Jump to content

Running Windows 98 in 2020 and beyond...


Wunderbar98

Recommended Posts

Thanks for all responses, i will investigate further. Thus far no passthrough attempts were successful, it could be that this old QEMU release did not yet have the feature. Will dig a little more tomorrow.

Hi Brunhino. The documentation was changed to 'Within QEMU press Ctrl-Alt at any time to break out to the host system', rather than 'Within QEMU press Ctrl-Alt to break out to the host system'. The intention isn't to break out, just to let people know how. So if you're using the old README.TXT and entered Ctrl-Alt then your active cursor returned to Windows. If so just re-click on the QEMU TCL window and the mouse cursor should return to action.

Unfortunately you're old hat with emulation so this probably isn't the case. My tests were performed on a bare metal Windows 98 installation. If you have Windows 2000 emulating Windows 98 emulating Tiny Core Linux then i'm not sure this will work, i believe QEMU needs hardware access. If i were you, use your favourite Windows 2000 emulator and go from there, bypass this old QEMU and Windows 98.

You could try modifying the LAUNCH.BAT video driver and retest. It's defaulted to directx, try windib.
SET SDL_VIDEODRIVER=windib

Edited by Wunderbar98
Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Wunderbar98 said:

Thanks for all responses, i will investigate further. Thus far no passthrough attempts were successful, it could be that this old QEMU release did not yet have the feature. Will dig a little more tomorrow.

Hi Brunhino. The documentation was changed to 'Within QEMU press Ctrl-Alt at any time to break out to the host system', rather than 'Within QEMU press Ctrl-Alt to break out to the host system'. The intention isn't to break out, just to let people know how. So if you're using the old README.TXT and entered Ctrl-Alt then your active cursor returned to Windows. If so just re-click on the QEMU TCL window and the mouse cursor should return to action.

Unfortunately you're old hat with emulation so this probably isn't the case. My tests were performed on a bare metal Windows 98 installation. If you have Windows 2000 emulating Windows 98 emulating Tiny Core Linux then i'm not sure this will work, i believe QEMU needs hardware access. If i were you, use your favourite Windows 2000 emulator and go from there, bypass this old QEMU and Windows 98.

You could try modifying the LAUNCH.BAT video driver and retest. It's defaulted to directx, try windib.
SET SDL_VIDEODRIVER=windib

windib helps to run launch.bat (previously it was closing on me), but when I get to the desktop the mouse is completely uncontrollable. I simply cannot control it (it moves, but goes to wrong places and very fast).

Edit: Fixed it by adding the flags -usbdevice tablet to Launch.bat.

Edited by Bruninho
more info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad you got things sorted, hopefully it helps someone else. What setup are you using exactly?

There are too many configuration options to discuss in a stripped down README. My test system uses a PS2 mouse. If anyone else using USB mouse has problems, please report the issue and solution. A README update may be pending.

Couple other things that may help others. FLWM is not a favourite window manager, just the default, obviously the goal is to get a browser running. Ctrl-Alt-m maximizes windows. Right-click the desktop or a title bar for an application context menu. Search 'flwm_topside' in Apps to review default keyboard shortcuts.

When in graphic mode Control Panel -> Mouse Tool can be used to adjust mouse speed.

If a TCL boot gives mouse or graphic grief (unusable), try:

Ctrl-Alt-Delete when QEMU window is active to exit TCL graphics and return to command line (cancel Window 98's coincidental task manager popup).

In command line, move .xsession file (note the .xsession period).
mv /home/tc/.xsession /home/tc/.xsession_backup

Run graphic setup, select mouse type and resolution.
xsetup

Restart graphic mode.
startx

If good, ensure backup is selected upon TCL shutdown. Otherwise repeat 'xsetup' and trial another option.

Edited by Wunderbar98
Link to comment
Share on other sites

for QEMU based solution, I wonder if you can do X11 passthrough and run xterm/firefox/seamonkey from host side?

EDIT: actually it does work, but X11 forwarding via SLIRP is slow.

Edited by roytam1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all responses. From DOS, running 'qemu.exe | more' or 'qemu.exe > QEMU_options.txt' lists all available options for this old QEMU, closest thing to documentation for this release. In LAUNCH.BAT replacing '-no-kqemu' with '-kernel-kqemu' may be worthy of a performance trial.

Also noteworthy that this old QEMU does have built-in networking capability, so there must be a simpler way to file share. If it can be enabled built-in, this may be better than other options. Will play over the next few days, if anyone can solve please post notes. Not all of this is probably related to this old QEMU, maybe it helps solve the issue.
https://wiki.qemu.org/Documentation/Networking

QEMU performance is apparently slow with Xvesa graphics, planning time trials using Xfbdev frame buffer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will definitely stick to Windows 2000 since it's the closest thing to Windows 98 with 2 browsers that work very well.

If I knew how to, I would customize the looks (bootscreen, start menu banner, logon/logoff banners) to something like a customized Windows 98 version so I could get half of what I wanted. *rolleyes*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all feedback. Couldn't get built-in networking running with vanilla Windows 98 on this old QEMU. Despite best efforts, couldn't find a KQEMU accelerator for it either, not sure Windows 98 compatible QEMU ever had acceleration. Tests with Tiny Core Linux Xvesa vs Xfbdev graphics did not make an appreciable difference, if anything default Xvesa looked faster.

Thanks for all the links. Disk Explorer good, will create a separate README.TXT for file sharing between host and QEMU guest. Extract v2.10 looked like an interesting console alternative but the download link failed in RetroZilla even with JavaScript, query broken link.

Thanks for confirming Firefox v55.0.3. Seems Mozilla couldn't decide, apparent contradictions within the same article. Will probably update the README with a range for non-SSE2 systems between Firefox v49 - v55.0.3, let the user decide what they want to experiment with. Query whether some features required SSE2 and caused crashes (eg sync, pocket), don't know. From the link, looks like Firefox ESR v52 still supports non-SSE2 systems.
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/your-hardware-no-longer-supported

Will upload updated README.TXT files for this experimental Modern Web Browser Emulation project in the next few days to wrap it up. Based on slow browser performance, query whether it would be functional even with maxed out Windows 98 hardware (ie. 2.6 GHz Pentium 4), wish i had this for testing. Regardless, still fun to see what may be possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the Modern Web Browser Emulation project, the firefox_getLatest script from the Tiny Core Linux v7 (TCL) repository broke. Just wanted to notify so nobody wastes time on it. If anyone still wants to hack, recommend the manual Firefox method described in the README.TXT. There will be lots of changes to the README files, so maybe just hold off. The SeaMonkey installation instructions should still work fine.

Linux is also a victim of new and shiny. The script author refuses to update older releases, 'update to the latest' is the usual response. Hogwash.

For those that know their way around Linux and Tiny Core, it just appears to be a new wget URL. Unsquash the firefox_getLatest.tcz extension, place the script in $HOME/.local/bin, shutdown, re-boot, modify the script, chmod +x. Note there may be more breakage than below, can't be bothered to check.

Broken:
http://download.cdn.mozilla.net/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases

Good:
http://download.cdn.mozilla.net/pub/firefox/releases

Revamped READMEs are pending, it will take time. New notes will describe manual Firefox installation methods, bypassing the firefox_getLatest script. Focusing only on ESR releases, going back and forward in versions as much as this TCL v7 release and my hardware will allow.

Presently running Firefox ESR 38.8.0 from April 2016. Since it's a little older, it still uses the more efficient GTK2 graphic toolkit. So it's actually fairly nice. In the end the broken script is likely a blessing in disguise, just a little more legwork. High-end Windows 98 hardware will still be required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Install notes will eventually be completed for all Firefox releases listed below. The install process will be similar for non-ESR releases too, just the download URL will differ, use same dependencies from the ESR release era. The bloat and performance hit is evident with each new release. The key is finding a sweet spot between performance and usability.

Although FF_3.6.28 was not an ESR release, it is included because it's classic. It has the same outdated cipher connection issues that plague all old OS users. If you want to run this version on Windows 98, consider kernel extensions with an enhanced FF v3.6 linked in this forum.

According to wikipedia, TLS v1.1 and 1.2 were enabled by default in Firefox v27.

Unable to test FF_ESR_60.9.0 onward due to exception error on non-SSE2 capable hardware. The GTK3 (Graphic Toolkit 3) releases are so heavy, unusable on current hardware. Of note SeaMonkey also changed from GTK2 to GTK3 sometime between v2.46 (in TCL v7 repository) and v2.49 (manual upgrade needed, see README.TXT).

FF_3.6.28 (MAR 2012, 10 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_10.0.12 (JAN 2013, 16 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_17.0.11 (NOV 2013, 20 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_24.8.1 (SEP 2014, 27 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_31.8.0 (JUL 2015, 37 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_38.8.0 (APR 2016, 44 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_45.9.0 (APR 2017, 50 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_52.9.0 (JUN 2018, 55 MB, GTK3)
FF_ESR_60.9.0 (SEP 2019, 53 MB, GTK3, need SSE2 processor, untested)
FF_ESR_68.5.0 (FEB 2020 ongoing, 63 MB, GTK3, need SSE2 processor, untested)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wunderbar98 said:

Install notes will eventually be completed for all Firefox releases listed below. The install process will be similar for non-ESR releases too, just the download URL will differ, use same dependencies from the ESR release era. The bloat and performance hit is evident with each new release. The key is finding a sweet spot between performance and usability.

Although FF_3.6.28 was not an ESR release, it is included because it's classic. It has the same outdated cipher connection issues that plague all old OS users. If you want to run this version on Windows 98, consider kernel extensions with an enhanced FF v3.6 linked in this forum.

According to wikipedia, TLS v1.1 and 1.2 were enabled by default in Firefox v27.

Unable to test FF_ESR_60.9.0 onward due to exception error on non-SSE2 capable hardware. The GTK3 (Graphic Toolkit 3) releases are so heavy, unusable on current hardware. Of note SeaMonkey also changed from GTK2 to GTK3 sometime between v2.46 (in TCL v7 repository) and v2.49 (manual upgrade needed, see README.TXT).

FF_3.6.28 (MAR 2012, 10 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_10.0.12 (JAN 2013, 16 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_17.0.11 (NOV 2013, 20 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_24.8.1 (SEP 2014, 27 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_31.8.0 (JUL 2015, 37 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_38.8.0 (APR 2016, 44 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_45.9.0 (APR 2017, 50 MB, GTK2)
FF_ESR_52.9.0 (JUN 2018, 55 MB, GTK3)
FF_ESR_60.9.0 (SEP 2019, 53 MB, GTK3, need SSE2 processor, untested)
FF_ESR_68.5.0 (FEB 2020 ongoing, 63 MB, GTK3, need SSE2 processor, untested)

Hi, I just thought I'd point out that FF 52.9ESR requires the SSE2 instruction as well. Otherwise, accurate, to my knowledge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback sparty411. Although there's conflicting information, will go with that. Probably better safe than sorry. The only systems that will have a chance at emulating these more recent releases will be SSE2 capable Pentium 4. The documentation will read as follows.

If not SSE2 capable the last versions that should work are:
Firefox ESR v45.9.0
Firefox v49.0.2

The Mozilla link provided earlier appeared conflicted and interestingly roytam1 reported Firefox v55.0.3 worked without SSE2 above. On my test FF_ESR_52.9.0 browser opened but the hardware was inadequate to properly test. Unlike FF_ESR_60.9.0, which immediately failed when launched from terminal. My tests and roytam1's used Linux releases, query differences from Window builds. Anyway doesn't matter much, thanks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder what the average age is of a typical Windows 98 user today? Although there may be the odd whippersnapper curious about DOS-based systems, my hunch is greater than 36-37 years of age would capture 95% of users. The average age would undoubtedly be much higher. Anyone who installed Windows 98 independently in 1998-1999 would probably have been 15-20+ years old. If i had to profile, predominantly male, computer hobbyist, stubborn and persistent with a strong sense of nostalgia.

Most kids using their parent's Windows 98 computer in 1998-2000 probably upgraded without much thought when they bought their first system, whatever was preloaded at the local box store or used in school. I'm not sure many of the new generation would have the patience to get most of this stuff installed and working. User expectations are now so much greater in regards to graphics, performance and ease of use. More modern software, such as DOSBox, has made running old DOS applications simpler, without having to load an old operating system or assemble ancient hardware. Too bad, so sad, they don't know what they're missing :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Wunderbar98 said:

Thanks for the feedback sparty411. Although there's conflicting information, will go with that. Probably better safe than sorry. The only systems that will have a chance at emulating these more recent releases will be SSE2 capable Pentium 4. The documentation will read as follows.

If not SSE2 capable the last versions that should work are:
Firefox ESR v45.9.0
Firefox v49.0.2

The Mozilla link provided earlier appeared conflicted and interestingly roytam1 reported Firefox v55.0.3 worked without SSE2 above. On my test FF_ESR_52.9.0 browser opened but the hardware was inadequate to properly test. Unlike FF_ESR_60.9.0, which immediately failed when launched from terminal. My tests and roytam1's used Linux releases, query differences from Window builds. Anyway doesn't matter much, thanks again.

I'm roughly 99% certain that is the case, but it has been a few years since I last used vanilla Firefox. I know for a fact that RT builds Basilisk for IA-32 on a weekly basis, though. I never really have much to say, but I do enjoy reading about your adventures with Windows98 ITT :D. Great work, and keep it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...