• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Windows 98 in multiboot system

Muse

Muse

Lifer
Today I boot my 2nd PC, the one that has Windows 98SE installed and use the bootloader to select the Windows 98 OS. I had it set up and working but hadn't used it in a LONG time. In the last 2-3 years or so I've only accessed the main (i.e. default) Windows 2000 on this PC. My main PC runs XP Pro, and the mobo doesn't support Win98, so using my 2nd PC is my only option if I want to run Windows 98 (At the end of this post I explain why I need to run Windows 98).

I got some strange behavior. The Win98 splash screen came up for a split second and then a DOS prompt turned up and the following was on my black screen:

The following file is missing or corrupted:
E:\Win98\himem.sys

The following file is missing or corrupted:
E:\Win98\dblbuff.sys

The following file is missing or corrupted:
E:\Win98\ifhlp.sys

C:\>

C:\>E:\Win98\cwcdata\cwcdos.exe
Bad command or file name

C:\>
Cannot find Win.com, unable to continue loading windows

C:\>

- - - -
The C: drive has boot files. Windows 98 itself is actually installed on the F: drive. I can see that when I boot to Windows 2000, which is where I'm at right now (i.e. I'm currently booted to this machine's H: partition, Windows 2000.).

I'm wondering why the machine is looking for Windows 98 on E:. E: is a data partition, presently.

- - - -
Why I need to run Windows 98: I'm trying to learn a new software (more or less new for me), Protools (6.4.1), and a few years ago I heard that there was a version that was a free download but it only worked on W98. So, I downloaded it, knowing that one day I'd want to use it to develop my chops. It's not the 6.4.1 version I'm trying to learn now, but I heard it's reasonably close for learning purposes, and it's on my home machine so I don't have to go to the radio station I volunteer at to practice. At the station I won't have access until I'm approved for use, and I'll have to go there to boot to get access.
 
By chance have you changed any of the disk partitioning or devices since the last time you booted into 98 so that whatever used to be taking drive letter E: is not seen by 98 so it is assigning E: to what was previously F:? If I understand you correctly from your original post you have been using Win 2K on this but have just not tried booting it in to 98 for a long time. The stuff you do with drive letters in Win2k do not affect 98 at all, it determines drive letter assignments differently. Here is an MS link that goes over how that works. Order in Which MS-DOS and Windows Assign Drive Letters
 
Originally posted by: Linflas
By chance have you changed any of the disk partitioning or devices since the last time you booted into 98 so that whatever used to be taking drive letter E: is not seen by 98 so it is assigning E: to what was previously F:? If I understand you correctly from your original post you have been using Win 2K on this but have just not tried booting it in to 98 for a long time. The stuff you do with drive letters in Win2k do not affect 98 at all, it determines drive letter assignments differently. Here is an MS link that goes over how that works. Order in Which MS-DOS and Windows Assign Drive Letters
Click to expand...
You understood my post. I don't believe I changed any of the partitioning. I have renamed drives in Windows 2000, and going into Disk Management I can see the physical positioning of the drives. The first partition (C: ) is a boot partition. The second is the Windows 98 partition. It's labled F: in Windows 2000, like I said. For some reason, when I try to boot to Windows 98, the system expects it to be on E:. I'm wondering where it gets that information. I looked over the files in the root of C: and don't see anything, although there's lots of files in there I just didn't bother to look at. I'll list them here:

Corrected to show hidden, etc. files:

Volume in drive C is BOOT_60
Volume Serial Number is 321D-10FB

Directory of c:\

03/17/2002 10:09a 0 CONFIG.DOS
04/23/1999 10:22p 93,890 COMMAND.COM
03/17/2002 10:35a 15,705 SUHDLOG.DAT
03/17/2002 10:05a 1,144 FRUNLOG.TXT
03/17/2002 09:58a 22 MSDOS.---
03/17/2002 10:38a 123,643 SETUPLOG.TXT
08/29/2002 12:46p 1,684 MSDOS.SYS
05/04/2003 10:58a 15,464 NETLOG.TXT
09/20/2003 06:26p 53,681 DETLOG.TXT
03/17/2002 10:02a 11,085 SUHDLOG.---
03/17/2002 10:29a 1,672 MSDOS.BAK
05/04/2003 01:23p 65,422 BOOTLOG.TXT
03/17/2002 10:35a 1,753,120 SYSTEM.1ST
04/23/1999 10:22p 222,390 IO.SYS
05/04/2003 12:45p 469 SCANDISK.LOG
05/04/2003 01:27p 73,714 DETLOG.OLD
05/04/2003 12:50p 65,422 BOOTLOG.PRV
06/17/2003 12:45p 91 CONFIG.SYS
03/17/2002 10:39a 0 AUTOEXEC.VIA
03/18/2002 03:55a <DIR> RECYCLED
03/17/2002 11:02a 512 bootsect.dos
04/08/1998 05:51a 60 DANS
01/29/2003 01:10a 40 hiberfil.sys
11/15/2007 01:24p 29 AUTOEXEC.BAT
02/16/2003 11:16a 34,724 NTDETECT.COM
11/15/2007 01:24p 385 boot.ini
03/21/2002 12:25p 0 AUTOEXEC.NS0
03/19/2002 11:20a <DIR> Program Files
05/04/2003 06:58p 31 AUTOEXEC.NS7
03/17/2002 10:39a 0 CONFIG.NS0
03/24/2002 09:16a 409 BOOT_winnt4.INI
04/25/2002 04:46p <DIR> ALDUS
05/04/2003 01:30p 91 CONFIG.NS7
05/23/2002 06:14p <DIR> msdownld.tmp
08/16/2002 08:00p <DIR> NCDTREE
01/22/2003 04:13a <DIR> WINNT
05/04/2003 07:54a 682 SETUPXLG.TXT
08/29/2002 01:20p 31 AUTOEXEC.NS6
09/24/2004 07:44a 214,432 ntldr
10/28/2002 08:57a 91 CONFIG.NS6
11/15/2007 01:20p 891,289,600 pagefile.sys
03/28/2002 09:02a 0 AUTOEXEC.NS1
03/17/2002 10:39a 0 CONFIG.NS1
03/28/2002 09:02a 0 AUTOEXEC.NS2
03/17/2002 10:39a 0 CONFIG.NS2
03/28/2002 09:02a 0 AUTOEXEC.NS3
03/17/2002 10:39a 0 CONFIG.NS3
03/28/2002 09:02a 0 AUTOEXEC.NS4
03/17/2002 10:39a 0 CONFIG.NS4
03/28/2002 09:02a 0 AUTOEXEC.NS5
03/17/2002 10:39a 0 CONFIG.NS5
04/04/2002 11:42a 15,133 N2pInst.log
03/29/2002 02:36p 0 N2PActiveX.log
02/06/2003 02:42p 102,031 SR_install.log
05/04/2003 07:55p <DIR> New Folder
06/16/2003 05:15p 4,358 CLDMA.LOG
08/28/2004 07:03a <DIR> NVIDIA
06/19/2003 12:05p 150,528 arcldr.exe
06/19/2003 12:05p 163,840 arcsetup.exe
12/19/2004 08:56a 1,957 dir1.txt
12/19/2004 08:56a 1,378 dir2.txt
12/19/2004 08:58a 1,923 dir3.txt
03/15/2007 09:31a 25 ansdev.txt
11/15/2007 01:45p 0 crootdir.txt
56 File(s) 894,480,908 bytes
8 Dir(s) 105,119,744 bytes free
<br
 
Win 98 expects to find its files in the drive letter it used when you installed it for the first time. If you installed it on F: and now that partition is being seen as E: then that is your problem. You need to figure out a couple of things to fix this:
1. The drive letter that was used when you originally installed Win 98
2. Was the partition you installed to a primary partition or an extended partition. This is very important because the most likely cause of your problem is some change in the partitioning scheme which changed the order the drive letters are being assigned. MS-DOS based systems, which include 98 and Me for this purpose, have a very specific order they follow to assign drive letters.
C: will go to the primary partition on the first physical disk in your system
D: will go to the primary partition of the next physical disk in your system
E: would go to an the first logical drive in an extended partition on the first physical disk if it exists. And so on.

If you read that MS link in my first post I think you should be able to figure out what is going on and how to fix it. It is just a matter of figuring out how your current partitioning scheme has been changed to shift the 98 drive from F: to E:.
 
I don't know (remember) the exact configuration when I installed. The machine has two FAT partitions starting things off. The first partition is a boot partition of 1 GB, and it's FAT because the machine multiboots Win98SE, NT4 and Windows 2000. Thus, the 1 GB first partition can be seen by all OS's.

The second partition (in the extended partition of the first physical drive) is also FAT and 2 GB, and this is for any data I want all three OS's to be able to see.

After that there is a FAT32 partition that has the Win98SE installed. Now, I figure you are right in that something has bumped that from E to F and now it won't boot.

Question: Could that be an additional optical drive? I have two optical drives in there now, a CDRW drive and a DVD read drive. Would installing the DVD drive have changed the drive letters or would that only be from a HD? I may have installed an additional HD, which I can remove to fix things too. Thanks for the help.
 
Originally posted by: Muse
I don't know (remember) the exact configuration when I installed. The machine has two FAT partitions starting things off. The first partition is a boot partition of 1 GB, and it's FAT because the machine multiboots Win98SE, NT4 and Windows 2000. Thus, the 1 GB first partition can be seen by all OS's.

The second partition (in the extended partition of the first physical drive) is also FAT and 2 GB, and this is for any data I want all three OS's to be able to see.

After that there is a FAT32 partition that has the Win98SE installed. Now, I figure you are right in that something has bumped that from E to F and now it won't boot.

Question: Could that be an additional optical drive? I have two optical drives in there now, a CDRW drive and a DVD read drive. Would installing the DVD drive have changed the drive letters or would that only be from a HD? I may have installed an additional HD, which I can remove to fix things too. Thanks for the help.
Click to expand...

You may want to look in the c:\autoexec.bat and see if you are explicitly assigning a drive to one or both of the opticals using mscdex. It should look something like mscdex /d:<XXXXX> /l:<Drive Letter> if it exists. The <XXXXX> will be identical to a string used with the CD driver in config.sys and the /l: option assigns a drive letter if used. You really don't need to have either of these present to use CD drives in Win 98 so hopefully they are not even in there. If they are then that is your problem. Otherwise assuming the opticals are not taking the drive letters the one bit of info you left out is whether or not the FAT32 part that has Win98 installed on it is on a separate physical drive from the C: primary and extended or if it is simply another logical drive in the extended partition.

Since you are booting to a command line you may want to figure out which drive your Win 98 directory is actually on when you select the Win 98 option. Just because shows as F: in Win 2K does not mean that is what it is when you boot up in Win98. You should be able to figure that out pretty easily from the DOS prompt since you say you end up there when you select the 98 option just by trying to do dir d:\, then dir E:\ etc to see what drives there are and what is one them. That will tell you exactly what is being assigned what drive letters when you choose Win 98.
 
I'd checked the c:\autoexec.bat early, really to see if there was something in there assigning Win98 to E:. The only line in the file has to do with running an exe that enables some soundcard function. I'd checked config.sys too, and there was nothing significant there either. Just a couple of lines assigning space for a memory hungry application. i.e. files = 100, buffers = 25 or something like that.

So, I can assume that the opticals aren't taking the drive letters, I suppose.

The FAT32 Win98 partition is on the same physical drive as the first two (FAT) partitions on the drive. There are around 3 more partitions on that physical drive, which is 60 GB. So yes Win98 is on "another logical drive in the extended partition."

The machine's command line when booting to Win98 (and failing, but going to command line) has the Win98 as being on the F: drive. The drive assignments at the command line are:

C: The FAT boot, primary partition on the 60GB drive (FAT)

D: The primary partition on what I suppose is the primary master of the second channel, an 80 GB drive

E: The first partition of the extended partition of the 60 GB boot drive, FAT.

F: The Win98 FAT32 partition (2nd partition in the extended partition of 60 GB boot drive)

G: The 3rd partition of the extended partition of 60 GB boot drive

H: I believe this is the primary partition of a 120 GB drive, probably a slave.

Now, what I did was move all the data from D, figuring I can maybe get Win98 running by merging that partition with one of the others (i.e. C: with D: ). Using Partition Magic 7.0, I found that Partition Magic would only do this by making the resulting partition FAT32, and not leave it FAT although both the partitions to be merged are FAT. Bummer, because the interface seems to suggest that FAT would be maintained. The radio button for FAT was greyed out, however, so I canceled. Changing the C: boot partition from FAT to FAT32 will (I think) mean that Windows NT 4.0 will no longer work. Seriously, I haven't used NT 4.0 it in years, but I am hesitant to do all this.

I figured that I could maybe try to reinstall Windows 98, but I'd prefer something easier and less disruptive.

I figure the easiest solution is probably to remove the other HDs. I don't know how I got into this mess, really. I find it hard to believe I didn't have a 2nd or even a 3rd HD in the machine when I installed the OS's. 😕
 
Originally posted by: Muse
I'd checked the c:\autoexec.bat early, really to see if there was something in there assigning Win98 to E:. The only line in the file has to do with running an exe that enables some soundcard function. I'd checked config.sys too, and there was nothing significant there either. Just a couple of lines assigning space for a memory hungry application. i.e. files = 100, buffers = 25 or something like that.

So, I can assume that the opticals aren't taking the drive letters, I suppose.

The FAT32 Win98 partition is on the same physical drive as the first two (FAT) partitions on the drive. There are around 3 more partitions on that physical drive, which is 60 GB. So yes Win98 is on "another logical drive in the extended partition."

The machine's command line when booting to Win98 (and failing, but going to command line) has the Win98 as being on the F: drive. The drive assignments at the command line are:

C: The FAT boot, primary partition on the 60GB drive (FAT)

D: The primary partition on what I suppose is the primary master of the second channel, an 80 GB drive

E: The first partition of the extended partition of the 60 GB boot drive, FAT.

F: The Win98 FAT32 partition (2nd partition in the extended partition of 60 GB boot drive)

G: The 3rd partition of the extended partition of 60 GB boot drive

H: I believe this is the primary partition of a 120 GB drive, probably a slave.

Now, what I did was move all the data from D, figuring I can maybe get Win98 running by merging that partition with one of the others (i.e. C: with D: ). Using Partition Magic 7.0, I found that Partition Magic would only do this by making the resulting partition FAT32, and not leave it FAT although both the partitions to be merged are FAT. Bummer, because the interface seems to suggest that FAT would be maintained. The radio button for FAT was greyed out, however, so I canceled. Changing the C: boot partition from FAT to FAT32 will (I think) mean that Windows NT 4.0 will no longer work. Seriously, I haven't used NT 4.0 it in years, but I am hesitant to do all this.

I figured that I could maybe try to reinstall Windows 98, but I'd prefer something easier and less disruptive.

I figure the easiest solution is probably to remove the other HDs. I don't know how I got into this mess, really. I find it hard to believe I didn't have a 2nd or even a 3rd HD in the machine when I installed the OS's. 😕
Click to expand...

Bingo! Try disconnecting that second physical drive that is on the 2nd channel taking up the D: slot. With it gone all the others will drop down 1 drive letter and your Win98 will be E:. What is happening there is that C: is the primary partition on your primary drive, D: is the primary partition on your 2nd physical drive. Next it goes back and assigns drive letters to the logical drives in the extended partition of your primary drive E:, F:, G:, and finally the logical drives in the extended partition of the secondary drive.

And I thought I was done with Win 98 when we disconnected the last ones from our network here at the end of the 2006-2007 school year 🙂
 
It was quite a tussle, but I finally got W98 up and running. Well, apparently lots of driver stuff to sort out. For one thing I need to find a W98 driver for my nVidia ti4600 card. My soundcard drivers aren't sorted out, that sort of thing. Running 640x480 right now, ugh.

Anyway, you were right that removing the 80 GB drive that came up as D: has allowed W98 to boot. Don't have internet access yet, but that will be another story, I guess (I'm on my XP system right now).

Weirdness with my KVM, but that's sorted out somehow. Some more bulldozing away the shrubs and weeds and I should have a usable OS.... Thanks!
 
I'm having another problem now. No matter what nVidia display driver I install, I get only a black screen in Windows 98SE except for the mouse cursor. I'm at a loss what to do. Any ideas?
 
Originally posted by: Muse
I'm having another problem now. No matter what nVidia display driver I install, I get only a black screen in Windows 98SE except for the mouse cursor. I'm at a loss what to do. Any ideas?
Click to expand...

I've never seen that before that I remember. Do you get the black screen even in safe mode? If not you may want to try experimenting with lowering the resolution and color depth to see if that changes anything.
 
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: Muse
I'm having another problem now. No matter what nVidia display driver I install, I get only a black screen in Windows 98SE except for the mouse cursor. I'm at a loss what to do. Any ideas?
Click to expand...

I've never seen that before that I remember. Do you get the black screen even in safe mode? If not you may want to try experimenting with lowering the resolution and color depth to see if that changes anything.
Click to expand...
I don't get it in safe mode. If I install the standard VGA driver I can boot into regular mode and it isn't black the first time (Windows gives a message that it will reboot into plain vanilla mode the first time and you are supposed to choose your resolution then). But on a reboot after that, it's black again.

Anyway, I've been kinda intending to rebuild the system, and I figure that will work around the problem whatever it is. I have another MB that would be better because it has USB 2.0 support. The one in there now (EPOX 8K7A) only has 1.0. So, replace the mobo, ditch NT (I don't want to bother researching installing it. I never use it now, I just wanted it for testing in case I get a job that uses it... less and less likely these days), and install Win98 on the primary partition, and Windows 2000 on the next partition. It's a lot more time than I wanted to put in on this right now, but I don't seem to have a choice. I had a premonition that Win98 might not boot nice, but this is ridiculous.

Or I could try Ghosting back Win98. I'm pretty sure I saw a .gho file for it on one of the drives today. I could try to revive that, but I'm not sure it's worth the trouble at this point. Probably simpler to just start from scratch.
 
Originally posted by: Muse
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: Muse
I'm having another problem now. No matter what nVidia display driver I install, I get only a black screen in Windows 98SE except for the mouse cursor. I'm at a loss what to do. Any ideas?
Click to expand...

I've never seen that before that I remember. Do you get the black screen even in safe mode? If not you may want to try experimenting with lowering the resolution and color depth to see if that changes anything.
Click to expand...
I don't get it in safe mode. If I install the standard VGA driver I can boot into regular mode and it isn't black the first time (Windows gives a message that it will reboot into plain vanilla mode the first time and you are supposed to choose your resolution then). But on a reboot after that, it's black again.

Anyway, I've been kinda intending to rebuild the system, and I figure that will work around the problem whatever it is. I have another MB that would be better because it has USB 2.0 support. The one in there now (EPOX 8K7A) only has 1.0. So, replace the mobo, ditch NT (I don't want to bother researching installing it. I never use it now, I just wanted it for testing in case I get a job that uses it... less and less likely these days), and install Win98 on the primary partition, and Windows 2000 on the next partition. It's a lot more time than I wanted to put in on this right now, but I don't seem to have a choice. I had a premonition that Win98 might not boot nice, but this is ridiculous.

Or I could try Ghosting back Win98. I'm pretty sure I saw a .gho file for it on one of the drives today. I could try to revive that, but I'm not sure it's worth the trouble at this point. Probably simpler to just start from scratch.
Click to expand...

If you have the hardware laying around a clean start with 98 is not a bad idea. It really doesn't take much to install and you could make a dual boot system with it and NT 4.0 if that is what you are referring to when you talk about NT. NT 4.0 is a pretty straightforward install and almost identical in the pre-GUI phase to Win2K and XP. I once had a system that would boot Win98 SE, NT 4.0, and Linux all from the NT loader menu.
 
I have the hardware. Problems have compounded this morning. The image on the monitor was unstable... first the cursor was wavering and then a crooked vertical line was near the center of the display! I rebooted, this time to Windows 2000 and the screen went completely blank. This was my 2nd LCD, so I moved the cable to my first LCD, onto the VGA input. The DVI input comes from my main PC, the one I'm using now (XP Pro).

Don't know what to make of this. Anyway, I'm getting the standard behavior again, but on my first LCD. I'm using a KVM to share the mouse and keyboard between the two PC's. Booting the problem box and going into Win98 Safe Mode, everything seemed "normal" until the boot finished. Then I found what I'd found yesterday, namely that Win98 in Safe Mode didn't see the mouse or keyboard. Ergo, I had to shut off the machine. No other way to get a response. I think I'll give up on it and when I have the time, swap out the mobo like I said. Before I do that, I'll go into Windows 2000 and move any data I might want off the boot HD and reformat it, partition it, install Win98 on partition 1, Win2000 on the first partition of the extended partition. That way I should never have this kind of problem again. It was having Win98 on one of the out-there partitions (E: ) that caused one major problem. If I can skip NT entirely, things will be a lot simpler. If I decide at some point I want NT I'll figure something else out. It seems unlikely right now. I haven't used NT in 6 years.
 
Originally posted by: Muse
I may have installed an additional HD
Click to expand...
Bingo.

On my multi-boot, which is Win98se, W2K SP4, and XP SP2, I have Win98se on my primary master, primary partition, and W2K SP4 and XP SP2 in extended partitions on the primary master.
 
Sorry I didn't read everything and this seems to be a week late, but in windows 98 as far as I can remember right now.
first you have the msdos.sys setting the path to the windows msdos drive and the boot msdos drive where the boot files are, meaning visible drives in dos. ones formated fat or fat32 not NTFS nor possibly ones on certain SATA controllers. Then the config.sys and autoexec.bat files may or may not have paths set, then the windows registry will have the paths to the drive that it was installed as well, these paths in the registry can't be easily changed. And if all the paths leading to the regisrty don't jive up you'll have problems.
So first I'd find where the windows registry wants windows then goto the msdos.sys and check that, also check the drives letters in a Dos command prompt to see how they are lettered in Dos. But then again if you're going to reinstall all this won't matter much.

A video drivers problem in windows 98 might result of too much memory in the system. Or rather a side effect.
Also KVM can add to problems and confuse troubleshooting, I'd remove the KVM until you get things working. Also I'd use standard ps/2 mouse and keyboards until things get set up.
 
This may be kind of silly, but have you tried Virtual PC? Windows 98 is listed as one of the supported operating systems and you can probably install and set up that in your Windows 2000/XP machine?
 
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: Muse
I may have installed an additional HD
Click to expand...
Bingo.

On my multi-boot, which is Win98se, W2K SP4, and XP SP2, I have Win98se on my primary master, primary partition, and W2K SP4 and XP SP2 in extended partitions on the primary master.
Click to expand...

This is no doubt a good solution. As I think I explained, I didn't do this because I wanted NT on the machine, and NT doesn't see FAT32 partitions. It made for an error prone system if you do any hardware juggling. Plus, it had been about a couple years since I last tried booting to Win98. What an adventure. I spent around a day trying to get it to work and finally decided that although it might be feasible to repair the problem, the easiest and smartest solution is to just install my alternate (and superior) mobo in the machine, ditch NT and just dual boot, having Win98 on the primary master's boot partition.
 
Originally posted by: Parasitic
This may be kind of silly, but have you tried Virtual PC? Windows 98 is listed as one of the supported operating systems and you can probably install and set up that in your Windows 2000/XP machine?
Click to expand...

Hmm. I've been trying to get Win98SE set up in my second system. My first system (the one I'm using now, my day to day machine) has a mobo that doesn't support Win98 (MSI K8N Neo-FSR/ V V2.0, although it's a bit hard to tell. MSI is kinda nuts with their mobo breakdowns, versions.). Is it possible it would support it using Virtual PC? Is it freeware?
 
Originally posted by: thegorx
Sorry I didn't read everything and this seems to be a week late, but in windows 98 as far as I can remember right now.
first you have the msdos.sys setting the path to the windows msdos drive and the boot msdos drive where the boot files are, meaning visible drives in dos. ones formated fat or fat32 not NTFS nor possibly ones on certain SATA controllers. Then the config.sys and autoexec.bat files may or may not have paths set, then the windows registry will have the paths to the drive that it was installed as well, these paths in the registry can't be easily changed. And if all the paths leading to the regisrty don't jive up you'll have problems.
So first I'd find where the windows registry wants windows then goto the msdos.sys and check that, also check the drives letters in a Dos command prompt to see how they are lettered in Dos. But then again if you're going to reinstall all this won't matter much.

A video drivers problem in windows 98 might result of too much memory in the system. Or rather a side effect.
Also KVM can add to problems and confuse troubleshooting, I'd remove the KVM until you get things working. Also I'd use standard ps/2 mouse and keyboards until things get set up.
Click to expand...

Darn, I brought all my PS/2 mice to a computer, etc. recycling facility a few months ago! All I have left are USB mice. I must have had nearly 10 PS/2's! I think I do have a PS/2 keyboard still, however.

For simplicity I think I'll try keeping the KVM in the equation during the reinstall of OS's, hoping things will work. Or is that a recipe for frustration? 😕

Funny thing is I have no idea if I'm going to have success running this Win98 version of Protools. It seems like noone at the radio station I work at has even heard of this (I've asked around 4 people). At the station, they run version 6.4.1 on an Apple computer and they have a hardware interface provided by the Protools folks, which includes a ton of RAM, or so I'm told. It's a big black piece of equipment that fits in a panel with switches, flashing lights, to me a black box.
 
Originally posted by: Muse
Originally posted by: Parasitic
This may be kind of silly, but have you tried Virtual PC? Windows 98 is listed as one of the supported operating systems and you can probably install and set up that in your Windows 2000/XP machine?
Click to expand...

Hmm. I've been trying to get Win98SE set up in my second system. My first system (the one I'm using now, my day to day machine) has a mobo that doesn't support Win98 (MSI K8N Neo-FSR/ V V2.0, although it's a bit hard to tell. MSI is kinda nuts with their mobo breakdowns, versions.). Is it possible it would support it using Virtual PC? Is it freeware?
Click to expand...

Yes, VirtualPC is free.
 
Originally posted by: Muse
Originally posted by: MrChad


Yes, VirtualPC is free.
Click to expand...
Is it possible it would allow a mobo that doesn't support Win98 to run Win98?
Click to expand...

Virtual PC emulates the hardware. I have win 95 running happily in virtual pc on all of mine comps. (I use win95 to run starfighter 3000, old dos game)
 
Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
Originally posted by: Muse
Originally posted by: MrChad


Yes, VirtualPC is free.
Click to expand...
Is it possible it would allow a mobo that doesn't support Win98 to run Win98?
Click to expand...

Virtual PC emulates the hardware. I have win 95 running happily in virtual pc on all of mine comps. (I use win95 to run starfighter 3000, old dos game)
Click to expand...
Is Virtual PC reasonably fast? I'm gonna check it out. Thanks.
 
Originally posted by: Muse
Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
Originally posted by: Muse
Originally posted by: MrChad


Yes, VirtualPC is free.
Click to expand...
Is it possible it would allow a mobo that doesn't support Win98 to run Win98?
Click to expand...

Virtual PC emulates the hardware. I have win 95 running happily in virtual pc on all of mine comps. (I use win95 to run starfighter 3000, old dos game)
Click to expand...
Is Virtual PC reasonably fast? I'm gonna check it out. Thanks.
Click to expand...

So, I'm running XP Pro on my main machine. No multibooting going on with this machine presently, although I have a partition set aside for a 2nd XP Pro install, just for testing purposes. Haven't gotten around to installing on it yet, and now's the time I could use it... I downloaded and installed Virtual PC 2007. The first MS download sites weren't working for downloading, for some reason. I got this message:

- - - -

Unable to connect


Firefox can't establish a connection to the server at view.atdmt.com.


* The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a few
moments.

* If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer's network
connection.

* If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make sure
that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.
- - - -

Well, I Googled up an alternative MS download page for it and downloaded it from there, the 32 bit version, installed it (I was surprised I didn't get the standard message about closing other applications... I only had Firefox open, a couple of other innocuous apps, so WTH). After installing, I rebooted and ran Virtual PC. A screen or two in, when I choose a name for the particular virtual machine I'm creating my computer locked up tighter than a drum. Mouse cursor frozen, no keyboard response, not even to a control-alt-delete. Had to hit the reset button. Went through this same scenario 3 times and gave up. Any idea what's up with this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top