awkduck

Thanks! I'll take a look at those files, after extracting them. Since the driver source is available, I may have to backport them that way. I'll need to familiarize myself with the differences between WDM versions, and setup up the correct compiler/build tooling. From where I stand now, I can't see why some of the more interesting features could not work with earlier WDM systems; but that is just from reading about the differences "on paper". The main developer did mention "not" supporting win98fe due to the WDM version; then later Win98se was also dropped. However, for my target features (ASIO, Soundfont support, hardware mixing/routing, DSP FX, etc) I'm not sure where the problem would have been. It may have been an issue with how the whole thing was written. The same developer also mentioned requiring a near total rewrite, in order to support more features. I'm not sure how (yet) leaning into newer WDM specifications could have caused that (it was probably something else). If it was the case, then I could be in trouble. I think the need for a heavy rewrite had something to do with wanting to support EAX and higher audio sample rates (ASIO was fixed at 48000hz). There was also some talk about needing a near complete rewrite, to support ALSA (Linux); but that doesn't mean much here. Thanks again, for the tips. If I have any luck there, I'll report back.

The main thing I miss about "older" goods was the in-built design decisions, for repair-ability. I think, by the time I was born, food stuff had already started declining in quality. There was already information that farming soil was nutritionally depleted, in the 1940's. Clothing was certainly still better, but likely worse than what had previously existed. One of the more notable tragedies is the decline in vehicle quality. If I could pick the era of quality, for a vehicle, it would probably land between the 40's to the mid or late 70's (something with a manual transmission). I think Amazon, as a focus for product decline, high-lights some areas of well deserved and needed attention. There are variables, existing in that scenario, that really only apply to Amazon. I think Amazon's methodology is just one example, of over all trends. In some markets there is very little option, for quality. In others, quality is only advertised/available where it is likely to be afforded. It seems to me that the decline in quality is an attempt to retain spending; this in the face of climbing inflation. If quality products replaced affordable ones the state of things would be more apparent, to the common individual. Instead, we see an increase in housing, some foods, energy, and transportation. With this increase we also see an increase in wages (depending on where you live), but this increase is "not" proportional to market inflation. There are different methods of offsetting (at least perceptually) the disproportional increase in these financial variables. At the grocer, consumers may have noticed the increase in meat and egg prices (maybe a little with dairy). But, that increase does not enough express the actual inflation versus quality of product ratio. The quality of the meat and eggs has decreased, while their price still increased. If you look outside, of the common grocer, these products are even more expensive; in the case of meat four times higher, when previously being nearer to equivalent. The increase in the cost of oats, as another example, is less dramatic. But that cost is offset by methods of growing. The use of pesticides is increased, to speed up the oat drying process. By this practice, the yield "per season" gained enough to offset the consumer unit cost. It kinda looks like (despite making more money, by transitioning to inferior products) that the overall goal is to slant consumer perspective, on the actual state of inflation. Some product actually remains at stable prices, helping secure a perspective of stability. Gasoline is a great example of this, as it's pricing gets lots of attention.

LOL, I love it (for an America). It still needs work. When I am tired, the punctuation gets much worse. You're speaking my language, now. American English enunciation is a crime to competency. The destructive evolution of defining specific words, in the U.S., is also awful; but that is a newer development.

Thanks! GoldMemory listed a substantially larger range.

Well, it is nitpicking at this point (on may part); but it still would not prevent Global Governance. You can still run different petri dishes under different rules, and be under the same umbrella of Governance. You can even have stand-offs and wars between them. It would probably work way better, than moving everything to the exact same culture of rule (Open Global Governance). There is a/some history of aristocrats and rulers fearing their own public, more than an invasion. As terrible as it may seem, there is a sound logic to sending males to battle other males (a less powerful public, during times of native unrest [especially if wishing to implement radical change]). While this it is really unlikely to have been the case "extremely" often, you can bet it has been used as a kind of population control; acts of straight out genocide being more documented. America has a pretty strong heritage of having running the Brits out. But, in reality, there is documentation of sizable British forces still being present there, after America won its independence; not long present, but enough to raise questions for some. While I won't say the whole thing was a sham (not nearly well enough informed to deny or support it) you can see the "liberation" of America being a pretty huge selling point, to get plenty of folks risking everything to develop an undeveloped territory. A large quantity of people failed, in the process of developing America. People seeking freedom of religion, freedom to develop experimental utopias, and other enamored by escaping the oppression of their native lands. There is a good chunk of that freedom that has since been revoked. For example, many delighted in the idea of allodial titles; a privileged mostly enjoyed by kings. As the government developed, this type of ownership ideal really kinda disappeared, and is now similar to what is available in many other countries today. This is "JUST" an example; so please, no one run with it as some kind of conspiracy theory. But it does show how blood and bullets could be considered cheap, when your philosophy is that you own it all anyway. What is harder to own, is the beliefs of the people. But, there is a large amount of documentation showing that great progress and success has been had there, for a very very long time. That aside, thank you for reminding me about "Checkpoint Charlie". I had fun distracting myself by digging into different aspects of it; as is available on the web, anyway. I could really easily agree with you about "Open Globalized Governance", as opposed to just the idea of a "Functional Globalized Governance". The latter likely only to be entertained speculatively (by the public), while for former being something likely quite obvious to the inhabitants thereof.

Never noticed the replies to this. Thanks, guys. I used Memtest86+ ranges and added (beginning adjusted for first bad logged address [xxxx000] and end for last bad logged address [xxxxfff] ) it to SYSTEM.INI > [386enh] > EMMExclude=xxxx000-xxxxFFF I see that I have a reduced total amount of ram, listed under properties. It is equivalent to the quantity listed in EMMExclude= Memtest86+ placed the bad memory at about 50mb thru to 65mb. If in Dos only, I use XMSDSK (not at top of memory), create a 75mb ram disk, and then ignore it. I initially thought EMMExclude has something to do with reserved UMB regions. Much latter, when exploring this machine again, I knew better. Anyway, that is what I have done. If you have any corrections, advice, or warnings, I'm all ears. EDIT: I had to use HIMEMX, as HIMEM.SYS complains about the detected bad memory; and prevents the loading of Windows.

You could be right. I can't say I agree or disagree. In the context I used that example, I am referring to objects of orientation. Not really intending to claim any particular imagined object as good or bad. Just that the objects are not actually real, only enforced as if they are. For example, if you break a law of man, you face consequences from man. The law is imagined, and the enforcement is an imagine correlation (although completely within causal logic) brought about by mob-rule. An example, for cross examination, is when you place your had in the fire, actual laws cause your hand to get hot and or burned. The resulting consequences are not correlated, to the the causal act, by imagination only; they are real. It may seem like it is all irrelevant, because the consequences you pay (from the imagined dictates of mob-rule) are still real, in their affect. But for examining the differences between your life and societal life, the distinction is relevant. So, it doesn't matter if they are good or not; they are still imagined. In order for you to act on them, as good or bad, you have to first drink the kool-aid (not meant as a criticism). However, I'm not sure that having enforced national boarders, prevents a globalized world. We may already be in one, but allowed (and highly encouraged) to see nations. In point-of-fact, it may prove to be advantageous. The less aware the public is, the easier it is to "Wag the Dog". But, again, I am not really informed enough to really comment on it further.

The Internet has always been bad. The intent, from the beginning, was never in our best interest. What made it good, was us. That is where the issues seem to be coming from. The Internet is less "us" as users and more as "us" as members. The playground has a lot more rules. What is making the Internet worse, is the very invested interest in turning it into an eventually "required" public utility. Once "Zero Trust" technology is more fully integrated, into peoples lives, there won't be much left that allows people a "casual" life, without Internet access. Captcha,2FV, browser scrutiny checks, and gaming services requiring root access to your device, are all parts of easing the world into accepting the idea of secured devices and "state level" digital I.D. authentication. 90% of the world's Governments and 90% of the major tech sector are very openly "PRO" - "Zero Trust" services. We are surrounded by simple examples of this everywhere. For example, apps that won't install on devices that you yourself have administrative access to (rooted), age verification laws, China's voluntary Digital I.D. (is voluntary really voluntary, if you live in China), fraudulent student loans, fraudulent employment, a good supply of data breaches, deep fakes, cyber attacks..... it almost seems like an endless list of real good reasons, for "Zero Trust". So a "secured" device will equate to, a device that has "secured" your personal and legal potential/liability to the Internet and the device you are using. I hope I'm not coming off as in support of this; I don't care for it at all. I'm just putting it out there, and trying to express that this is no personal theory of mine. I think most people kinda suspected this was the intent for the future. But, for anyone interested, the term "Zero Trust" isn't mine. I think even light research could turn up the relevant information, to confirm what I have here laid out; just dig into "Zero Trust". I think that there is probably a good portion, of many societies, that would find this information comforting. It will come with all kinds of changes, that many will find pleasant. I'm just a freak that views life and societal life as two distinct things. Anything that makes it harder to realize that all society is imagined (and functionally upheld by mob-rule (like lines between nations) kinda bothers me. I kinda feel like Internet as a dependency is one of those things. Sadly, for me, I don't think there are many people left, that can understand the difference between life and societal life. When most question what their life is, most probably cannot identify much, outside of a societal context. This kind of self identity, is one of the reasons we are where we are. It is also the cause of a lot of major human emotional distress. We are provided/grown with mental pattern structurings, like low/high self esteem. At the very root, self esteem establishes the your value is measurable (almost certainly at a social level). That alone is a core fracture in the truth of your reality. No matter how you look, smell, are treated, etc., you will always be the most important person to yourself; and with that realization there can be no self-esteem. You have to be good enough for yourself, it is your "only" option. The interesting thing here is that such capacity to realize yourself, puts you in line with definitions for psychopathic and sociopathic traits. It becomes clear why, when you realize that psychological health standards are set via sociology (social psychology). So, you are not a healthy member of society, if you see your self as a "singular" individual. You are psychologically healthy (for the whole) when you see yourself as an individual/member of the whole. To wax on this a little longer, there was a study about mice living in mazes, having observed two primary types of mouse reactions, to it. In one, the mice would establish habits of feeding, drinking, and grooming, well adapted to the construct of the maze. One note of interest, is that they began to groom quite constantly. The observing scientist nick-named the group "The Beautiful Ones". In the other, reaction, the mice were excessively focused with escaping the maze. Many were so concerned with escape, that they did not eat or drink; eventually perishing. This excessive grooming is masturbatory (psychological, not sexual). This masturbatory compulsion, for us, is the result of self identification within societal life. In other words, our natural patterns are replaced with ones provided to us. Any pride, opinion, psychological insecurity, and most identity traits, are completely masturbatory (pleasing/displeasing ourselves by the imagining of ourselves). I'm not saying I prefer chasing each other around with rocks, as we fight over the last fig. I just think it is a good and honest context, for understanding the aforementioned topic(s). Anyway, glad to see people resisting cellular payments. Maybe, with your help, it is something I don't have to try finding a way around from, for another handful of years.

It appears to me, that the last Kxproject driver (outside of community efforts) is 3550. There are earlier versions that work on Win98se and newer. Has anyone tried, or had any luck, getting/fudging newer versions to work? The driver/utilities source is available, now; so I can play around, at my leisure. However, my aim will be to get some functionality in Win98FE. I may decide it isn't a good aim I thought I should ask "here" before digging around, too much.

You are no novice user, so I assume most common questions aren't needed. For the sake of any novice, reading this thread, if you type C:\EXIT nothing happens? What happens if you use ahciwrap.sys or GCDROM.SYS? That may help eliminate that the issue is specific to rloew's driver. I'm not a huge user of cd-roms "in any O.S." with that said, the error exposes that the driver's disc filesystem functionality is blocked/unavailable; or now unable to recognize the data it observes it. Maybe, it could be the use of an updated UDF filesystem or other updates/patches; perhaps to the bit access of the drives and their controllers. A change/patch, when Windows loads, may be keeping something persistent, at the hardware level, in so doing "maybe" preventing the media from being recognized; after returning to DOS. I do think my reply is a placeholder, until someone else comes along. But you never know, as you are a competent user, maybe something here will help trigger a thought of your own. Looking forward to seeing this pan out for you.

So, I revisited this machine (with a fresh install) and WDMEX is needed to get the audio working. Once the driver is established as functional, it seems I can disable WDMEX. If I swap the driver out, and then back again, WDMEX is once again needed to initiate functionality.

Very nice!

I did find that Startech sells a mpci-e to pci-e riser, with a nice case and power supply. They were over $150, and I'd still need to convert slots to legacy PCI. Not saying under $200 is bad, but I am cheap.

I've been tempted to move to Alaska, from time to time. I've always been worried about the circadian rhythm. Messed mine up once, long ago, while working the overnight shifts. But, if moving to Alaska, maybe moving out of the US is an option too. Sorry, off topic. Soldering it fine. I use many old things, and must repair/modify them. I am also a little cheap; so buying it when broken, and fixing it for my use, is handy. Often, I don't take the time to make things look as nice as they could/should (except for guitars). I wondered if there was an already existing solution.

I have plenty of Laptops and Thin-clients. Majority of the more powerful older systems (circa 2005-2012) have internal MPCI-E. So, it seems I can buy MPCI-E (male) to 2x legacy PCI (female); but it has no case and is powered by sata power (meant to be use in a desktop). Most external sata powers supplies are DC adapter/USB to Sata power cable. They typically provide 2A, which isn't enough (a fair PCI GPU will use 7A, for sure). I have a MICRO PC case, and could run it (MPCI-E to PCI) off the power in there, potentially mounting the 2 PCI slots inside it. Before playing with any of that, I thought I should ask if anyone has seen something that comes with it's own case/power? The bare adapter runs about $40 US. I wouldn't want to pay a whole lot more, than that. I've seen PCMCIA (male) to 2x and 4x PCI (female); but they are rare and costly. However, they came with nice cases and power supplies. My MICRO PC case has a fanless PSU, so it may be the best choice for me (noise is important here). But, if there ever was a place to ask advice, this is the place. Notice:This may not be a solution, for adding PCI cards to "late era" Win9x machines. For that, the PCMCIA route is likely more certain.