trying to install Win 98 onto flash drive, but problems

[Dobbins etc]

I am trying to install Win98 onto a flash drive (in my case 8 GB flash)
as detailed here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qd7cDbtwj4

I get as far as the "Microsoft ScanDisk" screen during installation of
'98 onto the flash drive, but then I keep getting hanging during the
"directory structure" scan. Any ideas would be welcome.

I should mention that I did encounter one issue during set up detailed
in the video: where it says to reformat the flash drive as FAT, I was
presented with only FAT32 and NTFS options. I went with FAT32 after at
least one person said they had success (and I wasn't sure how to
reformat to FAT if I didn't have the option presented).

Thank you

[Lee]

setup /c /it /p a;b (spaces after c, it & p)
forces 98 onto the only drive it can see which would be the only FAT or FAT32 partition on your NT machine usually. But this means you are installing 98 onto C:/. Are you? It sounds like the wrong command has 98 DOS trying to deal with NTFS partitions and it can't do that.

Other major issue is the amount of RAM you have installed, usually NT boxes have way too much for DOS to handle properly. The shown tip about changing the line in [386Enh] section actually is dangerous as it only appears to work, it can't possibly cope with 1 or 2 or 4 or more gigs of RAM.

SATA driver issues may also be a problem, along with dual core processor which 98 also doesn't do and many more issues that we don't have a clue about since we don't know what machine or with what hardware this is being done on.

[Dobbins etc]

Thanks. This is an old Toshiba Satellite with IDE and 64 MB RAM. I'm
trying to install onto the flash drive using the setup command you have
above that was designated in the video as well. The flash was formatted
into FAT32 before starting the process. If I try to skip Scandisk by
also adding /is, it does so but then stalls at copying files for set up.

[Dobbins etc]

Just wanted to add that /is finally got me past the copying files for
set up and into the actual start of installation, but then a message
appeared that an invalid command was used which I assume was /is. I
suppose it won't let me install without doing Scandisk, so back to
square one.

[98 Guy]

Dobbins etc wrote:

> I am trying to install Win98 onto a flash drive (in my case 8 GB
> flash) as detailed here:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qd7cDbtwj4

I didn't watch the whole video, but I don't see how Win-98 setup can
transition from 16-bit "DOS" mode to 32-bit protected mode operation to
complete the setup without having the USB drivers installed and working.

Just having a usb-connected thumb drive accessible to a computer booted
into DOS is not an easy thing to do.

I suggest you remove the hard drive of the target machine and slave it
to another working PC and (a) format the drive as Fat32 with the /s
switch so that the drive will boot into dos, and (b) copy the contents
of a win-98 CD to the drive in some sub-directory (call it "win98-cd")
and then place the drive back into the target machine and boot it. Once
it boots into DOS you change to the win98-cd directory and run the setup
from there. You can also copy all necessary drivers and even the
installation files of some (or all) of your intended application
programs to the target drive so it's all there and available when the
target system is up and running.

One last thing. Having a conversation and adding to a thread on Usenet
is not the same as doing the same over email.

The email convention, which I don't necessarily agree with but was
re-inforced or originated by Micro$haft, is to top-post your reply above
the conversation which is being dragged into it's entirety into the
reply.

The original Usenet convention was to strategically quote appropriate
passages of the message you're replying to and thus to add your new
material "in-line" into the reply. This makes for a cleaner flow and
less visual clutter and shorter messages that don't unnecessarily
include the previous post in it's entirety. So you will notice that I
only quoted what was necessary to respond to your original post and I'm
not needlessly repeating your entire post at the end of what I'm typing
here.

[Dobbins etc]

On 01/20/2017 10:56 PM, 98 Guy wrote:


>
> Just having a usb-connected thumb drive accessible to a computer booted
> into DOS is not an easy thing to do.

I gave up on the idea because no matter what I did, I just couldn't get
'98 to install, so I ordered one of these:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hitachi-Travelstar-60-GB-IDE-PATA-Interface-Internal-4200-RPM-2-5-Hard-Drive-/141792359037

Not being in a hurry, I'll of course have a much better chance of this
working out. They say "new", but whether it really is or not who knows
but the price seems right if I don't mind the wait (and I don't).

> One last thing. Having a conversation and adding to a thread on Usenet
> is not the same as doing the same over email.

Yes, I know.

>
> ...So you will notice that I

> only quoted what was necessary to respond to your original post and I'm
> not needlessly repeating your entire post at the end of what I'm typing
> here.

Hopefully, that's better. Sorry, I was just being lazy and
inconsiderate. I probably won't post here again now, not because of
anything anyone has or hasn't done or said, but because I won't be
trying any more unsuccessful attempts to do what I was trying to do
originally. The old laptop already had Win Me on it, so that's what
I'll install again once the new HD arrives.

Thanks to you and others for trying to help,
Dobbins

[98 Guy]

Dobbins etc wrote:

> I gave up on the idea because no matter what I did, I just couldn't get
> '98 to install, so I ordered one of these:
>

> Hitachi-Travelstar-60-GB-IDE-Hard-Drive

Ah - you were trying to install win-98 on the thumb drive, not *from*
the thumb drive.

> This is an old Toshiba Satellite with IDE and 64 MB RAM.

I was thinking you were trying to install win-98 from the thumb drive
onto the Toshiba's internal hard drive.

So my next question is - what OS is currently on the Toshiba's internal
hard drive?

Or does it even have a (working?) internal hard drive?

Wow - old stock 2.5" IDE hard drives are cheap. Cheaper than a thumb
drive of comparable size. I might order a few myself.

[Dobbins etc]

On 01/21/2017 10:28 AM, 98 Guy wrote:
> >
> Ah - you were trying to install win-98 on the thumb drive, not *from*
> the thumb drive.
>

Correct.

>> This is an old Toshiba Satellite with IDE and 64 MB RAM.
>
> I was thinking you were trying to install win-98 from the thumb drive
> onto the Toshiba's internal hard drive.
>
> So my next question is - what OS is currently on the Toshiba's internal
> hard drive?

Right now, it has Win Me.

>
> Or does it even have a (working?) internal hard drive?
>
> Wow - old stock 2.5" IDE hard drives are cheap. Cheaper than a thumb
> drive of comparable size. I might order a few myself.

That seemed like a good price, so I went for it. If it doesn't last,
then it's not a great loss.

[Lee]

Thanks for that link, I'm getting some too, too cheap to pass up.

Being that old then the main problem may in fact deal with the BIOS not presenting the USB stick properly. Installing the last BIOS update may help immensely with that issue. And it may come down to the choice of USB stick used as well. Some will do FAT16 and some won't - just two other areas that may have been the problem if further studies or efforts down that road are attempted. I may try this myself just for grins. Best of luck.

[Dobbins etc]

On 01/21/2017 08:12 PM, Lee wrote:
>
> Thanks for that link, I'm getting some too, too cheap to pass up.

Well, I guess that will be a reason for me to stay in the group. See
how well or poorly the HD performs for all of those getting one.

> Being that old then the main problem may in fact deal with the BIOS
> not presenting the USB stick properly. Installing the last BIOS
> update may help immensely with that issue.

I've been suspecting this all along. Unfortunately, the laptop itself
didn't support USB in the BIOS at all, even with the final BIOS update
back in 2007. Just to get initial Win 98 installation files to start, I
had to use a program called "plop" on a CD first to load in a USB
driver. I've thought quite possibly that the USB driver the program
loads isn't a very good one. There may be other programs that would
have installed a better driver, but I don't have time to investigate it.

And it may come down to
> the choice of USB stick used as well. Some will do FAT16 and some
> won't - just two other areas that may have been the problem if
> further studies or efforts down that road are attempted. I may try
> this myself just for grins. Best of luck.

I did try a couple of different sticks and one did seem to get further
along than the other. I was also hoping to find a much smaller stick in
my inventory other than the smallest 8 GB ones I had, something on the
order of 2 GB or so, but I couldn't find one.

I may try the process again on one of my much more modern laptops that
have no USB BIOS issues, or even try out the process by setting up a VM
on my XP desktop. Already have several VM's running on that one set up
through Virtualbox. All of this takes time though, something I'm
running out of, but may have time over the next week or so.

Dob

[Lee]

Well the drives I get probably won't be used in a timely manner to begin with so not much news about them is likely to be coming from me. I'm quite confident that the NOS china drives are new and will work fine though, they are too big for my first 98 box and don't fit well with the 500 gig used on the XP dual boot box either. I may use them for Atari 8 bit system even so when any of that may come about is doubtful at best. I need other toys like IDE to SCSI bridge that are rare as hen's teeth today unless you have a bottomless wallet.
And I don't.

So 'plop' is certainly a stumbling point, you'll always have to boot from a CD containing plop which may be an issue in 98 install at second or third boot. I do say may, not sure there at all. Issue in my mind is getting plop to live on a standard 98 install CD such that plop gets used before DOS gets to load it's drive tables from partition info which is very early in the boot process. If the USB drive isn't present at that moment we have danger, will robinson, danger. Or Houston, we have a problem depending on just when you grew up. And yes, there might be better USB drivers than plop offers, could very will be the entire issue.

I know in other projects using other formatting tools, one USB drive will show an option for FAT16 and the next drive won't. And I have no idea exactly why. Can't help but think that there can be a fundamental difference in the hardware of USB drives from different sources, one installs a driver that is capable of FAT16 and the other installs a driver that overlooks that old junk as not useful. Doesn't seem to be an issue as reported anyway, I also got some 2 gig pen drives coming as mine seem to vanish too.

I do think that 98 would love to live on that laptop however, it's specs are just right for it and that's a very rare situation when you think about it. I would quickly abandon the USB approach once the NOS china drives arrive, that's for sure. 98 on USB drive is an interesting thing to play around with is all it will ever amount to here, and I have a good deal of other computer projects that are more pressing for me for the foreseeable future too. All the best.

Lee

[Aye-a...@command.com]

Fat 32 works fine with Win98. I have 98 installed on my HDD, which is
Fat 32. I also have Windows 2000 on the same machine (dual booted).
The computer was made and came with Win2000, but I use 98 a lot more.
I'd probably change Win2000 to XP, but I dont thing the computer would
have enough power to run XP properly. I have XP on another newer
computer anyhow. Anyhow, I have two 120gb drives on this machine. Six
partitions (All Fat 32), with Win98 on C: and Win2000 on D: (I think
Win2000 could use NTFS, I sort of forget, but I just have it on Fat32).
But Win98 was never made to use NTFS.

I have to ask WHY you want to install Win98 on a flash drive? Just
install it on a HDD and dual boot if you want.

One problem I see, is that Win98 was not built with any real USB
support. That might be your problem. There are some aftermarket progs
you can install for better USB sipport, but that is NOT in your
installation from the 98 CD. And most of that aftermarket stuff still
dont work the greatest in 98. For example, I can use some 2 or 4 GB
flash drives, but it wont accept any bigger ones. Thats the main reason
I have Win2000 installed. W2000 has a lot better USB support. I can plug
in my 500gb portable HDD and copy all my data to it, which is not only a
backup but also allowed me to access all my data on my XP machine.

One other thing. I still use some actual Dos programs. I dont want them
running in a Dos window, I want actual dos. Close Win98 using the
"Restart on MS-DOS mode", and when you restart you have true dos. I
always have it set that way. If I want to use Dos, it's loaded, if I
want Win98, I just type "WIN", and it loads.

So, I actually have THREE operating systems available on one
machine.....

[98 Guy]

Dobbins etc wrote:

> > Ah - you were trying to install win-98 on the thumb drive, not
> > *from* the thumb drive.
>
> Correct.
>

> > So my next question is - what OS is currently on the Toshiba's
> > internal hard drive?
>
> Right now, it has Win Me.

Running any OS from a thumb drive, even if you have USB-2 ports, is a
really dumb idea.

It would be VERY slow.

And if your temp files, cache files, virtual ram files are also being
written to the thumb drive, not only is is slow, you will eventually
burn out the thumb drive. Flash-ram doesn't have a lot of read/write
cycles.

If the computer has only USB-1 ports, then it's a _really_ dumb idea.

My next question is:

Why didn't you simply do a dual-boot Win ME/Win-98 on the existing hard
drive?

[98 Guy]

Aye-a...@command.com wrote:

> Fat 32 works fine with Win98.

That is hardly a "news flash" for anyone here. FAT32 is the standard
file-system for Win-98 and I think one of the versions of Win-95 as
well.

On a few Win-XP machines I putz with, I also use FAT32 for those (at
least on the drives where the OS is installed on).

> (I think Win2000 could use NTFS, I sort of forget, but I just have
> it on Fat32).

All NT-based OS's (NT, 2K, XP, etc) have built-in NTFS support and will
default to that file system when preparing new drives or during
installation.

> One problem I see, is that Win98 was not built with any real USB
> support. That might be your problem. There are some aftermarket
> progs you can install for better USB sipport, but that is NOT in
> your installation from the 98 CD. And most of that aftermarket
> stuff still dont work the greatest in 98.

NUSB 3.6 is what you want. Gives win-98 a very high degree of
compatibility with practically all USB thumb drives.

> For example, I can use some 2 or 4 GB flash drives, but it wont
> accept any bigger ones.

When it comes to SD-ram cards (those small, square ram cards, about the
size of a postage stamp that are commonly found in digital cameras) the
USB readers for those cards (frequently the readers come in the form of
a "9-in-1" 3.5" drive-bay slide-in unit) were limited to reading up
either 2 or 4 gb up. It was a hardware limitation in the reader. If
you have a SD-card reader newer than about 4 years old then it should be
compatible with SD-cards up to 128 or 256 gb.

I have one of those newer readers in my win-98 system, and have been
able to read and write to SD cards up to the largest I've had - 64 gb.
Note that the SD-card must be formatted as FAT32, not ExFAT. Some
cameras will use ExFAT when you format the card in the camera. Win-98
can't read or write to ExFAT volumes, and neigher can XP (but there is
an ExFAT driver available for XP that you must go and seek out and
install yourself).

When it comes to USB thumb drives, the largest that I buy are 32 gb -
which work fine on my win-98 system, but because my system is USB-2,
getting larger thumb drives isin't useful because I tend not to move
large files or a lot of small files on thumb drives because even with
USB-2 it's too slow for my liking. If I need to move anywhere from 1 to
several dozen GB worth of files I will just attach a SATA drive directly
to my win-98 computer and copy the files to the attached drive. I've
never connected a hard drive through a USB port on any computer I own
and never intend to and have never wanted to.

> Thats the main reason I have Win2000 installed. W2000 has
> a lot better USB support. I can plug in my 500gb portable HDD
> and copy all my data to it, which is not only a backup but
> also allowed me to access all my data on my XP machine.

Win 2K is a buggy piece of shit.
USB-connected hard drives are a piece of shit.

If you know what you're doing, and it isin't that hard really, you just
connect a spare drive to an available IDE or SATA port and copy your
files. Or use a thumb drive (32 gb capacity is usually more than
enough).

No reason to go to 2K just for better thumb drive support.

And my win-98 system currently has a pair of 1 TB sata drives connected
to it, fully supported with 32-bit drivers. Both drives formatted as
FAT32 and fully accessible to win-98.

[Dobbins etc]

On 01/23/2017 10:12 AM, 98 Guy wrote:
> >
> Running any OS from a thumb drive, even if you have USB-2 ports, is a
> really dumb idea.
>

Although I've never tried it, it probably isn't the greatest idea, at
least as far as for Win OS. On the other hand, supposedly Linux based
OS's tend to make the job much easier. I am using my Ubuntu based
laptop now as I write. Problem is that it doesn't seem that nearly any
Linux distro was far enough along yet at the same time as Win 98 and all
current ones are for better machines.


> .....you will eventually

> burn out the thumb drive. Flash-ram doesn't have a lot of read/write
> cycles.

I already surmised that, thanks. I use flash thumb drives on a regular
basis with all of my Win/Linux systems and I have had them burn out or
become unreadable on occasion. I finally learned to keep regular back
ups of each flash on a couple of master hard drives. I use probably in
the neighbourhood of 20 flash drives for different purposes.

> Why didn't you simply do a dual-boot Win ME/Win-98 on the existing hard
> drive?

Well, the laptop I'm on right now is configured that way as I can boot
into either Ubuntu or Win7 at start up. It just wasn't worth the
trouble with the very old laptop with ME. Besides, it seems like anyone
who tried what I had attempted to do with ME instead of 98 couldn't get
it to install. I've had a 98 CD around here for years, so knew I could
try to install exactly as per the video.

[Dobbins etc]

On 01/23/2017 07:04 AM, Aye-a...@command.com wrote:
>
> I have to ask WHY you want to install Win98 on a flash drive? Just
> install it on a HDD and dual boot if you want.

Well, before I saw 60 GB hard drives at a decent price, since the
laptop's original HD burned out, I have it currently configured with a
compact flash to IDE adapter and Win ME is installed and running fine
with the CF card as primary HD. Problem is, as someone else said, we
know flash drives have limited read/write cycles but so does CF. As a
workaround, I was just going to put 98 onto a cheap flash and use it as
a hard drive thereby limiting useage of the CF in the laptop. Now that
the supposedly new 60 GB hard drive is on the way, I no longer have the
CF concerns.

>
> One problem I see, is that Win98 was not built with any real USB
> support. That might be your problem.

Quite true and even that laptop's BIOS didn't have a selectable USB boot
option, so I had to use "Plop" on a CD to get bootable USB support.
Further research on my part showed that the "Plop" USB driver might have
been at fault too.

>
> So, I actually have THREE operating systems available on one
> machine.....

I actually have a bunch of OS's set up as VM's under Virtualbox on my XP
desktop. That was what helped me decide which Linux distro I was going
to use for the Internet. I probably could have preset a new VM using
the same RAM and CPU as the laptop in question, but it still wouldn't
have been as accurate of a test as the actual set up.

No longer any need to try though, now that my replacement HD is on the
way. I can use the CF lightly until then.

[Computer Nerd Kev]

Dobbins etc <jayson...@aolnet.com> wrote:
> On 01/23/2017 10:12 AM, 98 Guy wrote:
>> >
>> Running any OS from a thumb drive, even if you have USB-2 ports, is a
>> really dumb idea.
>>
>
> Although I've never tried it, it probably isn't the greatest idea, at
> least as far as for Win OS. On the other hand, supposedly Linux based
> OS's tend to make the job much easier. I am using my Ubuntu based
> laptop now as I write. Problem is that it doesn't seem that nearly any
> Linux distro was far enough along yet at the same time as Win 98 and all
> current ones are for better machines.

There's a Linux distro called Damn Small Linux (DSL) that was designed
to work well with Win98 era hardware. It can also be installed to flash
devices in a way that prevents wearing them out by running completely
in RAM, and thereby not performing all the small writes caused by
running an OS on the flash drive itself.

Unfortunately development has ceased and much of the software
available is rather out of date, but it is about as usable as Win98.

http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[Dobbins etc]

On 01/23/2017 04:18 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>
>
> There's a Linux distro called Damn Small Linux (DSL) that was designed
> to work well with Win98 era hardware. It can also be installed to flash
> devices in a way that prevents wearing them out by running completely
> in RAM, and thereby not performing all the small writes caused by
> running an OS on the flash drive itself.
>
> Unfortunately development has ceased and much of the software
> available is rather out of date, but it is about as usable as Win98.
>
> http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/
>

Yes, I tried a live CD of it last week after the old laptop's hd failed.
It was the only distro I found that would work. The laptop only has
64 MB RAM, so that automatically disqualified most OS software running
RAM. However, I could see some possible issues on the horizon such as
USB support (or lack thereof) and whether or not I'd ever be able to get
a 98 era webcam functional with it.

[Computer Nerd Kev]

USB usually works with DSL, I guess you might have had a driver
problem.

The webcam would indeed be an issue though. I don't think they're
very well supported in Linux even at the best of times.

[Dobbins etc]

Just for the record, I actually got this to work with my Dell Inspiron
1545. Of course, a *much* different animal than the "primitive" Toshiba
PII laptop, but I think the main reason for the no-go on the Toshiba was
limited USB support. At least I know the method works, however, given
the right machine.

[wetb...@feet.com]

I am not a linux user, un fact I really dislike it, but about 2 years
ago, I really tried to make it work, and used my fastest desktop
computer, which was designed for Vista. And it had RAM added to it,
which I think is the limit at 2gb.

I must have tried 14 to 18 distros. I tried to both boot from flash
drives and to install to a spare HDD.

I was amazed that NONE of the newer versions at that time, would even
install. Or they would install and freeze my screen. THe most popular
seems to be Mint. I tried that and several different desktops for it.
That piece of shit eneded up being the most troublesome of all of them.
It would completely lock the computer, and did all sorts of other crap,
and even ruined a flash drive.

However, Damn Small, and Puppy both worked and ran from a flash drive. I
also got my hands on an old version of Pc-Linux from 2007 or 2009
(forgot), and that installed on my HDD and ran well, aside from the fact
that I dont find linux to be useful for very much.

I stopped trying and allowing linux to annoy me. I learned one thing, I
learned that I dont like it, or want to waste anymore time with it.

However I do still have Puppy linux on a flash drive, and when the
motherboard on my laptop failed, I was able to plug in the HDD into
another laptop. but XP would not boot, because of the different
hardware. So, I booted from the Puppy linux flash drive, and was able to
copy all my data on to another flash drive.

[Kerr Mudd-John]

On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 21:35:24 -0000, Dobbins etc <jayson...@aolnet.com>
wrote:

tinycore says 48M min.
http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/overview.html
but you need a bit of linux experience to get going (it says there)

--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug