KernelEx?

[robert baer]

OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
(yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
Finally, how can one test it?
Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.

[bill in co.]

OK?? What is "OK"? You should try the win98se newsgroup.

Robert Baer wrote:
> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
> Finally, how can one test it?
> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.

[vanguardlh]

Robert Baer wrote (on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:15:50 -0700):

> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
> Finally, how can one test it?
> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.

Go read replies to your SAME post submitted over 18 hours earlier.

[bill in co.]

VanguardLH wrote:
> Robert Baer wrote (on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:15:50 -0700):
>
>> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
>> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
>> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
>> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
>> Finally, how can one test it?
>> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.
>
> Go read replies to your SAME post submitted over 18 hours earlier.

LOL. In which one of the half dozen groups of separate postings?

[vanguardlh]

Bill in Co. wrote (on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:47:52 -0600):

> VanguardLH wrote:
>> Robert Baer wrote (on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:15:50 -0700):
>>
>>> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
>>> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
>>> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
>>> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
>>> Finally, how can one test it?
>>> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.
>>
>> Go read replies to your SAME post submitted over 18 hours earlier.
>
> LOL. In which one of the half dozen groups of separate postings?

I didn't bother to track them all done to compile a timesheet of when
each was posted. The OP thinks hardware drivers can be supported in an
emulated environment (and not even that strong an emulated environment).

[tom willett]

You've asked this question before in multiple newsgroups. Learn how to read
the answers. Then, learn how to post in a Windows 98 newsgroup, since that's
what your question is based upon.

"Robert Baer" <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:b96dnX01tZXQMazXnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@posted.localnet...
: OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
: (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
: So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
: And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
: Finally, how can one test it?
: Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.

[robert baer]

Bill in Co. wrote:
> OK?? What is "OK"? You should try the win98se newsgroup.
>
> Robert Baer wrote:
>> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
>> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
>> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
>> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
>> Finally, how can one test it?
>> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.
>
>
Did that..

[robert baer]

VanguardLH wrote:
> Robert Baer wrote (on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:15:50 -0700):
>
>> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
>> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
>> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
>> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
>> Finally, how can one test it?
>> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.
>
> Go read replies to your SAME post submitted over 18 hours earlier.
Not available.

[robert baer]

VanguardLH wrote:
> Bill in Co. wrote (on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:47:52 -0600):
>
>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>> Robert Baer wrote (on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:15:50 -0700):
>>>
>>>> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
>>>> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
>>>> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
>>>> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
>>>> Finally, how can one test it?
>>>> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.
>>> Go read replies to your SAME post submitted over 18 hours earlier.
>> LOL. In which one of the half dozen groups of separate postings?
>
> I didn't bother to track them all done to compile a timesheet of when
> each was posted. The OP thinks hardware drivers can be supported in an
> emulated environment (and not even that strong an emulated environment).
So, is there a better way, and if so, please let me know.

[robert baer]

Tom Willett wrote:
> You've asked this question before in multiple newsgroups. Learn how to read
> the answers. Then, learn how to post in a Windows 98 newsgroup, since that's
> what your question is based upon.
>
> "Robert Baer" <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in message
> news:b96dnX01tZXQMazXnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@posted.localnet...
> : OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
> : (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
> : So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
> : And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
> : Finally, how can one test it?
> : Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.
>
>
So far, all "answers" have not (been an answer).
Tried Win98 NGs and MSFN.ORG's Forums:Win 95/98/98SE...

[tom willett]

"Robert Baer" <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:BYmdnRs_r7XwHa_XnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@posted.localnet...
: VanguardLH wrote:
: > Robert Baer wrote (on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:15:50 -0700):
: >
: >> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
: >> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
: >> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
: >> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
: >> Finally, how can one test it?
: >> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.
: >
: > Go read replies to your SAME post submitted over 18 hours earlier.
: Not available.

Sure they are. You just don't know how to use a newsgroup.

[vanguardlh]

Robert Baer wrote (on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:22:24 -0700):

> VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>> Bill in Co. wrote (on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:47:52 -0600):
>>>
>>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Robert Baer wrote (on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:15:50 -0700):
>>>>>
>>>>> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
>>>>> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
>>>>> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
>>>>> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
>>>>> Finally, how can one test it?
>>>>> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> Go read replies to your SAME post submitted over 18 hours earlier.
>>>
>>> LOL. In which one of the half dozen groups of separate postings?
>>
>> I didn't bother to track them all done to compile a timesheet of when
>> each was posted. The OP thinks hardware drivers can be supported in an
>> emulated environment (and not even that strong an emulated environment).
>
> So, is there a better way, and if so, please let me know.

Create a separate partition and multi-boot to it where you install the
OS (Windows 98). Then you load that OS and can install drivers into it.
You'll need a legit license for Windows 98 (and one that was NOT used as
an upgrade to a later version that you use on that or any other host).

Why are you concerned about drivers? Drivers alone are meaningless.
It's the apps you want to run. So why not use a virtual machine to
install Windows 98, like VirtualPC 2007 or VMWare Server or VirtualBox,
and install your apps in a virtual machine?

[robert baer]

Tom Willett wrote:
> "Robert Baer" <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in message
> news:BYmdnRs_r7XwHa_XnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@posted.localnet...
> : VanguardLH wrote:
> : > Robert Baer wrote (on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:15:50 -0700):
> : >
> : >> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
> : >> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
> : >> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
> : >> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
> : >> Finally, how can one test it?
> : >> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.
> : >
> : > Go read replies to your SAME post submitted over 18 hours earlier.
> : Not available.
>
> Sure they are. You just don't know how to use a newsgroup.
>
>
The "search" facility does not work.
Thanks for the non-answer.

[robert baer]

VanguardLH wrote:
> Robert Baer wrote (on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:22:24 -0700):
>
>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>> Bill in Co. wrote (on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:47:52 -0600):
>>>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>>>> Robert Baer wrote (on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:15:50 -0700):
>>>>>> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
>>>>>> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
>>>>>> So what exactly is it supposed to be able to do?
>>>>>> And what can it NOT do (no, i do not want it to wash dishes)?
>>>>>> Finally, how can one test it?
>>>>>> Pointers to answers (or NGs with answers) greatly appreciated.
>>>>> Go read replies to your SAME post submitted over 18 hours earlier.
>>>> LOL. In which one of the half dozen groups of separate postings?
>>> I didn't bother to track them all done to compile a timesheet of when
>>> each was posted. The OP thinks hardware drivers can be supported in an
>>> emulated environment (and not even that strong an emulated environment).
>> So, is there a better way, and if so, please let me know.
>
> Create a separate partition and multi-boot to it where you install the
> OS (Windows 98). Then you load that OS and can install drivers into it.
> You'll need a legit license for Windows 98 (and one that was NOT used as
> an upgrade to a later version that you use on that or any other host).
>
> Why are you concerned about drivers? Drivers alone are meaningless.
> It's the apps you want to run. So why not use a virtual machine to
> install Windows 98, like VirtualPC 2007 or VMWare Server or VirtualBox,
> and install your apps in a virtual machine?
Lemme see now; my sound does not work because the Win98 driver does
nothing..the NVIDIA video driver does not work..the apps are OK but with
sucky video and no sound.
Geee...now that i think on that, why am i concerned about drivers???

And..i have a legitimate OEM Win98SE CD (ie: not upgrade version).
And it is loaded and the drivers will not work and the MB install
fails at the git-go so making yet another partition to repeat this makes
NO sense.

[vanguardlh]

Robert Baer wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>> Create a separate partition and multi-boot to it where you install
>> the OS (Windows 98). Then you load that OS and can install drivers
>> into it. You'll need a legit license for Windows 98 (and one that
>> was NOT used as an upgrade to a later version that you use on that
>> or any other host).
>>
>> Why are you concerned about drivers? Drivers alone are meaningless.
>> It's the apps you want to run. So why not use a virtual machine to
>> install Windows 98, like VirtualPC 2007 or VMWare Server or
>> VirtualBox, and install your apps in a virtual machine?
>
> Lemme see now; my sound does not work because the Win98 driver does
> nothing..the NVIDIA video driver does not work..the apps are OK but
> with sucky video and no sound. Geee...now that i think on that, why
> am i concerned about drivers???
>
> And..i have a legitimate OEM Win98SE CD (ie: not upgrade version).
> And it is loaded and the drivers will not work and the MB install
> fails at the git-go so making yet another partition to repeat this
> makes NO sense.

The point of KernelEx is to run *NT* applications. Doesn't matter what
you want KernelEx to do for you. It wasn't designed to replace the
operating system. If you have problems back in your Windows 98 host
then you need to address those first. If you are considering moving to
NT drivers and NT applications then why aren't you looking at dumping
Windows 98 and moving to an NT version of Windows?

Also, if you are looking to run NT applications then virtual machines
still are a viable solution (but I haven't bothered to check if any of
the VM applications run on Windows 98). Multibooting and install an
NT-based version of Windows (not Windows 98) in another partition would
use the real hardware and you would install the NT drivers under there
and run the NT applications over there. You disconnect from that
screwed up Windows 98 setup.

If you don't have a legitimate version of an NT-based copy of Windows
(and don't want to buy it), and because your Windows 98 OS is screwed up
for hardware support, nothing you run atop of that OS is going to make
its problems disappear. You're stuck with whatever applications will
run under your Windows 98 setup. So maybe it's about time to flatten
your host and do a fresh install of Windows 98 along with all the proper
driver installs to support your hardware.