Anyone know how to manually unpack drivers ?

[Ian @ work]

I've read on another thread that it may be possible to use the new TGL with Windows 95 even though it's not supported, but I need to extract the dll first... any ideas ?

Ian

[SteveC]

I believe you can make winzip (I know it works with 7) open the files with the underscore '_' at the end and extract the file that way.

------------------
Cheers,
Steve

"The chances of anything coming from Mars, are a million-to-one", he said.

[ianshepherd]

I'll try it, Thanks !

Ian

[Rob M.]

another way if you have win3.1 around still, is to use extract.exe that was included with it... of course if winzip 7 does it that's a lot easier, thanks SteveC

[ianshepherd]

Winzip 6 worked fine for me - and see my reply to the "TGL + 5.31 + 95B works" thread for the results - do it, kids, now !

Cheers

Ian

[Gurm]

Ian,

Please forgive what I'm about to say - I'm sick, and I'm in a crappy mood.

STOP F***ING PROCRASTINATING AND UPGRADE TO WIN98. DO IT NOW. THIS IS NOT A JOKE.

Win95 on a modern machine is buggy crap.

- Ash

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Himself]

Gurm,

I have both, and WinNT and Win2K (well SP1), I run Win95 to avoid the MS's idea of gui progress. Win98 has just as many bugs, don't kid yourself.

[Himself]

Gurm,

Any and all SIMD support is in DirectX, equally available to Win95 users. For AMD users, they have to use third party bus mastering drivers anyway, and they work just fine. No complaints about AGP speed here either, like it matters. Basically if you look at it from a practical standpoint, it really is just a cosmetic upgrade. I agree that memory handling is better and I'm sure that some bugs were fixed, but it seems to me others were added. Win95 is harder to install granted, but it's worth not having to wrestle with Win98 to turn every stupid feature off. I simply can't stand the explorer in win98, I DON'T EVER WANT VIEW AS WEB PAGE, it's a mutant feature that refuses to go away, and the performance of opening folders is slower than under Wn95. Bug fixes plus more bloat == no further ahead.

Win98lite is something for people to look at, I've tried it, too many added instabilities though.

[Gurm]

Himself,

Get used to it. Fact is, as soon as Win2k gets widespread, MS is gonna drop Win95 like a hot rock. No more updates, no more nothin'. Just like it did with 3.11, etc.

In fact, even now if you call MS their "fix" is to upgrade to Win98.

And you can turn off EVERYTHING in Win98's explorer if you like. It's not all that hard. Simple HTML edit, and bingo! It's all gone forever without hacking anything.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Himself]

Gurm,

I think you'll be surprised how long win95 hangs around, support for Win98 really means support for Win95 as well, there isn't a lot of difference between the two. Look at long Win32s has been supported if you want to bring win31 into it. There has to be an advantage to upgrading, not just MS make work projects. Win2K looks like a lemon going by RC1, not sure why it's better than WinNT even. More bloatware. Junk.



[This message has been edited by Himself (edited 15 December 1999).]

[Ian @ work]

Gurm,

If you're sick and in a crappy mood, F**KIN DON'T POST !!!!

Why should I pay £100 + for an operating system I don't need ? If 5 minutes work allows me to use the TGL, with scores as good as any '98 result I've seen, I _have USB support and FAT32 - I've never needed my hand held, and in 2 years with this PC I haven't re-installed once. Stop trying to tell people to spend money unneccesarily. A new graphics card ? Money well spent. A new processor ? Money well spent. Win 98 ? A waste of money. Win 2000 ? Well, we'll see, huh ?

Up yours, buddy

Ian

[Gurm]

Ian,

I've been doing this (working intimately with PC's) for a long time. I also tend to overgeneralize.

Whether or not you like the new UI (as Himself seems not to) there are too many improvements in Win98 that AREN'T cosmetic. For example, there is no native support for high-speed bus mastering drivers in Win95. You could argue that Intel just released a new version of their bus-mastering drivers (the first in two years). Ok, fine. Win95 has no real support for AGP. The support which is there in the "USB Supplement" (which only partially implements USB, by the way) is only a partial implementation.

I'm VERY impressed that you pull down reasonable scores in Win95, considering that the OS, even with the newest patches, doesn't support Pentium 2's or Pentium 3's natively, and certainly doesn't support SIMD or KNI/3dNow! in any way.

I'm not just being Micro$oft's whore on this one. There are SO many enhancements found in the kernel and drivers of Win98 that it only makes sense.

And the upgrade version is fairly cheap.

Like I said last night, I was in a pissy mood. Perhaps I should have held my tongue until this morning when I was rational. Perhaps. *sigh* Well you do what you're gonna do. Just _PLEASE_ don't be one of those people who doesn't understand why AGP 2x really just doesn't work on his system, or why they just can't get program X to run, ok?

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Ian @ work]

Hey Himself,

did you ever get TGL working with 98 ? If so, is there any difference in fps ? If so, maybew Gurm has a point after all...

Cheers

Ian

[Himself]

Ian,

I never bothered to test it, I absolutely hate having to use Win98. OGL is pretty much OGL as far as benchmark scores go across Win9x. DirectX seems to be slightly faster in 3DMark benchmarks, nothing too exciting.