rloew

At the time I did not know a way of running Windows 3.1 from DOS 7. Your partitioning and installing instructions for novices sounds stupider every time you repeat it. In addition to being limited to FAT16, DOS 6.2 also does not support LBA, so it can only address 8GB, not 48GB. I have a Soundblaster Card that supported an additional IDE Controller making 6 IDE Drives possible. Maybe more with more cards. As far as I remember there are 6 sets of Ports defined for IDE use allowing 12 IDE Drives. I have a Motherboard that supports 4 IDE and 4 SATA Drives. Add just one IDE or SATA card and you are up to 12. Normally FDISK behaves itself and doesn't change things until exit. In this case it apparently overran some code and jumped to the Code that wrote the changes without having set them up in the first place. As I said, I had no intentions of changing anything when I ran FDISK. I just wanted to check my work. The Computer only had two Drives. The 8GB Boot Drive and the 64GB Data Drive. I ended up with 4 2GB Partitions on the 8GB Drive, 8 2GB Partitions on the first two mappings of the 64GB Drive, and 6 8GB Partitions on the remaining 6 mappings. DOS 6.2 saw the 12 2GB Partitions through the DDO. Windows 98 saw all 18 Partitions without the DDO. I added custom MBR Blocks so that both OSes saw what they needed to see. My Multi-Boot Profile was setup so that DOS 6.2 and 98SE shared the same Partition using a special PBR in RFDISK. My RFDISK and RFORMAT do not have the 24 Partition limit. I also have a Drive Mounter that can add a Drive Letter dynamically. If I write a Dismounter, I could swap in an unlimited number of Partitions.

Possibly, there is some overhead in 9x that probably is not present in NT.

If Customers want to know what it does, they can read the manual. I also answer questions as needed. Video demonstrations may be popular but they are a waste of resources. I generally try to avoid watching Videos unless I am expecting the visuals to be informative. I dislike the trend towards making Videos and Slide Shows for stories that don't need images. They also make it easier to slip in more advertising. Try reading what I said about the iPad analogy. You are not even close to understanding it. Who says I want the Date and Time every time I boot? Why would I want to tie up a Drive slot with a tiny Hard Drive? CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT do a lot more than run COMMAND.COM in my system. Everything you have said is obvious. Your suggestions have no value whatsoever. I don't have a Windows 98 only RAMDisk so I did not run any tests. I never said I did. I only said that I expect a Windows 98 only RAMDisk to be faster than a Windows XP only RAMDisk, due to lower overhead in Windowx 98.

You missed the point entirely. Of course I know how to Partition with FDISK. DOS 6.2 does not support LBA so it can only address 8GB. I mapped the 64GB Drive into 8 8GB Drives so that DOS 6.2 could use more than 8GB on it. The BIOS was not the issue. Windows 98SE and DOS 7.1 had no problem accessing the multiple 8GB Partitions as one Physical Drive. I even patched the BIOS to support 2TiB. FDISK could handle the Disk when the DDO was not loaded. The crash occurred when FDISK thought there were nine 8GB Hard Drives. I suspect the same thing would have happened if you hooked up nine small Drives. Since I customized the Partition Setup, I couldn't use FDISK to create it. I only ran FDISK to verify it, not expecting it to crash and destroy everything.

Almost 20 years ago I developed a DDO to make a 64GB Hard Drive look like 8 8GB Hard Drives to support DOS 6.2 and Windows 3.1. When I ran FDISK, it crashed without any further input. It wrote text over the MBR and every Extended Partition Record on all 9 Drives (8 above plus the Boot Drive). It took quite a while to repair everything. External USB Hard Drives are far slower than internal Drives. My 98SE Boot Partition is 8GB, but the Drive is 4TB and it is nearly full. I reconfigure my Partitions fairly often as I add new OSes or consolidate Partitions. I use a customized CD for Installing Windows 98SE with my Patches already implemented so I don't take any risks with the 137GB limit.

I'm not sure what your point is. Nothing you said is new. My way boots me into DOS. I can proceed to Windows by typing EXIT. I don't need to press F8 and navigate a Menu. I don't have to type WIN which alters the memory addresses slightly. I take it a step further by adding the /Z Option to COMMAND.COM which displays the Return Codes for Commands I run when in DOS.

I was referring to FDISK and my RFDISK, not a Partition Type such as NTFS. FDISK can crash, destroying ALL Partition information, if there are too many Drives. A Disk Imager won't fix that unless you have already saved the entire Drive.

The Wiki lists the maximum usable RAM without any settings or Patches. This is 512MB for both 98 and ME. The next step, 768MiB is marginal. The 1152MiB and 1.9GiB limits assume that the File Cache settings are modified. The PCI Card solution is more costly and ties up a PCI slot.

Windows ME did increase usable RAM from 1.152GiB. to approximately 1.9GiB. My Patches support 4GiB of RAM, 2TiB Hard Drives, and unlimited Registry sizes for both 98 and ME. NUSB grafts Windows ME and Windows 2000 File into Windows 98.

Today I went to my local Microcenter to survey the currently available Motherboards. I examined some Z170 and Z270 Motherboards from Intel and AMD. All of them had at least a couple of USB 2 Ports, although I don't think any of them were brought out to the rear I/O Panel. You would have to run cables to the internal headers. All had at least one PS/2 Port. An AMD Motherboard had two. The AMD Motherboards had at least one PCI slot. I think the death of Windows 9x will be a little later than 98SE expected.

I'm not sure what you are asking. The Import is resolved during loading to point to the Address Exported by the Destination Library. That Address is the location of the corresponding Code in RAM when the Library is loaded. You don't specify an Address unless you embed the Code in your Program and eliminate the Import.

Imports are stored in a two level tree. The first level is the Library (DLL or SYS) File. The second is the Function Name. Function names do not need to be Unique across Libraries although they usually are. The 4 digit number stored with the Function Name is not an Address. It is an Ordinal Hint to speed up searching for the matching Export during Loading. The actual Address is not known until after the Import is resolved. This resolved Address is inserted into the Memory Image of the Import Table. Code that uses this Import make Indirect Calls through the in-memory Import Table Entry. This structure makes editing the Import Table much more complicated.

Unpacking one of their WIM Files will definitely do it. I would hope that someone would separate their MP3s into different categories if they don't want to shorten their names.

If you are concerned about security, wiping the Drive is a good idea. Windows 9x has a number of leaks. I have seen parts of deleted files appear in new Files created by my Compilers. I have hit that Directory limit. The limit is around 65534 Records. The Short Name uses one. Long Names use one per 13 Characters. The chances of hitting the limit don't increase much with super large Partitions as they are more likely to have more Directories rather than bigger ones. I already solved the 4GiB File Size limit.

The missing import is tied to USER32.DLL. Adding another import, even with the same name, will not resolve it. A redirection Export can be added, to USER32.DLL in this case, with my MODEXP Program or equivalent. It has to specify the DLL and the new name of the Import, such as DLLFILE.Stub1 DLLHOOK does the same thing without Patching any Files. It uses a similar method to KernelEx.

I can't comment on the other Export Patchers, but there is a bug in KERNEL32.DLL that can cause a problem with using Redirected Exports in Windows 98SE. This is not a problem in XP so it works for Dibya.

I suppose I could make some Videos, load them up with advertisements and make some extra money. Otherwise what is the point. Videos can be faked so you are still taking me at my word. If you trust me, you don't need the Videos. They are not informative. Same with Pictures. Since you don't understand the iPad analogy, I won't bother any further with it. I put COMMAND.COM in AUTOEXEC.BAT because I want to. It gives me access to DOS and lets me continue to Windows when I am done. I meant what I said. COMMAND.COM is a "Command Shell". It displays a "Command Prompt". I have no problem making Bootable Floppy Disks, USB Keys, or CDROMs without your help or instructions. What W98 Copy are you talking about. You are the one running these tests, not me. We shall see which is faster. XMSDSK is a DOS Based RAMDisk as is mine. It is not going to be anywhere as fast. You need to get a Windows RAMDisk that is Installed from within Windows 98SE.

Not when you are Formatting a multi-Terabyte Drive and not when you are restoring a damaged MBR and you have data you want to keep.

My DLLHOOK Program intercepts the system Import resolver and provides an alternative Address. You can redirect the problem Import to your replacement DLL using a DLLHOOK.INI File. My MODEXP Program allows you to add, change, or delete Exports. You can add a Redirection Export to the original pointing to your replacement DLL. A KERNEL32.DLL Patch to fix a bug, is needed in most cases under Windows 98 for this to work. You would probably need to Compile a Replacement DLL unless you can find a suitable Stub or Function in some existing DLL.

That is why I wrote RFDISK originally, so I could rebuild a Partition without erasing it, and to avoid the long waits.

Videos and snapshots only prove it is working on a single Motherboard. Testing on every possible Motherboard is prohibitive and the Videos would full up the website. What do snapshots prove anyway. I have one showing Windows 98SE with 4064MB of RAM. I have one with DOS running with 128TiB of Free Space. The snapshots are real, but they are hardly usable. Others have Z77 Motherboards so they can run tests if needed. Wearing a jacket before entering the store is not even relevant. Maybe a better example is an iPad where the store has a serial number of an iPad missing from inventory and you are found with that serial number iPad. No receipt you get arrested. With a receipt, the store has to figure out who didn't record the sale. You said to remove BootGui. That is a Mod. I don't need to do anything to Boot to DOS on my Z87 System when I select 98SE. You clearly didn't read what I said. I said I added COMMAND.COM to my AUTOEXEC.BAT File. When startup reaches that line it puts me in that Command Shell. When I type EXIT, it returns to the startup shell that then runs Windows after exhausting AUTOEXEC.BAT. You misread what I said. I said a XP RAMDisk might be slower than a Windows 98 based RAMDisk, not my DOS based RAMDisk. Except for Virtual Machines, Licenses are for each Machine, not each Booted Machine. A per User license is a different type of License. Not all of my Customers are individuals so a User License would be more complicated. DOS Format has very limited options to set size. My RFORMAT Program can set any size. The RAMDisks themselves have no resizing options. They only need to know how big their reserved space is. You can always put something smaller in it. The rest is unused. The RAMDisks have very simple options that are in the instructions that come with it. They are in the "Unpackaged" Section of my Website so there are no Manuals to read there.

No. Your method replaces an entire DLLs set of Imports so you have to provide all the other Functions of the DLL as well. I have a program that can redirect individual Imports to alternative DLLs or names. I also have a tool that can add a Redirecting Export to the original DLL that can then point to your single Function DLL.

If you boot from a 98SE Setiup CD, you will end up in Drive A: if you stop the loading sequence. You will have to step through the loading sequence to load the CDROM Drivers, and skip the step that loads SETUP. I'm not sure what drive letter is used by default on that CD. I use X: on my modified 98SE Installer Disk.

An unconditional Format clears every Sector. There is no need unless you are afraid of data leakage. All that is needed to Format is to initialize the PBR Sectors, FAT Table, and Initial Root Directory.

You may not be obligated to buy anything, but a vendor is going to stop answering questions if it appears that he is not getting anywhere. An author does not have an unlimited obligation to provide answers. Most vendors provide far less information before purchase and only a few have demos. Do you ask for proof that a Computer or Program works before you buy it? In fact most Software comes with a disclaimer that they are not responsible if it doesn't fit your purpose. People buy my Software based on my reputation. If I sold Products that didn't work, my reputation would decline. If I sell my RAMDisk to a Z170 user, I am staking my reputation on that proof. I'm not sure why you cannot SYS or FORMAT on your Z170. I have no idea why the Z170 architecture would affect DOS in that way unless those programs use XMS like SCANDISK does. There is probably a fix for HIMEM.SYS. Try changing the A20 Handler selection method. You questioned for my RAMDisk would work on your Z170. Due to your unexplained HIMEM problem, I wanted to find out. My 64-Bit RAMDisk is not dependent upon HIMEM. The 32-Bit has to coordinate with HIMEM so it might have an issue if you don't use the Reserved Memory Option. XMS RAMDisk require HIMEM so they won't work unless you can resolve HIMEM or find an alternative. I agree that the Z170 has a big problem with Windows 9x. I don't know of any HDMI Cards in particular. There are adapters available. BIOS Emulation should take care of the USB Keyboard and Mouse, so they can be used in DOS or Windows 9x without Drivers. That is how I use an USB Keyboard with standard Windows 95. I don't have any USB 2 or Sound PCI-E Cards, so I can't run tests. I have several PCI-E SATA Cards that work just fine. They have their own BIOSes so you can Boot from them. What do you mean by 98/ME only. They can be used by other OSes if you have the necessary Drivers. Of course a P4 is easier to configure, but they are getting harder to find and are much slower. The Z170 has DDR4 memory so it should be faster than the earlier ones. It's a tradeoff. I already have a secure VOIP app and a >4GiB File solution for FAT32 Partitions on XP. There are already many Emulators and VMs. I will decide what I want to market. If you bought a Jacket and later the police were tipped off that you might have been involved in a robbery involving that same style, you could be in trouble if you don't have a receipt, even more if you acknowledge having a receipt and refuse to produce it. You asked me if HIMEM.SYS worked on my Z87, not if my RAMDisk worked. If Windows 98SE runs, HIMEM MUST work. I'm not sure if I even put a RAMDisk in the Z87. In any case, I don't have to go through all of your MSDOS.SYS mods to find out. The RAMDisk has to load in DOS so if it is visible in Windows it must have loaded in DOS. Also, I normally boot to DOS. Not by setting BOOTGUI=0 but by putting COMMAND.COM in my AUTOEXEC.BAT File. I go to Windows by typing EXIT. A crown doesn't pay the bills. Being "Ultimate" doesn't mean anything if it doesn't sell. A pure Windows RAMDisk will run in Protected Mode, so it will run faster. I doubt an XP one would be faster as XP has more overhead. The free ones may not be able to compete on universality, but they don't have to. They only have to compete on a machine by machine basis. Only people with more modern Computers would have a reason to use my RAMDisk, so it only has to support them. Again you didn't say that you would actually buy a separate copy of my "Ultimate" RAMDisk for a 386 System when free alternatives exist, so I must assume the answer is no. If you won't buy it, no one else will, so there is no point in developing it. The non-XMS "Unique" feature is actually the main selling point. I sell a lot more of the 32-Bit RAMDisks than I do the 64-Bit RAMDisks despite the greater capacity of the 64-Bit RAMDisks. Try rereading the Microsoft License. The License is transferable. In any case, it is not practical to verify the legality of Customers OSes. So there is no moral issue. Unless you need to recover the RAM used, you can just reformat the RAMDisk to any smaller size, and later up to the original size. In the case of the 64-Bit RAMDisks, you have no use for any recovered 64-Bit RAM other than another RAMDisk unless you purchase my other 64-Bit RAM Products.