Just stick with 24-bit and don't bother with RLE (run-length encoding).

leileilol wrote on 2020-12-04, 09:29:

Just stick with 24-bit and don't bother with RLE (run-length encoding).

I think I've tried this and it did not work. I even tried at 16-bit and it still failed.

Windows 98 sees the BMP but when I choose it in Desktop Properties it doesn't show up. I can however open it in Paint. Re-Saving in Paint doesn't work. Interestingly opening it in IrfanView and re-saving works.. 😒

Here are the BMP Save As options in GIMP:

Maybe I should try the "Do not write color space information" option?

That´s weird. I´ve made wallpapers with GIMP and they work. Although, I exported them as *.jpg, you might want to try that. Also, test different resolutions and set it as wallpaper straight from your picture.

appiah4 wrote on 2020-12-04, 11:00:

Interestingly opening it in IrfanView and re-saving works.. 😒

Seems to me the obvious step is to do a binary compare before and after saving, and see what changes. I think I use FrHed for that.

in worst case save the BMP over original in Irfanview, it always produces correct format.

Tiido wrote on 2020-12-12, 08:49:

in worst case save the BMP over original in Irfanview, it always produces correct format.

This is what I always do but it is an annoyance. How GIMP can not produce a Win9x compatible BMP eludes me still..

Just a thought - maybe it is correct but big and it take some time to show on desktop 😉

Is it really necessary to use BMP format in Windows 98 ?
With that "Active Desktop" (mis)feature, I would expect it to also support common WWW formats, like GIF and JPEG.

Edit: but then there would still be some compatibility problems - can't expect 90s software to support modern JPEG variants...

appiah4 wrote on 2020-12-12, 09:53:

This is what I always do but it is an annoyance. How GIMP can not produce a Win9x compatible BMP eludes me still..

Did you try the binary compare already? I imagine it's a matter of one or two bytes in the file header or something.

appiah4 wrote on 2020-12-04, 11:00:

Maybe I should try the "Do not write color space information" option?

This option works for me.

Grzyb wrote on 2020-12-12, 12:19:

Is it really necessary to use BMP format in Windows 98 ?
With that "Active Desktop" (mis)feature, I would expect it to also support common WWW formats, like GIF and JPEG.

Active Desktop would probably be overkill if all you want is to have a nice wallpaper (I don't know, I never used it myself). Simply converting the image you want into a BMP file that Windows can handle should be less of a hassle, assuming you don't want to change the wallpaper every five minutes. Even Windows XP didn't have native support for JPEG wallpapers. Sure, it would allow you to select a JPEG, but it would silently convert it into a bitmap file and then use that bitmap file instead of the JPEG. Run regedit and check "HKEY_CURENT_USER\Control Panel\Desktop" if you want to know which file Windows is actually using as your wallpaper. The "Wallpaper" entry is what you're looking for.

K1n9_Duk3 wrote on 2020-12-15, 00:16:

Active Desktop would probably be overkill if all you want is to have a nice wallpaper (I don't know, I never used it myself). Simply converting the image you want into a BMP file that Windows can handle should be less of a hassle

I thought it would be less of a hassle to let Windows do the conversion, instead of using some modern software where writing 9x-compatible files isn't straightforward.

I just did some experiments with 98SE, and:
- it does support GIF, JPEG, PNG
- when setting such a wallpaper for the first time, it displays that such formats are only supported with Active Desktop, and asks whether to enable Active Desktop

Now I'm lost - I always thought that Active Desktop is enabled by default.
But if not, then what's the reason Windows 98 is so much slower than 95 ?

Grzyb wrote on 2020-12-15, 04:10:

Now I'm lost - I always thought that Active Desktop is enabled by default.
But if not, then what's the reason Windows 98 is so much slower than 95 ?

If you're comparing Windows 98 to the original release of Windows 95, then Windows 98 has IE4 integrated into the shell regardless of whether Active Desktop is enabled.

Jorpho wrote on 2020-12-15, 05:17:

If you're comparing Windows 98 to the original release of Windows 95, then Windows 98 has IE4 integrated into the shell regardless of whether Active Desktop is enabled.

OK, looks like I misinterpreted the term "Active Desktop" - I thought it was mostly about that integration of MSIE into the shell.

Grzyb wrote on 2020-12-15, 06:53:

OK, looks like I misinterpreted the term "Active Desktop" - I thought it was mostly about that integration of MSIE into the shell.

Removing the IE4 shell integration requires 98lite from https://www.litepc.com/98lite.html , which in turn requires files from a Windows 95 installation (depending on how thorough you want to be). But this is getting off-topic.