OT help with Win 95 install

Robert Macy wrote in news:50382f37-f351-4c63-a998-
:

Is it possible that the original Win95 install that worked had a
specific order which software would sequence through, then upon re-
installing Win95 THAT order changed exacerbating any sensitivity to HW
speeds as mentioned previously? I had this happen once during the
'old' days developing computer systems when a software upgrade, did
NOT! Some section of I/O became unreliable. Went back and did a true
timing diagram and source of the problem became obvious. Changing
sequence rules for the SW and adding an intentional delay got us by
WITHOUT having to modify the HW, including costly field update to the
HW.



Was going to say 'no'. But you're right, it IS possible that hardware may be
detected, enumerated, etc, in different order. Some hardware may not respond
in a good time. BUT, the IOS failure relates to disks, mostly, so is fairly
fundamental and low level and high priority. The more complex stuff tends to
be handled by dynamic drivers that load later too, so at this point I suspect
something small but significant like a drive connection failure. Until that's
ruled out, I wouldn't want to try more diagnosis. As House does it, treatment
is often a better way to limit the field. Can't beat tweaking Molex connector
cores tight with a jeweller's screwdriver before shoving them back.

One thing that really might affect timing is if some low level driver was
added for some specific hardware. Not all code runs fast. But if it's all
native static driver support in the OS, then he could do worse than swap a
few PCI cards around. I'be only once encountered a need to do that, but
makers of sound gear like Echo Audio make a point of letting people know
about this when people want to make PCI cards from different firms co-operate
with each other.

It is possible that RAM may also cause this. I think it did cause a
protection error on me once, but likely some other VXD that IOS, but I don't
know enough to be sure on that.

"Peter Foldes" wrote in
:

There was four versions of Windows 95 a,b,c,d,


Do tell! I knew about OSR2 C, but never knew about D. I want to know so I can
see if the shell (Comdlg32.dll, Explorer.exe, Shell32.dll) offer anythign
better than those from OSR2c when doing shell swaps for 98-Lite.

Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote in
:

SR2.5 - ver 4.00.950c

So there wasn't a 'd' version, but depending on how you look at it
there were 4 versions after the original release. Why MS versioned
things this way, I have no idea...


Good enough for me then. That's the one I have shell files from.

You did forget the D version and I the original W95 one

--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect


"Zaphod Beeblebrox" wrote in message
...
In article , says...
Subject: OT help with Win 95 install
From: Peter Foldes
Reply-To: "Peter Foldes" bounce bounce
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support,
microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

"98 Guy" wrote in message
...
Gabriel Knight wrote:

Hi I tried other news groups for win 95 but their latest questions
were from year 2009 or no questions at all I hope this is ok here.

You should have considered the windows-98 newsgroup for your question.

I've cross-posted this reply to that group to assist you.

I am trying to install Win 95 But I get an error,

"while initializing device IOS:
windows protection error. You need to restart your computer."

I googled this and it said it could be a virus or because of a new
installed hardware/software. I am doing a clean install of the OS
with a new (deleted and new partition made) partition and then
formated so there are no files on the hdd.

I have taken out the sound and agp video card so im using onboard
video but I get this error still. I have 512mb of ram installed as
I found out that any more causes another type of error.

I have installed Win95 on this pc before so I know there should not
be anything wrong with the hardware, I also have tried using two
hard drives one an 80 gig with ultra ata and a 40 gig with ata 133
but both the same.

I am using:
P4SGX-MX Mobo
P4 2.80 GHz CPU
512mb DDR PC2700 ram
40 Gig HDD ATA 133 (IDE)

I can get into the bios so I know the onboard video works and I
have tried an agp 128mb 3d card aswell.

I get to the stage after the install that says something like
"windows is now starting for the first time" then the "while
initializing device IOS:" error.

I can not get into safe mode if I try the same error happens,
If I use "step-by-step confirmation" it gets to the "load all
windows drivers" then the error.
Please help

There were several version of windows 95 (2 or 3). The last one had
better support for large hard drives - that could be the problem you're
seeing. Do you know what version of Win-98 you have? Can you read the
date-stamp on the files on the CD?

As Philo said, win-95 did have a problem with CPU's running faster than
2.4 ghz - but that might not cause you a problem until you try to get a
network card up and running (don't quote me on that).

In any case, I highly recommend that you install Windows 98 instead of
Windows 95. You'll have a more stable os with more compatibility
options in terms of software and hardware (particularly USB devices).

There was four versions of Windows 95 a,b,c,d,


Close - depending on how you count, there were 4 or 5:

RTM - ver 4.00.950
SR1 - ver 4.00.950a
SR2 - ver 4.00.950b
SR2.1 - ver 4.00.950b
SR2.5 - ver 4.00.950c

So there wasn't a 'd' version, but depending on how you look at it
there were 4 versions after the original release. Why MS versioned
things this way, I have no idea...

--
Zaphod

The secret of flying is to hurl yourself to the ground, and miss.

In article , says...
"Zaphod Beeblebrox" wrote in
message
...
In article , says...
"98 Guy" wrote in message
...
Gabriel Knight wrote:

Hi I tried other news groups for win 95 but their latest questions
were from year 2009 or no questions at all I hope this is ok here.

You should have considered the windows-98 newsgroup for your question.

I've cross-posted this reply to that group to assist you.

I am trying to install Win 95 But I get an error,

"while initializing device IOS:
windows protection error. You need to restart your computer."

I googled this and it said it could be a virus or because of a new
installed hardware/software. I am doing a clean install of the OS
with a new (deleted and new partition made) partition and then
formated so there are no files on the hdd.

I have taken out the sound and agp video card so im using onboard
video but I get this error still. I have 512mb of ram installed as
I found out that any more causes another type of error.

I have installed Win95 on this pc before so I know there should not
be anything wrong with the hardware, I also have tried using two
hard drives one an 80 gig with ultra ata and a 40 gig with ata 133
but both the same.

I am using:
P4SGX-MX Mobo
P4 2.80 GHz CPU
512mb DDR PC2700 ram
40 Gig HDD ATA 133 (IDE)

I can get into the bios so I know the onboard video works and I
have tried an agp 128mb 3d card aswell.

I get to the stage after the install that says something like
"windows is now starting for the first time" then the "while
initializing device IOS:" error.

I can not get into safe mode if I try the same error happens,
If I use "step-by-step confirmation" it gets to the "load all
windows drivers" then the error.
Please help

There were several version of windows 95 (2 or 3). The last one had
better support for large hard drives - that could be the problem you're
seeing. Do you know what version of Win-98 you have? Can you read the
date-stamp on the files on the CD?

As Philo said, win-95 did have a problem with CPU's running faster than
2.4 ghz - but that might not cause you a problem until you try to get a
network card up and running (don't quote me on that).

In any case, I highly recommend that you install Windows 98 instead of
Windows 95. You'll have a more stable os with more compatibility
options in terms of software and hardware (particularly USB devices).

There was four versions of Windows 95 a,b,c,d,


Close - depending on how you count, there were 4 or 5:

RTM - ver 4.00.950
SR1 - ver 4.00.950a
SR2 - ver 4.00.950b
SR2.1 - ver 4.00.950b
SR2.5 - ver 4.00.950c

So there wasn't a 'd' version, but depending on how you look at it
there were 4 versions after the original release. Why MS versioned
things this way, I have no idea...


You did forget the D version and I the original W95 one

Yes, I saw that you forgot the original, but no, I did not forget the D
version since as best as I can tell there never was a D version.

None of the Windows version references I can find online (including
Microsoft) mention it. If you can point to a source that includes it,
I'd be interested in seeing it. Otherwise, I suspect it is a case of
your memory being flawed.

--
Zaphod

"The best Bang since the Big One" - Eccentrica Gallumbits

"Bill in Co" wrote in message m...
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , 98 Guy writes:
[]
In any case, I highly recommend that you install Windows 98 instead of
Windows 95. You'll have a more stable os with more compatibility
options in terms of software and hardware (particularly USB devices).

Yes, '98 supports USB a lot better (making '95 do so is hard work, and I
suspect few drivers exist). Especially if you use the universal driver
from the start.

If you don't like the user interface, you can make '98 look very like
'95, by using 98lite; this makes for a more stable (and less demanding)
system too, though some people hate it.

I can (have) made *Win98SE* look very much like 95 - LOL.
You don't need to go to the stripped down Lite version (which brings with it
some of its own limitations, as you've occasionally noted :-).
Let's face it, they're both pretty light, compared to what's out there now
(or ever since Vista and Windows7 made their icky debut)



Say Bill in Co, this is the One and Only Hot-Text...

Just setup a Windows 3.1 and put a Dr-Dos with it,
on a Compaq Evo D500 Small Form Factor,
now I have CD/DVD Rom running on win 3.1 cool,
And Cable Internet plug-in to a Intel(r) PRO/100 NIC too!

If he install windows 95 first then Dr-Dos,
he able to run Dr-Dos and start 95 for there,
and it will load all the drive for 95 for him.............

--
User-agent: *
Disallow: /