Hi eveybody,
I'm using Progdvb v 4.47.5 on windows 98se.
When I'm recording a channel, everything goes fine.
I can read the mpg file with Progdvb.
But I can't copy this file : Windows says "incorrect parameter".
Do you have any idea to solve this ?
thanks

Windows using FAT32 file system has several limitations regarding file sizes.
An absolute limit is 4GB per file, cannot be bigger that that at all, splitting at record time is a must for longer recordings.
But files between 2GB and 4GB even cannot be handled by Windows Explorer then. Means, they can't be written b<y the Explorer. You'd have to use a stream mode writing capable software for those, like f.e. MPEG2CUT or alike, to move to another partition or copy anywhere. No need to cut then, but the procedure needs some time, as the file is reconstrained for the target file sytem (even if nothing cut away and not reprocessed regarding MPEG2 compression).

So you should use automatic splitting routine at f.e. 2040MB, if you want to move to another data storage medium afterwards, or reprocess with any old software.

That FAT32 limitations also exist when using other OS, like Linux or more modern Windows, occasionally even with lower limits.

Same goes for me, as you can see in my signature.

NTFS would not limit file size, but there's no way to write to such a partition from Win9x directly.

Did not try to record such a long give to a UDF formatted data DVD, might perhaps work for over 4GB, up to the disk size. May be worth a try...

Thanks a lot Juergen .



Your advice works very fine .

If Windows Explorer crashes when handling >2GB files, couldn't you still copy/move them using the Command Prompt?

Also, you can install NTFS support into Windows 95/98 with a 3rd party tool:
http://www.sysinternals.com/Utilities/N ... ows98.html

The read-only version is free, and I remember they have a read/write version for a fee.

Also, you may wish to consider that your OS is nearly a decade old... An upgrade to something more stable (and supported) might be a good idea.

Opinions may differ...

Why throw away a nice oldtimer, go for a modern plastic box with a far higher consumption?
And pay again, more than ever?
Why throw away my fine vintage HiFi?
Or turntable?
Or girlfriend / wife? Also ain't the latest models, traces of usage included, I suppose. And possibly no more manufacturer support or upgrade...
But still downloading fine, I hope

Well, I've been working on w2k and XP, too, and one thing I can tell you, besides of being fat and hungry, any later Win version just tries to convince you, to be more stable and reliable.
Ugly Bill is a liar.

BTW, limitations for Windows Explorer (and the routines behind it) aren't limited to W9x. Try to format a big partition as FAT32 (for cross platform compatibility), in 2k or XP, then you'll know what I mean... True limit is 8.5 TB when using 32k clusters...
At MS, they are trying to force you, to accept limitations, that keep you away from using other OS or not MS certified equipment.
MP3 players, cameras and many other devices, normally can't write to or even read NTFS, so FAT32 is a must to stay compatible.

However, what W9x Explorer won't do on FAT32, also won't work from DOS prompt (or CMD on others).

oh well, if you had two computers, one with modern win (like I do), you can interact on both, if you wanted. And even booting another modern Win (perhaps poor basic installation for tool time), may let you benefit from both 'worlds'.

But don't listen to guys, that want to make you believe, a more modern OS was a must, or would brighten up your live or enlarge your private parts...
All they intend is, to get a lot of extra money out of your purse. Again and again...
Vista support will end one day, too...

Not that I wish to get into a dispute over which OS is better (or do I?), but my experience with Win98 was very poor (although better than Win95 at least). The OS provides little in the way of reasonable system stability. BSOD was a common occurance for everyone I knew who used it.

Maybe you're one of the few with the correct combination of good hardware, good drivers and good patches? I can't really say.

NT was a nice OS, starting with version 4. Very stable, fairly slim, but lacking compatibility with many Win9x based applications and definately limited driver support. BSOD though only really appeared if you were tinkering where you should not.

2000 was a welcome upgrade, still reasonably slim and adding some compatibility. Good stability and finally a process for ensuring good drivers.

XP came with a lot of bloat, but much of it can be removed or simply not installed. DOS/Win9x compatibility is quite good.

That's where I draw the line. Vista, IMO, is a piece of shit. I highly recommend it for anyone who wishes to turn their 3GHz CPU into a 3MHz CPU instead. Or perhaps they don't get enough nagging from their wife, so wish to receive it from their OS. A terrible OS -- I'll switch to OSX or Linux before I ever use Vista.

I fully agree that there's no reason to upgrade just for the sake of upgrading. But I honestly cannot comprehend how anyone could consider Win9x stable .

I don't need to be convinced of what I can see with my own eyes. Perhaps when your screen goes blue you close yours?

Regarding stability, Win98SE has learned a real lot over the years. Same goes for new functions (like safely remove hardware, f.e.)
Last BSOD I saw was years ago, and a good reason for that was a nasty VxD driver conflict, gone after an update.
Never change a running system (without proven good backups)...

Though, why not have more than one OS on a machine...
I have a few extra partitions prepared for Linux experiments. Just not much time ATM.
And W2k is installed as well, pretty helpful f.e. for large files copying and alike.
But it won't support all hardware I have and want to keep, like my good old FAST AVMaster.
A nice boot manager resides in MBR, from XFDISK.
Can only be adjusted from a DOS based platform, but starts Linux partiions directly, no fussing around with LILO or similar.
W2k boots from it's own menue from Win9x system drive's first sector.
As long as they tolerate each other, why not...
And a Knoppix live CD allways at hand, just in case...

But most important on that old machine of mine, it's almost noiseless.
Thanks to ProgDVB and Nexus, it is integrated into my HiFi and TV set.
And a couple of big HDs means, no more (S-)VHS, just collecting dust for years now.

Won't give up 9x at all, one day it may survive on a second computer, or just as a boot alternative, once I may find a really better OS for my personal needs and favours and daily use....
Surely that won't come from M$...

BTW, I never installed 98SE here.
Started with latest version of 95, just updated / upgraded up to now.
And never had to rebuild the system, as I've been making full backups systematically from the very beginning.
Many components exchanged by 3rd party stuff, of course, browser, mailer, editor(s), office, media players and much more.
Most alternative software works better for me, including a progress of basic safety and stability.
And regarding malware protection, partly that depends on the user's behaviour, a nice hardware firewall brings more, the usual software products do the rest.
Oh well, known insecurity and careful use is better than false believe in integral safety...



Back to subject, and that's ProgDVB.
Basically, I'm using two installations as default over here, latest 4.82.4 w9x for watching TV and recording, but still 4.75 w9x for playback. That's the last one, that does not have playback slider issues over here...

Regarding the thread subject:
A recording, that fails in other players, should just be de- and remuxed once, f.e. by use of PVAStrumento.
ProgDVB can't constrain streams / files for HD / DVD (or S-VCD f.e.).
Many players can't handle unconstrained files.
Quite similar issues with time code not starting at zero.

Try out and please post results...