awkduck

Maybe its a poor choice necro post. I guess I'll find out. With all respect to Ringo's Mplayer builds, I usually use a build from Sherpya. I think r34401 (12-7-2011) is the last to work with Win98. But the builds from redxii advance much later in version, when used with KernelEx (default settings). Seems you can use up to r37203 (5-17-2014). I haven't been able to use Ringo's builds on all machines. Maybe this will be useful to someone.

If not, toss a critique back. Then I'd keep my eyes open for something else.

Most have probably heard of Co-linux. A now defunct project that loaded Linux beside/inside Windows. It was never developed for Win9x. Only 2000+. Now there is Windows Subsystem for Linux. Also, the Aros distro "Icaros" has something called "Hostbridge". It installs Aros to Win or Linux. You can also create Aros Icons for loading native OS applications. I guess you could use Icaros like a shell replacement. But you don't have to. Then there is BoxedWine. It fakes a Linux kernel on Windows, so it can run Wine. You can run older incompatible applications/games on newer Windows. Running modern DX and GL, inside Win98, isn't going to happen. But we don't get that with KernelEx, either. The larger issue is the slow, but eventual, fade out of 32bit development. Even if that was bridged, the performance hit would likely be pretty noticeable. Still, the idea does tickle the imagination.

I've also ran into that a few times. Once for an audio/music application. So, far they have request at least 16Mb. I've debated if it would be worth creating a ram disk, with a swap file in it. Either create the drive and copy the file over, before Windows loads. Or just have Grub4Dos load a saved disk image, with the file already on it. But its not hard just to enable, from time to time.

1. I have a small Win98 device, that was built without a clock battery. It does have a RTC, but modding a battery addition isn't straight forward. 2. This same device, thus far, can only boot Windows as a live memory disk. So I make portable applications for it. Recently this included a custom codec pack. I can save the disk image after installing programs to another "physical" drive. So I don't have to use portable applications. But I am really starting to like running Windows this way. Maybe its just play? I was hunting the web for something unrelated, and ended up on Horst Schaeffer's Site. I've seen alternatives, for both of these, a hand full of times. But thought I'd share them, this time around. His "Timesync" can update the Windows clock, over the Internet. The /auto switch does so without loading the interface. Good for syncing at boot. And "Inifile" is for working with.... .ini files. It adds and remove entries, or gets and outputs an entry. Certainly, something like this could be helpful in making a portable codec pack (SYSTEM.INI/[drivers32]). Maybe it seems simple and silly, but I love that the codecs are now portable. Inifile only does one entry at a time. So, it could be a little quicker. It'll work until I write my own. He has a good chuck of software on his site. I noticed another tool for adding dialog boxes to batch. They look like the kinda tools you write, because you were learning to add these functions to some larger program(s). I ended up swiping a copy of everything, for my own toolbox.

I appreciated the extra detail.

A more convincing Win95 desktop for Linux. The Github project is here with screenshots here. It is supposed to be more like a total conversion. So the Linux boot graphics, calculator, Browser (Palemoon>Netscape), Email (Netscape again?), MSOffice (Libreoffice), File Browsing, Command prompt, and 95plus. Not for me. But maybe someone here is interested.

http://www.techtalk.cc/viewtopic.php?t=65 I probably am just not being clear enough. Its not an issue of general support for USB2.0. I was meaning that integrated USB, accompanying the chipset, will not be USB2.0. Usb add on cards have their own chip support. But to be frank, I haven't cornered the market on "Intel 810". I just peaked at the wiki on it. And Wikipedia isn't always 100% accurate or complete. So if you are talking about the integrated USB, whoa is me. I would not have been the first person to lean to far on Wiki, for support. "Support" should have been worded more clearly at the internal board devices. Re-reading, I did try to express that intentions to use USB2.0 should avoid Rloew's USB driver, as it is only USB1.0 and 1.1. So thankfully I wasn't too tired to to realize that USB2.0 could be used with the 810. Apparently clarity wasn't in the cards, for me. If I am way wrong, and you are talking about the integrated system, please correct me. You are right, Win98se does not support a bunch of machines, straight from install. But, you'll get it. Plenty here have Installed Win98se, on machines much much newer. I personally, have not pasted the 2010 manufacture date. I've got my fingers crossed, that the new driver attempt works for your machine. The Trigem Cognac has similar (maybe the same) specs, and the same chipset(although wiki says there are 5 different ones, it probably won't matter). So likely every thing should work. You will still need drivers for the USB2.0 card. I also do not like the SE Unofficial Service Packs. But 3.66 was added/updated in 2021. However, much of is is a collection of original updates. Things like Kernelex and USB are more recent. Despite 3.66 being the newest, it seems those that do use the service pack prefer 3.65. I found modem and video drivers on the restore disks. The audio driver is just an audio.exe file. maybe it will extract/install drivers somewhere. The other two are inf folder. All, but the first one listed, chipset support downloads on this page include the 810. The audio driver I mentioned earlier, will/should work. Video is included in the restore CD and maybe/probably the Trigem drivers. If you can't get USB2.0 working, try the more recent NUSB3.6 drivers. Hope you up and running, before you read any of this. Good luck!

Hopefully, MrMateczko's suggestion works for you. You could try the 95 modded AC97 drivers. They still contain original support for 98 and newer. You can get them here and here. These seem to be your specs, found from a brief search. The Intel® 810 Chipset seems to only support USB1.1, so you could try rloew's USB driver, instead. If you can provide the make/model of the "added" USB card, the drivers are probably common. But I have suspicions that NUSB will end up working for you. Note: if you intend to use USB2.0, do not use rloew's USB driver. There has been debate about the usefulness of "Intel Chipset" support additions being installed. I don't want to add anything to that debate, but I will say that the inf files for older chipsets have much more information in them. If the chipset support does anything useful, it is more likely to be useful on a system like yours. I know rloew instructed that the chipset support be installed "before" you install his USB driver. I've had VIA and Intel systems not correctly detect PCI "and other" devices, until the chipset support was installed. But who is to say "for certain" that it was actually the chipset installation that helped. It couldn't hurt to try. You mentioned that you installed updates. Did you install one of the Unofficial 98se service packs? If so, the newer ones provide their own USB drivers. So installing NUSB shouldn't be needed. You could remove the drivers and let Windows re-detect the system. But that probably won't do much better than just trying to update drivers from the ME infs. I doubt it could do much harm trying anyway. Since you are having USB and Audio issues, it seem like something else might be wrong. KolibriOS provides an ISO for it's LiveCD OS. You system is supported by KolibriOS, so you could test your hardware with that. You could also try burning an older "Live" 32Bit Linux to CD. Even something dated, like "Damn Small Linux", should boot and provide functionality tests. Knoppix 6 or 7 series would also be good. However, there are recent Linux releases that will still boot an older system, like the one you have. Maybe Pupply Linux? I have my doubts that there is a hardware malfunction. Perhaps a conflict? I would first remove the USB card, then see what happens when reinstalling "the existing" drivers. It may be further needed to remove any cards added to the system. Unless ME ran fine with these cards installed as the currently are. It is also possible that the audio driver for ME does not Fully support 98. If the drivers in the restore CD are ME Specific and unhelpful "and" the hardware proves functional (via alternative OS tests), then you will likely need to find 98 specific drivers. There are drivers, for you machine, that support both Win95 and 98. Hope someone finds something here useful.

I tried Iceows. It is a nice program. It lacks the main thing I found interesting about "MagicZip 98". Zip files become actual folders, to the system. Iceows does convert a zip file to a folder, viewed with explorer. But the command prompt still reads it as a file. Iceows looks like it is better than "Zip Folders" from 98plus. "MagicZip 98" is more like "Compressed Folders" on XP. So for example, I could have a bunch of Pdf files in a Zip archive. I can use any program to browse and open a Pdf file, from the Zip archive, as if it where a regular folder. With Iceows you can run an Exe from inside a Zip archive, converted to a folder. But you cannot create a shortcut for the Exe, place it on your desktop, and run it. You can do this with "MagicZip 98". If when you installed a program you installed it to "C:\Program Files\ProgramName.zip", then compressed it (Zip), and then renamed it from ProgramName.zip.zip to ProgramName.zip you'd be able to run it like normal. All of the registry entries and shortcuts would still comply with it. But, thanks for the heads up. I now have Iceows added to my collection :)

Maybe there are other programs for this. I know in XP< you have compressed folders. And with 98plus, you can work in zip files using explorer. I found an old disk, in a large collection of stuff, called "MagicZip 98". I know MagicZip is still a thing. I just didn't know it existed back then. It is basically compressed folders, for Win9x. It also supports a handful of other file archive types. But only zip files are supported with folder like access. Folder access is also available at the command line. It isn't anything earth shattering, but it would have come in handy a time or two. Just thought I'd share the find. I guess there is a version called "MagicZip 2000". From a read of a site, with a 30-day evaluation download (link not active), it also supports 95<.

This is why some people prefer 98FE and 95, as they were leaner. One of the first things I disliked, about WinME, was the system restore. I've never liked in any version of windows. Not only was this something you could do yourself, but it was exploited by malware. However, the malware issue is much less of a problem now. ME isn't a bad system. And depending on your interests, it may be the best. For me, it has always been about control. I don't like unneeded processes or too much automation, running in the background. That was the beauty of Dos. Windows kinda gave (better) multitasking to Dos. So, historically, many people noticed the progression of Windows as furthering the distance between the user and their machine. This has moved some people to Linux. But as it is now, some of those people are facing the same issues again. Just as modern Windows, Linux, and Apple are fine, for most, there is nothing really wrong with WinME. The bad name comes from inevitable change and commercialism. Often, what the small minority wants to keep, prevents the masses from being interested. And Microsoft was aiming for a HUGE audience.

This is a good point, Molly Dawn. The version of VirtualBox I use is from the 4.x series. I use the PIIX3 chipset. I have no idea if the newer versions of VirtualBox include that option. I also forgot to mention, I configure VirtualBox to the minimal hardware configuration. It isn't probably important. But it prevents Windows from detecting uneeded hardware. This reminded me, Grub4Dos can boot IMG and VHD harddisk images. That would be another way to copy the system over. You could even run the system booted via the image, and still have access to the entire physical harddisk. But, you would be running over Int13. It might be possible to do this with Grub2. Its been awhile since I've looked into it. Some of us certainly seem to be, Masochists. :)

You'll probably want to make sure that the Blackscreen is actually a 2GB ram issue. Otherwise, you could end up with the problem returning later. Though, it might be the problem. If it isn't, the problem may not show up again, possibly relating only to setup. If for the install you cannot "Physically" or thru "Bios" reduce the memory to 512MB of ram, you can place the harddrive in a different PC. Then finish the setup, configure or patch WinME with boot to dos option, unzip Rloew's Patchmem somewhere, boot to dos, and then run the patch. At that point you can return the harddrive to the 2GB machine. Allow it to boot and configure itself to the new hardware . If the memory patch is overwritten, during some update, boot to dos and run the patch again. You can also use Virtualbox, but then you need to decide how to transfer the system to the physical harddrive. With one method, you could zip the entire drive, preserving file attributes and ensuring hidden files copy. Make a pendrive WinME Dos bootable, copy the zipped system and a unzipping program to the same pendrive, boot the 2GB machine with the pendrive, unzip the system to the harddrive, and then run "sys c:" (C: will actually probably need to be D:). You would have to decide how you would get the file from the VirtualBox disk image. Maybe mount the disk image and copy the file, FTP transfer, http upload, install VirtualBox Guest Extentions(mapped network drive), or over VirtualBox usb -> Pendrive. I think some decompression programs extract ISO's and certian disk images. I don't know if I would recommend setting up any drivers, while in virtual box. USB could be pesky, when transferring to another system. If you use "vboxmanage" you can convert the disk image to other formats. You could then use a system clone/rescue boot CD/USB and clone/restore the image to the physical harddrive. You just have to make sure the image is converted to a type supported by the restore system. Depending on the restore method used, you might have to use some kind of partition tool (Live Gparted maybe?) so that you can expand the partition to the actual size of the harddrive. I have never tried this, but there are dos programs to create a ramdrive. Maybe you could make a 1.5GB ramdrive from Autoexec.bat. There are also programs that just fill the ram. Maybe then Windows would let you continue, since it can only make use of 512MB. This method would require that you install a prior Windows Dos, then copy the WinME setup files, and run them from the harddrive. There are more ways. Maybe easier ways. These are just some of the ones I've more recently used, over the last six months. However, not for WinME. I haven't installed that, since the first time I ever installed it. And that was back when it's stock IE stilled worked fine, for everything.

Giving the mailing lists a brief scan, I ran into instances of people working with Slimdx.dll. There were bug reports where people compared .net outputs to mono outputs. So maybe there is something there. Being busy on all fronts can make it rough to video document. But it sure does help others learn. I really should put it higher on my own priority list. Your project sounds exciting, and no doubt will be appreciated. Obviously, no pressure. But it will be delightful to hear how it, really they, progress.

Understood. I am of that same spirit. It was my intent to mention the option, while warning of "possible" complexity. I would hate to send someone down a rabbit hole, if they were only slightly interested. Obviously, your meter of interest might make it worth while. I should point out, that I avoid dot net and mono every chance I get. I am not well acquainted with them. I can tell you what I've done, in similar situations. But you've likely done the same yourself. Since there is a lot to test, maybe test one from the beginning of every year. The messages and errors will tell you a little about how the project changed. You could then analyze the conflicts between the source, your chosen tool set, and the build target. Hopefully, the version with the most appealing entry point, provides you with the features you need. A lot of times, I just start at the oldest version and work my way forward. You will need Win9x unicode support. Also installation will need to be tweaked for windows 98. There were persons building early versions for Windows 98, but I don't know if their work is available anywhere. They may have left some hints in the mailing lists. Google hints at that a little.

A person could try older versions of Mono. Since it is opensource, there is a possibility that it could be backported. But it might be a complex undertaking, beyond its value.

I think you might be an interesting person to converse with on this topic. I don't know that I should do it here. Maybe in private messages? I can see that I would have better used "Ignorant" as opposed to "Ignorance". I guess there is a slight difference in meaning. One being uneducated in general and the other uneducated in something specific. To me, both words equate to both definitions. So, I agree that hardly anyone is unaware. However, I cannot say that people are wise. And it is not my opinion that wisdom is actually encouraged. You cannot, for example, raise wise livestock and and expect them to accept the future slaughter. Even very educated persons, lack the reflection to examine beyond the expected outcomes of their plans. They just follow what is found in favorable dictum. The very key factor of any society, is to exchange self interest for societal interest. That does not equate to acting in the interest of humanity. However, being raised in society, we have come to see societal interests as one with personal. This encourages an innate dissonance. Many have not the adequate self awareness needed to internalize a realization of it, let alone circumvent it. Like you, I do what I can. But I admit, it probably has more to do with achieving a sense of self reliance. The powers that provide the path to this self destruction, are the ones best poised to prevent it. Lord knows that, the masses themselves have not the immense capacity to design such a perfect demise.

Thanks, Goodmaneuver. Sheet.dll will give me a starting point. The good thing is that I'm looking at it the right way now. I'll have to look at how things are done. Finding functions that manipulate the "live" database will help. For my use scenario, I probably don't even need to address the registry at all.

When you change an application setting, you do it though the KernelEx properties tab. The setting(s) take immediate affect. The only thing KernelEx seems to be doing, is adding/modifying/removing registry entries. You can add and remove keys via the reg add/delete command. By "automation" I mean changing those settings on the fly, by using the reg command in a batch file. I make extensive use of portable applications, and the temporary registry values work without a reboot. So you are saying, KernelEx does not re-examine the registry keys, on application launch. It only examines them on boot and when you make changes via the KernelEx tab. So I need to examine the KernelEx code, find the function for registry settings update/refresh and then create a command line interface for it? Does that sound right?

I've been doing a little mucking around with KernelEx. When you change a file's KernelEx properties, it adds two registry entries. Is there somewhere else KernelEx stores file properties? Deleting and re-adding the keys doesn't change the settings displayed in properties. Even after restarting Explorer, the settings persist. If the settings are only located in system.dat, what more must be done to make those changes take? Obviously, I could just change the properties via the KernelEx interface. I'm just wondering how one would automate changes.

If I remember correctly, VFEmail does a pretty good job with this. Their free account is a bit limited. I think 10 emails a day, auto deletion after 90 days of no use, and not encrypted. But I remember trying all kinds of different email clients with them. If a person can afford the onetime price, the offering is pretty good. But I am not a fan of the Webmail. They use the standard Roundcube/Horde5 stuff. But there is a no-javascript mode.

I've never set it up myself. Have you ever looked through the directions given at Operating System Revival?

It is possible jaclaz mentioned alternative methods, as there may be issues with the one you have chosen. jaclaz is experience and tends to use sound logic. I myself do not know. I have not touched ME is many years. And I have never boot patched it. You might want to examine (maybe re-examine?) the role of "msdos.sys" and "winboot.ini". If "io.sys" is altered, the processing of the above mentioned files may be skipped altogether. If your boot keys "F5"/"F8" are ignored, it hints that this is likely the case. But if not, you have part of your answer there. A person could add some intelligence to "autoexec.bat". Maybe a short count and execute menu, that if ignored defaults to "win.com". Just do some research on writing batch files. I don't know if there is a Dos program for loading Microsoft logos. But you would need one to load and then unload, while the booting processed in the background. If you learned a little reverse engineering, you could alter the boot process yourself. Then add to your video the directions for manually patching. Or write your own patching executable. If you have a command line hex editor, that can be batched, that might be an option. However, learning to modify by hex editing can easily become non trivial.

Its been a conundrum for me. Can we blame the ignorant for being ignorant. We are told that we are part of the human race, and all that comes with that. Achievements, like faster than sound travel. However, only a small fraction of us can make a door knob or shoe. More of us conceptualize, with an external observation, how a door knob works. But a staggering majority don't know what the internals of a door knob look like. Are these achievements of man ours? Or do we just assume that the farms fencing belongs to our heritage? It is really quite nice. I don't think anyone would argue about the things modern systems provide. Its quite important for large scale administration. But when I am the total sum of the hierarchy accessing a computer (Personal Computer) the hierarchy system gets in "my" way. Dos, Win3, Win9x, Aros, and Kolibri for the Win. In this light, Win9x is far from obsolete. Is it the most developed, and developed on, single user "MODE" O.S. to date? Edit:It occurred to me how profound the combination of the two above subjects could be; if one were to read into them with a certain insight. Something about the "personal" being obsolete, and what has replaced it being a conditioning architecture. The conditioners being the architects.