rloew

One requires the other one. So I think if one was to implement, one would have to include all the missing functionsfor a specific device. The devices I tested was printers/wireless cards/wifi cards/bluetooth. I created WDMEX to provide a Static VXD rather than the dynamic WDM Driver approach of WDMSTUB. I have added all of the Functions from the various versions of WDMSTUB, and all of the Functions provided by Windows ME. A few stubs have been replaced with actual implementations. My first target for WDMEX was to support an USB3 Driver Stack. That project stopped when I found structural problems not related to missing functions. Lately I have been working on adding USB 2 support for Windows 95, but am encountering structural issues there too. Obviously every function needed by a given device has to be implemented or stubbed, but even my partial WDMEX did get some less demanding Drivers to work. It is a work in progress.

Thanks rloew. I will look into it when I eventually have to get a replacement for my broken wireless router in the next couple of weeks, my wife complains already about those Ethernet cables lying around all over. I have been putting off the purchase of a new wireless router always to the next week, maybe I am suffering from router-phobia.What complicates matters is that the computers have to work in the home networks in 3 countries, with 3 different ISPs, with ADSL and cable modem connections, and with routers of different makes/country settings/voltages, and with a different digit in the third field of the IP number. I probably will have to buy 3 identical routers. Any advice is appreciated, thanks again rloew. During a recent garage sale I bought a good shrink-wrapped Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition, with 25 Client Access Licenses, for $3, and 3 thick books about Windows 2003 Server by Jerry Honeycutt, at the used book store of the public library, for $5. Would there be any benefit to migrate from Win98 to Windows 2003, instead of WinXP? Is there any use of installing Win2003 as an additional operating system selection, besides WinXP? Could one expect the support of Win2003 to go beyond that of WinXP? In other words, if one decides to move on from Win98SE, would it be better to move on to WinXP or to Win2003? Routers typically can be configured to set the LAN subnet. There is no reason to have different third digits unless the Routers are on the same LAN. Even then there are options. The hard part is finding a good Router with Static DHCP. Not many have Static DHCP and many of them have other issues. I use a Buffalo WHR-G54S which has Static DHCP, doesn't choke on Bit-Torrent activity, and I can turn off the Radio so I don't have to worry about wireless vulnerabilities.

I have five of these in my WDMEX Project already. Five more look pretty trivial to implement.

Hi duffy98,There are issues with Win98 and hotspots and WLAN. I have the additional problem that I have assigned fixed IPs to the WLAN cards in my desktops and laptops, and hotspots seem to require an automatic assignment of IP numbers to the WLAN card. With fixed IPs I can have shortcuts on the computer screen on all computers in the network, eMule etc requires the opening of ports on specific IPs, I have installed an HP2605n Color LaseJet network printer attached to my WLAN router via a fixed IP, and everything works fine for me with fixed IPs under both Win98SE and WinXP. I am currently thinking about setting up a network scanner. You may want to consider a Router with Static DHCP capability. You can set specific IP numbers in the Router for each Computer when connected to your network without having to set fixed IPs in the Computers themselves.

Wow, a 4TB ext.HDD working under Win98! My full respect! How should such a drive be partitioned/formatted, for access under Win98?I have a special Win98 opsys without nusb, for testing manufacturer-provided drivers under Win98. The enclosure does work fine under Win98 with the Win98 driver v1.04 by JMicron, with a Pioneer BD-R 203 SATA blu-ray burner inside, so a SATA HDD should work fine also. The exe installer file of the JMicron driver v1.04 has a time-stamp of 8-Dec-2006, so I am a little skeptical about its ability to "Support 4K sectors HDD command". Does nusb require an update to handle HDDs >2TB? I supply Partitioning and Formatting tools as part of the TBPlus Package. Single Partitions up to 8TiB are fully compatable. I can't say if a particular Driver will work without actually testing them. The Lexar based drivers, I offer free on my website, work. The USBSTOR files from Windows ME work fine. I use only part of nusb but I don't think it needs any updates. The TBPLUS Package patches Kernel files to add the support.

Hi rloew,Does this mean that a 4TB HDD inside this enclosure would be recognized under Win98 with your patch? How much of the 4TB would be accessible under Win98? Should nusb or the manufacturer-provided driver be used under Win98SE? Yes, it should if it works as promised. The USB 2 GoFlex Base I have does as does an External 3TB Drive I have. All 4TB would be available under Windows 9x. The limit is 16TiB. NUSB is fine. I doubt you will find a Manufacturer Driver for any of these enclosures.

USB bridges that support 4K Sector HDD Commands switch to a 4KB Logical Sector simulation mode when a Hard Drive between 2TiB and 16TiB is attached. The 3TB and 4TB USB Drives currently out use this. This allows non-UEFI Systems to support these Drives. Windows 9X needs a Patch to support this mode. It is included in my Terabyte Plus Package.

I tried to use the XP Version of the USB 3.0 Driver for my Motherboard using my WDMEX Stub but encountered multiple incompatabilities even after stubbing or implementing the missing WDM Functions. If anyone knows of a Windows 2000 USB 3.0 Driver. I might be able to do something with it.

Case closed for the other Topic. Probably for this one also. For dencorso and me, a bit after the fact, as our Posts preceeded that Post.

Gigabit Ethernet and large Registries can cause low memory problems that can make the system unstable. I have seen it manifest as crashes depending on MaxPhysPage in rather unexpected ways. Try my RAM Limitation Patch Demo using the /M Option to see if it helps.

How big are your Registry files SYSTEM.DAT and USER.DAT? Is your Ethernet Gigabit capable?

With exactly 4GiB yes. The larger ones all multi-boot ME.

I put together a simple script to install multiple Windows Updates at one time. I found it was necessary to avoid having more than one running at the same time for at least some of them. I wrote a Program called WAITFOR that will not return control back to the Script until the Executable it calls terminates. This insures that they do not overlap.

Understood. We have a fundamental problem with export forwarders not working, plus a function renaming issue. Using a .def file to tell fwd how to name/rename the new export will prevent the need to use ImportPatcher on every app that links to those new functions. Export forwarding seems to the issue of the day: vilyathegreat and schwups are having success printing with ComDlgEx (but can they "Open File" or "Save As" using export-forwarded functions?) loblo is having trouble with the export-forwarded Netbios function in NetApiEx that is linked the same way as ComDlgEx fwd.03 produces DLLs that still don't seem to work as expected. Looks like I'll have to review and restudy the whole concept of export forwarding and write some very targetted test apps and test cases to determine things like whether KernelEx processing affects link search paths, etc. Any programmers with experience that might be relevant are encouraged to chime in here. DLLHOOK already can forward as well as rename exports. It also works globally so only one .INI is needed for everybody. Unlike the Demo, the current Version is compatable with Kernelex 4.5.2. It is now listed on my Website as a separate product.

SumatraPDF uses tabbed Property Sheets to provide the "Advanced" tab. The Windows 98 PrintDlg Function does not support Property Sheets. It only supports alternative Dialog Boxes. A much more substantial Patch would be required to add this support.

An image of DOS is saved during loading and restored on exit. So I wouldn't describe it as being "evicted" or quite as clever. Now, *that*'s news to me! A full 1088 KiB memory image? Did that continue on 9x/ME times? Whither is it saved? OK, not really "evicted", but still clever enough, IMHO. Not the full 1088 KiB, just the allocated part, DOS, low TSRs, high TSRs, UMBs. Each DOS Virtual Machine has it's own copy of the Patched DOS image as well. They are all stored in RAM. Each one is copied to and from low Physical RAM when a DOS VM Executes.

Different drives definitely. Different folders on the same drive would be a problem for 95 and 98. They both expect the same "Program File" folder. At least one would have to be modded to use an alternative.

The fact that it is "evicted" from DOS on shutdown just shows how cleverly written it is. It does not mean unmodified DOS was working under it all the while. An image of DOS is saved during loading and restored on exit. So I wouldn't describe it as being "evicted" or quite as clever.

It can be used with my DLLHOOK redirector.

Well, I consider my answer qualifies for the "vague" one. So, with all due respect, where is the "wrong" answer hiding, since there are just three posts in this thread, of which one is the original question (hence not an answer), the other is my "vague" one and the last is yours, which, of course, cannot be part of the count. And mine cannot be "wrong" since it's "vague" and and just one entity, which prevents it ontologically from being both parts of "both"... I confess I'm flabbergasted. He did say vague OR wrong, not one vague and one wrong, so that part is OK. But he should have waited until I suggested RFDISK before using "both" in a sentence.

I have upgraded my DLLHOOK to work with KernelEx 4.5.2 and developed a VXD Version that insures that all DLL references are hooked. I have already tested it using SumatraPDF with KernelEx and a PrintDlgEx DLL.

Some years back, I had a problem with the original USB Drivers on my 98FE System. If I copied a large amount of data to a Flash Drive I would get a BSOD with a Disk Write Error Message, especially if I was browsing during the transfer. Whe I rebooted, there was significant corruption found on my Hard Drive. Typically an entire Sector of FAT data was filled with garbage and to make things worse, the corresponding backup FAT Sector was also destroyed. Sometimes a Directory Sector was also filled with garbage. This type of corruption could easily render a Partition useless, depending upon where the damage occurs. I managed to recover my data but only through massive manual hunting and patching. You cannot use SCANDISK as it makes things worse. The problem appeared to be only in 98FE, so I posted some warnings about using 98FE with USB. Some time later I setup a system to do some more research into the issue but was unable to reproduce the problem.

Sorry, but you've got me confused: with all due respect, what area above the MBR? The MBR is in LBA 0. The MBR is in LBA 0. The first Partition normally starts at LBA 63. The space in between is available for DDOs, Boot Loaders, etc. And unfortunately viruses. Some Copy Protection code also hides data in this area.

There are different kinds of Overlays. Some like mine and probably the Western Digital one you have, preserve the normal Sector numbering of the Drive. They just add additional Sectors to the area above the MBR. The Disk can be used in a newer machine without activating the Overlay. Some others shifted all of the Sectors making the Disk totally unreadable in any machine if the Overlay wasn't running. These Overlays turned a lot of people off to the whole idea of DDOs (Disk Drive Overlays). I'm not sure why Ghost 2003 cannot back them up. I do not have a copy.

BFF70000 and BFF60000 are in the Shared Arena. The System Arena is C0000000-FFFFFFFF. The NT Bases are in the Private (Per-User) Arena, meaning that each Process gets it's own copy.