cov3rt

does anyone know if there is a driver for the ati mobility x600 on 98SE? this is for the dell latitude d810 laptop. the driver doesn't have to be official. so far i tried a few setup installer packages and they would give an error at the end of setup that the inf is not found or some other error that i don't exactly remember. what i have not tried YET is the official dell one from their site which is supposed to be designed for xp i think and i may test out a older firegl v3100 driver because it fell under the same driver from dell's site. i also looked up the hardware id below and apparently the firegl v3200 also falls under the same hardware id. hardware id- VEN_1002&DEV_3150&SUBSYS_20021028&REV_00

does anyone know if there are usb wireless adapter drivers for windows 95? i would like to try out a few usb wifi cards i found which mention windows 95 in the documents but i don't think any of them mention windows 95 on the boxes that they ship in or on the official sites, the few i researched that may have support are d link dwl-120, dwl-122, IBM Thinkpad R40 FX-C2039 802.11b Actiontec Wireless Card 91P7261 ( actually a mini pci card but would be nice to have for a laptop ) another usb one was the actiontec brand which had windows 95 in the document and win9x which i hear a lot of the time but i don't know if win9x means windows 98 first and second edition or it can also mean windows 95 / 98/ se? - [PRISM_USB1] ; Win9x AddReg = PRISM_USB1.reg, COMMON_USB.reg, COMMON_NDIS.reg, COMMON.reg CopyFiles = PRISM_DRIVER.copy, PRISM_APPLET.copy, PRISM_NDI.copy PRISM_USB1 = "Actiontec USB 802.11b Wireless Adapter"

i just wanted to bump this thread because im having / had similar issues in the past with virtual memory not working right on windows 98 and have not found a working solution yet. it seems that after a certain point of updating the system, i will notice in system properties that it mentions that "performance can be improved by enabling virtual memory", i then see that dxdiag indicates 0 MB used and programs and applications either freeze or give blue screens. i have applied that patch indicated in this post and like the op mentioned, it did fix the size of the hard drive in the virtual memory settings menu but it did not fix the issue with the virtual memory working. \ i noticed this issue upon reboot after changing the display adapter driver to the scitech snap graphics driver for the intel 910gml graphics since there is no gma 900 driver for windows 98. i had problems in the past with vbemp9x so i tried to use the scitech solution but it seems that its no better, dxdiag shows it using 15 MB of video memory, mycomputer and mydocuments folder seem to be blanked out for the fonts for some reason and sometimes on some windows, some of fonts are missing for the folders. other than that, it does seem more stable however i don't know if the scitech driver has anything to do with the virtual memory problem. is there a possible patch from rloew or someone else that can fix this issue? it would seem that limiting the hard drive to just under 32 GB would fix the issue but i'd rather do that with windows 95 which brings up another thing. why is that windows 95 does not indicate using any of the swap file through dxdiag? it always says 0 MB used or 0 MB available, no matter how many things i had open or even using a test 200 MB setting of virtual memory did not change anything. could there also be a patch for this too? i always limited the hard drive to 31 GB or lower on windows 95 with 384 MB of ram limited as well and so far, i experienced little to no freezing or errors when opening programs and working. but it would be a whole lot better if i could use perhaps 115 GB in both windows 95 and 98 without virtual memory problems, it seems that 116 GB and higher causes issues, i think this is what rleow mentioned in his site that contains various patches. the specs of the laptop im working on is the hp dv4000, specific model hp dv4217cl, it has 1 GB ram, limited to 512 MB right now, although i had it working perfectly fine with 1 GB ram limited to maxphyspage=40000 before the virtual memory issue, the hard drive is 74.5 GB, i can provide other specs if needed.

you could try the dell inspiron 600m, make sure to pick one with the 64 MB of mobility radeon 9000 graphics, because some only come with 32 MB. there is a driver for the ethernet, you can put a mini pci wifi card, and pretty much find drivers for all the other devices, however, i would rather use this laptop for a windows 95 build with the pcmcia slot and wifi card combo being a perfect match with the other specs, i tested it and almost all drivers were there except for some reason i could not get the pcmcia slot to work or at least i didn't know how to set it up, could possibly be because of missing drivers or updated drivers needed too, i also couldn't find a working ethernet driver, with windows 98, some games may need up to 128 MB or possibly 256 MB of video ram and possibly a faster processor so the inspiron 600m wouldn't be the best choice. the only other laptops i've researched so far ( i recently got into the laptop business, i buy and sell them, and i noticed the hp dv4000 models with mobility radeon x700 graphics would possibly be a good candidate, dell latitude d810 with mobility radeon x600 graphics, or dell inspiron 8600 with geforce fx go 5650 128 MB gpu )

this may not be the best question here but does anyone know how to properly configure and make pcmcia wifi cards work on windows 95 / 98? i put the intel pro wireless 2011b card in a laptop build with w98se and was never able to get it work though to wierd resource problems. when i checked device manager, it did not even let me change the automatic settings or go into the box, it just showed kind of a glitched or messed up tab of the resources as if you put two of the same boxes in one and even in safe mode, it still looked the same. i was simply wondering if anyone has had this issue and what could be the cause and how to fix it? i dont have the laptop anymore and therefore i cant give much other info. could it perhaps have anything to do with updating the pcmcia controllers / cardbus adapter? also, when configuring pcmcia devices from the start, what options would i select, because it mentioned something about conflicting 16 bit with 32 bit during the windows 98 setup and also on windows 95 and some other stuff and i just clicked yes and no to some of the messages but i dont remember exactly what they meant.

it does not seem that i will need to install aol 7.0 because i already have up to dial up networking 1.4 and internet explorer 5.5 with service pack 2. however, i may check out netscape 7.2 if there is any crucial files that come with it or for any benefit of using the web browser itself. according to someone else's post in another forum, netscape 7.2 should work on windows 95 if deselecting all options in the second component pane during installation, except for classic skin and it should work fine.

thanks for the info, i use firefox 2.0.0.20 ( modified of course ) as the main browser, hardly ie 5.5 with sp2 unless there is something that doesnt work in firefox but even then, i would actually use opera 10.10 which seems to be the last ( non modified ) version to work on windows 95. for some reason, firefox doesn't display some web pages correctly, but opera 10.10 does. i did not know about the active scripting issue in ie 5.5, i will definitely disable it if using ie 5.5. also, would you happen to know if there is any specific files aol 7.0 would update?

this is odd, i have a working windows 95 build that works with acpi support, computer automatically shut downs when selecting shut down option without showing the "it is now safe to turn of your computer" message. i believe windows 95 osr 2.5 was the first to implement this function, im not sure why other people had problems with acpi, even with windows 98 which should have better support.

quick question but can windows 95 also use sata drives like ide devices the same way that you would do in windows 98 if you simply select the ide compatibility / legacy mode option in the bios? i dont care if the drives are limited in performance, as long as they appear in device manager as one detected dvd burner and one hard drive without any issues, that is all i need.

Ummm... I already have Flash 11 installed, and from Adobe's official archives. Every Flash Player version as far back as Flash 2 is still downloadable from Adobe. I don't have any problems with modern web content using Opera 12 (with the exception of obscure Unicode characters, and stuff like Java and WebGL, which I never need). Did Microsoft release any Windows 98 updates to improve the stability of the networking stack? this may be off topic to your specific problem but i just wanted to say that windows 95 and 98 carry lots of updates that improve stability, whether its official ones or unofficial, however, i try to find as many official ones first, before going to the unofficial ones, and i only use the unofficial ones if i really need them for a certain purpose like the extended usb mass storage update from rleow which works perfect on windows 95. i recently acquired over 20 hotfixes for windows 95 from looking up articles from kbupdate.info, i requested them from cached sites that had the option to request them and they were sent fairly quick. with all this being said, you should have over 100 official updates for both w95 and 98, if you have something like half of that or not many, then you may see noticeable issues like the ones you described, since these older operating systems rely heavily on important updates / additional updated files, they can run fairly poorly without them.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that the point of this project was only to update the Windows 95 Shell (i.e. the NON-Desktop Update/IE4/98 shell) to include functions that were added to the Desktop Update/IE4/98 shell so that the 95 shell could be used under 98 and/or with things like 98 Lite, etc... So for anyone already running the Desktop Update/IE4/98 shell under 95 it would actually be a downgrade and be incompatible with the newer shell if installed. WarCraft 3 incompatibility with Windows 95 was one of several factors that forced me to move from Windows 95 to Windows 98SE several years ago. Oddly enough the other factors that forced the decision at the time have now been remedied, but I digress. I never got past the "unsupported operating system" part on 95 back then, but admittedly at the time I didn't have the first clue how to begin to circumvent it. WarCraft 3 and the Frozen Throne do work properly under Windows 98SE though, I played them for years that way. However one of the later Blizzard patches (1.24B) breaks the game under Windows 98. I reported this to Blizzard tech support but of course they never gave any meaningful response, they never even bothered to try to tell me to upgrade or the like, they just acted like they didn't comprehend what I was saying. I don't know if it was ever corrected later or not. So, you may need to verify that the version you are installing is prior to 1.24B, and I would be very careful about the digital version, which may introduce this or other incompatibilities. thats interesting you had similar problems with warcraft 3 on windows 98SE, well, at least it still worked from running it off the already installed program copied to the hard drive. i have 1.26 version of wc3 the frozen throne, and i believe when i tested it on windows 98SE, it was also at least 1.26. my goal someday is to get wc3 running on windows 95 though, because i think that would be really cool to do and i don't see it being too hard for someone to do. of course, we would have to get it working properly on windows 98SE first lol.

Its not alowed to redistribute unredistributables. You ought to have read the Rules, already... sorry, i have not read the rules completely, but thanks for letting me know, i will look it at more thoroughly.

for web browsers, i would use firefox 9.01 if you have kernelex 4.5.2 installed on W98SE. seemed to work well the last time i used it. also with the adobe flash player 11.0.1.152 ( 32 bit ) plug in update, you can watch youtube videos up to 1080p. i think the flash player plug in version might have to be the non IE version. im not sure though. i have the specific file(s) but i don't know how to put it as a link or attachment here, does anyone know how to do this?

found this thread while researching on windows 95 and i was curious if there is any updated version of the shell32. i tried the sh95upd version .8 or the latest version i believe, it installed fine on my windows 95 osr 2.5 pc with most updates, official / unofficial, directx 8.0a, etc, however i was unable to shutdown the computer, even after uninstalling it, i had to manually turn off the pc and then reboot because it still wouldn't shut down after uninstalling. i only tested it today for a few minutes, i have not tested version .7 or earlier, from what i read, .7 seems to be the most stable? regardless, im still looking for a better alternative, i specifically need another api function ( i believe that is what its called ) to allow playing a certain game, warcraft 3. im not good with modifying files / using hex editors or any of that detailed complicated work, its just too much for me so i was hoping maybe someone can implement the new function or functions in a updated fix? the api is getlongpathnamew. the specific error message i got was "the msvcr80.dll file is linked to missing export kernel32.dll:getlongpathnamew." i had a similar problem on windows 98 ( that supposed to support warcraft 3 in the first place ) where i couldn't install frozen throne from the disc, reign of chaos would install fine and played but frozen throne gave errors that wouldn't allow installing it ( i dont remember the exact errors as i didnt write them down ). i tested this with and without kernelex on windows 98 and made no difference. i also tried to download from the website digitally and wouldn't let me install which gave an error message mentioning invalid path choosen, this too i researched and tried possible solutions but none of them worked, i found this ironic why warcraft 3 wouldn't install on windows 98 in all these ways. finally, i was able to get warcraft 3 working properly ( somewhat ) by copying the entire installed program folder from a working windows 2000 computer into a flash drive and then launching it from the flash drive in windows 98. however, i still faced another problem, after exiting the program and trying to load it again, windows 98 would give an error message that the program is already opened or something about quiting one ms dos program, i dont exactly remember. but i had to restart the computer, just to play it again. i tried to see if copying the program into the operating system itself would change anything, but made no difference. this too i found odd, the system was heavily updated, directx 9.0c installed, unofficial usb installed, vcache settings limited to 0 for min and max file cache and maxphyspage=40000 with 1 GB ram installed. so basically, im trying to get warcraft 3 to work on windows 95 in the way i got it working on windows 98, or at least in a similar way. however, there are obviously many issues, one would be that the ones i just mentioned, the missing api function in win95, the other one was that i got another error message at the same time of trying to launch the program which said "frozenthrone was unable to find war3.exe. please make sure your game is correctly installed, and that your frozen throne disc is in your cd-rom drive, and try again". another problem would be the installer or game rejecting launching warcraft3 because of a function they built in that mentions windows 95 as an unsupported operating system. so with all this being said, how hard would it be for someone experienced in this area to work around these issues? surely it shouldn't be too hard?

im having this new problem on windows 95 where i can't get the cisco 350 wifi card to connect to the internet. before on previous experimental builds for windows 95, i was able to connect to the internet with the same wifi card automatically without even needing a password or needing to put in any manual changes in the os, yes, i know its not secure but i was glad enough to get wireless internet to work on windows 95, although i think some builds asked for the guest password because i had a guess network and this was more secure but for some reason, different experimental builds didnt bring up that page. anyways, i can perfectly connect to the wired ethernet connection without needing to do any manual adjusted settings in the operating system and always was able to do so but now the wifi won't. there can be two reasons though for this problem that i suspect, one would be that for this build, i installed more updates and it could be that some of the updates / hotfixes were not needed or were not compatible for the os and caused issues but i don't think this would be the problem, or it could have something to do with the new router i got since i swapped to u verse internet and changed the modem / router? this, i think is probably the problem because of the newer / different technology making it harder to work with windows 95? before i had cox internet. lastly, i noticed that one wierd problem is that i can't release or renew ip addresses when using winipcfg. it gives a fatal error of dhcp server unavailable: renewing adapter. i looked up this problem on google and did save 4 pages explaining possible solutions, although i didn't really mess with the network settings just yet as i dont want to make things complicated and wanted to see if i can possibly get a better answers or solutions to my specific problem here, all the other computers in my house connect perfectly fine, but then again, they all have windows 7 and newer. there is one last solution that i can think of at the moment is to install the software utility for the wifi but in the past, i came to a point where i couldnt get it to install and the program would prevent the operating system from loading in which i needed to uninstall the program from safe mode and the wifi worked fine without it, so it was never a requirement anyways.

Now, all of the other "replace" files (#1->#7) have *only* to do with the SDK, so that you may/*must* perform #9/#10. That leaves #8 as the only relevant *operational* file, right? Besides DirectX is an *add-on* and has nothing to do with the OS, right? So, the SDK seems absolutely unnecessary. 1 - Install DX8.0a 2. Get the 8.0b package, unzip, and replace file in #8 above *** Done! Here, do a little light reading (from Wikepedia of all places) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX Please note the Direct3D reference (the only relevant file). yes, this seems more straightforward and makes more sense. i shall try it out soon and give feedback on the results. thanks for the help.

please read what i wrote completely, i put a link to the updates and it mentions which updates are official, which ones are unofficial, and which ones are misc in the thread ( not the add on / updates that i listed on the other portion that includes adobe reader 6, flash 11, etc, those may not be in the thread i gave the link to and you will need to find yourself but shouldn't be too hard to find ). most updates can be downloaded in that thread with a dl button but for some, you may have to go to a different site and / or use the wayback machine archive by copying the url and pasting it there. it will take a while to update a fresh windows 98 / 98se machine properly / and because you have to restart the system for almost every update, it will take a few hours but it is well worth it.

you can get most of the windows 98SE official updates from the link below, for some reason though, windows 95 and 98 give me wierd issues where certain updates don't get installed right, such as the dial up networking update / winsock files dont get properly updated or are missing and so you can't get the internet to work properly, it seems that there are certain files that the wizard says it needs from a certain cab file but since the path is not towards that cab region, it doesnt get installed right, what i do for this is copy these files from the cd into the same path of the update wizard so that the updates get installed properly and this method has always worked for me, i had to do this also for a cisco 350 wireless pci card for windows 95, and yes, windows 95 supports a few wifi cards. here is the thread for the updates - http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/84886-the-complete-list-of-hotfixes-updates-for-windows-98se/ and just for some reference, here is some add ons / updates that work and i have in my windows 98SE support cd that i made - adobe reader 6 nero 7.0.1.2 burning software hwmonitor 1.17 firefox 9.01 ( with kernelex installed ) winrar 3.30 microsoft framework 2.0 adobe flash 11.0.1.152 ( 32 bit ) ( works with kernelex installed for firefox, you can watch videos up to 1080p on youtube ) nusb33e ( unofficial usb mass storage drivers )

like i said, i simply want to know if it has a direct impact or not on the stability / performance of the operating system but i have not found any people who personally used directx 8.0b and what differences they saw. from what i see, wouldn't the operating system still function better with the updated files from directx 8.0b vs 8.0a in all sense?

although this may not be directly linked to your problems, your psu seems just a tad inadequate in both wattage and quality, a 350w power supply with 80 plus efficiency would be better. i never experimented with sata on windows 95 / 98 based operating systems but like mrmateczko said, you can try changing the settings in the bios to compatibility mode / ide mode and see if that helps, normally its best to do this before installing the operating system and i would actually recommend reinstalling the operating system if its a not a big problem for you and i would also have other options on the table as well before doing so. to limit the ram in system.ini, just open up system.ini from the run command and under 386en section, add "maxphyspage=20000" without the quotes and also add "minfilecache=0" and "maxfilecache=0" without the quotes under the vcache section, i personally never had slow performance with the 0 cache settings. i personally don't like to use the unofficial service pack, i used it on earlier builds but found that installing individual official updates / add ons was better. in other words, you should install all official updates in order / add ons, then kernelex. if your getting any memory related issues, it may have to do with 1 GB of ram being too much at first for windows 98SE, i found that putting in one stick of 512 MB was the trick at first, then editing the system.ini, and then adding another 512 MB worked, up to 1024 MB of ram can be detected i believe on 98SE without having special patches / manual patches, assuming you put maxphyspage=40000 and minfilecache and maxfilecache are set to 0. from what i read, you did a clean install of windows 98se but could not get a partition less than 250 GB and because of this, windows 98se couldnt work properly? if so, one way is to reinstall the os and install windows 98se the old fashioned way by using fdisk, formatting the drive with the partition size being about 120 GB, set the partition active, restart the system and go back to fdisk and do the ms-dos setup where you copy the files to the hard drive and run setup. if your interested, its available in the url below, the same method works to install windows 95 - http://www.windowsreinstall.com/win98/install98stepbystep1/indexfullpage.htm#.VU5PfPlViko

i have researched a bit on directx 8.0b on windows 95 but i could not really make sense on how to install it properly ( could not find a video showing how to update the dx files, install sdk properly, etc ). to clarify this better, i have not done this completely yet, there were a few test systems where i installed the sdk portion, it installed successfully but i don't think i even did that part right and i didn't go any further with the files because i was scared that i would mess up something. what would happen if i simply replaced the old directx files with the newer directx 8.0b files? would this basically update directx 8.0a to "directx 8.0b" or it is not as simple as that? has anyone done this before? i read that it doesn't have a direct impact on typical users but i would be so curious to know if there are any benefits it can give, i mean, wouldn't updating the directx 8.0a files to all those updated 8.0b ones with all the corrections just run games better, have less bugs, and just a more stable computer in general? if so, then why does it mentions its only for programmers, or am i wrong here?

thanks for the reply, and yes, i do agree specific errors are important, but i just wanted others know the big picture of the problem first and then get the facts together. thats why i mentioned the whole invalid operation / page fualt errors as the type of errors, rather than giving the entire log of errors reported as that is not practical at first hand for me, although its fine to do that first, i don't have a problem doing that occasionally but i prefer to work up there if i have the energy to carry on that task, you know what i mean? im no programmer or highly technical with computers, its mostly a trial and error thing and i spend a decent amount of time trying to get things working by googling the problems, etc, so when people tell me to be more specific, it can sometimes stress me out because of all the energy i already spent trying to fix the problem. its a personality thing.

If you don't list the specific errors that you are getting then we can't help you. Will the installer not run at all? Does it run but throw errors? Does it complain about missing exports or "devices attached to the system not functioning" etc etc? You need to be more specific about this and any other issues you may have. At any rate, I'm glad you found a different solution. the installer wouldn't even run when it mentioned the unsupported operating message, the other ones would install the driver ( where it would be detected in device manager ) but would still keep asking to configure the display adapter upon booting to desktop and when i try to configure it and restart it, it just does the same thing over and over, the other ones would just not let me boot into windows where i would have to go into safe mode, uninstall the driver and start over. although this may be a problem with other graphics cards and / or not necessarily the 845 one, the resolutions never passed more than the standard 640x480, the only other things i remember is that at one point when i tried doing this, i remember an error message saying missing hkcmd or something along those words. when i looked that term up, it seemed to be some sort of hotkey for the graphics adapter, but certainly a hotkey shouldn't be the factor of the driver working or not? other than this issue, i was gonna ask a few other questions on problems possibly due to memory management ( page faults, invalid operation, etc ) i don't have the exact errors and i feel like the specific errors don't matter so much as of now but rather the reason for getting them in the first place. for instance, i noticed in dxdiag that the page file always seems to be at 0 MB, shouldn't it be using at least a little bit of virtual memory? i checked it during web browsing, watching youtube, running microsoft word, running speedfan, etc, but still no page file seems to be present. is this normal or is there a particular reason to why it is using 0 MB or showing 0 MB? here is some other info if you need it, for system.ini, i put maxphyspage=39500 ( with 920 MB usable ( 2 sticks of 512 MB ), any more and the os doesn't boot, of course i tried lower too, i tried as low as 15000 with only 512 MB installed, for minfilecache and maxfilecache, i always put 0, for virtual memory, i let windows manage it, for the hard drive, i enable dma, i reserved 24 MB of ram for EMS, ACPI enabled in bios. i appreciate the help.

thanks for the reply. i may give that driver a try as well, although it is a little newer than the ones i found. that file you gave link to did not work for the 845 graphics on windows 95, i tried several others and they didn't work either, even the intel 830gm vga driver. some of the installers, including the one you gave from intel's site didn't even run because of the unsupported operating system preventing the installer from working but its fine though, im using a separate video card now.

thanks for the reply. i may give that driver a try as well, although it is a little newer than the ones i found.