisk DOS version you are not releasing or did you just mean that a demo version of it would not be released only?

I wasn't aware there was a Windows 95C. http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/file/osWin95BC-c.html OEM SR2.5: This was produced at around the time that Microsoft became obsessed with tying browsers into their operating system. :^) It includes everything from OSR2.1 and also Internet Explorer 4. This variant is often called "Windows 95C". So did you notice any differences between 95B and 95C? Is updating 95B to IE4.0 the exact same thing? On your 95C is Quick Launch user interface enabled by default? Why did you need the SATA patch for your configuration? How large are your SATA drives?

Thanks Dibya, Can you also create a non PAE patched version for standard XP SP3? Just simple USB keyboard and USB mouse functionality is fine for now. Later we can test storage devices, webcams, et cetera but those are not as important at the moment. I just want to get a slim down driver with just a few files that replaced without affecting XP SP3 OS purity still maintaining original 3.2GB limit. But later I will install your 128GB PAE patch version on a separate partition test. Don't worry about OS corruption. I have XP imaged and can restore as many times as possible and multiple computers here so no worry about getting offline as this computer is separate. I can test all version of XP with and without Service Packs 1-4.

Problem meaning Demo XMS Ramdisk being hacked? Sure I can try your little test program out for XMS compatibility on Z170 and report back. This is the first chipset I noticed himem.sys would not load on pure DOS. I just want to confirm on your Z87 MB did can you use a bootable 98SE floppy and load himem.sys properly in just the config.sys without any HMA area errors? Regarding XMS Ramdisk patch - I'm not trying to rip you or anyhow off so I understand your demo version of that has to be kept tight. But as for alternate XMS Ramdisk < 2GB testing is there a particular one you think which would simulate the same XMS Ramdisk compatibility as yours on a smaller scale? Have you thought about using your Ramdrive to load 98SE into it and then run off the Ramdrive entirely? Once inside Windows 98, does the XMS Ramdrive created in DOS appear inside 98 without any issues? Follow up, have you considered creating a versatile GUI version of it strictly for 95/98/ME usage so you can create multiple Ramdrives of different sizes that can be dynamically removed and added without rebooting rather than creating them before loading into Win 9x/ME? So no patch for Win 3.1 installed on or using FAT32 partitions? I normally used Win 3.1 on a 2GB FAT 16 back then so I never noticed this FAT32 bug. So if Win 3.1 was installed and run on the FAT16 partition and you also had other FAT32 partitions as D: E: F: et cetera on the same drive did you notice any issues exiting Win 3.1 back to DOS? While in 3.1 and using Explorer to browse the hard drive does the FAT16 partition show up only while the FAT32 partitions are missing or are the FAT32 partitions identified but look like corrupted characters and cannot be accessed? Thanks R. Loew

What is the maximum specific size of your XMS Ramdrive you can create which you state will not interfere with Windows 9X functionality? Do you have a handicapped or suggested alternate Ramdrive that uses the same or similar method as yours that I should test that would confirm it would work on Skylake? Glad to know Win 3.1 still has no issues even with 32GB memory on board. I will have to dig for those disks for a possible test. Which FAT32 bug are you referring to? Thanks for earlier answers.

Dibya No installer needed. I can copy the two files over in DOS and overwrite myself. Let me know what link to get them. Thanks. I will test first USB keyboard and USB mouse. Later I can test USB camera, Flash drive, SSD, and Hard drive also if it needs tweaking.

What do you mean by the acronymn PSE and DDO in an earlier message? What do you mean no room for anything else? I would of course still leave the conventional 640KB area untouched and 384KB HMA region or 1MB - 64GB for 63GB Ramdrive or it wouldn't usable if that's what you meant? But in low memory system say 1MB or less I can see creating a Ramdrive with just 256KB might be usable of conventional memory say in DOS 2.1 and maybe 3.3 and 5.0. Yes you should combine the 32-bit/64-bit Ramdrive so it doesn't use waste two separate DOS letters. Is it possible for it to be a single file that is 32 based but can access the 64bit code when needed for > 4GB instead of two separate Ramdrive files to deal with? Another idea is have you thought about creating a 98SE patch or command line or Sys file that loads in the Config.sys to automatically assign more than A to Z letters in DOS? If you have too many partitions I would like to see it go from A B - floppies C to Z then A1 B1 C1...Z1 A2 B2 C2...Z2 A3 B3 C3...Z3 A10 B10 C10...Z10 You get the idea. Another one if you have any way of modifying the original FDISK and the Fdisk 2nd version that was patched to 64GB drives however some has a few minor bugs to update it. I am more of a hard core DOS only partition user. Partition Size Entry only allows 5 digits for MB size so for too large a drive you can't insert the exact MB for a large partition size. Digits entry should be increased to 10 digits possible for MB size which should be plenty. Another issue is verifying integrity after each partition is created causes a lot of waiting. Option to stop that integrity check to speed up the partitioning process. These were just a few off the top of my head I have more. I figure you should have the capability to create such tools or can modify it? As for your NonXMS Ramdrive was there another type you Ramdrive you create for EMS or conventional memory? As for testing you still have not tested it on Z170 and higher chipsets? Do you have some handicapped version for me to test out you can cap it to 5GB or put some timer based expiration if you need to which I am fine with. I just want to make sure it can use the HMA and report back if it can use that region since you only have Z87 which from what you said has no problem loading himem.sys whereas my boot disks cannot load himem.sys so there must be an issue and perhaps a special mod is necessary. Also I can test the joining of the two memory segments (32bit+64bit) as one contiguous Ramdrive is possible with your program. Let me know. P.S. Have you tested or is it required to patch Windows 3.1 to work on a system with too much memory? I'm not sure if there was an inherent max memory limit for Windows 3.1 similar to 98. Does your original 98 memory patch also work on 95? Does 98 Lite function with it?

Dibya can you upload those files her?. Also will this work in XP standard, SP1, SP2, and SP3 without additional kernel updates? Simple overwrite those two files over my copy?

I don't know who Alex Ionescu is but if he's coming out with a generical USB 3.0/3.1 driver for Intel xHCI controllers that's a huge step in the right direction. But one step at a time. Even limited USB mouse and USB keyboard functionality would be fine right now instead of a full USB driver stack. Later back port for Windows 2000 and 98SE !!!

ReactOS is that a Linux based pure Windows emulator? Are they making a pure Windows XP 32 bit compatible driver? Newer motherboards only use xHCI starting with Skylake. I would need Windows XP xHCI driver for testing and modifying myself to work on as many systems as possible. I didn't see any downloadable links to any USB drivers. Can you link? I don't need full mass storage device detection functionality since that would take a lot more code most like to build. Just basic USB keyboard and USB mouse input support for now is good enough. Thanks.

No need to wage war Dibya. Start off just making the GTX 1000 Pascal series 2D Graphics driver (HDMI and VGA) function in XP (unaltered). I suggest start with GTX 1050/1050Ti model which has best low wattage performance and very affordable for testing. Then HDMI Audio out driver working. Then people can at least do tests to make sure it can browse the internet and watch videos with VLC and simple stuff in beta stage driver. Confirm HDCP functionality works for watching Blu-ray movies. Then this should be good enough for most people to try out. Later if time permits work on the 3D graphics first in XP (unaltered) and later the Big project if possible to port Windows 7 code functionality into XP so you can use Windows 7 Graphics driver and even Intel USB 3.0 xHCI driver instead in the future with less headache!

Are there any USB or driver programmers here that can help create a simple Intel USB 3.0 xHCI driver for XP? Looking for some basic functionality first to detect and connect a USB keyboard and a USB mouse. Intel was lazy and didn't bother making one so looking for some brilliant minds out there to help accomplish this so XP can remain functional many years to come. Thanks in advance!!!

Is this for internal floppy drives or USB external floppy drives? I don't recall having any issues with 1.44MB external USB. Internal drives I have a 360KB, 1.2MB, 1.44MB, an old 720KB somewhere around for legacy stuff and a recently acquired 2.88MB. Oh I also have a few LS-120 before they got discontinued. I have two 8 inch floppy drives but no way to interface with modern systems but I just love staring at those disks from time to time.

Yes Dual Birds Stone Method. That clears up the 29GB. So no way to do a straight 32GB or larger Ramdrive sized based on 32-bit? What about that PAE mode that is used in 2K3 to achieve 64GB? Is there some DOS equivalent use of getting it up to 64GB in one contiguous segment or a way to bridge the 3GB onto the 29GB seamlessly in case you want to maximize the DOS Ramdrive? No need for Himem.sys for non XMS Ramdrive is good. But still unsure of its usability on Skylake two generations above yours if normal Himem.sys can't even load. Why did you say, "Otherwise I would not have been able to run 98SE"? 98 doesn't require himem.sys when booting into the OS or are you needing that for something? Yes I understood it was in relation to the Native 4K HD. But I wanted to know could you even get to the 2K, XP, and Vista bootloader menu in your tests on such drives? If you created a small 2GB FAT16 partition for the 98SE boot partition the bootloader would reside on the C:. I'm using 8TB drives on XP with no issues. Next stage will be 16TB. Max should be 17.6TB MBR for XP. It may seem like a lot but 140.8TB would have been a better capacity limit.

I found this from an earlier posting to me. Your non-XMS Ramdrive only had 29GB of 32GB after booting into 98SE DOS? Where has the loss of 3GB gone to? On the Z87 have you tested booting up a 98SE DOS disk and did the standard himem.sys inside config.sys load properly? On the Z170 himem.sys no longer functions so there is no more HMA so you will need a conventional memory Ramdrive program unless you are able to test on a Z170 or want me to test for you. I think Intel has broken compatibility. I also noticed Windows XP has a loss of over 1GB of usable OS memory on Skylake. When you say your Multi-Boot Profile MBR will not boot from XP, Vista, and 7. What about just the 98SE DOS can it still boot on these drives? What about the 2000 / XP boot loader can it get to that screen? And if so what about the Vista / W7 boot loader?

Just took a look at the link. So was the purpose of that to make it some sort of service and autoload it into the OS rather than manually running it on the desktop? How exactly is the modified version Ramdisk that was linked different than the original release? I haven't had time to try this program in years but from what I could remember you could only create 1 Ramdrive letter? I can't recall testing for multiple Ramdrives. Or could you create as many as possible until you ran out of memory? I also noticed the user mentioning of it removing the actual drive letter so it doesn't use up a drive letter which was interesting. But does this hidden missing Ramdrive letter still show up under My Computer so you can still access the files located there? I noticed cell phones will show up under My Computer but not take up a drive letter.

If they could make 95/98 era games work on XP that actually would be more valuable since most graphics cards of that era are not installable on modern computers due to AGP and PCI based so it we would need some sort of translation matrix to let it use Intel HD and AMD/nVidia PCIe cards. I doubt those games would be taxing on modern graphics cards so something like a DOSBOX equivalent call it 95/98BOX for XP and higher is what we need. We'd need compatibility to emulate the Monster 3D cards and probably something like a 6800 Ultra AGP. I'm not sure if AMD actually had a better 95/98 graphics card than nVidia but might as well program 3 emulation graphics cards in case one was better for a certain game. As for running Vista and W7 games, I don't think it is worth the hassle to try to add that functionality into XP even if it sounds like a good idea. It would be a huge undertaking and plus running a XP/7 dual boot is actually better than trying to get that idea to pan out and a much easier solution since modern day computers still can run W7 64 natively for now. The W7 game would run w/o any compatibility problems and it would be taxing on the people trying to make every Vista/W7 game to work in a niche XP modified version. It it better to have XP handle more than 3.2GB, 128GB currently with that patch. If you had a 128GB capable motherboard I'd like to see it retain compatibility so it can run standard XP programs but divide the memory into standard 4GB, 8GB, 16GB, or 32GB chunks selectable by the user so each program has access to regular, double or quadruple its normal base memory rather than all of it. You still want to set aside remaining memory that can't be touched in case you need to create a Ramdrive where the memory region can't be encroached upon. Given that info about no memory limits in a 32-bit browser maybe in your situation I'd stick with XP64 and W7 64 as a Dual Boot. I wouldn't bother touching W10 unless you really need that DX12 support and if you did you'd end up with probably two graphics cards as most of the new ones will definitely not work with XP 32 or 64.

Are the Firefox version the 32 bit or 64 bit version? Maybe that is why the 1.5GB memory barrier isn't acting up? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP_Professional_x64_Edition "Windows XP Professional x64 Edition uses the same kernel and code tree as Windows Server 2003[3] and is serviced by the same service pack.[4] However, it includes client features of Windows XP such as System Restore, Windows Messenger, Fast User Switching, Welcome Screen, Security Center and games, which Windows Server 2003 does not have." I think if someone can patch over some 2K3 files you should retain the same compatibility for XP 32 still. But if you think XP 64 has no drawbacks and only 2 games had issues with it then I would stick with that. 128GB limit isn't too bad. Maybe a way to patch it easier since it is 64 bit to 192GB or 2TB. Checking limit shows 1TB for 64bit. https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366778(v=vs.85).aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_server_2003_r2 Do any Vista or W7 software or games work on XP 64? That would be more interesting since the XP user interface is probably the best so far.

Well since I didn't try using XP64 extensively to do 32 bit compatibility tests I have no clue if you are better off sticking with it. If I had to choose a 64bit OS that closely resembles XP 64 it would be Vista. It still retains the Classic mode. But you have to add SP2 and DX11 patch to make it worth it. Same classic user interface and probably better than XP 64. Without those two patches I would say stick with XP 64. W7 only has one benefit which is USB 3.0 support over Vista. Both Vista and W7 I dislike one common area. If you rename a file in a directory with hundreds of files it starts to refresh the entire folder and it can take a minute or longer before you can rename another file. This never happened in XP 32-bit. Does this occur in XP 64-bit? Also have you thought about trying W2K Server? I saw someone tweak it so it runs like XP 32 and it might be better than XP 64 since it has drivers and stuff still where as XP 64 might be dwindling since most XP 32 drivers are gone these days and harder to find. Since you are using the XP64 have you run into Browser crashes like Firefox around 1.5GB memory used freezing occurs?

Since it was awhile back it may have been tested on a P4 or a Sandy Bridge. Unless you can verify around 2011 that the earliest Gavotte Ramdrive supported > 3.2 GB memory region which is the reason I probably moved past that program either because it couldn't or because it crashes or it had a clunky interface. Was there a special code you had to force it to use above 3.2GB? I think it just used the OS base memory. My feeling is it did not suit my purpose at the time. As my P4 only had 2GB max memory so I doubt I would have tested Gavotte for that purpose. There was also a Microsoft based Ramdrive that also worked in XP but I think it was limited to 32MB at the time. For all we know this Chinese programmer may have programmed the one I'm using after perfecting it and licensed it off. There are probably multiple commercial Ramdrive programs out there that should support > 3.2GB by now for XP. I haven't taken the time to look at the free ones again or other commercial ones that could be better but if Gavotte works for you then you should stick with it that way if they pop back up again and notices a bunch of you are still using it maybe the source code will be released and then it can be improved by us.

XP can survive on 512MB but lots of disk thrashing. 2GB it starts to operate okay. 3.2GB Just makes it happier. Next step up to W7 64. 8GB at least required. So if you had 8GB Max memory I'd use XP 32 instead and make a 4.8GB Ramdrive. If you have 16GB max go with 8GB W7 64 OS / 8GB Ramdrive. Although you have to set 1GB min start, 2GB max to a pagefile on the Ramdrive since it is a hungry and greedy OS. Disable Hibernate as well. So your Ramdrive will be at most 6GB usable in the end. Anything above like 32GB is when things start to get interesting. Blu-ray threshold > 64GB is useful for editing an entire 50GB disc in one shot without lag.

I haven't tested the 128GB patch yet still using plain old XP SP3. But on another system I will see how it behaves. I have no idea what files or code was done which would at least help others replicate or update it further. But playing it safe for compatibility reasons yes any Ramdrive that can tap into > 3.2GB will be useful on XP SP3. But still limitations of how much memory each program can access. 1.5GB seems to be a barrier on Firefox. To get around it I used other browers like Opera and Sea Monkey all simultaneously and that seemed to work. Using more pagefile size on the Ramdrive is required since you will run out of regular base OS memory. But I can't say how far you can go with this. For example if you open up like 100 or 200 Notepad and MS Paint windows there will be a point where it cannot open another window even though you didn't use 3.2GB of memory. So whatever that limitation is if it can be patched or if the 128GB patch fixes that then yes XP would be more useful for a multitasker. Someone just using one or two programs at a time will not benefit from it. Any reason you prefer XP 64? I would switch to W7 64 instead. I don't think XP 64 can run all XP 32-bit software? Have you tested? I would think XP 64 would be similar to Vista 64 in XP 32 bit compatibility.

Not a huge fan of W10 but someone needs it so I installed. Lots of W7 software doesn't work on W10 or W10 disables its functionality. The Page Fault on Non-Paged Area BSOD sounds like an annoyance but I assume one time .reg file to add it in manually should avoid this issue forever? No objection to his stuff. I bought his > 1.5GB program just to test on a system with more memory than 98SE can deal with normally. However even with DDR3 there were 512MB and 1GB sticks to avoid needing that software in testing. The USB mouse also didn't function properly and could not be controlled. Not sure if anyone else has this problem. Serial Mouse using COM port 1 had no issue. As for his other program he doesn't offer trials on the non-XMS Ramdisk and modern chipsets I have noticed DOS HMA seems to be removed or disabled. Himem.sys can't even access what it normally could. I did try some alternative conventional memory software caches to try and speed up copying processes but it seems to have little or no effect which was strange. If you've successfully tested his non-XMS Ramdisk on modern systems you can let us know. I have a feeling it may not work or may need to be repatched for whatever was done to recent chipsets to be useful.

Different but not as different at 98 and 2K or XP and W7. A lot of drivers and programs that function on 2K will run on XP. XP is closely related enough to 2K that probably 99% of the software will work in it and 2K drivers can be forced. But XP software running on 2K is another nightmare and harder to do. No way you can force XP drivers to function in W7 they are completely different. Same with Vista.