If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
using an old OS (specifically, Windows 98) on XP
Paul wrote:
For example, I've installed win-98se on a 500 gb sata hard drive that was formatted as a single volume with 4kb cluster size (same as any NT-based OS would do). This resulted in about 125 million allocation units (far beyond what Macro$haft claimed was possible for either DOS or Win-98 to handle). I would expect the size of the FAT is a bit of an issue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_...cation_Tabl e "Because each FAT32 entry occupies 32 bits (4 bytes) the maximal number of clusters (268435444) requires..." 1073741776 bytes or a gigabyte of RAM to hold the whole FAT. I don't think that win-9x/me ever loads the entire FAT during normal operation. Right now I've got two large SATA drives (A and B) connected to the win-98 system I'm typing this post on. chkdsk on drive A: 1,464,780,864 kilobytes total disk space 900,908,800 kilobytes free 32,768 bytes in each allocation unit 45,774,402 total allocation units on disk 28,153,400 available allocation units on disk Drive B is a 750 gb drive, with 22.8 million total clusters, with about 6000 free clusters. I have 2 gb ram on this system (with a "special" memory patch that allows win-98 to see and use all 2 gb). According to Norton System Information, I currently have 2015 mb free, and 87.3 mb in use. I have Firefox 2 running, and it's using 24 mb (the most of any loaded module). Win16 Sys is listed as using 21.1 mb, Win32 Sys is using 14.6, Netscape (Communicator, what I'm using to read/post to usenet) is using 14.1 mb. 32-bit device drivers are using 9.51 mb. I see no large block of ram being used to store or cache the hard drives or their FAT's. Regarding this issue of cluster size and FAT-32, have a look at what I posted back in 2007: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...on/Rd6U5kIturI Cluster size and exploring the limits of FAT-32 ================================= So here is the master summary of this thread: --------------------------- 1) Scandisk (DOS scandisk.exe, not Windows scandskw.exe) does not appear to have a cluster-count limitation. Both Win-98se and Win-ME versions of scandisk have been run on drives with up to 31 million clusters and have executed properly with no errors. Himem.sys must be loaded for scandisk to function properly. Microsoft states that FAT-32 volumes are limited to 4.17 million clusters because of scandisk.exe, and that scandisk.exe is limited to a memory or data array size of 16 million bytes. It could very well be that this 16 mb limit is based on Microsoft's stated minimum system requirements for Windows 98 (which is 16 mb of system RAM) and that scandisk will automatically make use of all available system memory if required. ---------------------------- 2) Win-98se has been installed directly on 160 gb volumes formatted with 4kb cluster size (resulting in 40 million clusters) and has not shown any instability. This was performed on a 160 gb SATA drive assigned to a RAID controller (but not used in RAID mode). To test for 137gb data corruption (which theoretically takes place when a read or write across the 137 gb boundary occurrs) a series of 1 gb VOB files were copied repeatedly in order to fill the drive. The drive was eventually filled with 150 of these 1 gb files, and no drive corruption occurred. ---------------------------- 3) The only drawback that I've seen when running a volume with a large cluster count is that DOS will take a much longer time to perform the first DIR command. This might also happen in Windows as well - I may have seen this effect but I haven't specifically looked for it. The issue is the computation and display of free remaining drive space, which is part of the DIR command and also happens when browsing the drives in windows. Related to this is the question does windows store the amount of remaining drive space somewhere on the drive (instead of requiring it to be re-calculated every time it's needed). --------------------------- 4) Standard DOS tools like fdisk and format can be used to partition and format hard drives in excess of 137 gb. Fdisk was used to partition a 160 gb drive into a 32 gb primary and 121 gb secondary. The updated or "fixed" version of fdisk.exe was used. What has not been tested (yet) is the undocumented /Z:n command line parameter for format, which allows the user to specify a particular cluster size (n x 512 bytes). Third-party drive utilities (based on On Track's Disc Manager) can also be used to partition and format hard drives, but I have found those utilities to be very unstable and to lock up/crash about 75% of the time I use them. --------------------------- 5) There is evidence that 6,291,204 clusters may represent some sort of "magic number". A third-party drive partition tool (PartitionMagic Pro Server 8.05) resorted to this cluster count when an existing 32 gb partition was manually resized to 4kb cluster size. Norton Disk Doctor and Speed Disk was found to work properly using this cluster count, but not on a volume with a slightly larger cluster count of 7.8 million clusters (see note 7 below). This 6.3 million cluster count, combined with 32kb cluster size, results in a volume size of 206 gb. Perhaps this set of parameters is the reason for the 200 gb hard drive size which emerged in early to mid 2003. A dir command is also performed instantly with no delays in computing free space given a volume with 6.3 million clusters. --------------------------- 6) Win-98 versions of Scandisk (scandskw.exe) and Defrag did not function on a volume with 6.3 million clusters but seems to be limited to the MS stated value of 4.17 clusters. However, Windows ME versions of dskmaint.dll and defrag.exe does appear to function correctly with Windows 98se and compatibility with volume size of up to 31.2 million clusters has been observed. It is not know what their ultimate limit is. ---------------------------- 7) Norton Utilities is a very common third-party set of applications and their compatibility with large hard drives with a large cluster count may be of importance to some people. I have found that Norton Disk Doctor and Norton Speed disk were compatible with volumes with up to 6.3 million clusters, but not more without using the command-line parameter /NOLBA. When using this parameter, NDD and SD worked on volumes with 7.8 million clusters but not 31 million. The exact cluster-count limit is therefore unknown at this point and I may explore that in the future. The switch /NOLBA forces NDD and SD to skip the drive configuration check. This can also be done using a registry entry by adding a DWORD registry value named NOLBACHECK at this location: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Symantec\Norton Utilities When this option is set to 1, Norton Disk Doctor and Speed Disk skip the drive configuration check. ---------------------------- 8) Anyone considering adding a large hard drive (a drive larger than 137 gb) to an existing win-98 computer needs to consider certain issues that include the drive type (IDE/PATA vs SATA) as well as how the drive is controlled by the motherboard BIOS (mapped to IDE channel or controlled by RAID controller). The main issue here is that you DO NOT WANT the win-98se 32-bit driver (ESDI_506.PDR) to be used to access a hard drive larger than 137 gb. Many or most motherboards made for the past 3 years will have built-in SATA ports. Windows-98 users are advised to obtain SATA drives instead of the older conventional IDE drives when adding a new drive (larger than 137 gb) to a system or if building a new system. ==================================== And see also this: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...on/DV_7O2vV1hw Windows 98 large file-count tests on large volume (500 gb hard drive) |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
using an old OS (specifically, Windows 98) on XP
Bill Cunningham wrote:
I have talked to others about the possibility of a FAT64. They say they don't think it would be practical. MS does have this exFat thing that must be an extension. There is really no problem with the current structure of FAT-32 when used with hard drives of 2 tb or smaller. The FAT-32 method of storing files IS NOT limited to any particular file-size (clusing chaining can theoretically give you a single file that can take up the entire drive). The file-size entry for FAT-32 could make use of a few spare bits so that the max-file-size (as recorded in the FAT) could easily be 2 to 8 times more than the current limit of 4 gb. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
using an old OS (specifically, Windows 98) on XP
|
#64
|
|||
|
|||
using an old OS (specifically, Windows 98) on XP
"Hot-Text" wrote in message ... "Bill Cunningham" wrote in message ... "98 Guy" "98"@Guy . com wrote in message ... If you're going to ask questions about win-98, then why be a bone-head and not cross-post to microsoft.public.win-98.gen_discussion? Wow I just found out about this group. I always liked 98. It was DOS with windows. Now Windows has a "fake" DOS, basically a CLI or DOS box. I can't get my 98se to boot and I think I now know why. I had a genuine win98se CD years ago. Now I don't know where it's at and I have a copy of it I burned. I must not have made the CD-R bootable. I'm not sure what to do now. Bill I have a Genuine windows 98 se CD too That have to run in windows 98 fe But there is a work around to it By adding win98 boot to your CD-R bootable I would use http://www.deepburner.com/ The Free will do the job What is "win98 boot"? Bill |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
98 Guy "using an old OS on XP"
"Hot-Text" wrote in message ... "Bill Cunningham" wrote in message ... "BillW50" wrote in message ... Hi Bill, Windows 98SE needs a FAT partition I believe. Did you set up a FAT partition for it? It might also need that partition being within the first 120GB of the drive. Setting up dualboot is indeed possible, but the installer will likely setup it up all wrong if you install an older Windows version last. But it is indeed fixable. If you mean fat16 when you say FAT no. I formatted a fat32. Bill |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
using an old OS (specifically, Windows 98) on XP
"98 Guy" "98"@Guy . com wrote in message ... There are several versions of win-98se on the torrents... I didn't know there were several versions of 98SE. Isn't the second edition the second edition? Bill |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
using an old OS (specifically, Windows 98) on XP
"98 Guy" "98"@Guy . com wrote in message ... Bill Cunningham wrote: I have talked to others about the possibility of a FAT64. They say they don't think it would be practical. MS does have this exFat thing that must be an extension. There is really no problem with the current structure of FAT-32 when used with hard drives of 2 tb or smaller. The FAT-32 method of storing files IS NOT limited to any particular file-size (clusing chaining can theoretically give you a single file that can take up the entire drive). The file-size entry for FAT-32 could make use of a few spare bits so that the max-file-size (as recorded in the FAT) could easily be 2 to 8 times more than the current limit of 4 gb. So when we get up into the extbytes and petabytes we'll definately need a FAT64 or better then right? Bill |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
using an old OS (specifically, Windows 98) on XP
wrote in message ... I think I still have aW/98SE ISO here. If you can't find any other way, I can put it up on my web site I doubt Bill will sue me. Go ahead. I like ISOs but I don't care to much for torrents. Especially for such a small size OS. Bill |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
98 Guy "using an old OS on XP"
"Bill Cunningham" wrote in message
... "Hot-Text" wrote in message ... "Bill Cunningham" wrote in message ... "BillW50" wrote in message ... Hi Bill, Windows 98SE needs a FAT partition I believe. Did you set up a FAT partition for it? It might also need that partition being within the first 120GB of the drive. Setting up dualboot is indeed possible, but the installer will likely setup it up all wrong if you install an older Windows version last. But it is indeed fixable. If you mean fat16 when you say FAT no. I formatted a fat32. Bill Look for File systems (FAT, FAT8, FAT16, FAT32 and NTFS) explained Floppy Disk is just FAT Windows 98 Fat32 all you need is 10 to 60 GB And why would you need a Bigger Volume Size for http://www.pctechguide.com/hard-disk...ntfs-explained Stop and Think Windows 98 on your PC With a 64 bit Video Adapter That make no Drives for 98 Well You be only Able to Displays a 16 bit Color quality with a Screen resolution of 800 by 600 pixels to 1024 by 768 pixels You have No Audio Drive for it Lol No Internet too Because this on Drives for that Old windows 98 All you did I f-up your PC Is there a Work a around Hell Yes That's why Microsoft make Microsoft_Virtual_PC_2007 So that you can have a working Virtual Audio & Video Adapter Virtual_PC_2007 is not a Game But a Powerful Tool http://store.mynews.ath.cx/temp/Virtual_PC/ Options/ Virtual_Floppy_Disk/ New_Virtual_Machine/ Boot_V_Floppy/ Shot_Virtual-00001.jpg Setting_Up_VHD/ Virtual_Win-98/ Virtual_Win-Me/ Partition/ Shot_Virtual-00002.jpg PrintScreen47_Setup/ /temp/Virtual_PC/Partition With MaxBlast 4, ATA/IDE hard drive Installation utility Yes your Virtual PC hard drive can be Partition I did all that with a Win Me just for you to see http://store.mynews.ath.cx/temp/Virt...tual-00015.jpg I have no Windows Millennium Edition Setup Product Key Thank God I have a Windows 98 Product Keys Lol |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
using an old OS (specifically, Windows 98) on XP
"Bill Cunningham" wrote in message ... "Hot-Text" wrote in message ... "Bill Cunningham" wrote in message ... "98 Guy" "98"@Guy . com wrote in message ... If you're going to ask questions about win-98, then why be a bone-head and not cross-post to microsoft.public.win-98.gen_discussion? Wow I just found out about this group. I always liked 98. It was DOS with windows. Now Windows has a "fake" DOS, basically a CLI or DOS box. I can't get my 98se to boot and I think I now know why. I had a genuine win98se CD years ago. Now I don't know where it's at and I have a copy of it I burned. I must not have made the CD-R bootable. I'm not sure what to do now. Bill I have a Genuine windows 98 se CD too That have to run in windows 98 fe But there is a work around to it By adding win98 boot to your CD-R bootable I would use http://www.deepburner.com/ The Free will do the job What is "win98 boot"? Bill Windows 98 Set Up Floppy Disk That can with the CD But if your have a upgrade CD You will not have Floppy Disk I have in this file Boot_98.img But I'll can make a zip file for you at: http://store.mynews.ath.cx/temp/Virt...irtual_Win-98/ Boot_98.zip Make a New CD Add all your Win 98 CD files and add all file out of that Zip Not the Folder Boot_98 Just the Files that in it Then deep burner it to a new CD That will make a Bootable CD for You you do have your Genuine windows 98 se Product Key You have to have it |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
using an old OS (specifically, Windows 98) on XP
"Hot-Text" wrote in message ... "Bill Cunningham" wrote in message ... "Hot-Text" wrote in message ... "Bill Cunningham" wrote in message ... "98 Guy" "98"@Guy . com wrote in message ... If you're going to ask questions about win-98, then why be a bone-head and not cross-post to microsoft.public.win-98.gen_discussion? Wow I just found out about this group. I always liked 98. It was DOS with windows. Now Windows has a "fake" DOS, basically a CLI or DOS box. I can't get my 98se to boot and I think I now know why. I had a genuine win98se CD years ago. Now I don't know where it's at and I have a copy of it I burned. I must not have made the CD-R bootable. I'm not sure what to do now. Bill I have a Genuine windows 98 se CD too That have to run in windows 98 fe But there is a work around to it By adding win98 boot to your CD-R bootable I would use http://www.deepburner.com/ The Free will do the job What is "win98 boot"? Bill Windows 98 Set Up Floppy Disk That can with the CD But if your have a upgrade CD You will not have Floppy Disk I have in this file Boot_98.img But I'll can make a zip file for you at: http://store.mynews.ath.cx/temp/Virt...irtual_Win-98/ Boot_98.zip Make a New CD Add all your Win 98 CD files and add all file out of that Zip Not the Folder Boot_98 Just the Files that in it Then deep burner it to a new CD That will make a Bootable CD for You you do have your Genuine windows 98 se Product Key You have to have it http://www.cheetahburner.com/ I like this one too. Bill |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
with Virtual PC 2007 "It's fun to be able drag and drop Files from XP into a 98"
"David Catterall" wrote in message
... Hot-Text wrote: Bill That old School Use This This Virtual PC 2007 http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/downl...s.aspx?id=4580 It Supported your Operating System Or https://www.virtualbox.org He's right, Bill. I once tried to install W95 on to a FAT32 partition on a computer with XP on it. The machine jammed. Not because my installation was faulty, but because the 2002 processor executed the 1995 code too quickly and caused, IIRC, a division by zero error. Good luck! David I have a good windows 98 up and running in Virtual PC 2007 It's fun to be able drag and drop Files from XP into a 98 and back agene and he have a Big N0 win98 with a f**k up Xp by now |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
with Virtual PC 2007 "It's fun to be able drag and drop Files from XP into a 98"
In message , Hot-Text
writes: "David Catterall" wrote in message ... [] I once tried to install W95 on to a FAT32 partition on a computer with XP on it. The machine jammed. Not because my installation was faulty, but because the 2002 processor executed the 1995 code too quickly and caused, IIRC, a division by zero error. If you`really`do`mean`95`rather`than`98,`there`was`so me`such`a`problem -`IIRR,`with`AMD`only`not`Intel`processors;`AMD`had `a`fix`downloadable on`their`website.`No`idea`if`it's`still`there.`You `could`also`avoid`the`p roblem`by`running`the`processor`at`a`lower`speed:` IIRR`about`300`MHz was`OK,`by`the`time`you`got`to`350`MHz`you`were`li kely`to`be`having problems.`IIRR`it`did`mainly`show`during`booting,` and`once`you'd`got past`that,`if`you`did,`it`was`mostly`OK.`98`didn't `have`the`problem. Good luck! David I have a good windows 98 up and running in Virtual PC 2007 It's fun to be able drag and drop Files from XP into a 98 and back agene and he have a Big N0 win98 with a f**k up Xp by now -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf he was eventually struck off by the BMA in 1968 for not knowing his gluteus maximus from his humerus. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
with Virtual PC 2007 "It's fun to be able drag and drop Files from XP into a 98"
"Flasherly" wrote in message
... On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 22:30:58 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: `98`didn't`have`the`problem. 98 could get pretty weird on an advanced platform, although it's intial gag reflex action was feeding it too much memory. I tried out of curiosity to get it running - think it might have been on a S478 Celeron D platform, if that: but, a no go Virtual PC 2007 Windows 98 Virtual Machine Newsgroups News:alt.binaries.windows Windows 98 Virtual Machine Properties General Message-ID: Developing, building and duplicating a virtual environment, tho is probably for all intent redundant. Like trying to convince a gamer running 12 cores clocked out at 4GHz each, that Descent or Doom weren't so bad for W98 games. Memory Message-ID: Even used to be able to run slow-down tools and sound utilities for porting over old games. Statistics Message-ID: Amazing 50% of an American population regularly continue now to play along with their favorite games, with women only recently edging out men. Wouldn't take me but 5 or 10 minutes to realize with Descent/Doom - been there & done that;- but, evidently as is now proven in the case with women, they just take that licking and keep coming back for more of whatever makes 'em tick. Advanced Message-ID: |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|