Nvidia Driver Shutdown Problem

T

Tamiami

Greetings,

I recently purchased a BFG Nvidia 7800GS AGP card and since installing
the drivers (version 82.16, allegedly for 98SE) the machine refuses to
shutdown properly. Upon deleting the driver package, it shuts down
perfectly. The shutdown patch has been applied. BFG is stumped and
said they are referring the issue to Nvidia and that's the last I heard
from them.

Is there driver release software that would assist 98 in shutting down?
Maybe a batch file? EnditAll doesn't help.

And be sure to avoid anything from BFG.


--
STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
 
M

MEB

"Tamiami" <nospam@noway.moc> wrote in message
news:469539d1$0$4664$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
| Greetings,
|
| I recently purchased a BFG Nvidia 7800GS AGP card and since installing
| the drivers (version 82.16, allegedly for 98SE) the machine refuses to
| shutdown properly. Upon deleting the driver package, it shuts down
| perfectly. The shutdown patch has been applied. BFG is stumped and
| said they are referring the issue to Nvidia and that's the last I heard
| from them.
|
| Is there driver release software that would assist 98 in shutting down?
| Maybe a batch file? EnditAll doesn't help.
|
| And be sure to avoid anything from BFG.
|
|
| --
| STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.


81.98_forceware_win9x_english.exe from nVidia is the last *official* driver
for 9X.

MDGX lists an unofficial :

Tweaked Unofficial NVIDIA Display Driver 82.69 for Windows 98/98 SP1/98
SE/ME


Automated installer executable [14.5 MB, multilingual]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/NV8269.EXE
Documentation [this file, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/nv8269.php
also available as plain text (ASCII):
http://www.mdgx.com/files/NV8269.TXT


I have installed that driver, which has work "fairly well" for a few weeks.
As usual, your system is different so it may or may not work. Note it is a
tweaked driver, also that the NV8269 text shows reg tweaks which can be
applied.


--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
________
 
F

Franc Zabkar

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:14:11 -0400, Tamiami <nospam@noway.moc> put
finger to keyboard and composed:

>Greetings,
>
>I recently purchased a BFG Nvidia 7800GS AGP card and since installing
>the drivers (version 82.16, allegedly for 98SE) the machine refuses to
>shutdown properly. Upon deleting the driver package, it shuts down
>perfectly. The shutdown patch has been applied. BFG is stumped and
>said they are referring the issue to Nvidia and that's the last I heard
>from them.
>
>Is there driver release software that would assist 98 in shutting down?
> Maybe a batch file? EnditAll doesn't help.
>
>And be sure to avoid anything from BFG.

FWIW, I have had shutdown issues in both Win95 and Win98 whenever
video caching was enabled in the BIOS setup. Aside from disabling
caching, I could avoid the problem by bringing up a full-screen DOS
window and then exiting to the GUI just before shutting down. I
presume this procedure flushed the cache in some way.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
 
T

Tamiami

MEB wrote:
> "Tamiami" <nospam@noway.moc> wrote in message
> news:469539d1$0$4664$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> | Greetings,
> |
> | I recently purchased a BFG Nvidia 7800GS AGP card and since installing
> | the drivers (version 82.16, allegedly for 98SE) the machine refuses to
> | shutdown properly. Upon deleting the driver package, it shuts down
> | perfectly. The shutdown patch has been applied. BFG is stumped and
> | said they are referring the issue to Nvidia and that's the last I heard
> | from them.
> |
> | Is there driver release software that would assist 98 in shutting down?
> | Maybe a batch file? EnditAll doesn't help.
> |
> | And be sure to avoid anything from BFG.
> |
> |
> | --
> | STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
>
>
> 81.98_forceware_win9x_english.exe from nVidia is the last *official* driver
> for 9X.
>
> MDGX lists an unofficial :
>
> Tweaked Unofficial NVIDIA Display Driver 82.69 for Windows 98/98 SP1/98
> SE/ME
>
>
> Automated installer executable [14.5 MB, multilingual]:
> http://www.mdgx.com/files/NV8269.EXE
> Documentation [this file, English]:
> http://www.mdgx.com/files/nv8269.php
> also available as plain text (ASCII):
> http://www.mdgx.com/files/NV8269.TXT
>
>
> I have installed that driver, which has work "fairly well" for a few weeks.
> As usual, your system is different so it may or may not work. Note it is a
> tweaked driver, also that the NV8269 text shows reg tweaks which can be
> applied.
>
>

Thanks so much MEB. Will give it a try. I previously tried to install
the 81.98 package and wouldn't install with this card.

--
STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
 
T

Tamiami

Franc Zabkar wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:14:11 -0400, Tamiami <nospam@noway.moc> put
> finger to keyboard and composed:
>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I recently purchased a BFG Nvidia 7800GS AGP card and since installing
>> the drivers (version 82.16, allegedly for 98SE) the machine refuses to
>> shutdown properly. Upon deleting the driver package, it shuts down
>> perfectly. The shutdown patch has been applied. BFG is stumped and
>> said they are referring the issue to Nvidia and that's the last I heard
>>from them.
>> Is there driver release software that would assist 98 in shutting down?
>> Maybe a batch file? EnditAll doesn't help.
>>
>> And be sure to avoid anything from BFG.
>
> FWIW, I have had shutdown issues in both Win95 and Win98 whenever
> video caching was enabled in the BIOS setup. Aside from disabling
> caching, I could avoid the problem by bringing up a full-screen DOS
> window and then exiting to the GUI just before shutting down. I
> presume this procedure flushed the cache in some way.
>
> - Franc Zabkar

Thanks Franc. I'll check on caching status, but I don't think it's
enabled presently.

--
STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
 
M

MEB

"Tamiami" <nospam@noway.moc> wrote in message
news:46963452$0$24766$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
| MEB wrote:
| > "Tamiami" <nospam@noway.moc> wrote in message
| > news:469539d1$0$4664$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
| > | Greetings,
| > |
| > | I recently purchased a BFG Nvidia 7800GS AGP card and since installing
| > | the drivers (version 82.16, allegedly for 98SE) the machine refuses to
| > | shutdown properly. Upon deleting the driver package, it shuts down
| > | perfectly. The shutdown patch has been applied. BFG is stumped and
| > | said they are referring the issue to Nvidia and that's the last I
heard
| > | from them.
| > |
| > | Is there driver release software that would assist 98 in shutting
down?
| > | Maybe a batch file? EnditAll doesn't help.
| > |
| > | And be sure to avoid anything from BFG.
| > |
| > |
| > | --
| > | STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
| >
| >
| > 81.98_forceware_win9x_english.exe from nVidia is the last *official*
driver
| > for 9X.
| >
| > MDGX lists an unofficial :
| >
| > Tweaked Unofficial NVIDIA Display Driver 82.69 for Windows 98/98 SP1/98
| > SE/ME
| >
| >
| > Automated installer executable [14.5 MB, multilingual]:
| > http://www.mdgx.com/files/NV8269.EXE
| > Documentation [this file, English]:
| > http://www.mdgx.com/files/nv8269.php
| > also available as plain text (ASCII):
| > http://www.mdgx.com/files/NV8269.TXT
| >
| >
| > I have installed that driver, which has work "fairly well" for a few
weeks.
| > As usual, your system is different so it may or may not work. Note it is
a
| > tweaked driver, also that the NV8269 text shows reg tweaks which can be
| > applied.
| >
| >
|
| Thanks so much MEB. Will give it a try. I previously tried to install
| the 81.98 package and wouldn't install with this card.
|
| --
| STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.

That raises a good point.

Since 98 is an unsupported OS with most of the major manufacturers of
devices, users will be searching for un-official drivers and various fixes.
Hopefully those with the savy to *properly* test these supposed fixes/ports
will do so for the rest of the users. Moreover, hopefully those with the
ability to do those ports will continue to do so.
Uniquely or not, Linux ports ARE being created by many of the manufacturers
for these newer devices [one could make a reasonable argument that they do
because that still allows them to get MS validation/certification, whereas,
doing otherwise may cause them to not get this, check the various sites for
WHY they may not go the full route for VISTA certification], or by the users
of the OS. These unsupported MS OS users are now in that same boat as those
users of Linux/other OSs.... user support for the OS rather than via
Microsoft.
Even those presently using the supported OSs such as XP and VISTA should
understand that they are using true TIME LIMITED software / operating
systems. DRM is fully applied within them [and still being enhanced with
updates], so their *End Of Life* is end of product the first time an
activation is required beyond such support, unless Microsoft supplies some
automatic method to do so. Don't hold your breath for this one, if that was
intended then merely changing hardware would NOT be a consideration and
require potential re-activation. These are NOT portable/movable OSs and
applications.
This is going to leave an awful lot of *XP system* users that can not
support VISTA or 9X searching for Linux or other OSs to use [whoooooosh, the
thought bulb flickers] after *End of Support Life*.

The same holds true for vulnerabilities in the unsupported OSs,
applications, and other aspects. If it may cause issues for the general
user, those same users [for the most part] are the ones who will HAVE TO
advise other users, and create or advise of patches to correct them.

Of course this overlays a responsibility upon the Microsoft user that most
may be unfamiliar with. Having relied upon Microsoft to supply the
Notifications and updates and security fixes, and the manufacturers to
supply the needed updated drivers and/or software, when faced with these
necessary fixes, these users WILL have to make their own conscious decisions
and hopefully informed choices, rather than blind acceptance of or reliance
upon those previously *trusted*, *certified*, *bugfree* {cough} sources...

BTW, I note the "Stop using Google NOW". You do realize that Google was the
only major data base holder who fought the government in court when the
governments demanded access to its data base [others may have complained or
brought suit, but they readily supplied the data when pressed]. Even the
USENET servers collapsed under pressure of the governments' [US and foreign]
demands. So YES, Google does collect massive amounts of information/data,
but it may be one of the few who actually may be concerned with privacy of
that collected data [it requires its *associates* to also guarantee any
shared data is held private]...
So since your fostering the idea that Google should not be used, whom do
you suggest? Provide proof that privacy is protected or better protected by
those services.

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
________
 
T

Tamiami

MEB wrote:
<snip>
> | > |
> | > | And be sure to avoid anything from BFG.
> | > |
> | > |
> | > | --
> | > | STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
> | >
> | >
> | > 81.98_forceware_win9x_english.exe from nVidia is the last *official*
> driver
> | > for 9X.
> | >
> | > MDGX lists an unofficial :
> | >
> | > Tweaked Unofficial NVIDIA Display Driver 82.69 for Windows 98/98 SP1/98
> | > SE/ME
> | >
> | >
> | > Automated installer executable [14.5 MB, multilingual]:
> | > http://www.mdgx.com/files/NV8269.EXE
> | > Documentation [this file, English]:
> | > http://www.mdgx.com/files/nv8269.php
> | > also available as plain text (ASCII):
> | > http://www.mdgx.com/files/NV8269.TXT
> | >
> | >
> | > I have installed that driver, which has work "fairly well" for a few
> weeks.
> | > As usual, your system is different so it may or may not work. Note it is
> a
> | > tweaked driver, also that the NV8269 text shows reg tweaks which can be
> | > applied.
> | >
> | >
> |
> | Thanks so much MEB. Will give it a try. I previously tried to install
> | the 81.98 package and wouldn't install with this card.
> |
> | --
> | STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
>
> That raises a good point.
>
> Since 98 is an unsupported OS with most of the major manufacturers of
> devices, users will be searching for un-official drivers and various fixes.
> Hopefully those with the savy to *properly* test these supposed fixes/ports
> will do so for the rest of the users. Moreover, hopefully those with the
> ability to do those ports will continue to do so.
> Uniquely or not, Linux ports ARE being created by many of the manufacturers
> for these newer devices [one could make a reasonable argument that they do
> because that still allows them to get MS validation/certification, whereas,
> doing otherwise may cause them to not get this, check the various sites for
> WHY they may not go the full route for VISTA certification], or by the users
> of the OS. These unsupported MS OS users are now in that same boat as those
> users of Linux/other OSs.... user support for the OS rather than via
> Microsoft.
> Even those presently using the supported OSs such as XP and VISTA should
> understand that they are using true TIME LIMITED software / operating
> systems. DRM is fully applied within them [and still being enhanced with
> updates], so their *End Of Life* is end of product the first time an
> activation is required beyond such support, unless Microsoft supplies some
> automatic method to do so. Don't hold your breath for this one, if that was
> intended then merely changing hardware would NOT be a consideration and
> require potential re-activation. These are NOT portable/movable OSs and
> applications.
> This is going to leave an awful lot of *XP system* users that can not
> support VISTA or 9X searching for Linux or other OSs to use [whoooooosh, the
> thought bulb flickers] after *End of Support Life*.
>
> The same holds true for vulnerabilities in the unsupported OSs,
> applications, and other aspects. If it may cause issues for the general
> user, those same users [for the most part] are the ones who will HAVE TO
> advise other users, and create or advise of patches to correct them.
>
> Of course this overlays a responsibility upon the Microsoft user that most
> may be unfamiliar with. Having relied upon Microsoft to supply the
> Notifications and updates and security fixes, and the manufacturers to
> supply the needed updated drivers and/or software, when faced with these
> necessary fixes, these users WILL have to make their own conscious decisions
> and hopefully informed choices, rather than blind acceptance of or reliance
> upon those previously *trusted*, *certified*, *bugfree* {cough} sources...
>
> BTW, I note the "Stop using Google NOW". You do realize that Google was the
> only major data base holder who fought the government in court when the
> governments demanded access to its data base [others may have complained or
> brought suit, but they readily supplied the data when pressed]. Even the
> USENET servers collapsed under pressure of the governments' [US and foreign]
> demands. So YES, Google does collect massive amounts of information/data,
> but it may be one of the few who actually may be concerned with privacy of
> that collected data [it requires its *associates* to also guarantee any
> shared data is held private]...
> So since your fostering the idea that Google should not be used, whom do
> you suggest? Provide proof that privacy is protected or better protected by
> those services.
>

You right about one thing MEB, I'm holding my new copy of Kubuntu 7.04
that arrived today. IMO 98SE is the most stable and easily controllable
OS of the ages. It's a shame that the Planned Obsolescence Policies
mandated by Bill Gates wreak so much havoc on the world. Not to mention
the environmental damage caused through the disposal of perfectly good
hardware - just because it's "Not Microsoft Certified." I hope you're
right about increasing Linux development.

As for Google, the firm has recently aligned with a few states in the US
to develop an all-in-one database the would be so comprehensive a person
would need only to type in MEB at the search field and the results would
include MEB'S civil, criminal, social, and health histories in one
encompassing return. To me, that's too much power of information for
any corporation to ever exclusively control.

--
STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
 
M

MEB

"Tamiami" <nospam@noway.moc> wrote in message
news:4698d4d5$0$8018$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
| MEB wrote:
| <snip>
| > | > |Tamiami wrote:
| > | > | And be sure to avoid anything from BFG.
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > | STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > 81.98_forceware_win9x_english.exe from nVidia is the last *official*
| > driver
| > | > for 9X.
| > | >
| > | > MDGX lists an unofficial :
| > | >
| > | > Tweaked Unofficial NVIDIA Display Driver 82.69 for Windows 98/98
SP1/98
| > | > SE/ME
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > Automated installer executable [14.5 MB, multilingual]:
| > | > http://www.mdgx.com/files/NV8269.EXE
| > | > Documentation [this file, English]:
| > | > http://www.mdgx.com/files/nv8269.php
| > | > also available as plain text (ASCII):
| > | > http://www.mdgx.com/files/NV8269.TXT
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > I have installed that driver, which has work "fairly well" for a
few
| > weeks.
| > | > As usual, your system is different so it may or may not work. Note
it is
| > a
| > | > tweaked driver, also that the NV8269 text shows reg tweaks which can
be
| > | > applied.
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > | Thanks so much MEB. Will give it a try. I previously tried to
install
| > | the 81.98 package and wouldn't install with this card.
| > |
| > | --
| > | STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
| >
| > That raises a good point.
| >
| > Since 98 is an unsupported OS with most of the major manufacturers of
| > devices, users will be searching for un-official drivers and various
fixes.
| > Hopefully those with the savy to *properly* test these supposed
fixes/ports
| > will do so for the rest of the users. Moreover, hopefully those with the
| > ability to do those ports will continue to do so.
| > Uniquely or not, Linux ports ARE being created by many of the
manufacturers
| > for these newer devices [one could make a reasonable argument that they
do
| > because that still allows them to get MS validation/certification,
whereas,
| > doing otherwise may cause them to not get this, check the various sites
for
| > WHY they may not go the full route for VISTA certification], or by the
users
| > of the OS. These unsupported MS OS users are now in that same boat as
those
| > users of Linux/other OSs.... user support for the OS rather than via
| > Microsoft.
| > Even those presently using the supported OSs such as XP and VISTA
should
| > understand that they are using true TIME LIMITED software / operating
| > systems. DRM is fully applied within them [and still being enhanced with
| > updates], so their *End Of Life* is end of product the first time an
| > activation is required beyond such support, unless Microsoft supplies
some
| > automatic method to do so. Don't hold your breath for this one, if that
was
| > intended then merely changing hardware would NOT be a consideration and
| > require potential re-activation. These are NOT portable/movable OSs and
| > applications.
| > This is going to leave an awful lot of *XP system* users that can not
| > support VISTA or 9X searching for Linux or other OSs to use [whoooooosh,
the
| > thought bulb flickers] after *End of Support Life*.
| >
| > The same holds true for vulnerabilities in the unsupported OSs,
| > applications, and other aspects. If it may cause issues for the general
| > user, those same users [for the most part] are the ones who will HAVE TO
| > advise other users, and create or advise of patches to correct them.
| >
| > Of course this overlays a responsibility upon the Microsoft user that
most
| > may be unfamiliar with. Having relied upon Microsoft to supply the
| > Notifications and updates and security fixes, and the manufacturers to
| > supply the needed updated drivers and/or software, when faced with these
| > necessary fixes, these users WILL have to make their own conscious
decisions
| > and hopefully informed choices, rather than blind acceptance of or
reliance
| > upon those previously *trusted*, *certified*, *bugfree* {cough}
sources...
| >
| > BTW, I note the "Stop using Google NOW". You do realize that Google was
the
| > only major data base holder who fought the government in court when the
| > governments demanded access to its data base [others may have complained
or
| > brought suit, but they readily supplied the data when pressed]. Even the
| > USENET servers collapsed under pressure of the governments' [US and
foreign]
| > demands. So YES, Google does collect massive amounts of
information/data,
| > but it may be one of the few who actually may be concerned with privacy
of
| > that collected data [it requires its *associates* to also guarantee any
| > shared data is held private]...
| > So since your fostering the idea that Google should not be used, whom
do
| > you suggest? Provide proof that privacy is protected or better protected
by
| > those services.
| >
|
| You right about one thing MEB, I'm holding my new copy of Kubuntu 7.04
| that arrived today. IMO 98SE is the most stable and easily controllable
| OS of the ages. It's a shame that the Planned Obsolescence Policies
| mandated by Bill Gates wreak so much havoc on the world. Not to mention
| the environmental damage caused through the disposal of perfectly good
| hardware - just because it's "Not Microsoft Certified." I hope you're
| right about increasing Linux development.

Well so am I hopeful that is.

The sheer impact of all this *throw away society* and *designed in
obsolence* are yet to be fully addressed. Personally, I'm not sure they ever
will be, at least, before the sheer weight adds to the already overburdened
*world scale*, tipping the balance so radically as to be unrecoverable. The
general attitude is that we still have several decades of abuse before we
REALLY need to be concerned. As if the world can't add up all of the recent
world weather [and land] events.
But then we are dealing with world markets and investors demanding
reasonable profits regardless of the impact of those investments. We need
look to look at the entire picture of course. Regretfully much is left out
of the considerations, like the massive waste produced and massive energy
consumption, which can now be offset by supposed "green credits", meaning
investments in *future environmentally friendly* [and that can be decades
down the road] aspects can be used to offset present violations/destruction.
Moreover, those who show concern are outweighed by the investors in the
markets. Though a front may be placed for environmentally friendly aspects,
when it effects the investors returns, monentary enhancement over-rules the
supposed attempts because it MUST be profitable.

As for software development: The sad reality is most younger programmers
follow the money. *Microsoft programming* signifies that money. Its no
longer *good enough* for many, to receive peer recognition for your work,
monetary aspects generally are saught in some form.
I suppose it relates to the generally sad reality of the world, in whole.

BTW: I forgot {though you probably already do} to advise using DirectX 9.0c
with your card...

|
| As for Google, the firm has recently aligned with a few states in the US
| to develop an all-in-one database the would be so comprehensive a person
| would need only to type in MEB at the search field and the results would
| include MEB'S civil, criminal, social, and health histories in one
| encompassing return. To me, that's too much power of information for
| any corporation to ever exclusively control.
|
| --
| STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.

Well, thanks for bringing that to light but of course we shouldn't condemn
Google for the very same things occurring everywhere else. I could have
placed several sites upon which this [or similar] can already occur [and has
for years], but then I would be participating in the very thing I abhor.
When the governments [US and foreign] fomented the "patriot plans" and this
*assign all who oppose the government agenda as malcontents, radicals,
obstructionists, radicals, and "terrorist"*, any semblence of privacy was
lost, as well as any supposed *citizen* control. When corporatism [search US
Supreme Court rulings for the definition] trumped people controlled
government, there was only one outcome available.

Think of it like this:
When the governments and businesses started installing cameras on roadways
and buildings, supposedly to monitor traffic and potential illegal activity,
they essentially physically assigned EVERYONE as a potential criminal or
terrorist. Of course it was seen as reasonable for them to claim it was just
for safety and security of others, e.g. public welfare and protection.
When the governments [and they all did] fully instituted their policies for
*homeland safety*, removing the controls once placed upon them by the
peoples of the world by collecting and freely transferring information on
ANY of the peoples, any supposed privacy was lost. It was seen as reasonable
for the governments to claim it was for public welfare and safety.
When people began worrying openly about their safety and their children's,
and demanding the ability to investigate their neighbors ONLINE, any privacy
and obscurity was lost. It was lauded by the public and government as
distinctly for public welfare and safety.
When it became profitable to create or invest in businesses which do
complete investigations into ANYONE's background, privacy was placed in the
realm of non-existence money or other enhancement outweigh others privacy
concerns. It became entirely reasonable for this to occur as long as profit
was had. Ask any CEO and the new millionaires, they will tell you so.
In fact: Ask the general world population though they may find aspects
intrusive, but on whole, it must be okay because its for safety and
security....

Here's some things you may have overlooked:
When Google makes it a *no brainer* to check on ANYONE ANYWHERE, more
people MAY begin to understand their complete lack of privacy. When they
realize they may be seen as what they are or as what is fraudulently
presented as them, MAYBE the light will turn on, and we will see a return to
a measure of privacy. When they find out what their *personal ranking* is,
MAYBE they might be concerned...
Let all those who think they have nothing to hide, find out just how
damaging complete lack of privacy is.
Tax returns, domestic disputes, divorce, traffic tickets, going to the
wrong place at the wrong time, civil suits, videos of them talking to
someone in innocently being brought as questionable activity, health issues,
Internet tracks, credit disputes, email activity, online purchases, and
EVERYTHING else they do, is already monitored and logged so perhaps
smacking everyone on the head with that 2 X 4 of non-existent privacy will
bring a demand for a return to that privacy. These are big MAYBES though.

So for Google to expose this complete lack of privacy to the world [which
has been occurring for years]: perhaps that IS what is needed to dispel the
complacency, to remove that *nose ring* from the governments' chattel.....
Until the general population understands: all this non-existent privacy
really provides nothing of true value for their increased security and
safety [there has always been other ways] that all this armed and ready to
kill "security" is a real danger to EVERYONE that this increased "fear
factor" is part of an old world plan that much of what occurs, including
terrorist attacks, IS part of the plan that .... well there I go, off on a
supposed *radical* rant, though I have spent years researching these issues
and others, and created a site to document and expose this and other aspects
......
Ah well, as far as I can see, this realization will never occur... what
corporation, business, or government is now going to give up these
abilities? What legislature or parliament would ever act to change this....
How many people actually understand what those government created "Patriot
Acts" and *homeland security Acts* [here and abroad] were actually for? Or
more importantly, even care...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/people_v_bonini/expose/Expose_crimes_V1.html
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/people_v_bonini/expose/expose_Volume_II.htm
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/people_v_bonini/expose/expose_volume_iii.htm
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/people_v_bonini/expose/expose_Volume_IV.htm
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/people_v_bonini/expose/expose_volume_v.htm
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/people_v_bonini/expose/expose_volume_vi.htm
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/people_v_bonini/expose/expose_volume_viii.htm
________
 
R

Rick Chauvin

"Tamiami" <nospam@noway.moc> wrote in message
news:469539d1$0$4664$4c368faf@roadrunner.com
> Greetings,
>
> I recently purchased a BFG Nvidia 7800GS AGP card and since installing
> the drivers (version 82.16, allegedly for 98SE) the machine refuses to
> shutdown properly. Upon deleting the driver package, it shuts down
> perfectly. The shutdown patch has been applied. BFG is stumped and
> said they are referring the issue to Nvidia and that's the last I heard
> from them.
>
> Is there driver release software that would assist 98 in shutting down?
> Maybe a batch file? EnditAll doesn't help.
>
> And be sure to avoid anything from BFG.


It's not BFG's fault but I would think it's nVidia since I have a similar
problem with a nVidia 6600GT using drivers version 81.98 it won't shutdown
right either giving Protection Errors.. however I know others who use that
version with 9x and other video cards with no problem. Anyway I had always
used the v77.72 drivers for 98SE with no problems whatsoever, and so it's
possible that with you using v82.16 drivers that shutdown issue for 9x is still
prevalent if the BFG/nVidia rendition didn't worl it out.. I would have
suggested to drop down to v77.72 but I see you say that it won't install for
your model... ..What kind of errors are you actually getting anyway?

I may at somepoint search out a newer version than v77.72 for 9x, heck I may
even try the unofficial 82.69 MSFN drivers... ..did you try them yet Tamiami?

I may even try and get a hold of your drivers 82.16 and see if they will
install on my setup.. ..I just searched them out at BFG....
http://www.bfgtech.com/driverdownload.aspx
.....and can't find the ones you have - do you know another place to get that
particular ones? Is it on your CD? Do you have a way to upload them
somewhere? I can create an account for you on my site or you can use this free
place that's easy
http://w12.easy-share.com/

Rick



>
>
> --
> STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
 
R

Rick Chauvin

R

Rick Chauvin

R

Rick Chauvin

R

Rick Chauvin

Just a fyi & fwiw......

Being curious about it for my setup I made time to play..

~I updated from my v77.72 drivers to your v82.16 and yes I do get shutdown
problems too, and a few other issues as well otherwise the drivers work fine.

~I then updated to MDGx driver v82.69 hoping for that to do better, but the
shutdown problems were still there along with other problems otherwise the
drivers do work okay.

~I went back to my original v77.72 drivers and everything for my setup is back
to normal with no problems per-sey.

Rick
 
M

MEB

"Rick Chauvin" <justask@nospamz.com> wrote in message
news:egDEuoyxHHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
|
| Just a fyi & fwiw......
|
| Being curious about it for my setup I made time to play..
|
| ~I updated from my v77.72 drivers to your v82.16 and yes I do get
shutdown
| problems too, and a few other issues as well otherwise the drivers work
fine.
|
| ~I then updated to MDGx driver v82.69 hoping for that to do better, but
the
| shutdown problems were still there along with other problems otherwise
the
| drivers do work okay.
|
| ~I went back to my original v77.72 drivers and everything for my setup is
back
| to normal with no problems per-sey.
|
| Rick
|

Seems we do this a lot,,, okay I had no real issues AFTER I let *Tune-up
Application Startup* do its dirty work and the driver had a chance to settle
in... so I suppose we need to compare and NO shutdown issues at all [though
there is an occasional video lockup after a virus scan when done during
idle/my sleep time, but I'm about to put that to extensive DirectX use
before the idle time with no shutdown, may be a memory release issue] :

I use the PNY FX 5500 PCI card, what's yours?

This is the ONLY unofficial driver or tweak [though I applied the reg tweak
for the driver] in this test system [not even the normal shell scrap fix has
been added], was the test done in your usual manner of a cloned clean
partition/installation with no tweaks?

Anything else we should compare? Perhaps your newer motherboard is a closer
comparison to his?

BTW: I agree the 77.72 was a much more stable driver for my older card as
well.. though the 81.98 performed fairly well after it ran for a few
weeks..though for some reason the uninstaller NEVER worked.. but the 77.72
or the 81.98 driver only supports up to 6800 card [according to the
NVAGP.inf so he definitely needs a newer driver or a tweaked older driver].

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
_______
 
M

MEB

Umm, here's a wild thought, think one of the shutdown supplements might help
with his shutdown issue since the driver does monitor application usage and
save the information?


--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
_______
 
T

Tamiami

Rick Chauvin wrote:
> Just a fyi & fwiw......
>
> Being curious about it for my setup I made time to play..
>
> ~I updated from my v77.72 drivers to your v82.16 and yes I do get shutdown
> problems too, and a few other issues as well otherwise the drivers work fine.
>
> ~I then updated to MDGx driver v82.69 hoping for that to do better, but the
> shutdown problems were still there along with other problems otherwise the
> drivers do work okay.
>
> ~I went back to my original v77.72 drivers and everything for my setup is back
> to normal with no problems per-sey.
>
> Rick

Thanks for the follow through and updates Rick. No, I haven't had time
for the massive driver test (hope to sometime this week), so I can't say
anything about the unofficial 82.69 installation yet. Although, if
you're not having much success, I'm guessing I won't either. May have
to try the 77.72 package.

FWIW, I DO think it's BFG's fault. They marketed this card to work with
older MB's, AGP and 98SE and their tech support didn't support at all.
Actually claiming to have conquered the shutdown problem on 98SE with a
different BIOS version on a different card during their own testing and
then - "allegedly" planning for an exchange with me. And that's the
last I heard from them. After repeated emails and months of
frustration. Obviously they had no fix and were just humping me.

If the 82.16 driver package never worked with 98SE and the 7800GS AGP,
then they shouldn't have promoted that it would. Let alone including
the disc with the retail package.

Like I said, avoid anything BFG.


--
STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
 
T

Tamiami

MEB wrote:
> Umm, here's a wild thought, think one of the shutdown supplements might help
> with his shutdown issue since the driver does monitor application usage and
> save the information?
>
>
> --
> MEB
> http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> _______
>

Hi MEB,

If you mean all M$ shutdown supps, they're in place and still no luck.
I will try the unofficial 82.69 install later this week and let you know
the verdict.


--
STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.
 
R

Rick Chauvin

"Tamiami" <nospam@noway.moc> wrote in message
news:469bcc41$0$12188$4c368faf@roadrunner.com
> Rick Chauvin wrote:
>> Just a fyi & fwiw......
>>
>> Being curious about it for my setup I made time to play..
>>
>> ~I updated from my v77.72 drivers to your v82.16 and yes I do get
>> shutdown problems too, and a few other issues as well otherwise the
>> drivers work fine.
>>
>> ~I then updated to MDGx driver v82.69 hoping for that to do better, but
>> the shutdown problems were still there along with other problems
>> otherwise the drivers do work okay.
>>
>> ~I went back to my original v77.72 drivers and everything for my setup
>> is back to normal with no problems per-sey.
>>
>> Rick
>
> Thanks for the follow through and updates Rick. No, I haven't had time
> for the massive driver test (hope to sometime this week), so I can't say
> anything about the unofficial 82.69 installation yet. Although, if
> you're not having much success, I'm guessing I won't either. May have
> to try the 77.72 package.

It can't hurt to try the 82.69 really, and just becasue I had issues with it
does not mean you will since your setup is different.


> FWIW, I DO think it's BFG's fault. They marketed this card to work with
> older MB's, AGP and 98SE and their tech support didn't support at all.

I understand you point and support that.

> Actually claiming to have conquered the shutdown problem on 98SE with a
> different BIOS version on a different card during their own testing and
> then - "allegedly" planning for an exchange with me. And that's the
> last I heard from them. After repeated emails and months of
> frustration. Obviously they had no fix and were just humping me.

Can't hurt to call them again, keep your position friendly but firm with it
though so that they don't turn off to you, you will get more mileage doing it
that way - you know what I mean.

> If the 82.16 driver package never worked with 98SE and the 7800GS AGP,
> then they shouldn't have promoted that it would. Let alone including
> the disc with the retail package.

I'm not taking their side and just talking outloud here, but have seen
situations with other software's where something would work for hundreds of
people but an isolated problem would only show up just for one and there is no
way for them to have known that until it happened. Keep the pressure on them,
lightly. Also, make sure you go through all the Shutdown links around here and
try everything first before going on since there were many things that solve
shutdown problems with W98 and some worked for others where others worked for
some - get a handle on them all. Mine was somewhat different since it was a
protection error and so that falls into the next subject category, but it's a
reaction with my unique setup and the newer drivers.

Rick
 
R

Rick Chauvin

Hi MEB,

I use nVidia 6600GT mounted on an Intel D865PERLL

My interest and eye caught Tamiami posts subject only because I was playing
with a new video application that wouldn't work right with the years of solid
performance of the 77.72 driver. I was only play testing so I had no plans on
really updating. I always knew the 81.98 gave me a particular shutdown issue
(a particular limited protection error on shutdown but not on 'restart in dos'
or regular 'restart') and it also broke the operation of another video program
I had and so back then it was back to 77.72 and I've stayed there ever since
....anyway, on a whim seeing Tamiami had a v82.16 that worked with W98 which I
never new existed I wanted to give it a test go only to see how it changed my
test video application functioning is all, but just like 81.98 it had the same
problems for my setup so now this was an opportunity to even give MGDx's
v82.69 a go ..but that did not work for me even as well as 81.98 or 82.16 did
in those unique situations (otherwise it worked fine) ...so again it's staying
with my 77.72 and no worries here.

Anyway to your next post all the shutdown issues I'm well versed in and this
setup has had all those done years ago to it. I also understand the protection
error issue and it's also common with nVidia over the years.

We also know that everytime they update a video driver to work better for some
issues, invariably it break other issues ..the same ole same ole story.

I'm good to go though as is..

take care,

Rick
 
M

MEB

"Tamiami" <nospam@noway.moc> wrote in message
news:469bccf8$0$12188$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
| MEB wrote:
| > Umm, here's a wild thought, think one of the shutdown supplements might
help
| > with his shutdown issue since the driver does monitor application usage
and
| > save the information?
| >
| >
| > --
| > MEB
| > _______
| >
|
| Hi MEB,
|
| If you mean all M$ shutdown supps, they're in place and still no luck.
| I will try the unofficial 82.69 install later this week and let you know
| the verdict.
|
|
| --
| STOP using Google NOW! Protect your personal privacy.

Okay, you do realize that one of those shutdown supps will show as
installed but until you run the reg file, nothing is actually done, right?

Yeah, let me know, I may try to work up a NVAGP.inf for the old 77 driver
which includes support for your card... have to look into that a little
deeper [of course I'll have nothing to test that against here] ... maybe
someone already did that somewhere... or there are likely other newer mods
somewhere... did you check the 3dtweak and gamers sites? [watch out when in
their forums they ARE XP and VISTA fanatics ....]
So what you have is AGP right?

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
_______
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Windows cannot sleep or shutdown, volmgr Error 45 The system could not sucessfully load the crash dump driver. and Error 46 Crash dump initialization
Replies
0
Views
3K
Ryan Sergio
R
J
Driver sleep and shutdown issue.
Replies
0
Views
141
JosueVilla456
J
D
NVidia Graphic driver
Replies
15
Views
233
denmarfl
D
V
i have the same problem with my Sandisk Cruzer Micro 4GB .
Replies
0
Views
422
Vinoy Vijayan
V
C
Re: Beware! spyware on windows update
Replies
0
Views
195
CR
C
Back
Top Bottom