Jump to content

Cooler13

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    country-ZZ

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Cooler13

    Installation Guide for Win98 SE SP 2.0

    in Windows 9x Member Projects

    Posted

    Installation order:

    1- Install Windows 98 SE

    ...

    6- Install all latest drivers of your hardware

    7- Install DirectX (9.0c).

    8- Install IE 6.0 SP1(but I not use IE. I use internet browser ""K_Meleon"")

    9- Install windows media player codec pack 8 and 9.

    10- Install MS Office97 (is the best) .And any other programs like foobar2000(the best player mp3)

    I agree with you mkjp on some things (foobar2000 for instance).

    I usually do only clean installs of Win98SE.

    Here's my install:

    1. format c: /q (my C drive has only 1-2 Gb, and the information kept there is expendable)

    2. Install 98lite (+ Win98SE) -> NO IE!!!

    3. Install latest drivers

    4. Install directx 8.1

    5. Install Sesp2.0

    6. Install programs (only few: Total Commander, Irfanview, Firefox, foobar2000 or winamp 2.91, a colection of video/audio codecs made by a friend and other programs).

    My system is a rocket.. Thanks, Gape!

    0

    To do list for 2.0 FINAL

    in Windows 9x Member Projects

    Posted

    Sorry, kind of re-inventing the wheel for you, Cooler13?

    Kinda :)

    Well the only objection is that it not JUST for me... I'm sure many users would be happy to have such a support.. This service pack's purpose it's (if I understood correctly) to provide support and fetaures there where they don't exist or to correct some major issues, etc... So I think USB2.0 support would be a great achievement (if not maybe the best one).

    Thanks for your help horsecharles!

    0

    To do list for 2.0 FINAL

    in Windows 9x Member Projects

    Posted

    Typically the most disturbing thing was the lack of response/performance out of the onboard IDE controller. Regardless of drivers or drives attached to the board.. slooooooooowwwwwwww

    Sorry.. I'm sorry for your badluck... If you look at some reviews U'll see that the Amd Sis-based motherboards are actually the fastest in hdd performance (of course RAID systems are not compared). If U don't believe me I'll provide U some links to those tests. I haven't use P4 systems to be able to comment there, but on the AMD front SIS is pretty good. When I say that, I don't mean they are the best.. no way.. but at the price U pay for them SIS chipset offer more performance/buck compare to ANY other chipsets. They have their shortcomings (mainly their AGP performance) and now their lack of some support (USB2.0 in this case).

    I agree with U that SIS used to be really bad before (like 5 years ago or so.. yes, they were). Their video chips were awfull... but starting with their SiS735 chipset they started to compete for the first place in performance. As hard is to believe that, the SIS735 was the FASTEST chipset at the time of its introduction (see http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20010611/index.html for instance).

    I'm sorry the discussion took another direction that it should. My opinion (based on my own experience, of many hardware-related articles read) is that SIS are pretty good.

    I need a USB2.0 support for my future laptops (used ones). I own a combo drive that is USB2.0 compliant and also I'd like to purchase a good-quality USB soundcard (Audigy 2NX for instance). In USB1.1 its performance sucks...

    I think I foun a USB2.0 driver for Sis.. it remains to see if it really works

    0

    To do list for 2.0 FINAL

    in Windows 9x Member Projects

    Posted

    I have been upset with evey system I have ever worked on that had a sis based chipset.  Typically the most disturbing thing was the lack of response/performance out of the onboard IDE controller. Regardless of drivers or drives attached to the board.. slooooooooowwwwwwww

    Sorry.. I'm sorry for your badluck... If you look at some reviews U'll see that the Amd Sis-based motherboards are actually the fastest in hdd performance (of course RAID systems are not compared). If U don't believe me I'll provide U some links to those tests. I haven't use P4 systems to be able to comment there, but on the AMD front SIS is pretty good. When I say that, I don't mean they are the best.. no way.. but at the price U pay for them SIS chipset offer more performance/buck compare to ANY other chipsets. They have their shortcomings (mainly their AGP performance) and now their lack of some support (USB2.0 in this case).

    I agree with U that SIS used to be really bad before (like 5 years ago or so.. yes, they were). Their video chips were awfull... but starting with their SiS735 chipset they started to compete for the first place in performance. As hard is to believe that, the SIS735 was the FASTEST chipset at the time of its introduction (see http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20010611/index.html for instance).

    I'm sorry the discussion took another direction that it should. My opinion (based on my own experience, of many hardware-related articles read) is that SIS are pretty good.

    I need a USB2.0 support for my future laptops (used ones). I own a combo drive that is USB2.0 compliant and also I'd like to purchase a good-quality. In USB1.1 its performance sucks...

    I think I foun a USB2.0 driver for Sis.. it remains to see if it really works

    0

    To do list for 2.0 FINAL

    in Windows 9x Member Projects

    Posted

    sis are ultra crap

    Soldier1st, I'm using computers (PC) for almost 13 years now.. and I've started (seriously) with Dos 5.0 and passed through different versions of Dos/Win. I had about 10 different computers (not to mention hundreds of components) and 5 laptops... so I bet I'm not stupid :)

    And I'd say Sis are pretty cool actually.. I've benn sticking with them since the great days of Sis735. Now I'm using a Sis746Fx based mobo.

    0

    To do list for 2.0 FINAL

    in Windows 9x Member Projects

    Posted

    usb 2.0 support would only be possible if your usb ports are usb 2.0 compliant

    or just goto your mobo manufacturers website and dl the usb 2.0 drivers there

    my 98 has usb 2.0 ports and it uses usb 2.0 drivers or maybe usb 2.0 support might be in another version of the sp.

    :) Did I sounded that stupid?

    Of course I know what U are saying... Unfortunately the f***s in charge with driver writing from SiS did not considered that they should bother creating a WIN98SE driver for their southbridges and I don't think they will ever write such drivers... so I cannot use USB2.0 under WIN98SE. Gape wanted to create a USB Mass Storage (generic) driver.. why not include also a USB2.0 support (generic driver)? I've heard WinMe supports USB2.0 so it wouldn't be impossible...

    0
×
×
  • Create New...