Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

  • Country

    Czech Republic

Posts posted by Petr

  1. On 2/11/2020 at 8:28 PM, erpdude8 said:

    I was wondering Petr, if you still have that old MSI 915GM Speedster-FA4 device, can you try installing 32bit Win10 v1903 or v1909 on there? (using the ISO method - aka install any of those versions from a local usb flash drive or dvd disc).  this guy from this Ten forums thread was able to install 1903 on his old 2006 laptop that uses an old Pentium M cpu chip several months ago thru a 1903 ISO and it worked.

    Unfortunately no success:


    Installed from flash disk from windows environment, the flash disk itself is not bootable on this machine (invalid partition table).

  2. I have several computers with Intel 82574L NIC, both on-board and Intel PRO/1000 CT Desktop Adapter. Wake-On-LAN worked fine on Windows 7. Now I upgraded to Windows 10 and WOL is no longer working. Then I found https://kb.stonegroup.co.uk/index.php?View=entry&EntryID=87


    This means that a system that has an 82574L and supported WOL on Windows 7 or Windows 8.x may not support WOL on Windows 10.

    Does anybody know if it is possible to make the WOL working on these boards?

  3. Coreinfo for Core Duo T2300E shows:

    X64       	-	Supports 64-bit mode
    CX16      	-	Supports CMPXCHG16B instruction
    PREFETCHW 	-	Supports PREFETCHW instruction

    and  Windows 10 up to build 1809 work fine.

    Between Core Duo (Yonah) and Core 2 Duo (Merom) are the following differences.

    According to AIDA64, Merom supports the following instructions while Yonah not:

    64-bit instructions
    Supplemental SSE3
    Virtual Machine Extensions (VMX; Vanderpool)
    36-bit Page Size Extension
    64-bit DS Area
    CPL Qualified Debug Store

     Microsoft has the following requirement for 64-bit version of Windows 10 and Windows 8.1 only


    64-bit versions of Windows 10 require a processor that supports CMPXCHG16b, PrefetchW, and LAHF/SAHF capabilities.

    And the difference between Dothan and Yonah is support of:

    Digital Thermometer
    Enhanced Halt State (C1E)

    Hard to say, what causes no support of Yonah on 1809 build.

  4. It looks like some hardware platforms are no longer supported by new builds of Windows 10.

    1. MSI 915GM Speedster-FA4 with Intel® Pentium® M Processor 750 (Dothan)

    It works with all builds of Windows 10 up to 1709. Update to 1803 or 1809 ends with error, usually popular IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL error.

    2. Fujitsu-Siemens Esprimo Q5010 with Intel® Core™ Duo Processor T2300E (Yonah) and 945GM chipset, I have 2 pieces with same behavior

    It works fine with all builds of Windows 10 up to 1803. Update to 1809 fails, even the boot from the flas ends with blue windows logo and no rotating white circle.

    Does anybody know what is the reason? Is this valid for all systems with the same configuration or it is just my bad luck? Is there any way how to make build 1809 working on these old pieces of hardware?

  5. Hello,

    I'm trying to slipstream MP11 to Windows XP using the latest slipsteamer (this is the first time I use it) and both for English and Czech version I receive always this error:

    WMP11Slipstreamer v0.991
    Detected source: Windows™ XP Professional SP2


    System.IO.FileNotFoundException: Soubor E:\WXPCS-MP11\i386\wmp11temp\Fixes\WM11\PortableDeviceWMDRM.dll nebyl nalezen.
    Název souboru: E:\WXPCS-MP11\i386\wmp11temp\Fixes\WM11\PortableDeviceWMDRM.dll
    v System.IO.__Error.WinIOError(Int32 errorCode, String maybeFullPath)
    v System.IO.FileInfo.get_Length()
    v Epsilon.Win32.PeEditor..ctor(String pathToPe)
    v WMP11Slipstreamer.Backend.standardHotfixApply(String fixesFolder, Dictionary`2 hotfixFileDictionary)
    v WMP11Slipstreamer.Backend.ApplyFixes()
    v WMP11Slipstreamer.MainGUI.workerMethod(Object addonSettings)

    Deleting "E:\WXPCS-MP11\i386\wmp11temp"... Done!

    The source being modified has not been damaged.
    All changes have been successfully reverted.

    Any idea what may be wrong?



  6. Those files were taken from pre-sp4 microsoft usb 2.0 drivers:


    Not all of them, Usbhub20.sys is from SP4.

    Attention: usbport.sys higher than 5.0.2195.5652 is know to be faily, so please avoid now downloading MDGx pack.

    I was able to work with

    Usbport.sys 5.00.2195.6681

    Usbhub20.sys 5.00.2195.6891

    Usbehci.sys 5.00.2195.6882

    What failures are known?

    There are also reports of BSODs when installing flash drives first time. They seem to be fixed in future NUSB.

    Also non-letal BSODs are possible when disabling/removing controller or hub. Please test those cases.

    Yes, I have experienced many of BSODs both during installing and when removing the controller in the device manager. I was not able to find any reproducibility, it was just random, both with old and new files.

    And strange thing, when installed on computer with ICH6 and VIA controller, with VIA USB 2.0 driver installed, Usbport.sys remained the old one (4.90.3000.11) and the other two files were replaced. Unfortunately VIA USB 2.0 driver uses exactly the same file names as this generic driver.


  7. But do the newer files work properly?

    This is very good question.

    I tried to find some relevant SweetLow's post on forum.ru but I failed.

    So I tried just to copy newer versions over the old ones.

    All files form SP4 worked.

    usbhub20.sys and usbehci.sys from Windows2000-KB838989-x86-ENU.EXE worked too.

    usbport.sys from Windows2000-KB838989-x86-ENU.EXE caused Windows Protection at Windows startup.

    Tested on Windows 98 SE, with Intel ICH6 southbridge and VIA VT6212 USB 2.0 controllers, when I wrote "worked" I meant that Kingston USB disk was successfuly recognized and files could be copied in both directions at high speeds.

    Maybe there are other problems that I have not identified.

    I had also several blue screens during driver installation but I don't know what was the root cause and it is too late today to continue with experiments.

    It is really great to see this generic USB 2.0 support.

    Maybe somebody could proceed full Hardware Compatibility Test to check the driver for any possible problem.

    BTW, has anybody tried http://sweetlow.at.tut.by/download/umss.zip ?


  8. Feedback appreciated.

    They'll be included into newer NUSB version if positive :rolleyes:

    Wow, it seems to work!

    Intel ICH6 chipset + Kingston Elite Data Traveller High Speed, transfer speed 23 MB/s.

    Now what is the origin of those files? They are not from SP4.

    Usbport.sys 5.00.2195.5652 is from Q319973, SP4 contains 5.00.2195.6681

    Usbehci.sys 5.00.2195.5652 is from Q319973, SP4 contains 5.00.2195.6709

    Usbhub20.sys 5.00.2195.6655 - this file is from SP4

    Is there any reason not to use all files from Windows 2000 SP4? I tried them and they apparently worked.

    Here is list of USB 2.0 controllers, I think it is nice when exact detail name is present in the device manager.

    PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_24CD="Intel(R) 82801DB/DBM (ICH4 Family) USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 24CD"
    PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_24DD="Intel(R) 82801EB (ICH5 Family) USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 24DD"
    PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_25AD="Intel(R) 6300ESB USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 25AD"
    PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_265C="Intel(R) 82801FB/FBM (ICH6 Family) USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 265C"
    PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_27CC="Intel(R) 82801G (ICH7 Family) USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 27CC"
    PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_283A="Intel(R) 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 283A"
    PCI\VEN_1033&DEV_00E0&REV_02="NEC uPD720100A USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1033&DEV_00E0&REV_04="NEC uPD720101 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1033&DEV_00E0&REV_05="NEC uPD720102 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1033&DEV_00E0="NEC USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1039&DEV_7002="SiS 7002 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3104&REV_51="VIA VT6202 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3104&REV_63="VIA VT6212 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3104&REV_82="VIA VT8235 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3104&REV_86="VIA VT8237/A/R USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3104&REV_90="VIA VT8251 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3104="VIA USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_10B9&DEV_5239="ULi/ALi USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0068="Nvidia nForce2 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0088="Nvidia MCP2A USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00D8="Nvidia nForce3 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00E8="Nvidia nForce3 250 USB 2.0 CEnhanced Host ontroller"
    PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_4345="ATI USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_4365="ATI USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_4373="ATI SB400 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_4373&REV_80="ATI SB450 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"
    PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_4386="ATI SB600 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller"

    I suppose somebody could add some more controlers.


  9. "With few exceptions, Windows 98 hotfixes are stamped with a version number of 4.10.1999 or greater, which indicates that the file is a newer version than the file that had been originally included with Windows 98. Windows 98 Second Edition hotfixes are generally stamped with a version number of 4.10.2223 or greater"

    If i applied the above, in a company enviroment, I would alter certain information i.e version so I could keep tabs on which pc has which update applied. Easy failsafe method

    This is about file version, not OS version. OS version remains unchanged.


  10. I checked out that link....

    So I guess PCI-E installs are similar to forcing a PCI driver upon an AGP card or vice versa?

    My only experience was a total failure...

    Does PCI-E use a miniport driver or something like that (can't remember the name, AGP uses it)?

    I guess perhpas ATI has one thing going for them... drivers. I'm a NVIDIA guy.... hence, I didn't think it *could* work... I got 7900gs.. no 98 possible.

    On my computers worked with Windows 98 SE the following PCI-E graphics adapters: Nvidia Geforce 6200, Nvidia Geforce 6200 Turbo Cache, Nvidia Geforce 6600 (one only), ATI X300SE, ATI X550. All of them successfuly finished 3DMark2001SE and 3DMark03:

    3DMark03 results:

    Nvidia Geforce 6200 (NV43V, GPU Clock 300 MHz, DDR RAM 256 MB 128-bit 500 MHz)

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=4589845 Score: 3956

    Nvidia Geforce 6200 Turbo Cache (NV44, GPU Clock 200 MHz, DDR RAM 128 MB 64-bit 400 MHz)

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=4582474 Score: 1760

    Nvidia Geforce 6600 (NV43, GPU Clock 450 MHz, DDR RAM 256 MB 128-bit 500 MHz)

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=4582739 Score: 5957

    ATI Radeon X300SE (RV370, GPU Clock 325 MHz, DDR RAM 128 MB 64-bit 400 MHz)

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=4609648 Score: 1788

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=4594683 Score: 1770

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=4593911 Score: 1767

    ATI Radeon X550 (RV380, GPU Clock 398 MHz, DDR RAM 256 MB 128-bit 500 MHz)

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=4604819 Score: 3170

    3DMark2001SE results:

    Nvidia Geforce 6200

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8882899 Score: 11564

    Nvidia Geforce 6200 Turbo Cache

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8880433 Score: 6770

    ATI Radeon X300SE

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8893309 Score: 6263

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8884994 Score: 6227

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8885384 Score: 6223

    ATI Radeon X550

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8890773 Score: 11180


  11. the driver install program clearly recognizes it as " AC'97 HD AUDIO CODEC "

    If it is wrong, I apologize, as I was simply going off of the install labels...

    That's strange. But in the device manager you see "Realtek AC'97 Audio", right?

    I did search thru the installer and did not found the string "AC'97 HD AUDIO CODEC".

    But no problem, the most important thing is that everything works as expected.


  12. And even then, using a W2K driver fixed the audio issue... The sound is an AC'97 based driver, with FULL HD support in FULL SURROUND. Hell, even the dinky little environment program loads and runs properly.

    With DX8 or higher installed, **all** the HD audio functions work flawlessly. You read that right. F L A W L E S S ! !

    May I know what motherboard you have used a exactly what drivers?

    I believe this is a link to the proper board I am referring to...


    This board was highly recommended from all over the place... I would have thought it was prolific enough to be understood by specs... I'm sorry...

    This board has Realtek ALC653 codec, this is not HD audio codec but 6-channel AC'97 codec only.


  13. And even then, using a W2K driver fixed the audio issue... The sound is an AC'97 based driver, with FULL HD support in FULL SURROUND. Hell, even the dinky little environment program loads and runs properly.

    With DX8 or higher installed, **all** the HD audio functions work flawlessly. You read that right. F L A W L E S S ! !

    May I know what motherboard you have used a exactly what drivers?

    At this point, you might get stuck on no SATA support... well, who gives a ****? You heard right, it doesn't matter! As long as you don't use a RAID setup on the drives, they still work flawlessly under 98. You see, the BIOS has 'legacy' support. Enabled, it allows all the SATA drives to be seen under 98SE as standard IDE drives.

    Unfortunately there are many BIOSes without this legacy support. I've found a good one (combined) just in Gigabyte motherboards.


  14. Was this not included in the unofficial SP 2.1a? I tried to check, but I could not find a detailed and definitive listing of exactly what is included in the unofficial SP 2.1a anywhere. Since KB816093 is from 2003, I would've thought that it should have been included. Does anyone know if it was?

    AFAIK it was not included because

    - it is an Internet Explorer component.

    - it is too big

    - MS VM is obsoleted already

    - MS VM is not part of IE 6.0 SP1


  15. The description does not contain any information about the PCI bus version required.

    Here http://www.syba.com/support_download/faq/08/index.html you can see that their USB 2.0 cards are PCI 2.2 compliant, Intel 440BX, 440EX, 440LX chipsets are PCI 2.1 compliant only. If you have any of these chipsets you have to find USB board that is PCI 2.1 compatible.

    The motherboard, chipset and many other useful things you can get using Everest:

    Everest Home, build 475 - the latest beta, no longer developed.

    Everest Ultimate, build 865 - the latest beta, 30-day trial version.


  • Create New...