You could always add ISA slots by using an ISA riser card... or even add an external ISA expansion which you could use an ISA backplane on. (can be fairly cheap but would require some self made pieces and/or case modification)

The other option is adding PCI slots with a MAGMA PCI expansion chassis. (expensive)

Those are pretty much the options I know about that would be easy to use.

If you want to go all out, you can always rebuild your system with an PIAGP setup (AGP/PCI/ISA) backplane and SBC (Single Board Computer).

You can get up to either 18 or 19 usable slots that way and up to a Socket 478 Pentium 4 3.4Ghz or if you can find an unobtanium LGA775 SBC, you can go up to at least the 3.73Ghz Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. Not sure if Pentium D would work or not.

Only drawback is that AGP would be 8x and you would need a PCI Voodoo 3 or Voodoo 5 unless you use a PCI to AGP adapter that works with 3dfx cards.

That would also give you the option of using a much faster AGP card for Win9x.

But that whole option is pretty expensive unless you get super lucky.

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-03-05, 22:35:

You could always add ISA slots by using an ISA riser card... or even add an external ISA expansion which you could use an ISA ba […]
Show full quote

You could always add ISA slots by using an ISA riser card... or even add an external ISA expansion which you could use an ISA backplane on. (can be fairly cheap but would require some self made pieces and/or case modification)

The other option is adding PCI slots with a MAGMA PCI expansion chassis. (expensive)

Those are pretty much the options I know about that would be easy to use.

If you want to go all out, you can always rebuild your system with an PIAGP setup (AGP/PCI/ISA) backplane and SBC (Single Board Computer).

You can get up to either 18 or 19 usable slots that way and up to a Socket 478 Pentium 4 3.4Ghz or if you can find an unobtanium LGA775 SBC, you can go up to at least the 3.73Ghz Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. Not sure if Pentium D would work or not.

Only drawback is that AGP would be 8x and you would need a PCI Voodoo 3 or Voodoo 5 unless you use a PCI to AGP adapter that works with 3dfx cards.

That would also give you the option of using a much faster AGP card for Win9x.

But that whole option is pretty expensive unless you get super lucky.

Adding external slots would be neat, though beyond my current knowledge and budget (especially as I am still trying to get some specific parts.)

I am seeing serial-to-lan adapters, though I don't know how they work or if they are a solution.

Scythifuge wrote on 2021-03-05, 23:06:

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-03-05, 22:35:

You could always add ISA slots by using an ISA riser card... or even add an external ISA expansion which you could use an ISA ba […]
Show full quote

You could always add ISA slots by using an ISA riser card... or even add an external ISA expansion which you could use an ISA backplane on. (can be fairly cheap but would require some self made pieces and/or case modification)

The other option is adding PCI slots with a MAGMA PCI expansion chassis. (expensive)

Those are pretty much the options I know about that would be easy to use.

If you want to go all out, you can always rebuild your system with an PIAGP setup (AGP/PCI/ISA) backplane and SBC (Single Board Computer).

You can get up to either 18 or 19 usable slots that way and up to a Socket 478 Pentium 4 3.4Ghz or if you can find an unobtanium LGA775 SBC, you can go up to at least the 3.73Ghz Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. Not sure if Pentium D would work or not.

Only drawback is that AGP would be 8x and you would need a PCI Voodoo 3 or Voodoo 5 unless you use a PCI to AGP adapter that works with 3dfx cards.

That would also give you the option of using a much faster AGP card for Win9x.

But that whole option is pretty expensive unless you get super lucky.

Adding external slots would be neat, though beyond my current knowledge and budget (especially as I am still trying to get some specific parts.)

I am seeing serial-to-lan adapters, though I don't know how they work or if they are a solution.

Those are for doing super long serial connections over the network unless you found something else.

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-03-05, 23:09:

Scythifuge wrote on 2021-03-05, 23:06:

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-03-05, 22:35:

You could always add ISA slots by using an ISA riser card... or even add an external ISA expansion which you could use an ISA ba […]
Show full quote

You could always add ISA slots by using an ISA riser card... or even add an external ISA expansion which you could use an ISA backplane on. (can be fairly cheap but would require some self made pieces and/or case modification)

The other option is adding PCI slots with a MAGMA PCI expansion chassis. (expensive)

Those are pretty much the options I know about that would be easy to use.

If you want to go all out, you can always rebuild your system with an PIAGP setup (AGP/PCI/ISA) backplane and SBC (Single Board Computer).

You can get up to either 18 or 19 usable slots that way and up to a Socket 478 Pentium 4 3.4Ghz or if you can find an unobtanium LGA775 SBC, you can go up to at least the 3.73Ghz Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. Not sure if Pentium D would work or not.

Only drawback is that AGP would be 8x and you would need a PCI Voodoo 3 or Voodoo 5 unless you use a PCI to AGP adapter that works with 3dfx cards.

That would also give you the option of using a much faster AGP card for Win9x.

But that whole option is pretty expensive unless you get super lucky.

Adding external slots would be neat, though beyond my current knowledge and budget (especially as I am still trying to get some specific parts.)

I am seeing serial-to-lan adapters, though I don't know how they work or if they are a solution.

Those are for doing super long serial connections over the network unless you found something else.

I found some "serial to IP" comverters and see TCP/IP mentioned. I am reading and checking videos ands what not. If these don't do what I need, then I may either have to give up on a LAN option, or the "'cover all versions of glide" option.

Win98 supports networking including file sharing over serial and parallel. However you'd need another machine or vm to act as a gateway to your network. There's also usb network adapters, probably models out there with win98 drivers. Getting anything working from DOS seems difficult to be honest.

Oetker wrote on 2021-03-06, 00:39:

Win98 supports networking including file sharing over serial and parallel. However you'd need another machine or vm to act as a gateway to your network. There's also usb network adapters, probably models out there with win98 drivers. Getting anything working from DOS seems difficult to be honest.

I am considering usb adapters, though I am hoping that one of these various serial/LAN boxes provide a little more. I am reading that it may be possible to do what I am trying to do, though I have a lot of research to do.

What about something like this?

https://www.newegg.com/p/36X-0002-00013

Scythifuge wrote on 2021-03-06, 01:55:

What about something like this?

https://www.newegg.com/p/36X-0002-00013

I could be wrong, but I think that this device encapsulates serial (RS-232) data in TCP/IP packets and that it is not an actual Ethernet adapter that happens to interface to a PC over a serial interface .
In other words, the main significant use for this would be connecting the COM ports of two computers that are distant from one another over a TCP/IP local network or through the Internet (you would need two of these devices, one at each end, for this to work). The said computers would then "see" each other as if they were connected through a null modem cable .

Yeah devices like that are used to interface e.g. serial gps sensors over ethernet.
Something like that could conceivably be combined with virtual com port software and a win98 vm to get serial networking going between your retro pc and a modern pc acting as a gateway, it won't allow you to hook up a pc directly to the network.

With any type of null modem connection you could also try fooling the retro pc into thinking it's got a modem attached and 'dial' into another pc.

That reminds me, I've also seen posts about modem-to-modem networking on here.

I am sorry for not being able to add to your specific question and please feel free to completely ignore my advice! But I'd recommend you to reconsider the whole idea.
"Ultimate" allaround retro builds are always a headache.
They always end up costing too much, they are unnecessarily complicated and you always end up finding something they can not do just when you think you finally got it right.
If you have the room for it I recommend you aim for an "ultimate" setup with multiple PCs instead of a single PC that can do everything.

Would a USB Ethernet adapter that only works in Windows 9.x be so much of an issue ?
Is rebooting into Windows 9.x in order to transfer files over Ethernet that much of a hassle ?
Even if you did find a serial Ethernet solution would you really want to use at a likely "blistering" 15 kilobytes per second or so ?

At the end of the day, what are your use cases (specific software) for working Ethernet in plain DOS and Windows 3.x ? This is the most important question, IMHO, because even if you do find a working serial Ethernet solution, there is no guarantee that it will work in DOS or Windows 3.x , so it likely won't have any advantage over a USB Ethernet adapter .

FTP with mTCP massively simplifies file transfers in DOS, so I'd say a pretty valid use case.

As for hardware, serial port performance is much too low - but why not parallel port? Parallel port to Ethernet adapters exist and can still be found quite cheaply. They're not fast, but something like the Xircom Pocket Ethernet adapter or an el-cheapo Accton EtherPocket device will work fine with DOS drivers.

dionb wrote on 2021-03-06, 14:07:

FTP with mTCP massively simplifies file transfers in DOS, so I'd say a pretty valid use case.

As for hardware, serial port performance is much too low - but why not parallel port? Parallel port to Ethernet adapters exist and can still be found quite cheaply. They're not fast, but something like the Xircom Pocket Ethernet adapter or an el-cheapo Accton EtherPocket device will work fine with DOS drivers.

Transferring files in DOS is definitely an example of a valid use case. The question remains, though, is it a use case that the OP is interested in ?

Personally, in my retro setup, if I need to transfer something, I will fire up Windows 98 SE and wait the few seconds it takes for it to start up (from an SSD) so I can transfer over SMB . Alternatively, I can do it from Linux using a live boot CD or DVD. That's just my preference, obviously, and not necessarily OP's .

I have a Xircom PE3 somewhere and my last memory of its performance is about 100ish kilobytes per second using FTP , which is about 4 to 5 times slower than, for example, even my Linksys USB10T (USB 1.1 Ethernet).

Whether or not OP prefers to sacrifice the relatively fast transfer speed of a USB Ethernet adapter in favor of the added convenience of a DOS supported but much slower parallel port Ethernet adapter is up to him .

Thank you all for the replies! I am interested in giving this box as much functionality as possible, so file transfers and internet connection (Arachne in DOS, Netscape in Win 3.11, and a late 90's era browser for Windows 98.) I can use an external modem for calling a BBS, so figuring out a networking solution to use broadband would be great. If there is a specific parallel option, I would try that. I find it strange that we have external modems, but not external NICs.

I want to get a Dream Blaster X2, and maybe an external Sound Canvas. If I do that, I could remove the SCC-1 and use a 10/100 ISA NIC, which would have drivers for all three operating systems and would solved a lot of the issues. I am looking to utilize all of the ports on the Ultimate Box, so I am looking at all kinds of devices. I may never use them, but you never know. I may use a serial cable with a null modem adapter and connect my P3 to my 486 via serial port for games like Blood, Doom, and Wing Commander Armada, and thus use a serial port. I will be connecting an LS-120/Printer/other stuff to the parallel port. I actually found an old desk with hutch that us very similar to the one I had back in the Commodore 64/486/Pentium 90 era (for free,) and this is going to be the perfect nostalgia set up, with my 486 on the desk, and the P3 in a tower on the floor, using a KVM. Hell, I may think of a qay to get my Athlon XP system in the mix (rebuilt in the original case I had back in the day!)

I think I can connect an SC-55 an MT-32 at the same time using MIDI Thru, so the SCC-1 doesn't "have to" be in there. Also, so far, the Voodoo 2 and 3 are working together without issues, so I think it will be alright to get a 2nd V2 and a V1 (maybe a swap with someone for the SCC-1?)

At any rate, if I can connect to the internet through the parallel port, I'm game and would like to try it!

darry wrote on 2021-03-06, 15:28:

Transferring files in DOS is definitely an example of a valid use case. The question remains, though, is it a use case that the […]
Show full quote

dionb wrote on 2021-03-06, 14:07:

FTP with mTCP massively simplifies file transfers in DOS, so I'd say a pretty valid use case.

As for hardware, serial port performance is much too low - but why not parallel port? Parallel port to Ethernet adapters exist and can still be found quite cheaply. They're not fast, but something like the Xircom Pocket Ethernet adapter or an el-cheapo Accton EtherPocket device will work fine with DOS drivers.

Transferring files in DOS is definitely an example of a valid use case. The question remains, though, is it a use case that the OP is interested in ?

Personally, in my retro setup, if I need to transfer something, I will fire up Windows 98 SE and wait the few seconds it takes for it to start up (from an SSD) so I can transfer over SMB . Alternatively, I can do it from Linux using a live boot CD or DVD. That's just my preference, obviously, and not necessarily OP's .

I have a Xircom PE3 somewhere and my last memory of its performance is about 100ish kilobytes per second using FTP , which is about 4 to 5 times slower than, for example, even my Linksys USB10T (USB 1.1 Ethernet).

Whether or not OP prefers to sacrifice the relatively fast transfer speed of a USB Ethernet adapter in favor of the added convenience of a DOS supported but much slower parallel port Ethernet adapter is up to him .

I am thinking that a USB solution with a parallel solution for DOS is the best bet, unless I pull the SCC-1 in favor of an external or other option.

Scythifuge wrote on 2021-03-06, 23:15:

darry wrote on 2021-03-06, 15:28:

Transferring files in DOS is definitely an example of a valid use case. The question remains, though, is it a use case that the […]
Show full quote

dionb wrote on 2021-03-06, 14:07:

FTP with mTCP massively simplifies file transfers in DOS, so I'd say a pretty valid use case.

As for hardware, serial port performance is much too low - but why not parallel port? Parallel port to Ethernet adapters exist and can still be found quite cheaply. They're not fast, but something like the Xircom Pocket Ethernet adapter or an el-cheapo Accton EtherPocket device will work fine with DOS drivers.

Transferring files in DOS is definitely an example of a valid use case. The question remains, though, is it a use case that the OP is interested in ?

Personally, in my retro setup, if I need to transfer something, I will fire up Windows 98 SE and wait the few seconds it takes for it to start up (from an SSD) so I can transfer over SMB . Alternatively, I can do it from Linux using a live boot CD or DVD. That's just my preference, obviously, and not necessarily OP's .

I have a Xircom PE3 somewhere and my last memory of its performance is about 100ish kilobytes per second using FTP , which is about 4 to 5 times slower than, for example, even my Linksys USB10T (USB 1.1 Ethernet).

Whether or not OP prefers to sacrifice the relatively fast transfer speed of a USB Ethernet adapter in favor of the added convenience of a DOS supported but much slower parallel port Ethernet adapter is up to him .

I am thinking that a USB solution with a parallel solution for DOS is the best bet, unless I pull the SCC-1 in favor of an external or other option.

That's a great idea ! You can definitely do both USB and parallel. I hadn't thought of that .

As for the SCC-1 , if I had one, I would definitely sell it (considering the insane prices they are going for) and get an external Sound Canvas or 2, get a sound card with an MPU-401 clone that supports intelligent mode ( Orpheus or AWE64 Legacy) and likely still have money left over .

darry wrote on 2021-03-07, 01:01:

Scythifuge wrote on 2021-03-06, 23:15:

darry wrote on 2021-03-06, 15:28:

Transferring files in DOS is definitely an example of a valid use case. The question remains, though, is it a use case that the […]
Show full quote

Transferring files in DOS is definitely an example of a valid use case. The question remains, though, is it a use case that the OP is interested in ?

Personally, in my retro setup, if I need to transfer something, I will fire up Windows 98 SE and wait the few seconds it takes for it to start up (from an SSD) so I can transfer over SMB . Alternatively, I can do it from Linux using a live boot CD or DVD. That's just my preference, obviously, and not necessarily OP's .

I have a Xircom PE3 somewhere and my last memory of its performance is about 100ish kilobytes per second using FTP , which is about 4 to 5 times slower than, for example, even my Linksys USB10T (USB 1.1 Ethernet).

Whether or not OP prefers to sacrifice the relatively fast transfer speed of a USB Ethernet adapter in favor of the added convenience of a DOS supported but much slower parallel port Ethernet adapter is up to him .

I am thinking that a USB solution with a parallel solution for DOS is the best bet, unless I pull the SCC-1 in favor of an external or other option.

That's a great idea ! You can definitely do both USB and parallel. I hadn't thought of that .

As for the SCC-1 , if I had one, I would definitely sell it (considering the insane prices they are going for) and get an external Sound Canvas or 2, get a sound card with an MPU-401 clone that supports intelligent mode ( Orpheus or AWE64 Legacy) and likely still have money left over .

I just bought a Voodoo 5 after an auction went too high and I made an offer with $50 off on a whim and it was accepted (and then exceeded the auction price on the other one due tax and shipping - such is life,) and still need a V1 and a 2nd V2 for this crazy experiment, and I am definitely going to buy An AWE64 Legacy when it is ready, since it solves a myriad of issues and is the ultimate DOS card. So I am spending too much money on this nostalgia box (is 43 too young to be going through a midlife crisis as I lament the state of the world while reminiscing the 1980-2000 era?)

I have a CT2760 that hangs when selecting the IRQ, but I am thinking of selling it, and mentioning IRQ hang of course, because maybe someone with knowledge can find and replace whatever part has fried, and the SCC-1 works great for games, but I never got the midi in and out to work, so no one can connect an MT-32 or other midi devices. Again, someone may have the knowledge to grab a soldering iron and fix whatever it is, though I have to assume that the sell price would be less than one with working midi jacks. If I get the Dream Blaster X2 and put it on the AWE64 Legacy, I could put SCC-1 sounds on it (or better.) Then I would have 2 sound cards rather than 3, and can then put an ISA NIC in there. I will probably wait to buy the V1 and 2nd V2 (and an SLI cable) until I sell some parts. Figuring out the storage issues I mentioned in that other thread and connecting it to the brand new KDS 19" I found, would finish off this box. Damn, I almost forgot that I need to buy beige speakers/subwoofer, and a beige mechanical keyboard in better condition still...

I think I will wait for the AWE64 Legacy and then sell the SCC-1 and buy an external. I heard that the CM-500 is the holy grail, but I need to do more research. I also have a 2nd MT-32 that is missing the top cover, though I may keep that as a spare board. I may still try the USB and parallel option, just to say I did it. Before my motorcycle accident, I did all kinds of weird things with my PC projects. I am trying to get back into these experiments.