PCI Device Not working

I installed the chip set and downloaded the drivers that i was asked to
by the HP Sucpport said to do and still does not work its a BRAND NEW
OUT OF THE BOX dc7600 ,, GO FIGURE

You need to provide specific details on what the problem is. If there are
error messages, provide them verbatim.

--
Regards


Ron Badour, MS MVP for W98
Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
Knowledge Base Info:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo



"HP BAD service" wrote in message
oups.com...
I installed the chip set and downloaded the drivers that i was asked to
by the HP Sucpport said to do and still does not work its a BRAND NEW
OUT OF THE BOX dc7600 ,, GO FIGURE

Specs regarding cpu speed, and memory size are beyond windows 98's
capability to handle, the memory size requires a tweak at minimum.
http://www.windowsmarketplace.com/Sp...itemId=1936969

ME can handle the cpu speed, but not the amount of installed RAM for same
reason. Install XP w/SP2, be done with it.

Do the drivers support the SATA interface in 98? When do those get
installed? Same should be considered if installing XP.

XP Pro is provided with this PC. So are drivers. Are the drivers
compatible with win98?

Can a 64 bit processor backpedal for 32 bit operations?

How does one install drivers if "it still doesn't work", implying it works
to some degree.

This is a dual core cpu, does win98 support that?

If you're attempting proper operatiin in an XP environment, go to an XP
newsgroup.
--
Lil' Dave
Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
Else you will be absorbed
"HP BAD service" wrote in message
oups.com...
I installed the chip set and downloaded the drivers that i was asked to
by the HP Sucpport said to do and still does not work its a BRAND NEW
OUT OF THE BOX dc7600 ,, GO FIGURE

Win98 can handle 1GB RAM no problem - all you need to do is play a bit!g.
For a clean install you'd need to reduce the RAM to 512MB until after Win98
is installed, then modify the SYSTEM.INI file
after the [vcache] header, add/insert a line saying
MaxFileCache=512000
save the file, and shut down - then upgrade the RAM again to the full 1GB,
and you're away.

I can run Win98 on a Sempron 3000, so it shouldn't be too much of a problem
on a 3.2GHz P4 (which is NOT a 64bit chip!)
Win98 will run happily on a Dual-core chip - but only know about one of the
cores, although the on-chip controllers will actually utilise both.

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's
"Jonny" wrote in message
...
Specs regarding cpu speed, and memory size are beyond windows 98's
capability to handle, the memory size requires a tweak at minimum.
http://www.windowsmarketplace.com/Sp...itemId=1936969

ME can handle the cpu speed, but not the amount of installed RAM for same
reason. Install XP w/SP2, be done with it.

Do the drivers support the SATA interface in 98? When do those get
installed? Same should be considered if installing XP.

XP Pro is provided with this PC. So are drivers. Are the drivers
compatible with win98?

Can a 64 bit processor backpedal for 32 bit operations?

How does one install drivers if "it still doesn't work", implying it works
to some degree.

This is a dual core cpu, does win98 support that?

If you're attempting proper operatiin in an XP environment, go to an XP
newsgroup.
--
Lil' Dave
Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
Else you will be absorbed
"HP BAD service" wrote in message
oups.com...
I installed the chip set and downloaded the drivers that i was asked to
by the HP Sucpport said to do and still does not work its a BRAND NEW
OUT OF THE BOX dc7600 ,, GO FIGURE

| after the [vcache] header, add/insert a line saying
| MaxFileCache=512000
| Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Are MVPs Microsoft*'s employees who designed each windows os ? If
yes, then
[i] why doesn't * in its site offer a batch file to enable 98se to use 1gb
ram ?
[ii] why does * continue to sell 98se with the same defrag & scandisk
utilities which are lousy ( only ½ as fast ) when compared to Win
ME's ?
[iii] if a licensed user of 98se replaced these 2 utilities with WinME's
version ( work fine in 98se ), must he own a license of WinME too ?

MVP's are NOT Microsoft employees - in fact if you're an MVP and get a job
in MS, you have to resign from the MVP program. This helps us to retain our
independence, and prevents us getting shackled by 'company policy'.
For details of the MVP program see
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx

The information on this (the RAM 'limit' problem) issue has been posted for
at least 4 years that I know of - look here
http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=253912 - it's not been a problem that
many have encountered during clean installs, simply because most Win9x clean
installs until recently were on machines with considerably less than 512MB.

MS has not sold Win 98SE since around 2002 - but they can't stop resellers
selling remaindered stock, or System builders stockpiling, and then selling
on. Win98 was officially due to be 'killed off' as far as MS were concerned
in 2002(?) - but they realised that this would impact a very large number of
users, and have continued to support Security updates until 2006 - look here
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/default.mspx

What two utilities are you talking about?? - ScanDisk and Defrag? AFAIK,
although technically it would be a breach of the license for the process, MS
has turned a blind eye to this - and it is a 'fix' that has been advocated
almost ever since the release of ME (if not before).

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's
"TE Cheah" wrote in message ...
| after the [vcache] header, add/insert a line saying
| MaxFileCache=512000
| Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Are MVPs Microsoft*'s employees who designed each windows os ? If
yes, then
[i] why doesn't * in its site offer a batch file to enable 98se to use 1gb
ram ?
[ii] why does * continue to sell 98se with the same defrag & scandisk
utilities which are lousy ( only ½ as fast ) when compared to Win
ME's ?
[iii] if a licensed user of 98se replaced these 2 utilities with WinME's
version ( work fine in 98se ), must he own a license of WinME too ?

Replies enclosed below.

--
Lil' Dave
Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
Else you will be absorbed
"Noel Paton" wrote in message
...
Win98 can handle 1GB RAM no problem - all you need to do is play a
bit!g.
For a clean install you'd need to reduce the RAM to 512MB until after
Win98
is installed, then modify the SYSTEM.INI file
after the [vcache] header, add/insert a line saying
MaxFileCache=512000
save the file, and shut down - then upgrade the RAM again to the full 1GB,
and you're away.


I said that, in few words. Did you read?

I can run Win98 on a Sempron 3000, so it shouldn't be too much of a
problem
on a 3.2GHz P4 (which is NOT a 64bit chip!)

If 98SE, yep. 98 nope. One file will not cooperate during initial boot
after install. And you probably know what it is anyway.

Win98 will run happily on a Dual-core chip - but only know about one of
the
cores, although the on-chip controllers will actually utilise both.


Nice to know. Am transitioning all my stuff to XP during holidays. So,
makes no difference here.

The PC mentioned by the OP comes with XP, not windows 98.

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's
"Jonny" wrote in message
...
Specs regarding cpu speed, and memory size are beyond windows 98's
capability to handle, the memory size requires a tweak at minimum.
http://www.windowsmarketplace.com/Sp...itemId=1936969

ME can handle the cpu speed, but not the amount of installed RAM for
same
reason. Install XP w/SP2, be done with it.

Do the drivers support the SATA interface in 98? When do those get
installed? Same should be considered if installing XP.

XP Pro is provided with this PC. So are drivers. Are the drivers
compatible with win98?

Can a 64 bit processor backpedal for 32 bit operations?

How does one install drivers if "it still doesn't work", implying it
works
to some degree.

This is a dual core cpu, does win98 support that?

If you're attempting proper operatiin in an XP environment, go to an XP
newsgroup.
--
Lil' Dave
Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
Else you will be absorbed
"HP BAD service" wrote in message
oups.com...
I installed the chip set and downloaded the drivers that i was asked to
by the HP Sucpport said to do and still does not work its a BRAND NEW
OUT OF THE BOX dc7600 ,, GO FIGURE

To add to the dilema, there's also a total files equivalency to 128GB
limitation. You can use a 200GB hard drive, given the proper partitioning
and formatting tools. When the total size of all the files exceed 128GB,
the filesystem will exhibit gibberish. Many files will be renamed to
gibberish, and made into multiple files in most situations. Multiple
partitions makes no difference. The limitation is on the hard drive itself,
not a given partition. Haven't seen an MS KB on this, and its becoming more
widely known. Some recommend using an equivalent 128GB or less hard drive
with 98/98SE/ME PC to avoid this problem.

XP does not have this problem, and the fat32 partitions on such a capacity
or larger hard drive do not exhibit these discrepancies.

When written, MS was betting most would be done with 98 and ME before the
hardware limitations of the OS become a problem. Its easier to hold a deaf
ear to a few, rather than many. As time goes on, the former becomes more
true.

--
Lil' Dave
Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
Else you will be absorbed
"TE Cheah" wrote in message ...
| after the [vcache] header, add/insert a line saying
| MaxFileCache=512000
| Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Are MVPs Microsoft*'s employees who designed each windows os ? If
yes, then
[i] why doesn't * in its site offer a batch file to enable 98se to use 1gb
ram ?
[ii] why does * continue to sell 98se with the same defrag & scandisk
utilities which are lousy ( only ½ as fast ) when compared to Win
ME's ?
[iii] if a licensed user of 98se replaced these 2 utilities with WinME's
version ( work fine in 98se ), must he own a license of WinME too ?

There is an limit of around 138 GB which is caused by the fact that
the motherboard may not support 48-bit adressing - which is NOT a problem
with the HD, but rather with the motherboard BIOS.

All large HD's have to use 48-bit addressing, or there's not enough pointers
to show all the clusters. Win98 and SE do not support 48-bit LBA and cannot
therefore read drives beyond the end of the limit - although they will
sometimes try. A compliant BIOS understands non-48-bit LBA, and converts it
for the drive - again, this is an OS/driver/BIOS limitation not a problem
with the HD

also....
(from http://www.48bitlba.com/faq.htm#FAQ1)
quote
7. If Microsoft is not providing any Service Packs to Windows 98,
98SE, or ME to support 48-bit LBA hard drives, are there any other options
to make my 48-bit LBA hard drive work with these versions of Windows besides
what you've listed on this site?

Rudolph Loew has created a patch for Windows 98/98SE/ME. The High
Capacity Disk Patch Program patches Windows 98/98SE/ME to provide direct
support for hard drives larger than 137GB without requiring a controller
card or the Intel Application Accelerator which can only be used with an
Intel chipset motherboard. The patch installs support for the 48-Bit
addressing mode required for hard drives larger than 137GB. We have not
tested this patch ourselves and thus cannot provide any recommendations
positive or negative as to it's use. You will find this patch at
http://members.aol.com/rloew1/

Besides the Intel Application Accelerator which requires a motherboard
with an Intel chipset, drivers for other chipsets may be available. We have
been informed by one user that VIA has drivers which support 48-bit LBA for
their chipsets. For latest driver list check out Drivers section under
48-bit LBA Tools & Drivers section on the left.
/quote

There is another issue, in that the native Windows 98SE ScanDisk and Defrag
utilities are limited to smaller partition sizes and may not function on
partitions greater than 127GB.
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;263044

People tend to forget that when Win 98 came out, 40GB drives were considered
HUGE - I know mine came with a very expensive 10GB drive which I was sure
I'd never fill!

WinXP cannot *create* FAT32 partitions greater than 32MB - although it can
use
(and be installed on, AFAIK) FAT32 partitions of almost any size.

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's
"Jonny" wrote in message
...
To add to the dilema, there's also a total files equivalency to 128GB
limitation. You can use a 200GB hard drive, given the proper partitioning
and formatting tools. When the total size of all the files exceed 128GB,
the filesystem will exhibit gibberish. Many files will be renamed to
gibberish, and made into multiple files in most situations. Multiple
partitions makes no difference. The limitation is on the hard drive
itself,
not a given partition. Haven't seen an MS KB on this, and its becoming
more
widely known. Some recommend using an equivalent 128GB or less hard drive
with 98/98SE/ME PC to avoid this problem.

XP does not have this problem, and the fat32 partitions on such a capacity
or larger hard drive do not exhibit these discrepancies.

When written, MS was betting most would be done with 98 and ME before the
hardware limitations of the OS become a problem. Its easier to hold a
deaf
ear to a few, rather than many. As time goes on, the former becomes more
true.

--
Lil' Dave
Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
Else you will be absorbed
"TE Cheah" wrote in message
...
| after the [vcache] header, add/insert a line saying
| MaxFileCache=512000
| Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Are MVPs Microsoft*'s employees who designed each windows os ? If
yes, then
[i] why doesn't * in its site offer a batch file to enable 98se to use
1gb
ram ?
[ii] why does * continue to sell 98se with the same defrag & scandisk
utilities which are lousy ( only ½ as fast ) when compared to Win
ME's ?
[iii] if a licensed user of 98se replaced these 2 utilities with WinME's
version ( work fine in 98se ), must he own a license of WinME too
?

Thanks for reply.

| This helps us to retain our independence
Wow ! Very generous with your time.

i] When I press F3 to list all files in 'Temporary Internet Files', only 10
'000 can be listed. Can this limit be increased ?
ii] When Windows Explorer & IE6 display files' sizes, the unit (KB) used
is repeated for every file, & so wastes desktop space ( width ). Can
this unit ( KB ) be shown in just the title of this column ?
iii] Scanreg ( dos utility ) offers only 5 of the oldest registries saved. Can
5 be offered ?
iv] Can 98se be altered to support USB devices like WinME can ( i.e. no
need for drivers ) ?