Burn Win98SE Bootable CD as multisession?

May 1, 2011 at 19:48:49
Specs: Windows 98SE, 1GHz/256MB
1)I want to create a Full-fledged Windows 98 Second Edition Bootable disk, with which if inserted into CD Rom and pc booted as CDROM as first boot device should bring us to Windows 98 Startup Menu........
load all device drivers with CDROM support and finally bring to command prompt.
It should also have all the utilities as FDISK, FORMAT, EDIT etc required to start a fresh unpartioned/unformatted IDE harddisk.

What is the easiest method to do this? I am trying Nero to create bootable, I am not sure of the settings like to Select which sector or if the CD cannot be a multisession disk(whether we have to finalize it only then it would work as a bootable), whether to select floppy 1.44 emulation or not.

2)Is there any other bootable Win98SE which directly starts loading Setup/Installation without user commands? How to create one?

See More: Burn Win98SE Bootable CD as multisession?

Report •

May 1, 2011 at 22:44:39
# 1 is pretty much what a 98 installation cd already does. Have you already tried one of those to see if it's adequate?

But you don't need a start menu if you want to automatically load cdrom drivers. So get a standard OEM 98 bootdisk--at a place like bootdisk.com if you don't have one--and edit its config.sys and autoexec.bat to bypass the menu and its options and directly load cdrom support. Then copy the entire contents of a 98 installation cd to a folder on your hard drive.

Then start your nero and choose to make a bootable cd. You'll select everything in the folder containing the files and folder from the 98 cd--don't select the folder containing them, select everything in that folder. Also I believe you'll need to select the files on the bootdisk, except for config.sys and autoexec.bat.

Then it'll ask you to put the disk with the system files in drive a: Your bootdisk is already in drive a: so click OK. It'll copy the system files and config.sys and autoexec.cat from the disk.

Then burn the cd and close the recording session. You don't want a multi session cd.

I made an ME disk 7 or 8 years ago and the above is how I remember doing it but you may need to experiment a little bit to get it exactly right.

# 2 sounds like you're asking about an unattended 98 installation where the installation proceeds on its own by choosing the defaults so all you have to do is start it, go watch TV or something and when you come back it's all done. Google those words for help on that.

Ding dong the witch is dead. . ...

Report •

May 2, 2011 at 08:13:13
If you don't mind my asking, why go through all that trouble for something that you can't possibly use often? Not sure all the requested parameters can be accomplished anyway.

Report •

May 2, 2011 at 09:58:21
If you don't mind me saying, why not help the poster do what they want to do instead of asking them why they want to do it? Does it matter why?

I'm not sure about the multisession burning part, but what you want to do as far as an "unattended" installation is possible. BUT it will require quite a bit of learning about DOS batch scripts and INF files. It will NOT be "easy" unless you are familiar with these.

Having said that, see these threads at MSFN for more information:

Report •

Related Solutions

May 2, 2011 at 10:24:19

My question was qualified by "if you don't mind". Getting incite into the why can sometimes result in alternatives. Why don't you let the original poster decide if that is my business or not.

Report •

May 2, 2011 at 21:57:39
"result in alternatives"

Why should we steer someone toward an "alternative" when they have clearly stated what they want to do, and when what they want to do CAN be done?

Also, you make the assumption that the poster cannot possibly use his creation often. Why not? I use Windows 98SE every day. In fact I'm using it now. And such a disk would considerably ease the process of reinstalling Windows 98, because if one automates and integrates updates into the setup, then one spends considerably less time setting up a machine.

Report •

May 3, 2011 at 01:20:38
How about using an image of the system to restore it instead of going through the entire installation. Would that qualify as an alternative?

My assumption is that if Win98 is in use at all it is on a limited number of machines and certainly not be installed on modern hardware for any number of reasons.

Besides which maybe I am just curious as to what makes Tej tick. Isn't that between Tej and me?

From your own links it appears you have also worked on something along the lines requested here and have not solved all the issues.

Report •

May 3, 2011 at 23:37:07
Yes, I agree that imaging a system would be a valid (and good) alternative provided it will be used only for the same machine or machines with identical hardware. However, an automated or "slipstreamed" installation disk would be more versatile.

Since the term "modern" when related to hardware can have broad interpretation based on the views of the reader, I can't say that I agree that one can assume Windows 98 will not be used on it.

Windows 98 drivers were provided for Intel chipsets up into the beginning of the 9xx series, and as I have pointed out here before, the >137GB/48-Bit LBA Hard Drive and >512MB RAM "limitations" have long since been broken.
I would consider a 3.2GHz P4 with 4GB RAM system "modern," but some may not.

Yes, I have worked on a similar project, and have encountered and overcome several obstacles, and still have hurdles to cross. I have even worked on slipstreaming updates directly into the CABs. All of this is possible, it just depends on how much time one wants to dedicate to the project and how determined you are. I have not had a lot of time to devote to the project lately, but it will continue.

Meh, it appears we are debating this for no purpose anyhow, Tej seems to have disappeared.

Report •

May 4, 2011 at 06:52:05
Most any computer with a SATA hard drive will be a problem as will drives larger than 127GB. Then there is the maximum RAM of 511MB issue. This doesn't even address all the drivers that would need to be included that weren't in existence when Win98 was written.

My point was this. As a practical matter you won't be installing Win98 on a sufficient number of different computers to make the considerable effort worthwhile.

Report •

May 4, 2011 at 08:08:22
Do you even use Windows 98? Because it seems you are basing your argument on several misconceptions. Just because drivers for certain hardware (or the hardware itself for that matter) were not in existence when Windows 98 was written, then Windows 98 cannot be used with that hardware. That is ridiculous.

Windows XP is only approximately 1.5 years newer than 98SE, and drivers are still written for XP. Does this mean that XP cannot be used on a system that contains hardware made after it was written in 2001? I think not.

Drivers for Windows 98 were written up until 2006 when Microsoft dropped support for it. Virtually any motherboard that uses an Intel chipset up until the early 9xx series has official drivers for Windows 98. In fact even Windows 95 drivers were written up to the 845 chipset. Some of the early SATA motherboards even had Windows 98 compatible drivers.

Just because Microsoft (intentionally?) failed to address the >137GB HDD and >512 MB RAM issues does not mean that they cannot be fixed. These issues have long since been solved by dedicated individuals who refuse to be carried along in the "endless upgrade" cycle.

I can point you to one single website that contains solutions to all 3 problems you list. There are also other alternatives available, some of them are even free.

RAM, HDD, and SATA problems solved here:

Windows 95 installed on a 3.06GHz P4 machine, 845 chipset, later in thread using 3.5GB RAM (screenshots provided):

List of several MSFN members using >1GB of RAM with Windows 9x and methods used, contains links to relevant information:

Discussion about SATA and Windows 98:

Report •

May 4, 2011 at 08:21:04
I only stopped using Win98 on my primary rig maybe 3 years ago.

I didn't state that your couldn't run Win98 because the necessary drivers were not included in the release. What I am stating is that you would need to incorporate a multitude of newer drivers into the DVD that was discussed at the beginning of this thread.

Excerpt from your SATA link "Should not be a problem if you have a mother board that supports SATA or your using a host controller for SATA with drivers for win98SE". The key there is "if the board supports it" Virtually all current motherboards do NOT. I would venture to guess there are only a handful of older boards that do. This is but one example of issues that need to be dealt with.

I never stated you couldn't install older Windows versions on SOME current hardware. What I did say more than once is to go through all that work in preparing a DVD that can perform the required steps is too much work.

I am not going to debate this issue with you any further as it appears you just want to argue the point that it can be done while I am pointing out that it is penny wise and pound foolish.

Report •

May 4, 2011 at 08:50:24
I myself said above that we were arguing this for no purpose. You are welcome to your opinion, but whether or not it is "foolish" is strictly that - a matter of opinion.

Report •

Ask Question