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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Making Win98 work on the internet (now USB)
98 Guy wrote in :
If you have a motherboard based on the Intel 845 chipset (and possibly other 8xx chips) then look he http://www.tacktech.com/news.cfm?sub...orangeware-int elreg-usb-2.0-enhanced-host-controller-driver 10.07.2002 - OrangeWare/Intel® USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller driver Under the Driver File Details for the Intel USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller on my win-98 system, I have 3 files listed: - iusbehci.sys (USB 2.0 enhanced host controller driver, Orangeware) - iusb2hub.sys (USB 2.0 hub driver, Orangeware Corp, version 1.1.0.2) That last one might alwo work renamed as USBHUB20.sys in NUSB, for wider local support, when using that chipset. I don't know whether the other file is needed in that transplant, but if so, the name stays unchanged apart from omitting the 'i'. (NUSB might support that chipset natively for all I know, but that's something to can try if it doesn't). |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Making Win98 work on the internet (now USB)
"Bill in Co" wrote in
news 2. The universal USB driver, often called NUSB. There are several iterations - probably go for the latest for a first try, but some people have found earlier ones work better for them. The instructions for it say to remove any other USB drivers you may have before installing it; (at least for the newer, 3.x versions, although it may have been "recommended" for the older versions too - see my comments below): I think it should always go in a clean install. Conflicts with other drivers should always yield to core sysfiles (except where they are specifically known not to work), which is basically what NUSB is. It's a hybrid of W2K and WME core USB support, transplanted to W9X. Most of anything it could conflict with is very specific proprietary support. The common exception is the USBHUB20.SYS file, which may need replacing with mainboard-specific support from a file (often with some variant name) supplied by the mainboard maker. Whatever that file is, it should be named USBHUB20.SYS for NUSB to use. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Making Win98 work on the internet (now USB)
My post just now applies to v3.3, so likely to most if not all other
versions. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Making Win98 work on the internet (now USB)
"Bill in Co" wrote in
news In just checking over my notes, I seem to recall that if you stuck with the older 2.x nusb versions (like nusb23e.exe), instead of the newer 3.x versions, you just may be able to get away with NOT having to uninstall all the USB drivers first. And that's what I did on my old Win98SE system - I used the older nusb23e driver, and did NOT uninstall all the USB drivers first (as is now strongly recommended, or perhaps even required, in the later versions). And it worked fine for me! It may be that NUSB later included a lot more INF file details for specific devices. Core support alone should not bork so long as the new core is as consistent as it should be, with the OS and what remains of the old. I think the reason that newer NUSB changes so much, is to make sure that there is no 'old' to be inconsistent with. In which case, logically, any conflicts seem to arise from specific INF details added by proprietary drivers added to the OS later. So in either case, it is best to uninstall those first just to reduce risk and annoyance. It's easier than auditing the OS's INF stash, and that of NUSB also. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Making Win98 work on the internet
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in
: Good analogy! Better than my last. I used to describe it as a car crashing no buffer rails at the side of a road tunnel. It was clumsier.. When I said "net access" I was being sloppy - I meant anything that involves getting something over the internet, not just browser use. If you're playing an XviD file from a remote source, even if via ftp, streaming, or similar, I'd agree. (Ideally you'd need a way of telling the player to buffer a large proportion of the file before it starts playing, but many players don't have that option, or it isn't obvious anyway. Or just download the whole file before starting, but that may conceivably not always be possible.) I think this is what browser flash players do, loading, buffering before playback. They're just lousy at it, especially on erratic lines. Some sites specifically advise pausing to allow more download, then resuming playback. (It may not help that in an effort to make a file small enough to stream cheaply and efficiently, the CPU overhead needed to PLAY it on arrival is so great that nothing is gained, for the end user anyway. Turing machines (all computers we can afford) all do one instruction at a time, and every response to incoming data arriving after a wait is time not spent on hungry playback demands, and vice versa. So in practise streaming is nonsense. They might as well provide direct downloads and standalone players! The 'experience' would be better that way. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Making Win98 work on the internet (now USB)
Lostgallifreyan wrote:
"Bill in Co" wrote in news In just checking over my notes, I seem to recall that if you stuck with the older 2.x nusb versions (like nusb23e.exe), instead of the newer 3.x versions, you just may be able to get away with NOT having to uninstall all the USB drivers first. And that's what I did on my old Win98SE system - I used the older nusb23e driver, and did NOT uninstall all the USB drivers first (as is now strongly recommended, or perhaps even required, in the later versions). And it worked fine for me! It may be that NUSB later included a lot more INF file details for specific devices. But how would that allow for the older version to be stable w/o uninstalling all the old usb drivers, but not the newer versions (3.x)? BTW, I may be misremembering this, but I think when just the old 2.x nusb version came out, that strong cautionary note wasn't there, but when 3.x came out, it was there, or at least for the 3.x versions. Which is what prompted me to install the old 2.x version at the time, and it worked great (w/o going thru the hassle of uninstalling all existing USB stuff first, and then trying to get it all reinstalled again, assuming I even knew where the drivers were anymore) Core support alone should not bork so long as the new core is as consistent as it should be, with the OS and what remains of the old. I'm not sure I follow. Are you comparing the core support in the 2.x to the 3.x versions, and what is already installed, or what?. I think the reason that newer NUSB changes so much, is to make sure that there is no 'old' to be inconsistent with. In which case, logically, any conflicts seem to arise from specific INF details added by proprietary drivers added to the OS later. So in either case, it is best to uninstall those first just to reduce risk and annoyance. It's easier than auditing the OS's INF stash, and that of NUSB also. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Making Win98 work on the internet (now USB)
"Bill in Co" wrote in
m: It may be that NUSB later included a lot more INF file details for specific devices. But how would that allow for the older version to be stable w/o uninstalling all the old usb drivers, but not the newer versions (3.x)? Lack of conflict. Can't conflict with what isn't there in one of the instances. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Making Win98 work on the internet (now USB)
"Bill in Co" wrote in
m: Core support alone should not bork so long as the new core is as consistent as it should be, with the OS and what remains of the old. I'm not sure I follow. Are you comparing the core support in the 2.x to the 3.x versions, and what is already installed, or what?. Both. USB is a subsystem. (My X98 work shows me that W98 is far more modular than M$ wanted us to beleive). My main concern when first trying NUSB was that it replaced so many files. It seemed unwise, over-dominating, until I understood that it was an entire subsystem replacement. The roots of any conflict is has aren't so likely the files, but the INF data contained for lots of devices. There are two ways to handle that: either stay small and specific, which is what singular device manufacurers try to do, or go big and general, as NUSB had to do. Once NUSB had got to the point where it had to do this, it became important to have as clean a starting base as possible. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Making Win98 work on the internet (now USB)
Lostgallifreyan wrote:
"Bill in Co" wrote in m: Core support alone should not bork so long as the new core is as consistent as it should be, with the OS and what remains of the old. I'm not sure I follow. Are you comparing the core support in the 2.x to the 3.x versions, and what is already installed, or what?. Both. USB is a subsystem. (My X98 work shows me that W98 is far more modular than M$ wanted us to beleive). My main concern when first trying NUSB was that it replaced so many files. I wonder if the newer versions of nusb replace MORE files than the older versions, and that's part of the problem here (unless you do a clean install). More below. It seemed unwise, over-dominating, until I understood that it was an entire subsystem replacement. The roots of any conflict is has aren't so likely the files, but the INF data contained for lots of devices. There are two ways to handle that: either stay small and specific, which is what singular device manufacurers try to do, or go big and general, as NUSB had to do. Once NUSB had got to the point where it had to do this, it became important to have as clean a starting base as possible. I guess that may be implying that the old versions of nusb won't or can't handle as many devices as the new ones can, too. OR that the old versions were so limited in what they added that there were no potential conflicts. But I'm still not sure I'm getting it. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Making Win98 work on the internet (now USB)
"Bill in Co" wrote in
m: I wonder if the newer versions of nusb replace MORE files than the older versions, and that's part of the problem here (unless you do a clean install). But that's exactly what I said it did. While I don't know enough exact file- countage to prove it, it's clear that NUSB is aimed at reliable replacement of the whole subsystem. It's safe to assume (human logic being what it is) that originally it set out to do no more than it had to, then found it had to do more. Once they got to that point it would be easier to go for broke, all in, try to do everything a USB subsystem should be doing. Ergo, more files, more data. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Making XP desktop look like Win98 | [email protected] | General | 143 | June 13th 10 06:15 PM |
Making XP desktop look like Win98 | [email protected] | General | 0 | June 7th 10 05:39 AM |
making a copy of win98 | MIKEFOTHREE | General | 3 | November 18th 04 05:24 PM |
Internet work work properly due to network config?? HELP | rob --- | Internet | 0 | August 26th 04 01:05 AM |
Making 98 work with Win Office 2000 runtimes of Access? | Brian Gaff | General | 1 | June 21st 04 06:26 PM |