Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 

Sign in to follow this  
Gape

New Features of Version 2.0

Recommended Posts

azagahl    0

With WinTune98 I couldn't detect any performance difference between compressed (0.8 MB) and uncompressed (2.2 MB). Also I could not detect a DOS memory difference. BTW my system is Athlon64 3400 with 1 GB RAM, and old ATA100 hard drives.

I'm guessing boot time would depend on CPU and hard disk speed.

So my vote is for the compressed vmm32, with smaller footprint, probably faster loading (CPU 's are always much faster than hard disks) and higher danger of corruption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gape    0
With WinTune98 I couldn't detect any performance difference between compressed (0.8 MB) and uncompressed (2.2 MB). Also I could not detect a DOS memory difference. BTW my system is Athlon64 3400 with 1 GB RAM, and old ATA100 hard drives.

I'm guessing boot time would depend on CPU and hard disk speed.

So my vote is for the compressed vmm32, with smaller footprint, probably faster loading (CPU 's are always much faster than hard disks) and higher danger of corruption.

Thanks. Do you have any problem with your 1 GB of RAM ? Your system's specs are very high. Perhaps, a low-end system may show the difference. But the difference should be very small.

So I think a compressed and single VMM32.VXD should be best for averal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
azagahl    0

>>Do you have any problem with your 1 GB of RAM ?

Nope. I run Morrowind with both expansions and 1.4 GB of mods installed and it runs like a charm. I don't use MaxPhysPage setting, but I do use MaxFileCache=524288 setting installed by your SP; I believe this is required.

One problem I had before was that my SB Live! Value card is very touchy and likes to complain "cannot load patch RAM under 4 MB boundary", preventing Windows from starting. Sometimes the error occurs when shutting down windows. This error occurs less often on 512 MB systems. Setting MaxPhysPage lower, and maybe turning smartdrv off helps avoid this, but I don't want to use those fixes! These changes in windows\system.ini made this problem go away PERMANENTLY :) (not sure which changes are really required):

[386enh]

;EMMExclude=C000-CFFF

EMMExclude=A000-FFFF

VGAMonoText=OFF

PageBuffers=32

LocalLoadHigh=1

I also use lowest possible (undocumented) size of 16 KB for smartdrv cache under Windows. (It's not used anyway.)

FWIW, I currently have a ton of TSR's loaded, sblive drivers loaded high, lots of free conventional AND upper memory, and have no problems in Windows or playing DOS games in Windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gape    0
Nope. I run Morrowind with both expansions and 1.4 GB of mods installed and it runs like a charm. I don't use MaxPhysPage setting, but I do use MaxFileCache=524288 setting installed by your SP; I believe this is required.

Do you have any problem with DirectX based applications like Games? One user reported that he have some problems with DirectX Games on a 1.5 GB of RAM system. I recommend that he should add your settings, but the problem have not solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
azagahl    0

"One user reported that he have some problems with DirectX Games on a 1.5 GB of RAM system"

I only have 1 GB, but I'm using DirectX 9.0c (October release) and have no DX problems. What kind of DX problems where there? Crashes? Bluescreens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MDGx    0

Unrelated to gape's upcoming 98SE SP2, but cool.

Windows 98SE fans rejoice...

Now you can install the *newer* WMP9 from Windows XP SP2 onto 98SE

[suggested by erpdude8 = many thanks, dude! :)]

Complete guide:

http://www.mdgx.com/98-5.htm#KRM9S

Scroll down to "NEW: ADD WINDOWS XP SP2 FUNCTIONALITY:".

Enjoy. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
soldier1st    0

that sure is alot of steps

what are the advantages of adding this to 98 se?will it make it more stable?also could you do it and host it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MDGx    0
that sure is alot of steps

what are the advantages of adding this to 98 se?will it make it more stable?also could you do it and host it?

Advantages?

Because WMP9 files from XP SP2 are *newer*, which means a lot of security holes + bugs have been fixed by MS in this build [this is noted at the web page].

Do it and host it?

No, that would [probably] be illegal. :(

But it is legal to post instructions on how to do something like this for educational/personal purposes:

please see the rest of the topic at

http://www.mdgx.com/98-5.htm#KRM9S

In other words, what you do at home with your own computer is ok, as long as you legally own the software. :)

Although I do intend to host Gape's 98SE SP2 final when he's ready to post it.

News flash [12-7-2004]:

MS just posted Windows 2003 SP1 RC1 [which includes HHU build 5.2.3790.1289], and I had to post HTML Help 1.41 Update (HHU) build 5.2.3790.1289 for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE + NT4. :)

HHU links [English only]:

http://www.mdgx.com/add.htm#HHU

- Win98/98 SP1/98 SE HHU [701 KB]:

http://www.mdgx.com/files/HHUPD.EXE

- WinNT4 HHU [701 KB]:

http://www.mdgx.com/files/HHUPDNT.EXE

Enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
erpdude8    1
tarun posted a vmm32 file that i dled n put it where it was sposed to figuring it would help make windows 98 se faster,i run windows 98 se,windows xp+sp1&SP2,Windows 2000+SP3 then after i installed it it wanted msdos 8 then i reformatted so i deleted that file i dled

Ah, no wonder. You were trying to use that vmm32.vxd file Tarun suggested

which was the WinME version on a Win98se system. BAD IDEA! The vmm32

file is OS specific. That means the WinME version of vmm32 can only work

under WinME and not any other Windows version. Well, now you know what happened.

You CAN however, replace the user.exe and user32.dll files with the WinME version

as MDGx told me it can slightly improve performance & has better memory management

than the Win98se version. See Axcel216's Win98 Tricks + Secrets part 5 page

on how to do it:

http://www.mdgx.com/98-5.htm

And using the WinME user.exe & user32.dll files on a Win98 system won't have

the side effects of using that WinME vmm32 file under Win98.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
soldier1st    0

well it renamed it but it didn't allow me to place those files where they were sposed to and wouldn't boot or allow me to rename them back so i booted into xp,copied the new files where they were sposed to and here i am using those new files

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MDGx    0
well it renamed it but it didn't allow me to place those files where they were sposed to and wouldn't boot or allow me to rename them back so i booted into xp,copied the new files where they were sposed to and here i am using those new files

Probably because your original files [uSER32.DLL + USER.EXE] in C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM [default, generic is %windir%\SYSTEM] had the read-only and/or system and/or hidden attributes. If that was the case, the DOS COPY + MOVE commands would not allow replacing files with such attributes.

The fix is to run [from any DOS prompt after booting to Win98SE, no need to boot to another MS OS, and if you do, the %windir% variable applies *only* to that specific MS OS, in your case WinXP, and won't work as stated]:

ATTRIB -H -R -S %windir%\SYSTEM\USER32.DLL

and then:

ATTRIB -H -R -S %windir%\SYSTEM\USER.EXE

Then you can replace those files only from native MS-DOS, *not* from within Win98SE GUI [see more details at the web page]:

http://www.mdgx.com/98-5.htm#KRM9S

Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
soldier1st    0

i followed the instructions,it renamed the files in dos mode but didn't allow me to copy them so i moved them from another os and i do have the benefit of the better memory management

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×