submix8c

Hmmm.... wonder if KernelEX would work for/with AutoPatch... Otherwise, as above.

go to www.intel.com select your region (if not defaulted) and search ICH8M. It shows (for me) - Software - Intel® Viiv™ Software version 1.0 (for use with Windows* XP) Intel Viiv Software version 1.5 (for use with Windows XP) Intel Viiv Software version 1.6 (for use with Windows Vista*) Intel Viiv Software version 1.7 (for use with Windows Vista) Note: PCs with Intel® 965GM/PM, Intel® G33, and Intel® P35 Express Chipsets, install Intel Viiv Software version 1.7 or later. Usually all you have to do is provide the MoBo-id and you will be provided a list of drivers etc. edit - oops! read above post. good enough there!

Yes, but you have to have a bootable cd/floppy of the Win9x/ME variety. These can be obtained from nearly anywhere on the internet from many trusted sites (be sure it's trusted). One created from XP, even though the option is there to create one, does NOT work (I tried it). It just needs the IO.SYS, MSDOS.SYS, and COMMAND.COM files (delete all others). Then you copy the BIOS update files from the manufacturer and boot to it. Instructions are usually provided at the manufacturer's site. And be aware that a BIOS update may not help at all (it's a 48-bit LBA problem) so you will need to use the Install CD for your HDD to allow for a Dang-nabbit special MBR DDO code that would be installed. edit - scratch the Limit thing... 850e should support that (ATA100). edit2 - boot floppies - http://www.bootdisk.com edit3 - see jaclaz' post below; pretty good info in there and (FYI) additional links to other stuff. HTH

Urgh! Some file operations (AFAIK) "pass through" a user profile folder before they "hit" the target (final destination folder). Maybe that's where it garfs? Haven't tried this, but maybe this would be a solution/workaround - set up the XP (or whatever) as an FTP server and try using FlashGet (or another good downloader; they usually allow pre-allocating directly in the target) in the 98SE.

Thanks for the move gamehead2000 (wasn't sure?) and... Thanks for the response, Coffeefiend. I had suspected/figured as much re. your explanation and figured the "sales pitch" was over after said salesman stated "I'll talk to my supervisor and ask" then never called back (heh heh). Guess I must have shut them down when I gave half-correct arguments and told him I was "a geek" (not entirely true). Case closed. Except... how do I change the Title to "Solved" so no one else will bother. A simple P.M. will do.... (p.s. up/down speed is better or equivalent to AT&T ennyhoo, beside the phone lines stink around here - InTerFerEnce!)

I have RoadRunner Cable. AT&T has been trying to convince me that DSL is better both Download and Upload. AFAIK there is no advantage one over the other in this respect (I may be wrong). A "salesman" is telling me that with DSL I will have a "dedicated line" so "I won't be sharing my line as with cable". This doesn't sound right to me. Isn't DSL based upon the "band" (e.g. frequency) that I would be assigned? I would simply like to have some basic information to rationally discuss pros/cons with the "salesman" when he calls back (grrr!). Yes, I know I could dig into this on my own (undoubtedly all info is on MSFN), but I kind of want a quick down-and dirty explanation that any "id***" (e.g. salesman) would understand. SpeedTest says 6780k/453k - thought that was good??? Doubtful AT&T is better. Not intended for a full-blown discussion, if you please. Thanks, all. ...and I browsed here and got a little basic info - http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=88661 EDIT - OK, guy's I haven't been bothered again. And thanks for the info. By browsing around in above topic, it's obvious that they were just trying to suck me in. Phone lines are lousy around here, anyhow (electro-interference).

Uh... Crucial and Kingston seem to be the top-of-the-line by most people's reconning. I don't get your question... Shop around and compare, read some reviews, etc. Some people like A, and others B. Again, your choice...

Foolish thought (? I don't have Vista at all, but...) try comparing the contents of the INF's. If XP uses the same driver for either/or, then maybe Vista will if you modify the INF to correspond to XP. Just a thought... may hose the whole deal, but hey, whatever works....

According to specs (if authoritative), only 667 will work. However, when you go to www.Crucial.com and select your laptop, they say YES and they have them, so it sounds like they just want you to buy from Dell or Kingston. Go have a look-see, man! And Crucial will absolutely guarantee compatibility.

Clarification - If dual-boot, ok, else no "change fromNT4/upgradeto98", nope! "Over the top" meaning "replace with different"/"upgrade path" type thing.

Well, now that you know which chipset (you never said), you should be able to get the documentation from Dell that will tell you what you need to know, right? Short answer, probably so (but maybe not). And as for a recomenndation, it would be up to you (size, compatibility, manufacturer, price, etc). BTW, who told you "only Kingston"? If the MoBo "takes it", then you're good for the go. Most RAM mfgrs allow for an exchange/refund (with guarantees given) if it doesn't work (my bro did that once).

What duffy98 said (and more if you search-and-read). And be aware that you cannot install "over top" of NT4, It's new install (delete the NT partition after saving all your "good stuff" on CD or elsewhere) or nothing.

Search with Google for W2KSP4_DE (in quotes). You'll find it. And here you'll find an MD5 Hash value to confirm a good one - http://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?t=82484 Yeah, not from MS directly; not sure if they even keep it since I can't find a direct link...

Go here for a complete discussion and tips on limitations (Mr. Loew also comments) - http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=118097&hl=

? Huh! Don't make sense, has worked for me too. Try this one as well, just to test the problem - http://www.imgburn.com/ edit - also check here for good info, "official" downloads, and instructions for a good install - http://www.adaptec.com/en-US/speed/softwar...i_471a2_exe.htm http://www.radified.com/ASPI/forceaspi.htm Second one also has a "utility" to completely remove ASPI for a "clean reinstall". further info - http://www.afterdawn.com/guides/archive/aspisetup.cfm "Google is my friend" HTH

Also Extra Features. Go to MS website for further information.

Also Aida32 (last is v3.94.2) or Everest Home Edition (last free v2.20). Everest also has Free 30-day trial of latest. (note: Everest looks very similar to Aida32). Google on these and you'll find them. They list a lot more than CPU-Z, although if all you need is basic info, it's fine.

Some (small sketchy) info here - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/300415 XP TechNet - http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb490893.aspx Another more organized reference here - http://www.geocities.com/rick_lively/MANUA.../D/DISKPART.HTM So is this a difference between using VOLume as apposed to PARTITION? I see that using VOL when using basic disks assumes "partition". In addition, it seems that somehow you may need to set the Recovery Partition to Active (has to be one active, you know). I have noted in the past (AFAIKR) that if only one partition exists then that partition will boot. Could be because on Compaq/HP (past experience), the BIOS "sees" only one and "decides" to boot to it; could have been because the Disk Boot Code (MBR)(before the Partition Boot) was "special code" by the OEM to set the only to active or just "go there" (kind of like Grub4Dos, also kindly provided by Jaclaz). Any help here?

@CoffeeFiend - Believe me, it's still there. Just uses a different name. Had be sure it was NOT installed on my 250gb when I ran the CD (my MoBo supports large). Needless to say, I used alternative methods (Linux Live CD) for partitioning (the Install CD stuff stinks). Info at MS site on 48-bit LBA (also applies to Win2k) - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/303013/en-us And I won't swear to this, but it might work as long as the first partition is limited in size and then use the remainder of unallocated space after you're up-and-running. I think this is similar to the workarounds used in 98SE threads. edit - gparted live cd (uses Ubuntu as a basis). Works great. Jaclaz shuffled me to it. It also allows un-ticking hidden partitions.

Yeah... Activation! Stick with the Eula. Unless... this is some kind of "special edition" ("component parts"?). Again, read the Eula's. Real good question - did you have to Activate the first time (VLK doesn't)? No more from me on this...

(gags...) You would have to use the dang-nable DDO "function" of the Install software...

No message, probably no problem. Would probably have "told" you otherwise.

Not a particualr module. Your only alternative is to either stop updates, investigate the contents/KB when Microsoft Update suggests fixes (via Custom), download an affected fix manually, extract it and repatch OR just repatch after the updates.

Huh! Never tried the 2k3 viewers in 98SE. Wonder if the older ones would work with the Converters?

???? Hilarious! A-V busts A-V!!!! Only other way is if something else "infected" it...