KernelEx? (with full info of what did not work)

[robert baer]

OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
(yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
How can one test it?
* What i did:
Replaced [HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion]
* I had: Win98SE Win2K:
Version "Windows 98" <nil>
VersionNumber "4.10.2222" <nil>
ProductName Microsoft Windows 98 <nil>
* Now is:
Version "Windows XP"
VersionNumber "5.10.2600"
ProductName "Microsoft Windows XP"

Replaced [HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion]
* I had: Win98SE Win2K:
(Default) (value not set) CurrentVersion 5.0
ProductName Microsoft Windows 2000
* I now have:
(Default) ""
CurrentVersion "5.1"
ProductName "Microsoft Windows XP"
Version "Windows XP"

Installed unicows.dll and registered it
Installed KernelEX
Modified \Bootsec.DOS (to read MSWIN 5.1 and WIN XP)
Modified \MSDOS.SYS (to read MSWIN 5.1)
Modified \Windows\Winver.exe (to read 5.10.6200 and Windows XP in 2
places)
Modified \Windows\W98setup.bin (to read 5.10.6200 in 2 places)
Modified \Windows\Command.com
*Negative effect: MSDOS shell doesn't work

Even after all of that, sysinfo gives:
Microsoft Windows XP 4.10.2222 A
So do not know what else to fudge to fix the 4.10.2222...

Still..the ASUS M2N-MX SE Plus CD bitches saying it dislikes WIN_4.11
as an OS; cannot find that string *anywhere*.

So, what do i do to make it work?
Is there a way to test the above patch?

[bill in co.]

At least you're in the right group this time, Robert. Congrats.

Robert Baer wrote:
> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
> How can one test it?
> * What i did:
> Replaced [HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion]
> * I had: Win98SE Win2K:
> Version "Windows 98" <nil>
> VersionNumber "4.10.2222" <nil>
> ProductName Microsoft Windows 98 <nil>
> * Now is:
> Version "Windows XP"
> VersionNumber "5.10.2600"
> ProductName "Microsoft Windows XP"
>
> Replaced [HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion]
> * I had: Win98SE Win2K:
> (Default) (value not set) CurrentVersion 5.0
> ProductName Microsoft Windows 2000
> * I now have:
> (Default) ""
> CurrentVersion "5.1"
> ProductName "Microsoft Windows XP"
> Version "Windows XP"
>
> Installed unicows.dll and registered it
> Installed KernelEX
> Modified \Bootsec.DOS (to read MSWIN 5.1 and WIN XP)
> Modified \MSDOS.SYS (to read MSWIN 5.1)
> Modified \Windows\Winver.exe (to read 5.10.6200 and Windows XP in 2
> places)
> Modified \Windows\W98setup.bin (to read 5.10.6200 in 2 places)
> Modified \Windows\Command.com
> *Negative effect: MSDOS shell doesn't work
>
> Even after all of that, sysinfo gives:
> Microsoft Windows XP 4.10.2222 A
> So do not know what else to fudge to fix the 4.10.2222...
>
> Still..the ASUS M2N-MX SE Plus CD bitches saying it dislikes WIN_4.11
> as an OS; cannot find that string *anywhere*.
>
> So, what do i do to make it work?
> Is there a way to test the above patch?

[bill in co.]

Addendum:
Please let us know if you get ANY WinXP programs to really work on your
Win98SE computer with this Kernel patch, Robert.

> At least you're in the right group this time, Robert. Congrats.
>
> Robert Baer wrote:
>> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
>> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
>> How can one test it?
>> * What i did:
>> Replaced [HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion]
>> * I had: Win98SE Win2K:
>> Version "Windows 98" <nil>
>> VersionNumber "4.10.2222" <nil>
>> ProductName Microsoft Windows 98 <nil>
>> * Now is:
>> Version "Windows XP"
>> VersionNumber "5.10.2600"
>> ProductName "Microsoft Windows XP"
>>
>> Replaced [HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion]
>> * I had: Win98SE Win2K:
>> (Default) (value not set) CurrentVersion 5.0
>> ProductName Microsoft Windows 2000
>> * I now have:
>> (Default) ""
>> CurrentVersion "5.1"
>> ProductName "Microsoft Windows XP"
>> Version "Windows XP"
>>
>> Installed unicows.dll and registered it
>> Installed KernelEX
>> Modified \Bootsec.DOS (to read MSWIN 5.1 and WIN XP)
>> Modified \MSDOS.SYS (to read MSWIN 5.1)
>> Modified \Windows\Winver.exe (to read 5.10.6200 and Windows XP in 2
>> places)
>> Modified \Windows\W98setup.bin (to read 5.10.6200 in 2 places)
>> Modified \Windows\Command.com
>> *Negative effect: MSDOS shell doesn't work
>>
>> Even after all of that, sysinfo gives:
>> Microsoft Windows XP 4.10.2222 A
>> So do not know what else to fudge to fix the 4.10.2222...
>>
>> Still..the ASUS M2N-MX SE Plus CD bitches saying it dislikes WIN_4.11
>> as an OS; cannot find that string *anywhere*.
>>
>> So, what do i do to make it work?
>> Is there a way to test the above patch?

[thanatoid]

Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in
news:A4CdnaxCMP44JazXnZ2dnUVZ_tidnZ2d@posted.localnet:

> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE
> machine
> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).

<SNIP>


This is not an answer, just a comment.

About a month ago I dl'd ver 4 of KEx and read some stuff on the
page. It was created primarily to use FFox 3x with 98SE, and for
about 6-8 stupid games - the author says he makes it work with
what he wants to work. His fubar-given right. Some people /have/
reported is /may-does/ work with a few other applications, but
is not intended/patched to do so.

Since I use 98SE Lite, FFox 3 would not install since I have the
95 shell. I am not a gamer. Goodbye KEx.

Many people report success using it with normal 98SE, so I would
go back to pure 98SE and try reinstalling KEx. But seeing as how
little it does, personally, I would just make a dual-boot 98/XP
machine - the process has been covered here and elsewhere and is
extremely easy and trouble free. Frankly, I see no point
whatsoever in KEx - I /DID/ when I thought it made ALL XP apps
work under 98SE. But 1 questionable app (I maintain Opera is far
superior) and a few stupid games? WHAT is the point?

Use XP if you HAVE to and use 98 when you want to feel like a
thinking human being.

--
Lots of theoretical butchers are alleged and other bloody eyes
are suitable, but will Pam secure that?

[jeff richards]

Because each application different. the only way you can test it is to try
the app and see what happens.

There are many different ways that an application can determine what version
it is running on and it appears that your application uses something that
you haven't patched. You need to trace the execution of the installer for
that app and find out what it is testing, or locate someone who has already
done that to find out what they discovered. The label that is reported
(WIN_4.11) might not exist in your system at all - it could be the
installer's representation of what it has deduced as your OS version, and it
might not give you any clues as to how it worked that out.
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"Robert Baer" <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:A4CdnaxCMP44JazXnZ2dnUVZ_tidnZ2d@posted.localnet...
> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine (yes,
> unicows.dll installed and registered).
> How can one test it?
> * What i did:
> Replaced [HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion]
> * I had: Win98SE Win2K:
> Version "Windows 98" <nil>
> VersionNumber "4.10.2222" <nil>
> ProductName Microsoft Windows 98 <nil>
> * Now is:
> Version "Windows XP"
> VersionNumber "5.10.2600"
> ProductName "Microsoft Windows XP"
>
> Replaced [HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion]
> * I had: Win98SE Win2K:
> (Default) (value not set) CurrentVersion 5.0
> ProductName Microsoft Windows 2000
> * I now have:
> (Default) ""
> CurrentVersion "5.1"
> ProductName "Microsoft Windows XP"
> Version "Windows XP"
>
> Installed unicows.dll and registered it
> Installed KernelEX
> Modified \Bootsec.DOS (to read MSWIN 5.1 and WIN XP)
> Modified \MSDOS.SYS (to read MSWIN 5.1)
> Modified \Windows\Winver.exe (to read 5.10.6200 and Windows XP in 2
> places)
> Modified \Windows\W98setup.bin (to read 5.10.6200 in 2 places)
> Modified \Windows\Command.com
> *Negative effect: MSDOS shell doesn't work
>
> Even after all of that, sysinfo gives:
> Microsoft Windows XP 4.10.2222 A
> So do not know what else to fudge to fix the 4.10.2222...
>
> Still..the ASUS M2N-MX SE Plus CD bitches saying it dislikes WIN_4.11
> as an OS; cannot find that string *anywhere*.
>
> So, what do i do to make it work?
> Is there a way to test the above patch?

[robert baer]

thanatoid wrote:
> Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in
> news:A4CdnaxCMP44JazXnZ2dnUVZ_tidnZ2d@posted.localnet:
>
>> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE
>> machine
>> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
>
> <SNIP>
>
>
> This is not an answer, just a comment.
>
> About a month ago I dl'd ver 4 of KEx and read some stuff on the
> page. It was created primarily to use FFox 3x with 98SE, and for
> about 6-8 stupid games - the author says he makes it work with
> what he wants to work. His fubar-given right. Some people /have/
> reported is /may-does/ work with a few other applications, but
> is not intended/patched to do so.
>
> Since I use 98SE Lite, FFox 3 would not install since I have the
> 95 shell. I am not a gamer. Goodbye KEx.
>
> Many people report success using it with normal 98SE, so I would
> go back to pure 98SE and try reinstalling KEx. But seeing as how
> little it does, personally, I would just make a dual-boot 98/XP
> machine - the process has been covered here and elsewhere and is
> extremely easy and trouble free. Frankly, I see no point
> whatsoever in KEx - I /DID/ when I thought it made ALL XP apps
> work under 98SE. But 1 questionable app (I maintain Opera is far
> superior) and a few stupid games? WHAT is the point?
>
> Use XP if you HAVE to and use 98 when you want to feel like a
> thinking human being.
>
*THANK* YOU VERY MUCH!!
You are the first that mentioned the (purposeful) limitations.
In that light, it is useless for me - and so i must give up until
something better pops up.
I use 3 OSes: DOS, Win98Se and Win2K; everything i need works in
Win2K, but i prefer to use Win98SE for almost all web stuff; DOS is #2
for a lot of other DOS-related program support, and lastly Win2K for big
apps.

[robert baer]

Bill in Co. wrote:
> Addendum:
> Please let us know if you get ANY WinXP programs to really work on your
> Win98SE computer with this Kernel patch, Robert.
>
>> At least you're in the right group this time, Robert. Congrats.
>>
>> Robert Baer wrote:
>>> OK; KernelEx does not seem to be of benefit on a Win98SE machine
>>> (yes, unicows.dll installed and registered).
>>> How can one test it?
>>> * What i did:
>>> Replaced [HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion]
>>> * I had: Win98SE Win2K:
>>> Version "Windows 98" <nil>
>>> VersionNumber "4.10.2222" <nil>
>>> ProductName Microsoft Windows 98 <nil>
>>> * Now is:
>>> Version "Windows XP"
>>> VersionNumber "5.10.2600"
>>> ProductName "Microsoft Windows XP"
>>>
>>> Replaced [HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion]
>>> * I had: Win98SE Win2K:
>>> (Default) (value not set) CurrentVersion 5.0
>>> ProductName Microsoft Windows 2000
>>> * I now have:
>>> (Default) ""
>>> CurrentVersion "5.1"
>>> ProductName "Microsoft Windows XP"
>>> Version "Windows XP"
>>>
>>> Installed unicows.dll and registered it
>>> Installed KernelEX
>>> Modified \Bootsec.DOS (to read MSWIN 5.1 and WIN XP)
>>> Modified \MSDOS.SYS (to read MSWIN 5.1)
>>> Modified \Windows\Winver.exe (to read 5.10.6200 and Windows XP in 2
>>> places)
>>> Modified \Windows\W98setup.bin (to read 5.10.6200 in 2 places)
>>> Modified \Windows\Command.com
>>> *Negative effect: MSDOS shell doesn't work
>>>
>>> Even after all of that, sysinfo gives:
>>> Microsoft Windows XP 4.10.2222 A
>>> So do not know what else to fudge to fix the 4.10.2222...
>>>
>>> Still..the ASUS M2N-MX SE Plus CD bitches saying it dislikes WIN_4.11
>>> as an OS; cannot find that string *anywhere*.
>>>
>>> So, what do i do to make it work?
>>> Is there a way to test the above patch?
>
>
Shoot, so far i have no clue as to how to *test* it...

[robert baer]

Jeff Richards wrote:
> Because each application different. the only way you can test it is to try
> the app and see what happens.
>
> There are many different ways that an application can determine what version
> it is running on and it appears that your application uses something that
> you haven't patched. You need to trace the execution of the installer for
> that app and find out what it is testing, or locate someone who has already
> done that to find out what they discovered. The label that is reported
> (WIN_4.11) might not exist in your system at all - it could be the
> installer's representation of what it has deduced as your OS version, and it
> might not give you any clues as to how it worked that out.
As far as i can determine, you are correct about that label, and i
had the same thought (installer's representation).
So far, i do not know how it worked that out, so some debugging is in
order..
...but the only debugger i have is DOS DEBUG and that might not report
same action as if installer runs in Win98SE.
It is a start, tho..

[teebo]

Hi!

> There are many different ways that an application can determine what version
> it is running on and it appears that your application uses something that
> you haven't patched. You need to trace the execution of the installer for
> that app and find out what it is testing,

What program shall one run to do the trace?


>> Still..the ASUS M2N-MX SE Plus CD bitches saying it dislikes WIN_4.11
>> as an OS; cannot find that string *anywhere*.

what application are you trying to run? is it some nice application
that asus is distributing together with that motherbard-driver-for-XP?

[robert baer]

teebo wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> There are many different ways that an application can determine what
>> version
>> it is running on and it appears that your application uses something that
>> you haven't patched. You need to trace the execution of the installer
>> for
>> that app and find out what it is testing,
>
> What program shall one run to do the trace?
* Good question; best i can do is use DOS DEBUG for now..

>
>
>>> Still..the ASUS M2N-MX SE Plus CD bitches saying it dislikes WIN_4.11
>>> as an OS; cannot find that string *anywhere*.
>
> what application are you trying to run? is it some nice application
> that asus is distributing together with that motherbard-driver-for-XP?
I am trying to use the (not-so-nice) ASUS installer.

[teebo]

>>> it is running on and it appears that your application uses something that
>>> you haven't patched. You need to trace the execution of the installer
>>> for that app and find out what it is testing,
>>
>> What program shall one run to do the trace?
> * Good question; best i can do is use DOS DEBUG for now..

I don't think dos debug whould do, shouldn't it be something more Windowsy?

>>>> Still..the ASUS M2N-MX SE Plus CD bitches saying it dislikes WIN_4.11
>>>> as an OS; cannot find that string *anywhere*.

> I am trying to use the (not-so-nice) ASUS installer.

I'm still not sure what application you want to run...
But as long as you are not trying to install motherboard-drivers
that is made for another os than win98/se/me, wich of course will
never work - being more a part of the os than a application,
I hope you find the call to the missing API etc your application need

How do you get a GeForce6100/nForce430 chipset working with win98
in the first place?

[jeff richards]

I would start with a registry monitor that reports registry queries. But
you will probably need something that shows what system calls are embedded
in a particular EXE, or what system calls actually occur when the EXE runs.
It's not a simple task.
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"teebo" <no@mail.no> wrote in message news:op.uvezqnxwbr8ivg@300pl...
> Hi!
>
>> There are many different ways that an application can determine what
>> version
>> it is running on and it appears that your application uses something that
>> you haven't patched. You need to trace the execution of the installer
>> for
>> that app and find out what it is testing,
>
> What program shall one run to do the trace?
>

[robert baer]

teebo wrote:
>>>> it is running on and it appears that your application uses something
>>>> that
>>>> you haven't patched. You need to trace the execution of the installer
>>>> for that app and find out what it is testing,
>>>
>>> What program shall one run to do the trace?
>> * Good question; best i can do is use DOS DEBUG for now..
>
> I don't think dos debug whould do, shouldn't it be something more Windowsy?
>
>>>>> Still..the ASUS M2N-MX SE Plus CD bitches saying it dislikes WIN_4.11
>>>>> as an OS; cannot find that string *anywhere*.
>
>> I am trying to use the (not-so-nice) ASUS installer.
>
> I'm still not sure what application you want to run...
> But as long as you are not trying to install motherboard-drivers
> that is made for another os than win98/se/me, wich of course will
> never work - being more a part of the os than a application,
> I hope you find the call to the missing API etc your application need
>
> How do you get a GeForce6100/nForce430 chipset working with win98
> in the first place?
I used VBE Miniport by Anapa Corp; the SVGA driver which gives
800x600 16 colors; the best that i could do (better than a kick in the
head).

[teebo]

>> How do you get a GeForce6100/nForce430 chipset working with win98
>> in the first place?

> I used VBE Miniport by Anapa Corp; the SVGA driver which gives
> 800x600 16 colors

oh, even without graphic drivers for you graphic card
you don't have to stay with only 16 colors
If you don't find a driver or the tweaked NVidia 82.69 drivers
don't work for you, it should be possible to use 24bit color
with Bearwindows universal VESA-drivers. There is no 3D-support
and it say something about need to update bios for full
resolution with nvidia graphic cards(?) but it should at least
give you truecolor.

http://www.geocities.com/bearwindows/vbe9x.htm
or http://bearwindows.boot-land.net/vbe9x.htm
or http://www.navozhdeniye.narod.ru/vbe9x.htm

(I assume the geocities site will dissapear when yahoo
is closing geocities later this year)