View Full Version : win 3.1 up to Win98 sec

31-07-2002, 01:12 PM
Hiya everyone,

I want to know, that if I want to install win98 sec to replace the Win.31 version of windows, how can this be done.

I have already, put one of my startup disks into the drive and because win.3.1 runs on an earlier version of dos, where or how can I get this system up and running.

Would this mean that I can copy all my dos files from my Win98 and put them into the hard drive and boot up from there? Is this not as simple as it sounds.

I am having trouble that the startup disk [win98] can't be read with Win 3.1

hope this isn't too much to ask, but thanks for any help

Im pretty good at FDisk, so we don't need to go there for starters......

Elwin Way
31-07-2002, 01:22 PM
From what I recall, You have to upgrade to 95 before you can upgrade to 98.

31-07-2002, 01:38 PM
If you've got the full set of Windows 3.1 disks. You can then use the Windows 98 upgrade disc to do a clean install.

31-07-2002, 01:41 PM

I've got the full version of Windows 98 second edition, so does this still mean that I have to install Win95 first?

If not, then can I install straight from the Win98 cd after formatting the entire hard drive and starting from scratch?

Terry Porritt
31-07-2002, 02:02 PM
I think you really need to post full details of your computer including hard drive size, cpu, BIOS date, the lot, before any sound advice can be given.
If you have been running Win3.1, then it sounds most probable that your computer is old. The BIOS probably wont support booting from a CD. the hard drive may be small, you may only have a few megs of ram etc. etc.

Give us all the details.

31-07-2002, 02:35 PM

Well, its a 486, 16 megs of ram, 500mb hard drive and my disks for my CD rom drive allow me to boot up from a win.31 version.

Its not mine, but is given to me just to see what else I can do for the mean time. Im still sure that this is enough to install Win98 but I don't expect it to be exceptionally outstanding.

31-07-2002, 02:50 PM
What speed 486? 33/50/75/100?

I dont know that 98 will run in 16 Mb. 95 will *just* run in 8 mb but you cant do much with it, but 98 is much more resource hungry.

Any software I have seen for 98 requires more than 16 (usually minimum 64)

Be interested what others say.

Elwin Way
31-07-2002, 03:40 PM
I'd go as far as 95. After that, it won't be of much use. Even 95 could stretch it.

31-07-2002, 03:47 PM
for the record, I had 98se running on a 486dx2-80 w/ 20mb of ram.
It's definitely not fast, but for checking email, typing up assignments and the like it's usable.
I used to use an old dos6.22 boot disk w/ cd and sound drivers to play games.

31-07-2002, 04:31 PM
I recommend you put on 95 for the PC you have unless you upgrade your HDD and memory

Terry Porritt
31-07-2002, 06:45 PM
The fact that you can boot from a CD with win3.1 (is that the IBM disk that was available a few years ago with IBM dos+win3.1 ?) suggests that your bios is not 'all that old' and that the motherboard is maybe a PCI.

If its PCI then some of those also ran AMD 586 chips which went well, more or less equivalent to Pentium 75/90, and you may also have a reasonable PCI video card, and onboard I/O. So it could just handle Win98SE with a bigger hard drive and another 16MB of ram.

If the mother board is an ISA or VESA, then Win 95 is as much as it will take.

All that's IMHO.

01-08-2002, 08:49 PM

Thanks all for your responses! Yeah, I think now that installing Win98 will be stretching it, so Windows 95 seems the better choice.