LinuxQuestions.org
Register a domain and help support LQ
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
LinkBack Search this Thread
Old 04-13-2012, 07:46 PM   #16
k3lt01
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Distribution: Debian Wheezy, Jessie, Sid/Experimental, playing with Slackware 14.
Posts: 2,457

Rep: Reputation: 507Reputation: 507Reputation: 507Reputation: 507Reputation: 507Reputation: 507

This is getting tiring. Sometimes proof is all that is required. Googling "How much RAM will Windows 98" brought up this as the 2nd link. There are links to MS knowledge base articles as well.

@Zssfssz, I'm sure this will be an interesting exercise for you. When you have tried it please let us know how you go.
 
Old 04-13-2012, 08:51 PM   #17
jefro
Guru
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Posts: 10,255

Rep: Reputation: 1256Reputation: 1256Reputation: 1256Reputation: 1256Reputation: 1256Reputation: 1256Reputation: 1256Reputation: 1256Reputation: 1256
A free virtual machine application is the solution. As stated above a few times.
You have no reason to hate it. It is the proper solution.

A virtual machine emulates older, simple hardware. It is a program that software creates a computer. You can run a new OS and the old OS at the same time. You can drag and drop between on some versions too.

If you insist, you should consider an old computer to install it on. There is about a zero chance to get it running on a modern good system.

Last edited by jefro; 04-13-2012 at 08:56 PM.
 
Old 04-14-2012, 10:00 AM   #18
allend
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Melbourne
Distribution: Slackware-current
Posts: 3,289

Rep: Reputation: 802Reputation: 802Reputation: 802Reputation: 802Reputation: 802Reputation: 802Reputation: 802
As stated above, Windows98 does not recognise SATA drives and has a maximum limit of 8GB for the FAT32 file system. This presents problems for the installer on modern machines. Also recognition of modern hardware such as network devices is problematic.
You can run Windows98 in a virtual machine. It works OK in VirtualBox (although programs using DirectX are very slow, making some games all but unplayable) but there are no guest additions available. It does not work in qemu-kvm.
The Windows98 operating system did not implement the halt instruction, so if you run it in a virtual machine you will see high CPU usage. You can fix this by installing software that implements the halt instruction such as Rain 2.0.
In the past, it was necessary to install graphics drivers when using Windows98 in VirtualBox, but this is no longer necessary.

Last edited by allend; 04-14-2012 at 10:02 AM.
 
Old 04-14-2012, 06:43 PM   #19
GrepAwkSed
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2012
Posts: 23

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
@ Zssfssz

I suggest you find a way to get the latest windows OS even if you have to borrow money from family and friends. windows 98 is dead to microsoft.

Not sure if windows 8 consumer preview is still available for download but you should check before installing windows 98.

BTW, the windows 98 disc is not bootable like windows XP disc is so you will need a boot floppy disc to load windows 98.

Last edited by GrepAwkSed; 04-14-2012 at 06:45 PM.
 
Old 04-14-2012, 06:53 PM   #20
rokytnji
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: AntiX 13 , Various Puppys (MacPup,Slack0),MX-14
Posts: 2,147
Blog Entries: 12

Rep: Reputation: 643Reputation: 643Reputation: 643Reputation: 643Reputation: 643Reputation: 643
Quote:
I suggest you find a way to get the latest windows OS even if you have to borrow money from family and friends. windows 98 is dead to microsoft.
and a new computer


Quote:
It is a VAIO desktop modle number PCV-RX550 with a 50G HD (Non Phienox BIOS Settings). It is currently running FreeDOS (No Way FreeDOS Has All The Drivers For My Machine). I will never have to use Internet on it,windows 98 will be second edition. 256 Ms of ram, Pentium 4.


No way Jose.
 
Old 04-14-2012, 06:54 PM   #21
jlinkels
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Bonaire
Distribution: Debian Lenny/Squeeze/Wheezy/Sid
Posts: 3,986

Rep: Reputation: 477Reputation: 477Reputation: 477Reputation: 477Reputation: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrepAwkSed View Post
BTW, the windows 98 disc is not bootable like windows XP disc is so you will need a boot floppy disc to load windows 98.
I think you need even DOS 6.22 installed before you can proceed. I remember something that the standard procedure for installing W98 was DOS 6.0, upgrade to 6.22 and then insert the W98 disk en run INSTALL.EXE. Oh and you need the proper CDROM drivers installed in order to access the disk. Maybe that was why I always needed DOS 6.22.

Talking about DOS and descendants like DOS 7 etc., don't hit <TAB> all the time when you cannot remember the filename, it doesn't do a thing.

jlinkels

Last edited by jlinkels; 04-14-2012 at 06:56 PM.
 
Old 04-14-2012, 07:49 PM   #22
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 14,880
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlinkels View Post
I think you need even DOS 6.22 installed before you can proceed. I remember something that the standard procedure for installing W98 was DOS 6.0, upgrade to 6.22 and then insert the W98 disk en run INSTALL.EXE. Oh and you need the proper CDROM drivers installed in order to access the disk. Maybe that was why I always needed DOS 6.22.

Talking about DOS and descendants like DOS 7 etc., don't hit <TAB> all the time when you cannot remember the filename, it doesn't do a thing.

jlinkels
Back in the days when I used Win98 I never had such problems. I installed it so often that I could recite my product key and it always started right of the bootable Win98-CD. No need for boot floppies or a DOS install.
 
Old 04-14-2012, 08:54 PM   #23
rob.rice
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 777

Rep: Reputation: 88
depending on where you live you can get a 3year newer than W98 for about $20.00 whole system
that said

the only problems I can think of you running in to with W98 on a newer computer
would be support for the larger HDDs and RAMs of the newer computers
the newer CPUs will run the old machine code NO PROBLEMS
 
Old 04-14-2012, 09:13 PM   #24
rob.rice
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 777

Rep: Reputation: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
Back in the days when I used Win98 I never had such problems. I installed it so often that I could recite my product key and it always started right of the bootable Win98-CD. No need for boot floppies or a DOS install.
I think he had an upgrade disk in the day it was cheaper to buy an up grade disk than a home copy of 98
 
Old 04-15-2012, 08:44 PM   #25
cascade9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Brisneyland
Distribution: Debian, aptosid
Posts: 3,658

Rep: Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
It depends. Windows 98 will have problems if you have more the 512MB of RAM and will not work at all if the CPU is clocked higher than 2.7GHz. It is also not able to use more than 1 CPU or CPU-core. You also may run into problems with modern power-saving features, causing the CPU to produce more heat than it normally does. Besides the problem that you most likely will not find any drivers for it, so probably a large part of your hardware will not work. May be you can give us some info about the hardware.
I've seen the '512MB+ RAM causes problems' with Win9X more than a few times. Not that I ever saw the point of running Win9X on 512MB+ systems, 2K/XP were nicer all round with that amoumnt of RAM.

AFAIK Win9X will run on 2.7GHz+ systems. I'm pretty sure I've seen it run on a P4 3.0GHz. The newer or faster the CPU is the more likely you will have problems though. Maybe you were thinking of the 2.1GHz+ issue?

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=312108

Yes, agreed, you will have serious issues even finding drivers for chipsets after some point. Exactly when that point is varies (IIRC you can get Win9X chipset drivers for systems that support some dualcores, eg intel 915, but if you try to run a dual-core its not properly suppoted, some single core CPUs are supported with that chipset and 9X)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
If you really want to run Windows 98 for whatever reason I would recommend to install a small Linux on that machine and use Virtualbox or Qemu to run Windows.
Or run winXP, drop it back to 'classic' mode (looks pretty similar to 9X) and use 'compatibility mode' for 9X programs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jlinkels View Post
I think you need even DOS 6.22 installed before you can proceed. I remember something that the standard procedure for installing W98 was DOS 6.0, upgrade to 6.22 and then insert the W98 disk en run INSTALL.EXE. Oh and you need the proper CDROM drivers installed in order to access the disk. Maybe that was why I always needed DOS 6.22.
Nope, 9X is CD bootable. Theres a few reason why you might have had issues, the most common is win9X only supports a single channel for IDE until you have installed the chipset drivers. So if you have your HDD on IDE channel 0 and CD on IDE channel 1 it wont install. The other common one is that you've got a CD drive hooked up to some controller (eg the classic 'Soundblaster card being used as a CD controller')
 
Old 04-15-2012, 09:23 PM   #26
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 14,880
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807Reputation: 3807
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascade9 View Post
AFAIK Win9X will run on 2.7GHz+ systems. I'm pretty sure I've seen it run on a P4 3.0GHz. The newer or faster the CPU is the more likely you will have problems though. Maybe you were thinking of the 2.1GHz+ issue?

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=312108
Yes, seems that my memory played games with me, I was pretty sure that it was 2.7GHz.
 
Old 04-15-2012, 10:58 PM   #27
cascade9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Brisneyland
Distribution: Debian, aptosid
Posts: 3,658

Rep: Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883
7, 1, easy mistake to make.
 
Old 04-16-2012, 07:32 AM   #28
jlinkels
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Bonaire
Distribution: Debian Lenny/Squeeze/Wheezy/Sid
Posts: 3,986

Rep: Reputation: 477Reputation: 477Reputation: 477Reputation: 477Reputation: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascade9 View Post
Nope, 9X is CD bootable. Theres a few reason why you might have had issues, the most common is win9X only supports a single channel for IDE until you have installed the chipset drivers. So if you have your HDD on IDE channel 0 and CD on IDE channel 1 it wont install. The other common one is that you've got a CD drive hooked up to some controller (eg the classic 'Soundblaster card being used as a CD controller')
You might very well be right, my memory is a bit fuzzy about those kind of things. I do remember I was running a PC business at the time. Installing W98 on consumer PC's and NT4.0 on business machines. And which each upgrade or release (like W98 SE) I thought "Wow, isn't Windows a great product, always on the move, heading into the right direction." Altough it would be nice if I did not have to restart 30 times during an installation.

jlinkels
 
Old 04-17-2012, 04:20 AM   #29
cascade9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Brisneyland
Distribution: Debian, aptosid
Posts: 3,658

Rep: Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883Reputation: 883
If I was trying to remember the win9X stuff from the last time I did a 9X install on my own hardware, I'd probably be fuzzy as well. But I was working doing win98/win98SE/ME installs only a few years ago. Well, up until I told them I wouldnt do any more 9X (or 2K/XP either) installs without seeing the papaerwork from microsoft they said they had. Only lasted there 3 more days before I was fired.....
 
  


Reply

Tags
old windows, windows


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does FreeBSD work well on newer hardware (server) ? Akhran *BSD 2 07-15-2008 09:34 PM
Compiling newer forcedeth and making it work kovacsp Linux - Hardware 1 12-13-2007 03:45 AM
Why dose my internet work in windows but not in opensuse 10.2 on a dual boot computer jennylschofield Linux - Wireless Networking 6 04-21-2007 11:11 PM
Transferring Hard Drive to Newer Computer kaplan71 Suse/Novell 2 11-04-2005 04:11 PM
Transferring Hard Drive to Newer Computer kaplan71 Fedora 1 11-04-2005 01:32 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:09 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration