Using 2 USB portable/external HDDs simulatenously - is there a trick to it?
Marts
motherboard.
Yesterday I plugged my Seagate 1tb external drive into it. I then plugged a WD
portable HDD into it. However, Windows reported a hardware error.
I unplugged the Seagate and plugged the WD in. It read fine.
I then plugged the Seagate back in. Windows reported the hardware error again.
It seems that for some reason Windows (XP SP2) cannot have two USB based storage
devices running at the same time.
I used different USB ports during this testing, too in case they were off the
same root hub or whatever it's called.
Didn't make any difference.
Any ideas?
Rod Speed
> I have a P4 based computer which has multiple
> USB ports on an Asus P5 based motherboard.
> Yesterday I plugged my Seagate 1tb external drive into it. I then plugged
> a WD portable HDD into it. However, Windows reported a hardware error.
> I unplugged the Seagate and plugged the WD in. It read fine.
> I then plugged the Seagate back in. Windows reported the hardware error again.
> It seems that for some reason Windows (XP SP2) cannot
> have two USB based storage devices running at the same time.
Works fine here.
You sure you didnt just stuff up the cabling to a front USB port ?
What happens if you plug them both in at once to USB ports off the
motherboard at the back of the motherboard, no hubs used at all ?
> I used different USB ports during this testing, too in case
> they were off the same root hub or whatever it's called.
Thats fine, USB allows mulitiple devices.
> Didn't make any difference.
> Any ideas?
See above.
me here
What happens when you have a thumb drive and one of the HD's at the
same time?
Rob
yes you can have 2 USB HDD's at the same time actually I have used 3.
Exterhal case, and two sata docking stations. All mine are powered tho.
Is the WD portable tak8ng too much power?? and does it have two USB
plugs on the cable? are both plugged in?
r
atec 77
it might be a case thing but I have had trouble with wd and another
brand in the same machine , wd seems not terribly compatable with other
brands
son of a bitch
The 1TB must be 3.5", therefore needs a 12V or 240V supply external
The WD, you didn't say 2.5" or 3.5". Assuming it's a 2.5" then it's
USB Power problem, and probably need an external 5V supply.
Evan
Gettamulla Tupya
> You need to map the drives to different letters eg. WD -->M: and SeaG -->N:
>
Windoze does that automagically.
Doug Jewell
> I have a P4 based computer which has multiple USB ports on an Asus P5 based
> motherboard.
>
> Yesterday I plugged my Seagate 1tb external drive into it. I then plugged a WD
> portable HDD into it. However, Windows reported a hardware error.
the limit of power that your USB ports can deliver. The USB
specification is that a device cannot draw more than 500mA
from the USB bus. WD don't seem to list a power spec for
their external drives, but their internal 2.5" drives draw
500mA. The externals are basically internal drives in a
shell, so are going to be drawing right on the limit of the
USB port. In theory each port should be able to deliver full
power simultaneously, but in practice a lot of USB
implementations fall over when they are delivering high power.
>
> I unplugged the Seagate and plugged the WD in. It read fine.
>
> I then plugged the Seagate back in. Windows reported the hardware error again.
>
> It seems that for some reason Windows (XP SP2) cannot have two USB based storage
> devices running at the same time.
letters - actually more if you use some tricks. I routinely
use 4 external HD's plus 2 or more thumb-drives, an Ipod,
and a memory card reader. Windows doesn't even blink at this.
>
> I used different USB ports during this testing, too in case they were off the
> same root hub or whatever it's called.
>
> Didn't make any difference.
>
> Any ideas?
can recommend from experience either a Belkin or Targus, but
there are sure to be many more that will work.
>
--
What is the difference between a duck?
Rod Speed
> You need to map the drives to different letters eg. WD -->M: and SeaG -->N:
Nope, I dont do that and it works fine without that.
Marts
> > It seems that for some reason Windows (XP SP2) cannot
> > have two USB based storage devices running at the same time.
>
> Works fine here.
As it does on a mate's PC who I'm trying to copy these files for (it's his port.
HDD that I'm using).
> You sure you didnt just stuff up the cabling to a front USB port ?
Dunno how. You plug one end into the port, the other into the HDD...
> What happens if you plug them both in at once to USB ports off the
> motherboard at the back of the motherboard, no hubs used at all ?
Not using any hubs. The ports at the front work fine for other peripherals and
only one HDD connected. The ones on the back are on the motherboard's backplane
or whatever it's called. Tried a different combo with no success.
Marts
> What happens when you have a thumb drive and one of the HD's at the
> same time?
Same thing. Only the first connected drive is recognised....
Marts
> Is the WD portable tak8ng too much power?? and does it have two USB
> plugs on the cable? are both plugged in?
It isn't, or so Device Manager tells me. And it only has the one cable.
I did have one of those, though. And it did the same thing, even with the two
cables connected.
Marts
> The 1TB must be 3.5", therefore needs a 12V or 240V supply external
> The WD, you didn't say 2.5" or 3.5". Assuming it's a 2.5" then it's
> USB Power problem, and probably need an external 5V supply.
The 1tb has its own PS which is in use. The port. one is powered off the cable.
Thing is, I can plug either one in by itself and they work fine. When the 2nd is
plugged in Windows pops up an alert about a hardware failure. I can't remember
the exact message now.
And the powered unit, the Seagate 1tb external HDD, is powered up first before I
plug the USB cable in, regardless of the sequence of them being connected.
And Device Manager doesn't report any power issues, which you can display and
which I did when trying to get this to work.
It's always been a problem with this particular computer. And a fresh install of
XP and the Asus motherboard drivers hasn't fixed it.
atec 77
machines hard drive or machine to machine across the network , it sounds
like the usb controller has issues with the combination , now does the
hardware realise they are both there or is it software ?
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>>> It seems that for some reason Windows (XP SP2) cannot have
>>> two USB based storage devices running at the same time.
>> Works fine here.
> As it does on a mate's PC who I'm trying to copy these files for
> (it's his port. HDD that I'm using).
So it cant be XP SP2.
>> You sure you didnt just stuff up the cabling to a front USB port ?
> Dunno how. You plug one end into the port, the other into the HDD...
No, I meant the cable inside the PC case, between
the motherboard and the front physical port.
>> What happens if you plug them both in at once to USB ports off the
>> motherboard at the back of the motherboard, no hubs used at all ?
> Not using any hubs. The ports at the front work fine
> for other peripherals and only one HDD connected.
Yes, but you can get the effect you are seeing with some bad internal cables.
> The ones on the back are on the motherboard's backplane or whatever it's called.
> Tried a different combo with no success.
Did you try with both drives on USB ports on the back that are soldered into the motherboard ?
That eliminates any cable.
son of a bitch
The max on any port is 500ma, laptops are lot sticter and usually crap
out about 450ma. If you have 8 Ports, it's not a total of 4Amps it's a
bit over 1AMP in total. On some PC's they don't show the current usage,
is probably due to generic drivers and not correct ones. And if it's
got VIA Chipsets then that's your problem.
Marts
> I expect the only quick solution is copy drive to drive across the
> machines hard drive or machine to machine across the network , it sounds
That's what I had to do. However, the PC's HDD having only half the required
space it took a while to do. Copy files to PC, swap HDDs, copy them back to
target drive. Delete files, repeat..
A couple of hundred gigs of data takes a while across a USB port...
> like the usb controller has issues with the combination , now does the
> hardware realise they are both there or is it software ?
Dunno. Just that Windows reports a hardware error when the second drive is
plugged in.
Marts
> The max on any port is 500ma, laptops are lot sticter and usually crap
> out about 450ma. If you have 8 Ports, it's not a total of 4Amps it's a
> bit over 1AMP in total. On some PC's they don't show the current usage,
> is probably due to generic drivers and not correct ones. And if it's
> got VIA Chipsets then that's your problem.
It's Intel based. Asus P5 GDI Pro board.
I wouldn't piss on VIA chipsets if they were in fire. Last one that we had was a
total piece of crap.
Marts
> >> You sure you didnt just stuff up the cabling to a front USB port ?
>
> > Dunno how. You plug one end into the port, the other into the HDD...
>
> No, I meant the cable inside the PC case, between
> the motherboard and the front physical port.
No. Installed by the computer builder (Computers and Parts Land in MEL).
> Did you try with both drives on USB ports on the back that are soldered into the motherboard ?
>
> That eliminates any cable.
Yes. Same result.
Evan
they already have drive letters map to network drives, or they have devices
mapped to letters via disk management, that often windows tries to load more
than one drive on the same drive letter. I have printouts of screenshots of
the various times I've found that problem.
"Gettamulla Tupya" <gettamu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0000n5dko10itkc53...@4ax.com...
Rod Speed
>> That eliminates any cable.
> Yes. Same result.
Looks like you mangled something, just like you always do.
I'd try a clean install of XP after imaging the current install.
Rob
Have you looked up microsoft as see if they have a Fix for the problem?
Run this fix can't hurt.
Marts
> Looks like you mangled something, just like you always do.
Crap. Just because you can't understand a problem doesn't mean that someone has
"mangled" something.
There's nothing to mangle, cockhead. It either works or it doesn't.
> I'd try a clean install of XP after imaging the current install.
It IS a clean install, as I said earlier.
And the problem has always existed ever since I've owned this computer.
Now, piss off if you don't have anything constructive to offer.
Marts
> Have you looked up microsoft as see if they have a Fix for the problem?
>
> Run this fix can't hurt.
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/817900
Unfortunately this is for an unresponsive USB port. But yes, I did try that.
Marts
> I would be interested to see if they work together in another machine ,
They do. I have a PCI based 4 port USB 2.0 adaptor in an aging IBM Netvista. I
plugged the two drives into it and copied the files from one HDD directly to the
other.
It's just this one PC that it doesn't work on.
And despite Rod Spittle's bullshit about "mangling" something, there is
something inherently wrong with the way the USB ports are working. Although they
can handle any number of other peripherals such as wireless mouse/keyboard, MFC
printer, webcam and a second printer.
Plug one external drive (portable HDD, external HDD, thumbdrive, memory card
reader) in, fine. Plug a second one in, no go...
Doesn't matter. I've used another computer to copy the files over. I'd just like
to know why this particular machine cannot handle two USB drives concurrently.
Thanks to everyone for their suggestions, though.
Marts
> On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 09:20:35 GMT, "Evan" <newsr...@evan.me> wrote:
>
> > You need to map the drives to different letters eg. WD -->M: and SeaG -->N:
> >
>
> Windoze does that automagically.
And in this case, the external Seagate was mapped as Drive H. The WD portable
drive, when I plugged it in after the Seagate, was mapped as Drive I.
atec 77
I am inclined to think either to much current drawn for the installed
chip set r the board is old and the chips are simply unable to operate
two drives which did happen years ago along wit things like single sided
ram.Good you got the job done .
Rob
Just a thought, something like this happened to another PC which was all
intel when you plugged in a usb device which was in this case a 2.5 ext
HDD. it sometimes blue screened or stopped. Had to reload the system
drivers for ???? can't remember off hand. But it was a software glitch.
What would happen if you did a repair install of the OS. Or put up W7 :)
send me an email.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Looks like you mangled something, just like you always do.
> Crap.
Have fun explaining why its always you with problems like this.
> Just because you can't understand a problem
Corse you understand it yourself, eh ?
> doesn't mean that someone has "mangled" something.
But when the same fool keeps getting something no one else does,
its very likely indeed that you do keep mangling anything you touch.
> There's nothing to mangle, cockhead. It either works or it doesn't.
Wrong, as always with the config of XP when you do stuff like let it get virus infected etc.
>> I'd try a clean install of XP after imaging the current install.
> It IS a clean install, as I said earlier.
Like hell you did.
> And the problem has always existed ever since I've owned this computer.
Pity you never even mentioned that crucial detail.
Bet you are actually lying about that.
> Now, piss off if you don't have anything constructive to offer.
Go and fuck yourself, again.
atec 77
> Marts wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>
>>> Looks like you mangled something, just like you always do.
>
>> Crap.
>
> Have fun explaining why its always you with problems like this.
and get stuck in the paper bag all to often
>
>> Just because you can't understand a problem
>
> Corse you understand it yourself, eh ?
with urls and quaotes
>
>> doesn't mean that someone has "mangled" something.
>
> But when the same fool keeps getting something no one else does,
contrary
> its very likely indeed that you do keep mangling anything you touch.
>
>> There's nothing to mangle, cockhead. It either works or it doesn't.
>
> Wrong, as always with the config of XP when you do stuff like let it get virus infected etc.
>
>>> I'd try a clean install of XP after imaging the current install.
>
>> It IS a clean install, as I said earlier.
>
> Like hell you did.
>
>> And the problem has always existed ever since I've owned this computer.
>
> Pity you never even mentioned that crucial detail.
now woddles are you still beating your wife and lending you bum to
other blokes ?
>
> Bet you are actually lying about that.
>
>> Now, piss off if you don't have anything constructive to offer.
>
> Go and fuck yourself, again.
another tanti of no substance ?
>
>
Marts
> I think you have all the relevant information through the suggestions
> I am inclined to think either to much current drawn for the installed
> chip set r the board is old and the chips are simply unable to operate
> two drives which did happen years ago along wit things like single sided
> ram.Good you got the job done .
This particular computer has never been able to run 2 external drives
simultaneously. But the Netvista is a Pentium 1.5 gig running PC133 RAM to give
you an idea of its vintage (its built in USB ports are 1.1, not 2.0.
But then, I was running the two HDDs off the PCI USB port card.
Whatever, the job's done. The mate has his videos back and everyone's happy.
Marts
> > Have fun explaining why its always you with problems like this.
> another false and fallacious claim eh woddles , shame you bullshite
> and get stuck in the paper bag all to often
That's Rod. Should really follow my own advice and ignore the prick.
> >>> I'd try a clean install of XP after imaging the current install.
> >
> >> It IS a clean install, as I said earlier.
> >
> > Like hell you did.
> yea he did you wanker
Maybe he missed those posts where I mentioned this.
> >> And the problem has always existed ever since I've owned this computer.
> >
> > Pity you never even mentioned that crucial detail.
> pity you have no comprehension
Maybe he missed those posts where I mentioned this.
But then he seems to miss a lot these days.
Marts
> What would happen if you did a repair install of the OS. Or put up W7 :)
The machine was rebuilt (OS-wise) about 2 months ago. Prior to that it ran an XP
Pro install for about 3-4 years. Before that, when I bought it, it ran Win98SE.
And at no time during these periods was I able to connect more than one external
drive, whether it be a thumbdrive, memory card reader or external/portable HDD
unit.
Marts
> I'm not a betting man, but if I was my money would be on the motherboard
> (and possibly just the USB headers).
Probably the former. If there was a problem with the headers (by that you mean
the connectors?) then it would show up with other peripherals. Further, the two
HDDs wouldn't even work when plugged into the back ports which are soldered
directly to the motherboard.
Marts
> > Just because you can't understand a problem
>
> Corse you understand it yourself, eh ?
I'm not the one trying to hold the "superior" position of knowledge here.
Of course I don't understand why the computer is doing this. That's why I
started this thread.
> > doesn't mean that someone has "mangled" something.
>
> But when the same fool keeps getting something no one else does,
> its very likely indeed that you do keep mangling anything you touch.
I see. Spouting yet more unsubstantiated bullshit from your arse repetitively
doesn't somehow make it true.
> > There's nothing to mangle, cockhead. It either works or it doesn't.
>
> Wrong, as always with the config of XP when you do stuff like let it get virus infected etc.
Yet more vague generalities. Pity that you're long on it but short on substance.
> > Now, piss off if you don't have anything constructive to offer.
>
> Go and fuck yourself, again.
Sorree. You don't get to tell anyone to fuck themselves. You're totally and
utterly irrelevant, what with all that puerile outpourings that a 2 yo can leave
for dead...
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote...
>>> Just because you can't understand a problem
>> Corse you understand it yourself, eh ?
> I'm not the one trying to hold the "superior" position of knowledge here.
Its obvious to everyone with even half a clue that everything you touch turns to do shit.
There might just be a reason for that.
> Of course I don't understand why the computer is doing this.
> That's why I started this thread.
So much for that puerile shit of yours now right at the top.
>>> doesn't mean that someone has "mangled" something.
>> But when the same fool keeps getting something no one else does,
>> its very likely indeed that you do keep mangling anything you touch.
> I see.
Obvious lie. You wanked yourself completely blind long ago.
<reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
>>> There's nothing to mangle, cockhead. It either works or it doesn't.
>> Wrong, as always with the config of XP when you do stuff like let it get virus infected etc.
> Yet more vague generalities.
Everyone can see for themselves that you are lying, as always.
Nothing vague about that, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
<reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
>>> Now, piss off if you don't have anything constructive to offer.
>> Go and fuck yourself, again.
> Sorree. You don't get to tell anyone to fuck themselves.
Just did, fuckwit child.
<reams of your puerile derivative shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
Rod Speed
>>>>> I'd try a clean install of XP after imaging the current install.
>>>> It IS a clean install, as I said earlier.
>>> Like hell you did.
> Maybe he missed those posts where I mentioned this.
You never said that in the post I replied to, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
>>>> And the problem has always existed ever since I've owned this> computer.
>>> Pity you never even mentioned that crucial detail.
> Maybe he missed those posts where I mentioned this.
You never said that in the post I replied to, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
Marts
> > Maybe he missed those posts where I mentioned this.
>
> You never said that in the post I replied to, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
I mentioned it in other posts. You should pay more attention. Saves wasting eggs
and having to clean it off your face.
> <reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
ROFL from the guy who prefaced his quoted reply with "Farts"...
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Farts wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Farts wrote
>>>>>> I'd try a clean install of XP after imaging the current install.
>>>>> It IS a clean install, as I said earlier.
>>>> Like hell you did.
>>> Maybe he missed those posts where I mentioned this.
>> You never said that in the post I replied to, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
> I mentioned it in other posts.
Pity that was after my reply, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
Marts
> >> You never said that in the post I replied to, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
>
> > I mentioned it in other posts.
>
> Pity that was after my reply, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
So?
And it doesn't mean that I'm lying. Stop trying to obfuscate your way out of
that hole of yours.
Fact remains that I did mention all the pertinent facts, particularly where
others asked specific questions which required more info.
Anyway, why don't you FOAD already?
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote...
>> Farts farted
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Farts farted
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>> Farts farted
>>>>>>>> I'd try a clean install of XP after imaging the current install.
>>>>>>> It IS a clean install, as I said earlier.
>>>>>> Like hell you did.
>>>>> Maybe he missed those posts where I mentioned this.
>>>> You never said that in the post I replied to, you pathetic excuse for a lying
>>>>> I mentioned it in other posts.
>>>> Pity that was after my reply, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
> So?
So I couldnt have allowed for that in that post, fuckwit.
Marts
> > <reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
>
> Never ever could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag, eh woddles?
That's Spittle for you. The old coot is harmless (and clueless). Should just
ignore the prick.