submix8c

There's the answer. Some folks just don't know...edit - go here for several links on the RAM thingy... http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showto...st&p=672362

98 must be installed BEFORE XP for dual-boot! Clear your HDD and start over. When you install 98 FIRST, just FDISK an appropriate size leaving oodles of HDD unused-space for the XP install (AFTER). XP must go onto a second partition. This is an option that will be provided during the XP Install (detects a previous OpSys). XP NTLDR will then list 98 as another start-up option (BOOT.INI). Also, be wise and install the XP Command Console after XP installation ("WINNT32 /cmdcons"). Did you do this? (keywords are MultiBoot or Dual-Boot) As for the hardware, you'll need appropriate drivers for the 98 system. Problematic as previously noted by others. Also a setting in an INI file (a cache setting in SYSTEM.INI?) if gt 512mb RAM. Topics/threads available on MSFN (or Google). Sift through them, try it, come back and post the results. HTH

??? Won't swear to this, but there's a parameter or a program that you can execute (can't remember offhand; busy rite now with other stuff to look up) during startup (or after?) to set codepage (or some-such) to allow utilizing the correct character set. Search around for the correct info... Also won't swear to this, but MSBACKUP(?) can do selective incremental backups correctly(?). Search around on this as well (must be used in Windows? can't remember...). HTH

@Sfor - Thank you! (see? I knew you were ejumukatid! you even know the definition of "symantics"...) @all-who-argue-DOS ...read here for more info on MS-DOS (or is MDGx also wrong? ) - http://www.mdgx.com/msdos.htm @ohms006 - no takers, too much hassle; guess you're on your own edit - Looks like IO.SYS looks in SYSTEM.DAT to get the Configuration (which is where ALL used Hardware/Drivers is defined to set CurrentConfiguration) before starting WIN.COM (which it does). From there I guess you go for the Kernel, VMM stuff (all those VXD's), etc etc (an assumption of course, not having dug into that). Still proves that there is more to this than just one single module mod. And AFAIK NT-type HAL has something to do with multi-cpu support, or tell me I'm wrong on that too? Seems that you would have to support multi-CPU in Win9x in the same fashion. More than just the kernel module or am I wrong again?. IBM (used to for extra $; don't know about now) provides Source Code for every last scrap of the DOS/OS and all standard (exception COTS-type) software they provide. MS does not. Makes the project a bit harder unless you're willing to break the EULA, don't you think?

IPL (on Mainframe DOS) = IO.SYS IPL (on Mainframe OS) = NTLDR Yep, the Boot Sector "loads" and "executes" it. Now what does IO.SYS do? AFAIK it defines basic hardware, grabs and processes some parameters, runs Config.sys/Autoexec.BAT, then tosses you to the command PROMPT awaiting input (didn't even imply you needed command.com). So go on and boot, delete it from both the HDD and Memory. What now? I repeat - THAT and every single bit of code inside is DOS and nothing else! Without it, no Programs can access one whit of the hardware. Therefore, Windows is DOS-based. And in NT-type Windows, the NTLDR makes them OS-based. Without these, NOTHING runs, get the picture? I must assume NTLDR (not having looked inside it yet) does very similar processing. These two items prepare the remainder of Programs to do their job (eg the HAL which is a pain in the a@@ to change without reinstall because of other dependencies). The thread was started suggesting that some poor soul sucker-up to making Win9x use more than one CPU/Core. It's the interaction between modules that makes this "project" unfeasible. If YOU had the Source Code, you would see what I mean... Now if this is going to be a flame-fest instead, have at it; we're not ALL geniuses. And the thread-starter is probably laughing his bootie off at us "geniuses" (or should I say fools?)... Bye Bye edit - just did the same in VPC on 98SE "Safe/Command Prompt" then rebooted "Normal" - "The Following File Is Missing Or Corrupt - Command.com - Type the name...". NO WINDOWS! Same message when "Safe/Command Prompt". So how DID you test that on the WinME, hmmmm??? Did you even reboot?

I beg your pardon? Press F8 on Start-up, select "Safe Mode Command Prompt", key in WIN.COM and watch Windows start up...Win3.x, same deal. Is Win3.x then the base system/real core? The only reason IO.SYS changed (ref. my statements/posts above in "configuring a new IBM OS") was to recognize the "new design". VMM only interfaces with DOS (IO.SYS/COMMAND.COM). Also changed to directly utilize 32-bit addressing (Win3.x cheated). Ever use Linux/Unix (any Mainframe OS's)? When the Computer (not PC) "boots", it is called IML (Initial Microcode Load), which is, in essence, the equivalent of the "hard wired" code within the CPU of a PC. Next, is IPL (Initial Program Load), which is the "base system" (DOS/OS/Unix/Linux, etc. Command Prompt). Next, start the Partitions/Address Spaces (VMM). Now you have the option of either manually or automatically starting other software on top (GUI's like CICS, the equivalent of W-I-N-D-O-W-S) within a given Space, which in turn allows other software (eg GUI editors like MS-Word and Inventory Systems like SQL+Apps) to run on top of it. Where do you think Billy got the ideas from? Remember IBM (all source code supplied)? Fact! It's all in the design of the operating system. But there's still an underlying "DOS/OS" that needs to be changed to get the rest to work (Windows components changes). IO.SYS (in DOS/Winx.x) is the primary Hardware Interface in conjunction with Command.com, hence the underlying OS (ref. previous paragraph). Windows (utilizing VMM interface) is written to simply route its commands to the underlying DOS (single-threaded). It does indeed "ride on top of" DOS! Winx.x is not capable of what is being suggested unless the basis (IO.SYS) is modified as well and that is the reason NT-oriented Windows is so radically different (NTLDR, not IO.SYS; ref. IBM DOS vs OS). Are you suggesting eliminating/rewiting IO.SYS and changing the MBR (which is also different)? How many modules in VMM? One, two, a gazillion? How many to change? One, two, a gazillion? Again, go ask the KernelEX Project people whether a SINGLE module can be changed/written to access multi-cpu's. It's in the overall design. I refuse to disassemble the key components of Windows just to prove the point of "forget it, not worth it". "Migrate" NT/XP code to 9x if anyone thinks they can; it would be faster! Systems Mainframe 2themax! Done it all and recognize the direct relationships to Windows x.x/NT... (p.s. Mainframes also have SQL) Sheesh! Symantics (mis-spelled before; was that what confused you all?) @ohmss006 - Give it up; ain't gonna happen. Be happy with a jet-engine Win9x PC using 1 core. Genuises many on MSFN, but unless there are any takers for such a vast project (ain't heard from any volunteers yet) forget it... Pipe dream...

??? Agreed all around... but probably no CD burner on PC if HDD that small. Somebody else musta loaded that puppy; no OEM would put W98 on it, only W95. !Query: Are the setup files on the HDD? If so, ensure you have them on CD also (from the original install) and delete. Saves @122mb. Also/or, since it's networked, "copy" the HDD (all of it?) to the "server" PC (excluding the WIN386.SWP in the WINDOWS folder) into a new folder then "zip" (7-Zip?) the "copy" (to save space) in case you boo-boo. Same goes for using 98Lite; just "copy" the removed same way as backup (no-burner scenario). ?Cleared the Internet Cache lately? Wastes a lot of space...

eidenk: No doubt it works as specified (correctly set up; code/reg looks fine). If you need a "dir"-type output, then that's good. Only reason I suggested DirPrint was as an alternative (it also saves to disk). The format of DirPrint is definitely different from "dir" command and is "customizeable" and has context menu (takes you to DirPrint), so depends on your "needs". I don't think it has command-line capabilities tho (written in VB6). Peace, folks! Good idea, 'k?

Oops! In Flashget (whatever version), under File, save/backup your "default.jcd", exit FG (that nifty icon that overlays everything), go to the FG folder, copy it (and default.jcd.bak)to a safe place. Uninstall any/all Flashget. Reinstall FGv1.73. Try it now. Should work. The ".jcd" files are just a "history" of downloads. Can copy back (after exit FG) if you want, or proceed "clean". p.s. FG does not play well with files named out-of-standard; it WILL "rename" according to the filename in the HTTP/FTP location/name of the file. Only happens with sites with that in it. Requires knowing the "%xx" equivalents to ASCII/ANSI and changing them accordingly. Run into that on some of MDGx' stuff. Almost never happens. Only other "rename" is according to albator's comment.

Yep, something fishy going on. Just downloaded the manual. You should too and read the BIOS section (GOD-awful Bios; looks kinda like Phoenix). Use "Load Factory Defaults", then set all HDD parameters to AUTO; be sure to "Save". Next boot from an Emergency Floppy (if you don't have one, go to Bootdisks.com and get one), then run FDISK and Delete Partition, reboot, FDISK and Define Partition, reboot, then FORMAT it. NOW attempt an installation. BTW, are you using the Restore CD? This could cause trouble ("tatooing"). The main thing it does is re-install to Factory (on a new HDD) and may install incorrectly (HDD parameters hard-wired? Restore tied to the Serial #'s?). Thus, the Restore CD could be useless (unless you know what to look for, mod it, then reburn it). You might be able to find the CAB files on the CD, in which case just run Setup directly from there using the Floppy. Instructions can be found for this all over the internet ("Clean Install"), providing you have the xxxxx-xxxxx-(etc) product key to enter during installation (usually on the COA paper, the CD case, or the tower). Naturally, you would have to install any necessary drivers afterwards and any additional software on the Recovery CD would be lost-and-gone (probably). BUT you would have an operation PC. Search on this forum (advanced search) for member "soporific"; he's pretty much wrapping together general Win98SE install/update stuff based on many other member's contributions and projects (official/unofficial Hotfixes, Upgrades, Tools, etc.). (this is 98SE right?) Again, HTH (Cheers, gosh! I remember seeing you around in the past; glad to "see" ya!)

Hilarious! Das ist gut, ja? (wo bist dieser umlauts?)

Not enough memory for anything beyond NT/Win9x/WinME. No-go for 2000 or XP... Msg for 98SE sounds familiar. Check on MS website for possible solution (exact message, or Google it in quotes). May have something to do with APM or BIOS AntiVirus. Try turning them off in BIOS (if present) and try again. Also may have something to do with LBA (or some such) in the BIOS... Definitely reminds me of a prob I had once (BIOS-related?). Last resort see if there's a selection (in BIOS) for "Load BIOS Defaults" (not Setup or Optimal defaults, if present). DOH! Re-read your post... definitely has something to do with the HDD replacement. Try forcing Auto-Detect again. Used to have a problem swapping primary HDD in bro's 'puter; got sick every time until force AutoDetect again; kept retaining previous HDD parameters. HTH

Well said! You seem to be very knowledgable (a compliment). GUI=Graphical User Interface (Interface being the keyword; symantecs again) And don't anyone suggest a new/modified kernel. There's much more to the design than just that single item. Ask the KernelEX Project guys. Even in the Mainframe world there are multiple modules that need generated to support a single new configuration. The kernel is only the basis (ref. IBM's DOS/VSE/AF and OS/390, the latest I'm familiar with). Still, all-in-all, seemingly not worth the effort. There doesn't appear to be any takers to code from scratch the necessary support. How many months/years of dedicated coding/testing for such a project to satisfy a "want" and not a "need" (without recompense)? That's why MS quit bothering (IBM DOS is history, IBM OS is not; same rationale). On a side note, the SETI project allows for Computer Clustering via specialized software, but I hesitate to suggest this as relevant to Multi-CPU support, since it's task-specific (as are the other Cluster projects). Check out MS' latest "server inventions" to what's involved. @ohmss006, how about a little "light reading" on the subjects/objections, 'k? 'Nuff said. As MCP said in Tron (the movie) "End of line..."

infact, Windows 98 is more or less the GUI that runs on a DOS-based layer, so assuming now correctly i assume, Windows 98 does run on top of DOS. No, I don't think Win9x does run on top of a DOS layer. http://win32assembly.online.fr/vxd-tut1.html DOS is apparently used in the boot sequence of Win 95 and 98 (but not ME which is why it boots faster) but that's it. Once Windows is running there is no DOS layer running underneath it. Unless I am wrong but in this case you'll have to show where is this DOS layer that runs underneath the 9x GUI. Re-read the referenced link. VMM (I believe) is interfacing with IO.SYS (the "DOS layer"), ergo DOS!All Win 1.x/2.x/3.x and Win9x (including WinME) run "on top of DOS" That's why you can Upgrade from Past (DOS) through "current" WinME (with the appropriate Windows Upgrade sequences). Note that certain DOS modules are either replaced or eliminated as part of the Upgrade process (compatability). Also note that there is a "patch" for WinMe that allows you to "boot into pure DOS Command Mode" available on the internet. WinME from MS simply eliminated the access to it to phase Consumers into WinXP (an offshoot of NT, no DOS involved). Kind of like the difference between IBM Mainframe DOS-based (now defunct) and OS-based (still going strong). Trust me, I've installed them all (including the IBM stuff)! It is definitely DOS-based (symantecs aside)! And forget modifying 9x to use dual-core! It's definitely not worth the effort (ref. IBM stuff; look it up...). The systems specs are too radically different...

There is a parameter in MSBATCH.INF (can't remember what it is offhand...) that allows for pointing to a secondary folder for INF's, etc. This would have to be placed on the HDD along with the setup files (etc.; ref. soporific's UBCD) for them to be "found". They cannot be ".exe" or ".msi" etc, ONLY INF's and the related files. Also reference ShadeTreeLee's comment about WINDOWS/INF/OTHER (it's relevant). This is how OEM's pull this stunt off. The main problems as I see them are - gathering the INF's and the associated files (for each INF) and placing these into the special folder. Windows Setup will then find them and install the necessary files as appropriate. - having a list of all (potential) candidates for Setup Install (lots of hardware out there that is not in W98SE WHCL). Make a list(?) and search away! HTH. Cheers... edit - FOUND IT! This is from WinME. Haven't tried it, but it may work for 98SE (MSBATCH.INF)... [OPKExpress] ... (etc.) [OEMDrivers] ; Add additional driver paths for OEM specific drivers ; Ensure each entry is separated by a semi-colon ; HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion","OtherDevicePath",,"C:\DRV\AUDIO;C:\DRV\VIDEO"

Old HP? Must be if BIOS limit is still 8GB HDD even after flash (boo!). Looks like the attempt to access an external drive croaked due to fact that the necessary drivers to access it were not available upun entry to Setup (a USB drive?). There are DOS-based USB drivers available somewhere (I can't remember where...) that could be loaded somehow(?). 100% CPU Utilization is undoubtedly a result of a fix needed for your particular HP. I seem to recollect something about that. Look into "AutoPatcher 98SE"/"Unattended Boot CD For 98SE" (soporific's babies) to see if it is corrected... The key factor/module that segregates Retail vs OEM vs Upgrade vs MSDN vs Select vs Update (yes, Upgrade and Update are different beasts; Update is a StepUp-Only) is SETUPX.DLL, not SETUP.EXE. I can't/won't tell you how to get around this (sorry...), but you can find out on your own elsewhere. Disclaimer - This post is merely informative in nature and not a suggestion for w@r3z. HTH. Have a nice day.

Dudes! Do a Google on "Karen's Directory Printer". It's free and has a load of options! It's the only thing I've used since I stumbled across it. And it's extremely small! There are other freebie utilities there too - With Source Code!

soporific : Installed 98SE using UBCD (only the Opsys, bypassing patches by "moving" to sub-folders, i.e. "raw/clean" 98SE install). Installed June SP2 to cross-check "official" patches (what I had previously downloaded past/present and what AP has) vs "unofficial" patches. Intent is to one-by-one install "official" to see where this bad boy stands in relation to "unofficial" (oddball TaskBar/goboom confirmation)... Noted GDI+ Detection Tool (KB873374) is a "registry bypass" instead of the actual tool. Assuming installation of Cumulative IE6SP1 (re KB833989) and DotNet2 (over DotNet1.1 without SP1) and other non-installables onto Win98SE obviates the need for it... For a test, I decided to use AP to install IE6SP1 only (no other patches whatsoever) and then intended to install and run the actual KB873374. But it didn't happen... During the AP install of IE6SP1, I got the following screen (attached JPEG). Apparently AP exited during/after the install without rebooting(?). I clicked "End Task" which caused a reboot ("Configuration Settings Update"). Run-Mod continued (after System Settings Update) and completed normally. Musta not detected/set "Reboot Needed" in IExplore for this scenario... Also noted in MainCode the new DOREG4/DOREG5 routines (DOREG5 is unused). They are exactly the same and appear to be a variation of DOREG3 utilizing the RegKey from DOREGZ (DOREG3/DOREGZ are also unused). Appears to be due to some modifications in HFSecure for registry checking. Extraneous code is a real be-otch to sift through (I know, "Hurry Up and finalize")... cheers, m8!

Yep... Uninstall latest version (kinda buggy) and get Flashget v1.73. Works like a charm!

soporific : Ok, my bad... Google on "alternate" and "cdfs.vxd". Just by reading dang near everything referenced indicated that it might not work on some hardware. Hey, if it works, the user is stylin'! If it not, well uninstall...Tracking down AP Report "not installed" modules. Guess my re-install of IE6 undone a lot of stuff, all of which do not show up in WU anyway. I see a lot of them (official) would have required getting the Hotfix through MS Tech Support. Good luck with that! Still holding stable... perhaps some of my hardware is too new / too fast for Win98 (?). I don't actually recollect what I was doing when the odd stuff started; seemed random. Maybe accessing a RAR on the DVD drive (a burned DVD, not CD). Possibility that was what was causing some of it (?). Think I might try re-install clean (I keep saying that...) and give the new CDFS.VXD a shot; it may "cure" it. All I did was clone fully patched, installed NIC, VIA video (from Soyo), VIA platform (VIAHyperion4in1453v), modem, VIA audio (in that order) - ZAP crashes began... Just me, folks... If you are good, then kewl! This is the most complete 98SE package devised. And I might recommend creating at least a minimal UBCD and keep AP handy as well. It may save your hides! Edit @soporific - Read this attachment. I uninstalled a couple more (IExplore probs gone?). Notes inside... forced_one_still_shows.txt

In addition, you will find all of the "hotfixes" in "raw" (i.e. original download) in a folder on your hard drive. Problem is they are generated names. You can go to Windows Update to see them. Or theer is a file(s) called IUHIST(something)CATALOG.XML that may tell you exactly which is which and what it's generated name is. Just replace "(something)" with "*" and do a search (setting Search Hidden and System under Advanced). THen comes the drawn-out copy-to-work-folder and rename-to KBxxxxxx-names. If you have hi-speed internet, get all the names, go to WU/MU, use Administrator (set in Customize), go to Old Site and search for the specific files. Whichever is faster for you. HTH

soporific : re CDFS.VXD - google search reveals "may not work on all..."; worth testing for people that want to try (make it optional - you will have to create an installer, tho). re WMI? dunno... Down to my nitty-gritty - Yep still had probs even after the last post (you read + attach?). Strange "overlay" of IE portions of screen in addition to crashes (especially when accessing burned DVD); usually Explorer when accessing the HDD; usually when using WinRar (using that the most). Finally got frustrated, uninstalled all IE6-related stuff and a few other unofficial (including Explorer fix). Unofficial un-installs mainly due to re-install of IE. Had a heck of a time flip-flopping file-names so's the uninstallers would work. Reinstalled IE6SP1, installed official IE6/OE6 stuff, went to WU, re-installed (official) from stored fixes. Only one shows up in WU - q273017 (can be ignored). Then ran AP Find Missing Report (after selecting all)... interesting to say the least (see attached report). Certainly doesn't jive with WU. And so far not a single "crash". I will attempt another reload (someday soon?) and retest (perhaps bypassing some unofficials via code-tweaks). Other than my "personal problems" (?VIA driver conflicts?) it seems to be ok (but see the attached - wierd). (edit) According to SHELL32.DLL fix, "Anonymous" has patched a number of these files... how well have they been tested in conjunction with each other / this install (this is not SP1; a different breed). ?Who is "Anonymous" and can he assure us that there are no cross-dependency problems? l8tr, m8! keep up the good work Report.txt

seskanda : Can't tell from the picture; is that XP and IE7, or XP and IE6 (comes with XP)? If you downloaded jscript.dll you may have inadvertantly gotten a wrong version. BTW, there is a KB article (KB917344) that would have "fixed" a problem - go to MS and search for it. My version (in Win2k3, IE6SP1) is for KB917344 is 5.6.0.8831 and the original (pre-KB fix) was 5.6.0.8827. Maybe you can download that KB "fix" and re-install it. If you already have IE7 installed, dunno if that will impact you, since I did not install it (I like IE6). If indeed you have IE7, try uninstalling it. You could also try extracting the original out of the I386 folder of the original installation of XP(?). It goes in WINDOWS\SYSTEM32 (also WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DLLCACHE). You might have to do this in Safe Mode. If not Safe Mode, install the Recovery Console (you can find instructions all over for that) and use the Recovery Console when you boot-up to replace it in those folders. Wouldn't be a bad idea to re-install the KB "fix" either. Another way would be to Uninstall the KB "fix"; should be listed in the Add/Remove Programs (select "Show All" option at the top). If you have that "fix", it should restore the Original. You should also uninstall Sun-Java then re-install it. Dunno if you have hosed your IE with the "fixes" you have described or not (I'm only as bright as a flashlight). edit: just dl'd the image and can see what you have. Do a google on IEXPLORE.EXE, JSCRIPT.DLL, and the displayed version (in quotes). Scads of people having problems. Even one at the Sun website. You might find the correct fix. (could be a trojan) HTH

Sophy : I agree with Idontwantspam on the Vista thing; can you check and see if it has shipped? If not, perhaps you can get them to change the order... IsoBuster - you're welcome You mean "UDF", don't you? This is a special format that allows using a CD/RW "as if" it were a e.g. HDD or memory card. You must have had some software (UDF Reader / Formatter) like Nero or Roxio (read Adaptec) installed. It may have installed with your Kodak software. This would have allowed you to I/O to the CD/RW. As you are now "set up", XP only recognizes any CD inserted as a "burnable" CD never to be written to again. Chances are, you had some CD/RW's "pre-formatted" to UDF, hence the nasty error message. BTW, any Burning Software you install usually requires you to separately install the UDF-thingy separately. Check what you have and see if you can install that "special" software; then the "Format / Read+Write UDF" functionality will return. WARNING! for any disks you already have in that format, you MUST use the same version of the software to allaow accesses. Otherwise you will have to use (whatever) to Full Format them (not UDF), which basically turns them into "unused" CD/RW's. Luck to ya.... edit: DOH! Just remembered; the XP re-install is what got ya! It probably blew away a bunch of stuff you had installed (depending on the reinstall method - thx Dell!). Just find the "burning" software you used before and re-install it. MIGHT just fix your probs...

I have noticed that some new folks have started one or more topics with the same question being repeated over-and-over-and-over... even though they have had their question answered. They also tend to variate the question to snare new "helpers". Should this be part of the Forum rules, or is it aleady there and I just didn't notice? How can they be convinced to "Just Stop It"? (hope this topic is in the right place...)