alexanrs

If it isn't a FAT partition, why would it show in Explorer. Anyway, hiding is useless: even though the drive won't appear in My Computer, you can still access it in the Address Bar, AFAIK.

No go Well, I'm not going back to x86, I'm stubborn and I'm gonna stick to x64 . I have an P3 700 which is installed in another room, in which the webcam works perfectly, so I'm gonna leave it there, and buy another camera for this one.

Hi everyone I recently installed Vista x64 on my desktop, and I plan on keeping it. I managed to get everything working well, even an old bt878a-based capture card (didn't have sound, but now I connect my VCR, since I use it for tunning, directly to the PC's line-in and it is working well), but this **** webcam is a no go. I myself didn't even use it, but the thing is: it is a shared computer, and my relatives want the webcam working. I can't just tell them to buy another one, because this one is perfectly fine, and does its job well enough, but I don't want to just ditch x64 and go back to XP x86, not because of some stupid USB webcam. In linux, this Webcam is supported by the spca5xxx module. I tried installing the x64 driver for Logitech QC for Notebook, which uses the same module, and it is a no go. Does anyone know ANY way to get it working? EDIT: I didn't know the "d" word was censored oO, sorry

Try to get a laptop with some nVidia-based graphics card up to the 7xxx family, with less than 512MB. As for sound, I'm not sure... try to get something with some realtek-card and hope there are drivers for it. About wireless, network and stuff, I've got no idea... perhaps you'll be better off with some external wireless adapter.

I think Constructor would be a good call. Although it is a DOS application, it is really user friendly. By the way, I think there is an official update that made it a native Win95 application (my Constructor CD came with this, I could install both the windows version and the DOS version in the same folder, besides the EXE and some video files, and some DOS-only config files, everything was "shared"). The bad news is, the Win95 "version" doesn't work on Windows XP, whether I was able to get the DOS version working in NTVDM perfectly.

Actually, DOSLFN (not LFNDOS, LFNDOS is sloooooooow and buggy) can handle international characters perfectly, as long as it is configured right. Perhaps using a free alternative to XCOPY would be better... just in case someone ever needs to do this in DOS, and to avoid trouble with these ANSI characters...

If you absolutely need anything like that to be done on DOS, I suggest using UIDE to enable UDMA transfers in bare DOS, and also do some nice caching. I myself always load UIDE (after altering IOS.INI or .SYS... don't remember exactly, to tell Windows the driver is safe so Windows will handle the HD itself, instead of using DOS)

Interesting, didn't know 6x00 cards had some juice left ;-) According to the chard, a 8600 GT IS superior to a 6800 GT (6800 GT>Xt, soooooooo), but an 6600GT is superior to an 8400GS.

I'm not sure I can give you more details... I'm not an expert My bad, this is only for Windows 95 and upwards. Windows 3.11 gets loaded either in AUTOEXEC.BAT or manually by the user. I think IFSMGR.SYS needs to be loaded for Windows for Workgroups 3.11, and needs to be explicitly in CONFIG.SYS. IO.SYS from MS-DOS 7.0 (Windows 95) and newer loads it automatically if it isn't loaded in CONFIG.SYS. Note that HIMEM.SYS also needs to be there in pre-Windows 95 systems, since it will not be loaded automatically either. Loading IFSMGR.SYS per se is the least of your problems, since you can just load it in CONFIG.SYS, if necessary. Windows uses undocumented DOS stuff only present in MS-DOS 7.0 and up. AFAIK, yes, even before CONFIG.SYS, I guess. But only if DrvSpace/DblSpace are enabled in MSDOS.SYS, I think. Either way, it is not essential. No one should be using these nowadays, specially because floppies compressed with DriveSpace won't be readable on anyting other than Win9x-ME. Oops, my bad... horrible mistake. No idea... the only thing I know is that in Windows 3.11 you could go to Windows system directory and start WDOSX.EXE directly and enter Windows in standard mode, only that there would be no support for running DOS apps, because that needed another program WIN.COM loaded before loading WDOSX.

AFAIK, the support is good. Honestly, I doubt a 6600GT is faster than a 8400GS. I have both a 6800Xt (AGP) and a 8600GT (PCIe), and the 8600 beats the 6800 like a train vs a toy car: I can run Overlord in 1440x900, high settings, with the 8600 with good constant fps, I can only run with my 6800 in 960x720, Medium settings and I have bad fps drops in intense scenes. A 4200 can be better than a 5200 in some cases... I think it is supported, but I'm not sure... Passively cooled = no noise at all [], take this into account when buying a card! Remember to use someting like CPUIdle if your CPU cooler speed can be adjusted dynamically.... even less noise!!!!

AUTOEXEC.BAT does not call for WIN.COM, this is for sure. I think IO.SYS has a way of instructing COMMAND.COM to load it or not. HIMEM.SYS, IFSMGR.SYS and SETVER.COM are loaded automatically by IO.SYS, after loading everything in CONFIG.SYS, if it isn't loaded already. DRVs are user-mode drivers? AFAIK, they are WDM ones, and not necessarily user mode, but I can be wrong. AFAIK, WIN.COM's role is done ages ago... as soon as the protected mode kernel is loaded, I think.

Nope I think NVidia has a PureVideo technology for playing videos, but has to be insalled (and perhaps purchased?) separatedly... and I think 7x00 cards supports more features for PureVideo. Apart from that, any crappy FX5200 is probably good enough... unles you want to use Vista!

6600 beats the crap out of that 6200, even though it has less memory.... I don't think ultrasilent cooling alone is worth the price difference.... Anyway, get the 7600 if you want AGP. WTF?! An 8400 not only should beat the 6600 BADLY, but also support DX10 (if you ever need it)... I'm not sure if the unnoficial drivers work with 8x00 series cards.... anyway... if you really go for PCI-e, get a 7600 at least... a 7800 or 7950 if the price isn't much higher... don't waste your money on that 6600 or anything from that family, not for PCI-e at least... it isn't worth it, you can get better for at about the same price... now, if there are no 7600 or higher avaliable (and 8x00 cards really do not work on 98), then that 6600 is probably better than the 7300...

What version of IE do you have installed? Have you tried reinstalling it? Perhaps some graphic filters have been unregistered.... I can't think of anything else.

I think you should be able to find a 7600 AGP. It is simple, actually. the first number is the family and the second is the model, and the rule is, higher model, higher performance, so a GF 6600 beats a 6200, and a 6800 beats both. If I am not mistaken, a 7600 should beat a 6800, but I'm not sure. About the LE/GS/GX, well, I do not know exactly. But the thing is, AFAIK, avoid LE, and I think GS is the better one. Some GF 7600 or some 6800 Xt should do the trick. Beware, though, these cards might need to be connected to the power supply using one of those cables IDE HDs use.

Honestly, I think both Windows and CPUIdle are just ignoring the second core.

My bad, I meant idle.com, that comes with VPC Additions for DOS in VPC2004. I was talking about DOS, I know that the Windows-based software works fine .

To my experience, running DOS in any VM software causes 100% processor usage, but not necessarily Windows 98 (not on Virtual PC anyway). Also, on MS-DOS, I find that using POWER.EXE in config.sys to be more effective than CPUIdle (for the best results, you can use both at the same time ), because CPUIdle only kicks in while on command prompt, but your processor will go back up to 100% as soon as you execute anything. POWER.EXE, on the other hand, is more generic.

Windows 98SE and ME has its own generic SoundBlaster emulation WDM driver that can be used by any WDM sound driver that makes reference to it (SBEMU.SYS, if I recall correctly). The major problem here is that it emulates an SoundBlaster Pro, wich means 8-bit sound only. VXDs drivers, on the other hand, have to implement this manually. An easy way to spot this is to install both Win98se and WinME in a machine with a SB16 board. Windows 98 ships with a VXD driver which implements SB16 sound emulation for DOS boxes, Windows ME ships with a WDM one, so you'll only get 8-bit sound. EDIT: typos xD

Have you tried installing the latest version of KernelEX?

Isn't the last version released by Jasc 9.0?

Gape's unnoficial service pack should fix that, or any other patch that replaces the Win98 shell with the WinME one.

Tihiy, what is the eventual reason/s for cancelling this project? Xeno86 doesn't update his KernelEx regulary. Perhaps because by porting it to KernelEx there would be no need to patch GTK+ Cairo binaries everytime an update comes along, or because this way other software that uses the same unsupported functions would work correctly on Win98.

My bad, sorry. Btw, I ever really adapted to alternate shells in Win95/NT4 upwards.

So? Never said I love them. My taskbar has two rows, the bottom one for running applications and the other one for shortcuts. They are way more convenient than using the start menu. EDIT: Besides, those toolbars do not need to be in the Taskbar, they can be moved anywhere you want. Not trying to convince you to ditch W95's shell, because it has its advantages (lower memory requirements being one of them), but you'll have to admit W98's one has its advantages, if you now how to use it