rodarkone wrote:

*snap*

You're seriously holding back that system with that slow laptop hard drive...

Until recently, hard drives were the main reason laptops were much slower in daily use compared to desktops.

Unfortunately I don't have an alternative 🙁 ... I have 2 SATA - SSH 500 GB (Seagate Momentus XT) ... but no adapter to plug them in the IDE

GeorgeMan wrote:

Yes, I've bought the patch and it works good. The only reason I've not stayed at 512MB is because this computer also has a GeForce 6800 Ultra and it's also able to play newer games on Windows XP that feel comfortable with more than 512MB of ram, while still being officially supported under 98SE.

One of these days I would like to test my theory that modifying the e820 memory map on boot to limit the machine to 512MB is enough to get 98SE running on such a machine. Many Dell machines have an "OS Install" option in their BIOS that limits visible memory to 256MB and allows 98SE to work on 1+GB machines. It appears that all it does is change the e820 memory map. I don't know if you can do it from DOS with something like a device driver though.

rodarkone wrote:

Unfortunately I don't have an alternative 🙁 ... I have 2 SATA - SSH 500 GB (Seagate Momentus XT) ... but no adapter to plug them in the IDE

Here you go then....
http://www.ebay.com/itm/PATA-IDE-TO-SATA-Conv … =item2ed953ccac

For Seagate HDD's. Mod' them with Seatools. You can get like a 2tb drive to act as it was an 32gb or any other size.

thanks mate - I know what I need 😀 I just don't have it ... yet 😀

1. power supply is ordered
2. case is ordered
3. sata to IDE adapter is in plans 😀 (I am hunting for some brand new ide hdd's that will be more suitable)
4. monitor is again .. a project, unfortunately I don't have space for a CRT monitor 🙁 so it will be a LCD, but I want a 4:3 (I currently have a 16:9)
5. keyboard - still looking for a PS/2 mechanical and AT mechanical (for my other projects)

The rest will be .. software, I will have to hunt some of my childhood games (from Dangerous Dave, Jill of the Jungle and Jazz Jack Rabbit to more "modern" titles like Unreal, Quake, NFS, Mafia ... the usual suspects)

brostenen wrote:

Well... I won't say that it is running on top of Dos. It has a lot of old MS-Dos technology integrated into the windows part, ye […]
Show full quote

Well... I won't say that it is running on top of Dos.
It has a lot of old MS-Dos technology integrated into the windows part, yet as a product per se', it is Windows98.
As far as I was told, back in the 90's, Windows98 makes use of MS-Dos system during the boot procedure.
When stuff like virtual devices are loaded, the Windows kernel takes over and the Dos are not used in the Windows part
from this point and onwards. (yes. The windows-windows-part not win-dos-part)
It does however make use of Dos, whenever an old Dos game or program is required.
Yes. You can load clean Dos. In other words. You just boot into MS-Dos 7, hence not loading Windows.

As I understand it. Windows98 is not running on top of dos. It is the Dos support that runs on top of Windows.
This is why I am firm on asking everybody, if they mean MS-Dos-6.22 or Win98, when they have trouble running something
from dos (setting up SB etc.) So much confusion out there. So much... 🤣
(Talking product-name here, not technologies)

I was simplifying matters a bit. Windows 9x, unlike 3.1, has built in drivers for every piece of hardware. Windows 3.1 relied on DOS for quite a lot of stuff (disk access, disk caching, CD-ROM access, etc.). Windows 9x also runs 32-bit applications natively, and has preemptive multitasking, but it WILL revert to behaving like Windows 3.11 if it doesn't have the drivers for a certain device. RAMDISK drives are an example, they are accessed through DOS. Deep down it is an evolved Windows 3.11 for Workgroups.

alexanrs wrote:

brostenen wrote:

Well... I won't say that it is running on top of Dos. It has a lot of old MS-Dos technology integrated into the windows part, ye […]
Show full quote

Well... I won't say that it is running on top of Dos.
It has a lot of old MS-Dos technology integrated into the windows part, yet as a product per se', it is Windows98.
As far as I was told, back in the 90's, Windows98 makes use of MS-Dos system during the boot procedure.
When stuff like virtual devices are loaded, the Windows kernel takes over and the Dos are not used in the Windows part
from this point and onwards. (yes. The windows-windows-part not win-dos-part)
It does however make use of Dos, whenever an old Dos game or program is required.
Yes. You can load clean Dos. In other words. You just boot into MS-Dos 7, hence not loading Windows.

As I understand it. Windows98 is not running on top of dos. It is the Dos support that runs on top of Windows.
This is why I am firm on asking everybody, if they mean MS-Dos-6.22 or Win98, when they have trouble running something
from dos (setting up SB etc.) So much confusion out there. So much... 🤣
(Talking product-name here, not technologies)

I was simplifying matters a bit. Windows 9x, unlike 3.1, has built in drivers for every piece of hardware. Windows 3.1 relied on DOS for quite a lot of stuff (disk access, disk caching, CD-ROM access, etc.). Windows 9x also runs 32-bit applications natively, and has preemptive multitasking, but it WILL revert to behaving like Windows 3.11 if it doesn't have the drivers for a certain device. RAMDISK drives are an example, they are accessed through DOS. Deep down it is an evolved Windows 3.11 for Workgroups.

Then you must think the same as I. That there is a great deal of misunderstanding of MS-Dos vs. Win9X on this forum?
It's just really helpless, when someone asks for help to fix something in Dos, when they are running Win9X and not MS-Dos-6.22
The real problem is that someone is not making clear, that they are using the build-in Dos of Win9X.
And whenever someone is saying that they are running Dos, I automatically think that they are running something like MS-Dos or DR-Dos.
I know that I am a pain in the a** here, yet why do people call it a shovel, when it's in fact a spade instead? Mind's bubbeling here. 😉

EDIT:
Anyway... It's not as bad as what we see in other media's. I have seen people talk about Win7 command-prompt as being Dos.
You know. "Start up the Dos" that some are telling other's to do. Or when people say that Linux is Unix or Unix being Linux.

If they are using Windows 9x's DOS kernel only (DOS7) and not starting the GUI then I don't mind people calling it MS-DOS, as the kernel is a real DOS kernel, just missing a bunch of the auxiliary drivers and utilities. Also I've never found anything that runs on 6.2 and not on "DOS 7.1". Calling it that is technically wrong, though.

True... When Win9X is not loaded, it is just MS-Dos. Yet with Win9X loaded, it is not Dos anymore.
Then it's simply a case of Dos being run on top of Windows....
Wich then again makes me remember that I have seen a clean MS-Dos-7 install cd without the Win-part.

NJRoadfan
GeorgeMan

I am no Windows 98 SE expert and I just learned a little trick that I will share. How to run properly run Windows 98 SE with large amounts of RAM. I knew about vcache but that is only part of the equation.

I have a Dell 4600 that has the option in BIOS for 'OS Install' mode that limits RAM to 256MB but in practice it is a pain in the ass to use. You have to hit F1 to boot every time while it is enabled which might not sound bad but when you are working on multiple things and reboot and the thing stays stuck at the prompt when you need it booting and more importantly... what if you forget? You could bork your install and be reloading 98 instead of playing your favorite game.

Here is the answer. Theoretically it will work with any amount of RAM. I am using 2GB for XP and limiting to 256MB for 98.

You need to edit these two files:

This is the normal Windows System File

C:\Windows\System.ini

This is the Safe Mode System File (so you can still boot into Safe Mode if needed)

C:\Windows\System.cb

In both files add a section (if it does not exist) labeled [vcache] and underneath it create a entry called MaxFileCache and set it to a sane value. In my example I set it to 128MB.

[vcache]
MaxFileCache=131072

That takes care of the vcache problem but it doesn't solve the bigger issue which is large amounts of RAM installed, specifically more than 1GB. This takes care of that.

In both files add a section (if it does not exist, it should in system.ini) labeled [386Enh] and underneath it create a entry called MaxPhysPage and set it to a sane value. In my example I set it to 256MB.

[386Enh]
MaxPhysPage=10000

Enjoy!

Some other values.

MaxFileCache=524288 = 512MB RAM
MaxFileCache=262144 = 256MB RAM
MaxFileCache=131072 = 128MB RAM
MaxFileCache=65536 = 64MB RAM
MaxFileCache=32768 = 32MB RAM

MaxPhysPage=40000 = 1GB RAM
MaxPhysPage=20000 = 512MB RAM
MaxPhysPage=10000 = 256MB RAM

Are there any Pentium 4 chipsets/sockets to stay away from for a build like this? Also are there any specific bios features/options that would be helpful?

I went to build a Pentium 4 system last night and I think the motherboard has some bad caps as it will randomly reset, so I need to keep an eye out for another board.

I see one with this board on craigslist.

How are those quadro's on dos game compatibility? So far the Voodoo 3 is the best I've seen and have.

brostenen wrote:

Here you go then.... http://www.ebay.com/itm/PATA-IDE-TO-SATA-Conv … =item2ed953ccac […]
Show full quote

rodarkone wrote:

Unfortunately I don't have an alternative 🙁 ... I have 2 SATA - SSH 500 GB (Seagate Momentus XT) ... but no adapter to plug them in the IDE

Here you go then....
http://www.ebay.com/itm/PATA-IDE-TO-SATA-Conv … =item2ed953ccac

For Seagate HDD's. Mod' them with Seatools. You can get like a 2tb drive to act as it was an 32gb or any other size.

This also works with Samsung drives. Seagate took over. A shame WD doesn't have something similar because I have quite a few WD drives.

I have the same Asus P4S333-VM motherboard. Currently with a P4 3.06 GHz, a 32 GB capacity limited 2 TB Seagate as main drive on primary IDE master.. On the secondary IDE master I've got a 80 GB drive (I use Seagate Disc Wizard / Acronis to take a HDD image for quick restorations when swapping cards) and the DVD-RW as secondary slave.

sgraffite wrote:

Are there any Pentium 4 chipsets/sockets to stay away from for a build like this? Also are there any specific bios features/options that would be helpful?

I went to build a Pentium 4 system last night and I think the motherboard has some bad caps as it will randomly reset, so I need to keep an eye out for another board.

I see one with this board on craigslist.

The chipset I can recommend is the Intel 865. You should easily find boards with that chipset. The 875 is also good, but rarer, harder to find and more expensive.

The board you linked is interesting / odd. Socket 775 and 845 chipset. Very interesing.

philscomputerlab wrote:

A shame WD doesn't have something similar because I have quite a few WD drives.

Uhmmm..... I am not 100% shure on this.
Though, I remember using a different program, found on eighter Highrens boot-cd or Ultimate Boot Disc on my 80gb WD HDD.
It was one of those program's that could run on a K6-Class cpu, as compared to Seatools, that does not run on such old CPU's.
You might want to look into that. As far as I remember, it was a more or less older looking user interface, and for a different
drive manufactor than WD. It could be a tool for Maxtor drives. As said. I am not 100% shure on this.
The 80gb-SATA drive is modded though, to 32gb, and I only vaguely remember using a tool for a different manufactor than WD.

Can someone confirm me on this, or am I remembering only half of what I actually did 6 to 12 months ago......
(Only did this once, hence not remembering 100%)

I've got both, UBCD and Hiren's and will have a look. Any idea of the name? Was it a tool from Western Digital or something third party?

philscomputerlab wrote:

I've got both, UBCD and Hiren's and will have a look. Any idea of the name? Was it a tool from Western Digital or something third party?

Nope. Not a clue whatsoever. Just remembering that it showed up in the list, when searching the system for Drives.
It might have been a textbased ui with a blue, black or grey background.

My bad. It was not a mod of the drive it self.
It was an Operating installation tool that I used, combined with Extended Fdisk.
So yeah.. Did have Win98 running on a 80gb WD-Sata-HDD, using a 32gb partition.

Thanks for clearing that up 😀

Question about the Aureal Vortex 2:

I have a Diamond Monster 2 Vortex 2 sound card. I can't get any sound out of the thing in a DOS game. My question is can I expect to get Sound FX but no MIDI(without a wavetable add-in board), or should I be able to get MIDI and Sound FX to work under Sound Blaster emulation?

I'm having a helluva time with this because I know it should work.

SPECS:
Athlon XP 25000+
ASUS nForce2 motherboard with native Win98SE drivers
Diamond Monster 2 Aureal Vortex 2 sound card
Nvdia FX 5200 AGP GPU
768MB RAM

Can you take a screenshot of the resources in device manager?

What is the SET BLASTER varible set?

Do you have Sound Blaster Emulation installed?

Have you tried running DOS games from within Windows first, rather than running MS-DOS mode?