Size of hard disk question

[Adrian]

"Ingeborg" <a@b.invalid> wrote in message
newsp.tyb13lpukpmw55@naaikamer...
On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 12:49:19 +0200, Brian A. <gonefish'n@afarawaylake>
wrote:
<snipped>

Three ways to solve this:
1) Use a PCI-IDE card using it's own BIOS and W98 drivers.
2) Use an USB 2 card (make sure that W98SE drivers are available) and use
an external closure. (make sure ... drivers)
Downside is that unless you're using 2.5" drives which can be powered from
the USB, the disks will not be switched off with the computer, and so use
more electricity.
3) Use a SCSI card with SCSI disks. Downside are the costs of the SCSI
disks.

-----
Ingeborg, this discussion has left me confused.

At a computer parts shop I was told that, because of processor limitations,
(1.) in no way will W98 support > 40 Gig HDDs.
(2.) a HDD via the USB port isn't feasible.

(1.) You seem to suggest that a PCI-IDE card could overcome the mobo
limitations. If so, how would I obtain the required W98 drivers?
(2.) Should the USB option be feasible, the power issue makes it
unattractive.

Given that I am finding myself in uncharted waters, would you please
formulate a conclusion to the excellent posts that have been done re my
question, because I am quite lost (apart from having made one person "sick
and tired").

Adrian.

 

[Ingeborg]

Adrian wrote:

>> I went to the local computer parts shop and was told that
>> no way can I install a hdd > 40 Gig on a W98 box simply because the
>> OS couldn't handle it, even if I installed a PCI-IDE card. (What
>> about drivers though?) And drives < 40 Gig are no longer sold.

They don't know where they are talking about. (Groningers zeker?) W9x uses
an 32 bit sector address internally, so theoretically it could address 2^32
* 512 (default sector size) = 2199023255552 bytes ~ 2000 GiB. However, W98
standard uses a IDE driver which can use only 28 bits (LBA28 addressing),
which limits it to 2^28 * 512 = 137438953472 bytes = 128 GiB. To overcome
this 128 GiB limit you'll have to use 3rth party IDE drivers which
implements LBA48, which you can find here:
<http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=78592>


dadiOH wrote:

> You have no problem using a larger drive - up to 128 +- GB - with
> Win98SE on a mobo channel. You *might* have a problem because your
> BIOS is old. BIOS can be updated. I do not know if an add in card
> would overcome a BIOS drive size limitation but I suspect it would.
>

The 128GiB problem is a two trap problem for W98. W98 relies on DOS to get
the drive letters, and DOS relies on the BIOS to get partition information.
But W98 will use it's own driver to access the disk. So both W98 and the
BIOS has to handle LBA48 (48 bit sector addressing) to be able to access
drives above 128GiB.
The OP's BIOS will not handle LBA48. According to Brian A. the youngest
BIOS for his mobo is dated 8/21/2000. To support LBA48 it should be from
2002.
The magic of an add in IDE card is that is comes with its own BIOS, and
that it has W98 drivers, covering both traps of the problem.

 

[Ingeborg]

Adrian wrote:

>
> "Ingeborg" <a@b.invalid> wrote in message
> newsp.tyb13lpukpmw55@naaikamer...
> On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 12:49:19 +0200, Brian A. <gonefish'n@afarawaylake>
> wrote:
> <snipped>
>
> Three ways to solve this:
> 1) Use a PCI-IDE card using it's own BIOS and W98 drivers.
> 2) Use an USB 2 card (make sure that W98SE drivers are available) and
> use an external closure. (make sure ... drivers)
> Downside is that unless you're using 2.5" drives which can be powered
> from the USB, the disks will not be switched off with the computer,
> and so use more electricity.
> 3) Use a SCSI card with SCSI disks. Downside are the costs of the SCSI
> disks.
>
> -----
> Ingeborg, this discussion has left me confused.
>
> At a computer parts shop I was told that, because of processor
> limitations,
> (1.) in no way will W98 support > 40 Gig HDDs.

That's bull****. Out off the box W98SE can handle *IDE* drives up to 128
GiB, and SCSI and USB drives have AFAIK a limit of 2 TiB.

> (2.) a HDD via the USB port isn't feasible.

Depends on what you want to do with it. You can't boot W98 from an USB
disk. But as long as you boot from an internal disk you can use an
external disk for data storage. That will be slower, and consume more
processor time, but since this computer has nothing to but fileserving,
and the network is the bottleneck, this shouldn't be a problem. (As long
as you've got USB2. The standard USB1.1 on your mobo *will* be the
bottleneck. USB1.1 does 11 Mbit, your network 100 Mbit, and USB2 480
Mbit.

> (1.) You seem to suggest that a PCI-IDE card could overcome the mobo
> limitations.

Yes. I discussed that somewhere else in this thread.

> If so, how would I obtain the required W98 drivers?

They should be provided with the card. If not, first have a look on the
vendors website. If the vendor doesn't provide it, you'll have to look
for another one.

> (2.) Should the USB option be feasible, the power issue makes it
> unattractive.

I agree.

> Given that I am finding myself in uncharted waters, would you please
> formulate a conclusion to the excellent posts that have been done re
> my question, because I am quite lost

See my post to dadiOH in this thread. A PCI IDE card should overcome all
your problems.

> (apart from having made one person "sick and tired").

98 guy has forgotten that the problem is old for him, but new to anybody
who stumbles over it. And that it's difficult to search for a solution
when you don't know what the problem could be.

 

[Adrian]

"Ingeborg" <a@b.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns99A5CF8BBD1CFabinvalid@207.46.248.16...
> Adrian wrote:
>
>>
>> "Ingeborg" <a@b.invalid> wrote in message
>> newsp.tyb13lpukpmw55@naaikamer...
>> On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 12:49:19 +0200, Brian A. <gonefish'n@afarawaylake>
>> wrote:
>> <snipped>
>>
>> Three ways to solve this:
>> 1) Use a PCI-IDE card using it's own BIOS and W98 drivers.
>> 2) Use an USB 2 card (make sure that W98SE drivers are available) and
>> use an external closure. (make sure ... drivers)
>> Downside is that unless you're using 2.5" drives which can be powered
>> from the USB, the disks will not be switched off with the computer,
>> and so use more electricity.
>> 3) Use a SCSI card with SCSI disks. Downside are the costs of the SCSI
>> disks.
>>
>> -----
>> Ingeborg, this discussion has left me confused.
>>
>> At a computer parts shop I was told that, because of processor
>> limitations,
>> (1.) in no way will W98 support > 40 Gig HDDs.
>
> That's bull****. Out off the box W98SE can handle *IDE* drives up to 128
> GiB, and SCSI and USB drives have AFAIK a limit of 2 TiB.
>
>> (2.) a HDD via the USB port isn't feasible.
>
> Depends on what you want to do with it. You can't boot W98 from an USB
> disk. But as long as you boot from an internal disk you can use an
> external disk for data storage. That will be slower, and consume more
> processor time, but since this computer has nothing to but fileserving,
> and the network is the bottleneck, this shouldn't be a problem. (As long
> as you've got USB2. The standard USB1.1 on your mobo *will* be the
> bottleneck. USB1.1 does 11 Mbit, your network 100 Mbit, and USB2 480
> Mbit.
>
>> (1.) You seem to suggest that a PCI-IDE card could overcome the mobo
>> limitations.
>
> Yes. I discussed that somewhere else in this thread.
>
>> If so, how would I obtain the required W98 drivers?
>
> They should be provided with the card. If not, first have a look on the
> vendors website. If the vendor doesn't provide it, you'll have to look
> for another one.
>
>> (2.) Should the USB option be feasible, the power issue makes it
>> unattractive.
>
> I agree.
>
>> Given that I am finding myself in uncharted waters, would you please
>> formulate a conclusion to the excellent posts that have been done re
>> my question, because I am quite lost
>
> See my post to dadiOH in this thread. A PCI IDE card should overcome all
> your problems.
>
>> (apart from having made one person "sick and tired").
>
> 98 guy has forgotten that the problem is old for him, but new to anybody
> who stumbles over it. And that it's difficult to search for a solution
> when you don't know what the problem could be.
-----
Ingeborg,

Thank you. What you say is transparent and clear. I will get cracking.

Regards,
Adrian.

 

[Adrian]

"dadiOH" <dadiOH@guesswhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23Zjrdsj8HHA.5424@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Adrian wrote:
>> "dadiOH" <dadiOH@guesswhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23AoEfEi8HHA.2208@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Adrian wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wouw! Thanks again Ingeborg.
>>>> Re 1) The motherboard has a ide-controller, so your option would
>>>> mean adding a card = new interface to a hdd with a BIOS and its
>>>> own drivers, so the current parameters of the W98 box would not be
>>>> relevant - is that it? But that would not be purchasable - am I
>>>> misunderstanding?
>>>
>>> Yes you are. There are many PCI IDE cards available, generally <
>>> $30. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=pci+ide+card
>
>> DadiOH, I went to the local computer parts shop and was told that
>> no way can I install a hdd > 40 Gig on a W98 box simply because the
>> OS couldn't handle it, even if I installed a PCI-IDE card. (What
>> about drivers though?) And drives < 40 Gig are no longer sold.
>
> They are either lying or misinformed. Or stupid. Or all three.
>
> Win98 SE DOES have a limit - around 128 GB IIRC. A "driver" is just a
> program that does low level stuff and with which users don't normally
> interact...programs to access hardware, etc. There is nothing magical
> about them and the cards come with software. They are easy to
> install...put the card in a free slot on the motherboard and follow
> the written instructions. They give you two channels which means
> they'll handle four drives.
>
> I have four physical hard drives on my Win 98SE machine...
> #1. 76.3 GB (80 GB)
> #2. 112 GB (120 GB)
> #3. 153 GB (160 GB)
> #4. 9.6 GB (10 GB)
>
> #1 is on the primary mobo channel (CD & DVD drives on the other)
>
> #2 & #3 are are each masters on separate channels on an add on card.
>
> #4 is a slave on one of the add on card channels. It is never used
> except to once in a blue moon to back up the primary drive from my
> wife's machine.
>
> I have zero problems.
>
> You have no problem using a larger drive - up to 128 +- GB - with
> Win98SE on a mobo channel. You *might* have a problem because your
> BIOS is old. BIOS can be updated. I do not know if an add in card
> would overcome a BIOS drive size limitation but I suspect it would.
>
> --
>
> dadiOH
-----

Well dadiOH that is a relief. (I also read Ingeborg.)
I cannot update the BIOS: I tried. No update available.
I shall give it a try and see where it leads me.

Many thanks.
Adrian.

 

[Brian A.]

"Ingeborg" <a@b.invalid> wrote in message newsp.tyb13lpukpmw55@naaikamer...
On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 12:49:19 +0200, Brian A. <gonefish'n@afarawaylake>
wrote:
<snipped>
>
> The Fdisk.exe utility may not be able to create a hard disk partition that is
> larger than 128 GB
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kben-us327202

Wow, that's a dangerous one! It tells you how to create a partition
bigger than 128GiB,
without warning that W98 will screw it.

I don't see where it tells anyone how to create a partition larger than 128GB. It
states that Fdisk relies on the system BIOS and is limited to what the BIOS reports
the disk size as, if the BIOS doesn't support LBA48 it will only report a 128+GB disk
at 128GB. It does also state that updating the BIOS will resolve the issue, if the
BIOS can be updated, which I read as resolving the reporting issue.
No matter, I have always used a PCI controller card in 98 when adding larger drives
than 120GB and I have never partitioned/formatted any in 98 to their full capacity.


<snipped>

--

Brian A. Sesko { MS MVP_Shell/User }
Conflicts start where information lacks.
http://basconotw.mvps.org/

Suggested posting do's/don'ts: http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
How to ask a question: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

 

[Curt Christianson]

Someone got up on the wrong side of the bed today, and is feeling *itchy.
Apparently, in that kind of mood, it's OK, or should I say "justified" to
act like an *sshole.

Q: Did *you* decide to act like an *sshole before you came here today, or
did you decide early on that everybody would feel your wrath today?? Maybe
you were just too "lazy" to try to act respectful when you came to the
group.

--
HTH,
Curt

Windows Support Center
www.aumha.org
Practically Nerded,...
http://dundats.mvps.org/Index.htm

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:46E2C793.2E587CF@Guy.com...
this newsgroup.

 

[Lil' Dave]

"Ingeborg" <a@b.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns99A5CF8BBD1CFabinvalid@207.46.248.16...
> Adrian wrote:
>
>>
>> "Ingeborg" <a@b.invalid> wrote in message
>> newsp.tyb13lpukpmw55@naaikamer...
>> On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 12:49:19 +0200, Brian A. <gonefish'n@afarawaylake>
>> wrote:
>> <snipped>
>>
>> Three ways to solve this:
>> 1) Use a PCI-IDE card using it's own BIOS and W98 drivers.
>> 2) Use an USB 2 card (make sure that W98SE drivers are available) and
>> use an external closure. (make sure ... drivers)
>> Downside is that unless you're using 2.5" drives which can be powered
>> from the USB, the disks will not be switched off with the computer,
>> and so use more electricity.
>> 3) Use a SCSI card with SCSI disks. Downside are the costs of the SCSI
>> disks.
>>
>> -----
>> Ingeborg, this discussion has left me confused.
>>
>> At a computer parts shop I was told that, because of processor
>> limitations,
>> (1.) in no way will W98 support > 40 Gig HDDs.
>
> That's bull****. Out off the box W98SE can handle *IDE* drives up to 128
> GiB, and SCSI and USB drives have AFAIK a limit of 2 TiB.
>
>> (2.) a HDD via the USB port isn't feasible.
>
> Depends on what you want to do with it. You can't boot W98 from an USB
> disk. But as long as you boot from an internal disk you can use an
> external disk for data storage. That will be slower, and consume more
> processor time, but since this computer has nothing to but fileserving,
> and the network is the bottleneck, this shouldn't be a problem. (As long
> as you've got USB2. The standard USB1.1 on your mobo *will* be the
> bottleneck. USB1.1 does 11 Mbit, your network 100 Mbit, and USB2 480
> Mbit.
>
>> (1.) You seem to suggest that a PCI-IDE card could overcome the mobo
>> limitations.
>
> Yes. I discussed that somewhere else in this thread.
>
>> If so, how would I obtain the required W98 drivers?
>
> They should be provided with the card. If not, first have a look on the
> vendors website. If the vendor doesn't provide it, you'll have to look
> for another one.
>
>> (2.) Should the USB option be feasible, the power issue makes it
>> unattractive.
>
> I agree.
>
>> Given that I am finding myself in uncharted waters, would you please
>> formulate a conclusion to the excellent posts that have been done re
>> my question, because I am quite lost
>
> See my post to dadiOH in this thread. A PCI IDE card should overcome all
> your problems.
>
>> (apart from having made one person "sick and tired").
>
> 98 guy has forgotten that the problem is old for him, but new to anybody
> who stumbles over it. And that it's difficult to search for a solution
> when you don't know what the problem could be.

There is one issue with a USB enclosure regarding drive capacity, and that's
the bios/firmware involved with the interface chip in the enclosure. Many
early ones were 128GB limit. Many sold today don't divulge the HD
recognition capacity limit. My recommendation is to get one that does and
get a hard drive that conforms with that limit. Have read many complaints
about all 3 one touch models (enclosure and hard drive combo). Am using a
Startech USB/firewire enclosure (500GB HD capacity recognition per specs).
Dave

 

[Adrian]

"who where" <not@bigpond.net> wrote in message
news:8f97e3hgfqhcfq4hbvu8fdmdjf955ig1jt@4ax.com...
<snipped>

> If you had done the latter, with the search keywords he suggested, you
> would
> have found an enormous amount of traffic on the very question you asked.
> As
> some have pointed out, the veracity of those posts is never assured -
> after all
> this IS usenet - but it would have revealed that the subject has been
> canvassed
> to death many times even within the last twelve months.

You point out:

(1.) an enormous amount of traffic
(2.) the veracity of those posts is never assured

The contributors to the this forum, with their knowledge and experience are
capable of extracting what is relevant and presenting that information
concisely, thus protecting an individual against (2.) and stopping him or
her from getting totally lost because of (1.) As to the response of 98 guy
to my post, I would like to differentiate between "form" and "content". I
have never doubted his expertise (content). My recent post had to do with
"form".

Adrian.

 

[98 Guy]

Adrian wrote:

> Gauging by the number of responses and the quality of the
> discussion you can see that it my question wasn't stupid
> and /or misdirected.

The question you asked is no different than at least a dozen that have
been posed during the past year. The number of parameters to it's
answer is relatively small, and each have been covered in previous
threads.

> had I followed your advice and gone there in the first place.
> I must say that I am happy not to have done so, because I would
> have found myself in an informational quagmire.

You have received information that is no different than others have
gotten in the past. Your attempts to portray your experience here as
being different than what has been posted in the past will not work
with me. It's sad that you are responding in this way to defend your
original decision to not perform a simple search first.

> it is quite legitimate to have a personal point of view, but it is
> not ok to be out of tune with reality and to measure out bad
> language and bad behavior to all and sundry who have not merited
> such treatment.

You are hardly in a position to judge me. I have pointed out the
flaws in your judgement and the errors in your reasoning.

> you should get some professional help.

Your ignorance is exceeded only by your ego.

 

[Adrian]

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:46E42688.4B085E9A@Guy.com...

> Your ignorance is exceeded only by your ego.

Good, my ego is quite small.

Adrian.

 

[who where]

On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 10:43:23 +0200, "Adrian" <xx@xx.xx> wrote:

>
>"who where" <not@bigpond.net> wrote in message
>news:8f97e3hgfqhcfq4hbvu8fdmdjf955ig1jt@4ax.com...
><snipped>
>
>> If you had done the latter, with the search keywords he suggested, you
>> would
>> have found an enormous amount of traffic on the very question you asked.
>> As
>> some have pointed out, the veracity of those posts is never assured -
>> after all
>> this IS usenet - but it would have revealed that the subject has been
>> canvassed
>> to death many times even within the last twelve months.
>
>You point out:
>
>(1.) an enormous amount of traffic
>(2.) the veracity of those posts is never assured
>
>The contributors to the this forum, with their knowledge and experience are
>capable of extracting what is relevant and presenting that information
>concisely, thus protecting an individual against (2.) and stopping him or
>her from getting totally lost because of (1.)

You have again (and I now suspect deliberately) missed the point of MY post. It
is EXACTLY the posts in *this_forum* which you would find via Google GROUPS.
Same authors, same level of veracity, same traffic. Clearly you haven't - and
have decided not to - explore that which is an archive of posts in this forum.

>As to the response of 98 guy
>to my post, I would like to differentiate between "form" and "content". I
>have never doubted his expertise (content). My recent post had to do with
>"form".

 

[Adrian]

"who where" <not@bigpond.net> wrote in message
news:f189e31n1bls6qansvot04t4uv8n8s7vr7@4ax.com...
<snipped>

Forums are interesting places psychologically. There are participants that
contribute in a serious way, and those that evaluate the validity of
questions raised, and of the discussion taking place. Fortunately the
talk-about-talk group is a minority.

 

[Adrian]

I would like to thank all for your contribution. The second hard disk is up
and running, and I am very pleased. Guys, you were great!

Regards,
Adrian.

 

[Curt Christianson]

Way to go Adrian!

--
HTH,
Curt

Windows Support Center
www.aumha.org
Practically Nerded,...
http://dundats.mvps.org/Index.htm

"Adrian" <xx@xx.xx> wrote in message
news:46e6d94c$0$24430$5fc3050@news.tiscali.nl...
|I would like to thank all for your contribution. The second hard disk is up
| and running, and I am very pleased. Guys, you were great!
|
| Regards,
| Adrian.
|
|

 

[BeBopaLula]

Don't know the Limit, but just finished installing a WD 500GB P-ATA as a
second Hard-Drive with XP Pro / FAT 32 / 4 Kb Clusters) as the OS on Active
1. Remaining 7 volumes are sized ~ 62 GB with 8 KB clusters.

This 500 GB HD-D resides in a Dell Optiplex GX240 along with a 40 GB Hard
Drive (W98se FAT32 as the OS) and seems to be working fine.
Dual Booting, using Boot-US.

You'd probably need to update the Native W98se tools to be successful,
*depending on what you'd consider a large hard drive*.

I used Intel's Application Accelerator and Western Digital's Data Lifeguard
Tools - version 11.2 - for DOS (floppy) and they did all the work. Used
various checking tools to see if Mobo, Chipset and BIOS would support
(48bit-LBA compatible) the large drive without need for a supplementary PCI
IDE Host Controller card. The tools 'confirmed' that my system was a "go"
for the job at hand.

Needed to use the DOS-Floppy version 11.2 WDLG Tool as the Windows version
of the Western Digital Data Lifeguard Tool could not do the job properly. It
balked that my system was *not* 48bit-LBA compatible and would not support
HD-D's > 137 GB. I guess the Windows verion needs to have a "chat" with the
DOS version.

If you are using a different brand of large Hard-Drive
(Seagate/Hitachi/Maxxtor/ etc), you'll probably need to investigate whatever
tools they might offer to configure their make of Hard Disk. Not sure if
these tools work across different "company boundaries".

Good luck.


"Adrian" <xx@xx.xx> wrote in message
news:46e19d4a$0$24409$5fc3050@news.tiscali.nl...
> Are there any limits to the size of the hard disk I can run on a W98SE
box?
> When formatting a hard disk, can I simply use the format utility provided
by
> W98, or do I have to do special things to do with FAT etc.
>
> Thank you,
> Adrian.
>
>