OT: Windows 95

[Daniel Mandic]

Hi NG.




I have finished my 280SE Benz (iP2/280MHz). It´s working with Windows
95.

Now I am interested in some decent Win95 Links. Please be so kind and
reply some Links to Sites with Win95-Stuff.
I am especially interested in the AGP-Issue (VGART.VXD) and USB-Support
(USBSUPP and USBSUPP2). Everything is working, but to get an AGP card
working flawlessly, seems not to be possible.
The best what I have found, was an older vgart.vxd (somewhere in the
Internet) and 3DMark2000 runs at least 2-3 Tests (of 20). With the
original Vgart.vxd (Matrox-driver) it did not start at all, just the
first frame and stop (crash).

Not installing USBSUPP let AGP features disabled, and the AGP-Card
works as a PCI, I know.




Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[Man-wai Chang]

I am especially interested in the AGP-Issue (VGART.VXD) and USB-Support

(USBSUPP and USBSUPP2). Everything is working, but to get an AGP card
working flawlessly, seems not to be possible.

That should be fixed by the chipset driver. What chipset are you using
in your machine? What motherboard?

 

[kenny]

can you please explain to use why you want to use win95 and not win98 at
least?

 

[Daniel Mandic]

can you please explain to use why you want to use win95 and not win98
at least?

Bez 98 and ME are ACPI-Beasts, I don´t care to configure. I just need a
WIN32 at the lowest (DOS and 3.1 compatibility) and most impressive
(Chicago) manner. That´s Windows 95, AKA as Windows 4.0.
I don´t like 3.1 or 3.11... though it would totally suffice, as I need
exactly a 3.x. for my apps and games.

But using the newer AGP Card instead of the PCI, is not possible
without "not enabling" the USB-Port. ;-( Win98SE and ME can fix, sure.




Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[Fran]

If you can, you should install Windows 98SE, it will work just fine on a 280
machine, and is considerably easier to upgrade than Windows 95.

 

[kenny]

WTF????
I do not understand what you are talking about ACPI beasts!

I insist you FORGET about windows 95 (even though there was a version win95b
and win95C that had (fat32 support and usb enabled)

If you want something lighter you can use a program that removes unneeded
elements from windows 98

Look here and tell me if this information helps:
http://www.litepc.com/

as I said TELL me if this information helps you.

 

[Daniel Mandic]

That should be fixed by the chipset driver. What chipset are you
using in your machine? What motherboard?

Hi Man-wai!



I use the mighty i82443, AKA i440BX (in any purposes). The Problem is,
when installing the USB Support, vgart.vxd get changed to support USB
and full-featured AGP. The new vgart.vxd might work with USB but not
with a Matrox G400 AGP. For now I have changed the GfX, to a PCI (Mil2).

Disabling the AGP-texturing at DX (dxdiag) does not help. Only when
it´s greyed out (AGP-texturing). Changing the vgart.vxd "could" help to
get back in the greyed out-state, but obviously USB wouldn´t work
anymore.

As I said, I have found an other .vxd which is working at least at
standard Windows operations stable (before, also non AGP-texture
programs melted down like cheese on my screen) , or not (i didn´t test
a long time), but running 3DMArk2000 is not possible. A while... and
crash. So I changed to PCI. At least stable now and no 3Dmark at
all ;-(




Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[Daniel Mandic]

WTF????
I do not understand what you are talking about ACPI beasts!

I insist you FORGET about windows 95 (even though there was a version
win95b and win95C that had (fat32 support and usb enabled)

If you want something lighter you can use a program that removes
unneeded elements from windows 98

Advanced Configuration Power Interface. Maybe you can save something
with it. I can´t.

I already have 95b OSR2.1. With USBSUPP and USBSUPP2 it gets upgraded
to OSR2.5, AKA Win95C.


Well, I could remove that unneeded things so an so, why not take a
lighter OS in the first. I like to adjust and set on Windows, and for
that purposes I have a XP Service Pack2 Computer. The Win95 Sys should
met the minimum standards (Plus!, IE5.5SP2, USB, Chipset Driver
installed and Optical Mouse) and being as fast as possible. Win98 and
ME is maybe more stable to the unexperienced User, or more feature-rich
and better supported, but never faster IMHO.

Otherwise, I have no copy of 98, 98SE or ME. Maybe ME is
interesting........ I´ll see.




Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[Roger Hunt]

I use the mighty i82443, AKA i440BX (in any purposes). The Problem is,
when installing the USB Support, vgart.vxd get changed to support USB
and full-featured AGP. The new vgart.vxd might work with USB but not
with a Matrox G400 AGP. For now I have changed the GfX, to a PCI (Mil2).

Disabling the AGP-texturing at DX (dxdiag) does not help. Only when
it´s greyed out (AGP-texturing). Changing the vgart.vxd "could" help to
get back in the greyed out-state, but obviously USB wouldn´t work
anymore.

As I said, I have found an other .vxd which is working at least at
standard Windows operations stable (before, also non AGP-texture
programs melted down like cheese on my screen) , or not (i didn´t test
a long time), but running 3DMArk2000 is not possible. A while... and
crash. So I changed to PCI. At least stable now and no 3Dmark at
all ;-(

When I was grappling with Win95b/AGP/OpenGL/DirectX etc there were two
benchmark programmes which I did use quite a lot :
Final Reality - quite pretty -
http://www.remedygames.com/fr/
(says d/l link active but they won't work for me. Available here :
ftp://ftp.gosting.ru/pub/soft/Utilites/Benchmarkers/3dtest/fr101.exe
)
and Wintune98 1043 - quick system benchmark including graphics -
http://tucows.mundofree.com/win2k/adnload/37681_30039.html
(automatic download page, ignore that Win2000 banner - OK with 95b)

Both free and fairly old.
Hope these might be of interest to you ...

 

[kenny]

why not take a
lighter OS in the first

Because the core of windows 98 is better than the core of win95??

in otherwords a stripped down win98 is better than win95

I would use an nt kernel though.. like a stripped down version of win2000
that can run (if you see the specs) on a pentium 133 with 64 or 128 ram.

Just for your information I have installed XPPRO on a pentium 90 Mhz with 96
mb ram.

 

[Daniel Mandic]

lighter OS in the first

Because the core of windows 98 is better than the core of win95??

maybe, but not faster.

in otherwords a stripped down win98 is better than win95
Better.


I would use an nt kernel though.. like a stripped down version of
win2000 that can run (if you see the specs) on a pentium 133 with 64
or 128 ram.

Me too, I used NT4.0 since SP2 came out, but I need full DOS and Win3.x
compatibility. NT4 is no solution, thanks.

Just for your information I have installed XPPRO on a pentium 90 Mhz
with 96 mb ram.

Oh my dear, are you really so patient?


I tried it on the machine I talk about. Well, the Special AMI-Cpu is
doing well (300MHz P2, 512K cache with zero latency, probably a XEON or
a limited version. But even that, XP needs at least 500-1000MHz. Sorry.
Although it is possible to apply a 486 CPU to WinNT5.1 (XP).

Your P90 should feel better, merged to a WinNT4.0.





Kind Regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[kenny]

It is possible to use 386 with xp

maybe, but not faster.


Me too, I used NT4.0 since SP2 came out, but I need full DOS and Win3.x
compatibility. NT4 is no solution, thanks.


Oh my dear, are you really so patient?


I tried it on the machine I talk about. Well, the Special AMI-Cpu is
doing well (300MHz P2, 512K cache with zero latency, probably a XEON or
a limited version. But even that, XP needs at least 500-1000MHz. Sorry.
Although it is possible to apply a 486 CPU to WinNT5.1 (XP).

Your P90 should feel better, merged to a WinNT4.0.





Kind Regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[Daniel Mandic]

It is possible to use 386 with xp

No no, on but not with. It´s also possible to use a MIPS or Alpha on
XP. Or a MC680xx, PowerPC, ARM, Zilog and more.


;-) you are a funny guy. 386. tsk ts...

I think NT3.51 was the last NT-Version with 386 Support. You don´t need
knowledge in Arabic, to understand that.




Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[kenny]

I think NT3.51 was the last NT-Version with 386 Support


I thought it just had to be 32 bit to work...
perhaps you are right.. if I had a 386 I would try it

 

[Daniel Mandic]

I thought it just had to be 32 bit to work...
perhaps you are right.. if I had a 386 I would try it

I am never right.




.....Good Luck with that.





Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic