Working with BING
ms
Date: 8 Oct 2006 19:17:10 GMT
From: ms <m...@invalid.com>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
ms <m...@invalid.com> wrote in news:4osu92F...@individual.net:
> "PCR" <pcr...@netzero.net> wrote in news:uIugB5v6GHA.2364
> @TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
>
>>
>> But what does this line mean, then? Has it changed...?...
>>
>> Primary Master User 7921 MB ....LBA
>>
>> ... If so, to what? If it now says "Auto" there, does it still say
>> just 7921 MB? Is it still LBA? Could be you also need to delete those
>> empty partitions you've got before the BIOS will detect the hard
>> drive right. But I just don't know, not for sure.
>>
> Good news
In my BING screen "Work with Partitions", I created 4 FAT32 partitions.
They completely use the 10 GB hard drive, no free space.
The first 3 are listed in the screen with names including ANP, the last
one is MBR Entry 3. There is no indication the first partition is active.
Does BING do that automatically?
When I created the last partition, it went OK. When it completed
formatting and error checking, looked OK but now at the top of the screen
is the legend "errors exist". I looked in Properties in each partition,
no error notation.
Comment?
ms
ms
This post should read:
Bill in Co.
> Subject: Re: Everest Report
> Date: 8 Oct 2006 19:17:10 GMT
> From: ms <m...@invalid.com>
> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
>
> ms <m...@invalid.com> wrote in news:4osu92F...@individual.net:
>
>> "PCR" <pcr...@netzero.net> wrote in news:uIugB5v6GHA.2364
>> @TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
>>
>>>
>>> But what does this line mean, then? Has it changed...?...
>>>
>>> Primary Master User 7921 MB ....LBA
>>>
>>> ... If so, to what? If it now says "Auto" there, does it still say
>>> just 7921 MB? Is it still LBA? Could be you also need to delete those
>>> empty partitions you've got before the BIOS will detect the hard
>>> drive right. But I just don't know, not for sure.
>>>
>> Good news
> In my BING screen "Work with Partitions", I created 4 FAT32 partitions.
> They completely use the 10 GB hard drive, no free space.
>
> The first 3 are listed in the screen with names including ANP, the last
> one is MBR Entry 3. There is no indication the first partition is active.
> Does BING do that automatically?
I don't think so, but I'm not positive. But there is a "set active"
option or button, which I have had to use when cloning my hard drive to a
second (backup) one. Normally the second drive HD1 is NOT set active, since
the first one (HD0) already is. (I'm talking about booting off the floppy
in maintenance mode).
ms
BIOS screen on bootup,
Primary Master LBA, UDMA 66, 10247 MB
Standard Cmos Setup screen:
Primary Master Auto
Slave None
Secondary Master Auto
Slave None
IDE Autodetect:
2 (Y) 10241 1245 cyl .... LBA mode
1 10248 19856 Normal
3 10248 2482 Large
When I ran the Fujitsu diag, (it always ran fine before), it opened and
detects a non-Fujitsu hard drive! It won't run, and the only difference
is the BIOS is set to Auto.
Two issues:
a. BING says errors present, doesn't show them.
b. now the Fujitsu util does not detect the Fujitsu hard drive.
ms
Gary S. Terhune
Active, and yes, I forgot to mention that in BING you do that in "View MBR",
but I *think* the first Primary you create is automatically set Active by
BING if no Active partition already exists.
Remember that you only need to use a Primary Partition for OS installations.
Use an Extended Partition with Volumes for partitions that will be used for
data storage only (or TEMP partition or whatever.)
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"Bill in Co." <not_rea...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:uma4Vex6...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
PCR
news:4ot3d9F...@individual.net...
I begin to suspect the prior owner limited the size of that hard drive
purposely because it had errors he couldn't fix. I would run that
Fujitsu diagnostic utility on it, & see what it says. Delete that bad
partition first. Try creating it again, afterwards, if the utility
reports it did a repair.
Absolutely, as Colorado said, only one partition per hard drive
should/can be marked Active. It should be a Primary, too. The Active one
is the one that will boot to Windows.
Gary S. Terhune
MBR". Then go back and create new partitions.
I'm concerned that a drive overlay may exist. I haven't been following the
previous mega-thread except in a very cursory manner. Are you certain that
no overlay exists (you'd probably use the drive manufacturer's own tools to
determine this and remove the overlay if present.)
I've never seen that ANP notation in BING and don't know what it means. In
my experience, MBR Entry ## is the usual label that's applied to all Primary
Partitions BING creates. You might want to check out BING Support,
especially the BING forums.
http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/support.html
There is a paragraph on that page called "TeraByte Sponsored Newsgroups".
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4ot3oqF...@individual.net...
Gary S. Terhune
Select the partition and then click on Resize. The first thing it will do is
check the partition. It's only a fast check, and it won't tell you anything
about the nature of the error(s) found, if any... I *think*... , and it
won't fix anything. For that you'll need to run a real disk checking tool.
Personally, I'd leave the partitions the way they are, then use some disk
checking tool on them, and if bad sectors are found, toss that HD into the
trash -- unless this is only a play machine and you're willing to risk
losing everything on it when the disk continues to go bad, and it *will*
continue to go bad.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4ot78eF...@individual.net...
Bill in Co.
Thanks for the corrections, Gary, my bad!
PCR
Well, that certainly looks good now, getting the full hard drive. I was
overjoyed! There certainly are a huge number of screens in there,
though, & I must wonder whether something else is being missed. I've
posted the older settings below for someone to comment.
| When I ran the Fujitsu diag, (it always ran fine before), it opened
and
| detects a non-Fujitsu hard drive! It won't run, and the only
difference
| is the BIOS is set to Auto.
Why! Why! Why! BIOS appears to have auto-detected the correct amount of
GB for a...
Fujitsu MPE 3102AT 10 GB
..., which by Google search is 10.2 GB. What was the utility that said
it was a Fujitsu in the first place? Maybe run that again to get a new
report.
We were so close to getting the full amount! The proper manufacturer's
hard drive diagnostic utility is supposed to correct the errors-- not
disown the drive!
| Two issues:
| a. BING says errors present, doesn't show them.
|
| b. now the Fujitsu util does not detect the Fujitsu hard drive.
|
| ms
....Quote older BIOS settings...........
Standard CMOS Setup
Primary Master User 7921 MB ....LBA
Primary Slave None 0
Secondary Master Auto 0 Auto
Secondary Slave None 0
BIOS Features
Hard disk boot from Pri-IDE-M
HDD Smart Capability Enabled
Power Management
HDD Power Down Disabled
Integrated Peripherals
?? IDE Channel 10. 11 Enabled
IDE Prefetch mode Enabled
IDE HDD Block mode Enabled
Primary Master P10 auto
Primary Master UDMA auto
?? - can't read my own writing!
HDD Autodetect
Select Primary Master
Options Sector
2(Y) 10241..... 63 LBA
1 10248......63 Normal
3 10248 63 Large
......EOQ ms's older BIOS settings..........
ms
news:uC0M2Ay6...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
> Please delete all partitions. Then look in "View MBR" and click on
> "Standard MBR". Then go back and create new partitions.
>
Done
> I'm concerned that a drive overlay may exist. I haven't been following
> the previous mega-thread except in a very cursory manner. Are you
> certain that no overlay exists
I have no knowledge, but the drive capacity jumped from 7.5 GB to about 10
GB due to a bios change, don't know if that effects what you said.
(you'd probably use the drive
> manufacturer's own tools to determine this and remove the overlay if
> present.)
>
That's a strange one. Now, even will all partitions removed, free space =
97XX MB, the Fujitsu diag util that did run fine, now still refuses to
regognize the hard drive. So it can't check the hard drive, but before, it
scanned the entire drive and checked OK several times.
> I've never seen that ANP notation in BING and don't know what it
> means. In my experience, MBR Entry ## is the usual label that's
> applied to all Primary Partitions BING creates. You might want to
> check out BING Support, especially the BING forums.
> http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/support.html
>
> There is a paragraph on that page called "TeraByte Sponsored
> Newsgroups".
>
I recreated new partitions,
Each partition was created entirely normal, in each, the drive checked for
errors OK. Each one is created with MBR label, but the first name does not
look like a Primary partition? Here is what I see, then will finish the
comment.
JES IBR ANP-0 Partition 2494 MB Fat32
JES IBR ANP-1 Partition E 2494 MB Fat32
MBR Entry 2 Partition E 2494 MB Fat32
The last partition is the right size, but should have left about 2400MB
free space, like it did before, for a 4th partition. It did not. And as
soon as it was created, the "errors exist" legend appeared.
Comment on above results?- before I go to that newsgroup.
Up to now, I had no indication there's anything wrong with this hard drive.
ms
ms
More data, I ran a DOS version of Aida, a system analysis utility.
Its says:
BIOS is Award ver. 4.51PG
The first hd partition is active.
Hard drive is described as BUJIP5Q IPA3102AP, this was the reported
Fujitsu model number before.
Capacity 9773 MB EIDE
9767 MB BIOS
It shows 3 partitions, 4th is empty.
ms
Gary S. Terhune
http://www.fis.fujitsu.com/support/disk/software/fjdt_v6.61.zip
Note, the version is 6.61. When you say it worked before, was that before
you used the LBA setting in BIOS? Has this BIOS been upgraded to the latest
firmware? (I'm sure there are questions here that were answered in that BIG
thread, but it got soooo confusing... Bear with me.)
Not sure what's going on with BING, but if it doesn't see the full size of
the disk... Have you gone and changed anything in BIOS today? I have to
think that if LBA-enabled is required to access the full capacity, but
you're getting these weird errors with LBA enabled (and the Fujitsu diags
think the disk is fine with no LBA enabled) then either your BIOS is goofy
or the disk itself is goofy. BING reporting error(s) and this new anomaly of
BING only being able to create approx. the same amount of partition as it
would be without LBA enabled...
You see what I'm getting at? Something is wrong, and it can only be BIOS or
the disk itself. I'm tend to think it's the BIOS, frankly. If you've
recently flashed it, perhaps it was the wrong upgrade? Hope you wrote down
the original BIOS string.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4otdjaF...@individual.net...
ms
> You used this one from Fujitsu?
> http://www.fis.fujitsu.com/support/disk/software/fjdt_v6.61.zip
>
> Note, the version is 6.61.
Yes
When you say it worked before, was that
> before you used the LBA setting in BIOS?
I believe the LBA setting was unchanged? I changed User to Auto in
Primary Master, before that the fujitsu utl worked.
Has this BIOS been upgraded
> to the latest firmware? (I'm sure there are questions here that were
> answered in that BIG thread, but it got soooo confusing... Bear with
> me.)
No, no upgrade, and I don't plan that.
>
> Not sure what's going on with BING, but if it doesn't see the full
> size of the disk...
Except just today, after the BIOS change above, and I deleted the old
partitions, it showed the 9767 (?) OK.
Have you gone and changed anything in BIOS today?
See above.
> I have to think that if LBA-enabled is required to access the full
> capacity, but you're getting these weird errors with LBA enabled (and
> the Fujitsu diags think the disk is fine with no LBA enabled) then
> either your BIOS is goofy or the disk itself is goofy. BING reporting
> error(s) and this new anomaly of BING only being able to create
> approx. the same amount of partition as it would be without LBA
> enabled...
>
> You see what I'm getting at? Something is wrong, and it can only be
> BIOS or the disk itself. I'm tend to think it's the BIOS, frankly. If
> you've recently flashed it, perhaps it was the wrong upgrade? Hope you
> wrote down the original BIOS string.
>
I know what I did, PCR is aware of it in the last thread,
----
BIOS screen on bootup,
| Primary Master LBA, UDMA 66, 10247 MB
|
| Standard Cmos Setup screen:
| Primary Master Auto
| Slave None
| Secondary Master Auto
| Slave None
|
| IDE Autodetect:
| 2 (Y) 10241 1245 cyl .... LBA mode
|
| 1 10248 19856 Normal
|
| 3 10248 2482 Large
Well, that certainly looks good now, getting the full hard drive. I was
overjoyed! There certainly are a huge number of screens in there,
though, & I must wonder whether something else is being missed. I've
posted the older settings below for someone to comment.
----
How does this relate to your comment on LBA?
Also, in your other reply, Resize, I click on a partition, click Resize,
get a screen freeze when it starts checking for errors. This happened
twice, in DOS ?????
Pretty tired so I will check in tomorrow.
And thanks for the help, Gary.
ms
Franc Zabkar
and composed:
>ms <m...@invalid.com> wrote in news:4otdjaF...@individual.net:
>
>> "Gary S. Terhune" <grys...@mvps.org> wrote in
>> news:uC0M2Ay6...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> Please delete all partitions. Then look in "View MBR" and click on
>>> "Standard MBR". Then go back and create new partitions.
>>>
>> Done
>>
>>> I'm concerned that a drive overlay may exist. I haven't been
>>> following the previous mega-thread except in a very cursory manner.
>>> Are you certain that no overlay exists
IIRC the OP performed an Fdisk /MBR from a startup diskette. That
should have trashed any overlay.
Did Aida really return those ID strings?
Shouldn't ...
BUJIP5Q IPA3102AP
... really be ...
FUJITSU MPE3102AT ? (or MPE3102AP ?)
If so, then it is no wonder that a Fujitsu diagnostic doesn't
recognise a "BUJIP5Q" (or was it BUJIPSQ ?) hard disc.
If you analyse the ASCII bit patterns for each of the errant
characters, you will see that they all differ in bit 2
B 42h F 46h
P 50h T 54h
Q 51h U 55h
I 49h M 4Dh
A 41h E 45h
I'd suspect that there is something wrong with your IDE cable, or your
HD's or motherboard's IDE connector, probably at pin 13 or pin 8.
>Capacity 9773 MB EIDE
>
> 9767 MB BIOS
>
>It shows 3 partitions, 4th is empty.
>
>ms
I think the difference of 6MB may represent the reserved last cylinder
plus any "surplus" sectors.
- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
Franc Zabkar
and composed:
>I recreated new partitions,
>Each partition was created entirely normal, in each, the drive checked for
>errors OK. Each one is created with MBR label, but the first name does not
>look like a Primary partition? Here is what I see, then will finish the
>comment.
>
>JES IBR ANP-0 Partition 2494 MB Fat32
>JES IBR ANP-1 Partition E 2494 MB Fat32
>MBR Entry 2 Partition E 2494 MB Fat32
More problems with bit 3? (see my other post)
IBR = MBR ?
ANP = ENT ?
JES = NEW ?
Gary S. Terhune
people repeating gobs of irrelevant data and going over and over the same
crap and diverging into all kinds of archania, entirely losing sight of the
GOAL in the process, I'm outta here. Not referring to this particular post,
Franc, just taking this opportunity to make that comment in general. This
means you, MEB, and you too, PCR. I'd like to help MS *fix* the problem, not
just chew the gristle.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"Franc Zabkar" <fza...@iinternode.on.net> wrote in message
news:31bji2toit9t0d7hl...@4ax.com...
real@hotmail.com MEB
when he ran the Maxtor tool.
He has also fdisked and formatted numerous times with the improper disk CHS.
Correct that and he has a chance of using the disk.
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/
BLOG http://peoplescounsel.spaces.live.com/ Public Notice or the "real
world"
"Most people, sometime in their lives, stumble across truth.
Most jump up, brush themselves off, and hurry on about their business as if
nothing had happen." Winston Churchill
Or to put it another way:
Morpheus can offer you the two pills;
but only you can choose whether you take the red pill or the blue one.
_______________
"Gary S. Terhune" <grys...@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:%23KKvlk0...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
real@hotmail.com MEB
Fine then I'll tell you all one more time he has corrupted the disk code
NOTE: this is the only post I will place in this discussion.
Good Luck
"MEB" <meb@not re...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OX28mS16...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| | > - Franc Zabkar
| | > --
| | > Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
| |
| |
|
|
Franc Zabkar
put finger to keyboard and composed:
> Add to first sentence:
> Fine then I'll tell you all one more time he has corrupted the disk code
> when he ran the Maxtor tool ...
See page 105 and 106 of the Fujitsu Product Manual for the MPE3xxxAT
series:
http://www.fis.fujitsu.com/support/disk/manuals/PB14_PM1.PDF
Table 5.7 lists the drive's response to the diagnostic command. If the
drive's EEPROM was corrupted, as would be the case if it was
misreporting its model number, then the drive would return a ROM
checksum error which means it would be dead.
Table 5.7 Diagnostic code
Code Result of diagnostic
X‘01’ No error detected.
X‘03’ Data buffer compare error
X‘05’ ROM sum check error
X‘8x’ Failure of device 1
> ... "with the incorrect BIOS setting".
The manufacturer's diagnostic would most likely bypass the BIOS when
accessing the HD. In fact that's what overlays do.
>NOTE: this is the only post I will place in this discussion.
Likewise.
>Good Luck
I think it's time the OP called in a professional. Otherwise, if he's
willing to open up the box, I would have him test the IDE cable by
using different combinations of the connectors, eg use the middle
connector instead of the end one, and swap the motherboard end for the
drive end. Oh, and jumper the drive as Master rather than Cable
Select.
If the OP has a CD-ROM/DVD-ROM drive on a secondary IDE port, then he
could swap the two cables.
Jeff Richards
possibly RAM errors.
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4otf45F...@individual.net...
> snip <
dadiOH
> We were so close to getting the full amount! The proper
> manufacturer's hard drive diagnostic utility is supposed to correct
> the errors-- not disown the drive!
That drive has been fdisked/formatted/binged so many times that
Fujitsu doesn't recognize it as one of their own. Or maybe they just
don't want the responsibility :)
--
dadiOH
____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
ms
> You used this one from Fujitsu?
> http://www.fis.fujitsu.com/support/disk/software/fjdt_v6.61.zip
>
> Note, the version is 6.61. When you say it worked before, was that
> before you used the LBA setting in BIOS? Has this BIOS been upgraded
> to the latest firmware? (I'm sure there are questions here that were
> answered in that BIG thread, but it got soooo confusing... Bear with
> me.)
>
> Not sure what's going on with BING, but if it doesn't see the full
> size of the disk... Have you gone and changed anything in BIOS today?
> I have to think that if LBA-enabled is required to access the full
> capacity, but you're getting these weird errors with LBA enabled (and
> the Fujitsu diags think the disk is fine with no LBA enabled) then
> either your BIOS is goofy or the disk itself is goofy. BING reporting
> error(s) and this new anomaly of BING only being able to create
> approx. the same amount of partition as it would be without LBA
> enabled...
>
> You see what I'm getting at? Something is wrong, and it can only be
> BIOS or the disk itself. I'm tend to think it's the BIOS, frankly. If
> you've recently flashed it, perhaps it was the wrong upgrade? Hope you
> wrote down the original BIOS string.
>
I'm sorry you're "out of here", because your post recalled something. I
was getting better results until I changed User to Auto.
Just a guess, but if as you suggested there was an overlay put in
before, in User, the partitions seemed to go Ok in the 7.5 GB, the
Fujitsu util worked, etc. After I set it to Auto, the entire capacity
showed up, but BING started acting odd and the diag util stopped working.
Hope you can comment on this.
Some of the advice is too complex for me, so I may try going back to
User, can't be much worse off.
ms
ms
Franc, the Fujitsu util always did report that, but now it doesn't work,
and Aida did report what I noted, Fujitsu was not mentioned but part of
the model number is there.
> If so, then it is no wonder that a Fujitsu diagnostic doesn't
> recognise a "BUJIP5Q" (or was it BUJIPSQ ?) hard disc.
>
> If you analyse the ASCII bit patterns for each of the errant
> characters, you will see that they all differ in bit 2
>
> B 42h F 46h
> P 50h T 54h
> Q 51h U 55h
> I 49h M 4Dh
> A 41h E 45h
>
> I'd suspect that there is something wrong with your IDE cable, or your
> HD's or motherboard's IDE connector, probably at pin 13 or pin 8.
>
IMO not here, the computer had worked, I installed the OS, nothing has
happened to the internal cables since then. I know anythings possible,
but I really doubt it.
ms
ms
> Fine then I'll tell you all one more time he has corrupted the disk
> code when he ran the Maxtor tool.
Yes, I certainly think that happened. Why the Maxtor util did that to this
hard drive I don't know.
> He has also fdisked and formatted numerous times with the improper
> disk CHS. Correct that and he has a chance of using the disk.
>
Improper CHS?
If fdisk and format wipe previous contents off the disk, why does it matter
how many times I use them?
Isn't it a fresh start each time?
ms
ms
Thanks, Franc, various things to think about above.
ms
Ben Myers
Ben
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4ov2tnF...@individual.net...
dadiOH
> "MEB" <meb@not re...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:OX28mS16...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>
>> Fine then I'll tell you all one more time he has corrupted the disk
>> code when he ran the Maxtor tool.
>
> Yes, I certainly think that happened. Why the Maxtor util did that
> to this hard drive I don't know.
Maybe because it was a Maxtor program and not one from the drive
manufacturer. Think maybe?
________________
>> He has also fdisked and formatted numerous times with the improper
>> disk CHS. Correct that and he has a chance of using the disk.
>>
>
> Improper CHS?
Cylinders/Heads/Sectors. Which, in aggregate, define capacity
________________
> If fdisk and format wipe previous contents off the disk...
<snip>
Because they *don't* wipe off the previous contents. Not the info
that was put there when the manufacturer did a true, complete format
of the drive prior to its sale. Note that that sort of format is
totally different from the wimpy thing that passes for "format" in DOS
:)
_______________
> ... why does it matter how many times I use them?
If the CHS was wrong it is possible that fdisk/format (BING too) were
bad boys and wrote where they shouldn't.
ms
@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
dadiOH, thanks for the info,
I ran the Maxtor diagnostic only because of advice in this ng, because
people here were interested in my missing hard drive space. No one knew,
I'm sure, the damage it could cause just in Scan mode, as I stated that
before.
I don't appreciate your last comment in the other thread and answered it.
Try to either be helpful or keep your other comments to yourself. Maybe
someday you'll have medical issues and understand.
ms
Gary S. Terhune
capacity than it should, then that's not right, regardless of whether it
"works". If the disk has errors when capacity is reported correctly, then
something is wrong with the hardware. Either BIOS is in need of an upgrade,
or something is wrong with the disk, cable, controller, whatever. If you
want to use the disk with a reduced capacity, and you feel comfortable that
your data will be safe, that's your choice. Personally, I'd want to test
everything and figure out what's wrong. Franc, and now Jeff, have suggested
possible problems based upon data that you've reported. I'd trust them to
know their ways around these kinds of issues. Something is wrong, and you
can either figure out what that is or use the "workaround" of setting BIOS
to User. Myself, I wouldn't build a Windows system on goofy hardware. Not
worth the effort.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4ov2gjF...@individual.net...
Gary S. Terhune
interpret to be Read Only. How in blazes would that damage the disk? (Please
keep your answer to a single short paragraph, perhaps with references that
back up your claim.)
As you say, with the proper CHS (which BIOS apparently gets right when it is
set to Auto, as evidenced by reporting correct capacity) FDISK, BING, etc.,
should work correctly. They don't. The issue is that those things only
*appear* to work correctly *if* the BIOS is set to User (with what CHS
settings, I don't know) and then capacity is reported incorrectly. You see
the problem?
MS will get no farther with this issue until he's willing to open the box
and do some real diagnostics work. Something is wrong with the hardware, and
very possibly not the disk itself. More likely the cable or controller. Only
by swapping the current arrangement(s) to others can he narrow down the
possibilities. Even if the disk *is* FUBAR, hands-on swapping is the only
way he'll be able to confirm that. I would think that the telltale that
things are actually progressing is when BIOS reports the capacity correctly
*and* the Fujitsu tools recognize it and can be used on it, and the results
make sense, whether the disk is found to be bad or not.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"MEB" <meb@not re...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OX28mS16...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
PCR
news:uc9pFv56...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| PCR wrote:
|
| > We were so close to getting the full amount! The proper
| > manufacturer's hard drive diagnostic utility is supposed to correct
| > the errors-- not disown the drive!
|
| That drive has been fdisked/formatted/binged so many times that
| Fujitsu doesn't recognize it as one of their own. Or maybe they just
| don't want the responsibility :)
I GUESS it could be that. Looks like other good brains have reengaged
the issue, & I will step aside a bit. I made that decision even BEFORE
reading Terhune's gentle admonition...!...
"And if this thread gets like the other one, with
people repeating gobs of irrelevant data and going over and over the
same
crap and diverging into all kinds of archania, entirely losing sight of
the
GOAL in the process, I'm outta here. Not referring to this particular
post,
Franc, just taking this opportunity to make that comment in general.
This
means you, MEB, and you too, PCR. I'd like to help MS *fix* the problem,
not
just chew the gristle."
BUT it was my persistence that finally recovered 2.5 GB on that hard
drive. I do not believe going back to 7.5 GB is the answer. There were
partitioning problems even then. Remember, ms, you could not create 1
Primary Partition & 2 Logical Partitions, EVEN at the smaller size-- in
FDISK or in BING.
ms: Don't answer. Stick with the others a while. Zabcar is definitely
onto something with that "bit" theory.
Franc Zabkar
<grys...@mvps.org> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>From what I read, MS used the Maxtor utility to "scan only" which I
>interpret to be Read Only. How in blazes would that damage the disk? (Please
>keep your answer to a single short paragraph, perhaps with references that
>back up your claim.)
>
>As you say, with the proper CHS (which BIOS apparently gets right when it is
>set to Auto, as evidenced by reporting correct capacity) FDISK, BING, etc.,
>should work correctly. They don't. The issue is that those things only
>*appear* to work correctly *if* the BIOS is set to User (with what CHS
>settings, I don't know) and then capacity is reported incorrectly. You see
>the problem?
>
>MS will get no farther with this issue until he's willing to open the box
>and do some real diagnostics work. Something is wrong with the hardware, and
>very possibly not the disk itself. More likely the cable or controller. Only
>by swapping the current arrangement(s) to others can he narrow down the
>possibilities. Even if the disk *is* FUBAR, hands-on swapping is the only
>way he'll be able to confirm that. I would think that the telltale that
>things are actually progressing is when BIOS reports the capacity correctly
>*and* the Fujitsu tools recognize it and can be used on it, and the results
>make sense, whether the disk is found to be bad or not.
Sorry, I just have to respond.
Firstly let me say that I have experienced this exact same problem,
except that in my case the model number was misspelt during the POST.
I narrowed down the problem by interchanging the connectors in the IDE
cable. At the risk of introducing a red herring, I also had this
curious problem which produced a similar symptom:
IMO, the Maxtor utility could *not* have damaged the Fujitsu drive,
even during the writing phase. A *real* low level format hasn't been
possible for 15 years (today's LLFs are bogus), and the OP certainly
did not flash the drive's firmware with Maxtor code, assuming that
were even possible. In any case a failure in the drive's firmware,
where the model number is probably stored (the only other place is on
the platters) would be reported by the drive's self test as a ROM
checksum error. A failure in the drive's buffer RAM *should* be
similarly detected during the self test, although memory diagnostics
are not infallible.
A possible reason why the drive's capacity is reported correctly could
be that the failing bit (bit 2) is actually 0 when it is meant to be
0, or it could be that the result of a dropped is insignificant. For
example, a capacity of 10241 MB equates to 13134A1h logical blocks. If
bit 2 was dropped for the high order byte of each 16-bit word, then
the Identify Drive command would report 13130A1h which amounts to a
difference of only 400h sectors. This represents a loss in capacity of
only 512KB, which would go unnoticed, except when BING checks the size
of the last partition.
ms
> If User setting in BIOS results in the disk appearing to have much
> less capacity than it should, then that's not right, regardless of
> whether it "works". If the disk has errors when capacity is reported
> correctly, then something is wrong with the hardware. Either BIOS is
> in need of an upgrade, or something is wrong with the disk, cable,
> controller, whatever. If you want to use the disk with a reduced
> capacity, and you feel comfortable that your data will be safe, that's
> your choice. Personally, I'd want to test everything and figure out
> what's wrong. Franc, and now Jeff, have suggested possible problems
> based upon data that you've reported. I'd trust them to know their
> ways around these kinds of issues. Something is wrong, and you can
> either figure out what that is or use the "workaround" of setting BIOS
> to User. Myself, I wouldn't build a Windows system on goofy hardware.
> Not worth the effort.
>
I hear you, but it seems some of the advice set me back, now whatever
space I can use on that hard drive will be beneficial.
Once W98Se is operating, I can run programs to tell me quality of the
hard drive. Maybe I'm wrong, but I wonder if your drive overlay idea
explains a lot of whats been going on.
Anyway, I won't expect any answers so will forge ahead and see how things
go.
Thanks to all for the help in both threads.
ms
ms
> From what I read, MS used the Maxtor utility to "scan only" which I
> interpret to be Read Only. How in blazes would that damage the disk?
> (Please keep your answer to a single short paragraph, perhaps with
> references that back up your claim.)
I didnt say it "damaged" the disk, I said it corrupted the OS.; I ran it
in Scan mode only, it should have just read the drive, it seemed to run
Ok. Since it ran in DOS, I rebooted and my W98SE OS was not working
anymore. The Maxtor diagnostic never should have done that.
ms
Gary S. Terhune
I agree, it shouldn't have done that. But I've been the victim of
coincidental circumstances *soooo* many times in computers that I'm not
willing to say that just because your system was unusable after you ran the
Maxtor app that it immediately follows that the Maxtor app was the cause of
the problem. Even if it *contributed* to the failure, it's likely the real
problem was just lurking and only required the Maxtor app to exercize it
past the breaking point.
Forgive me if I ask questions that have already been answered, but did the
drive report the correct capacity before all this began? What prompted you
to use the Maxtor utility, and when you say that Windows was corrupted, how
do you mean? Did the disk start reporting errors? What?
Honest, everything you've reported thus far (that I've read) suggests
hardware failure, either in the disk itself or the cable, controller, etc.
Only decent way of diagnosing that kind of thing is to swap things around
physically.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4p08uuF...@individual.net...
ms
> I was responding to what MEB claimed, not what you said.
>
> I agree, it shouldn't have done that. But I've been the victim of
> coincidental circumstances *soooo* many times in computers that I'm
> not willing to say that just because your system was unusable after
> you ran the Maxtor app that it immediately follows that the Maxtor app
> was the cause of the problem. Even if it *contributed* to the failure,
> it's likely the real problem was just lurking and only required the
> Maxtor app to exercize it past the breaking point.
>
> Forgive me if I ask questions that have already been answered, but did
> the drive report the correct capacity before all this began? What
> prompted you to use the Maxtor utility, and when you say that Windows
> was corrupted, how do you mean? Did the disk start reporting errors?
> What?
>
> Honest, everything you've reported thus far (that I've read) suggests
> hardware failure, either in the disk itself or the cable, controller,
> etc. Only decent way of diagnosing that kind of thing is to swap
> things around physically.
>
I save your posts, they are always informative.
Before I answer the above, please let me mention progress "of a sort":
Yesterday, I changed in BIOS Primary Master Auto back to User. Probably
not helpful, will change back. But anyway. Then I booted up in DOS, see
C/D/E and F is the CD drive- this is what I wanted after all. I then
formatted C/D/E, all seemed ok. Then I started OS install. It first ran
scandisk, it found and fixed some errors in C and D, FATs do not match,
lost clusters, - bad, I know. It fixed those errors quickly and when it
got to E, lots of errors. So I went into BING, deleted E, recreated E.
The only good news is the resulting display:
IS-0 Partition 2494 MB FAT32
IEP-1 Partition 2494 MB FAT32
MBR Entry 2 2598 MB FAT32
2178 MB Free Space
No "errors present" legend.
IIRC, you said this is the normal display you expect. That was the only
good news. I left the free space, solve other issues first.
I rebooted and started OS install again, but again scandisk found/fixed a
few errors in C and D, found lots of errors in E, a repeat. When BING
scanned each partition for errors, it found nothing.
With the above, let me answer your questions.
> Forgive me if I ask questions that have already been answered, but did
> the drive report the correct capacity before all this began?
My memory is not good these days, but in that long thread, IIRC, Fdisk
Status reported a total of about 7500 MB, while a BIOS screen I reported
showed 10.4 GB, the Everest report listed a Fujitsu hard drive that
speced at 10 GB. But in fdisk and later BING, the total was 7.5 GB
What
> prompted you to use the Maxtor utility,
Advice to run a diagnostic to verify the disk capacity.
and when you say that Windows
> was corrupted, how do you mean? Did the disk start reporting errors?
> What?
>
IIRC, windows would not boot up. No errors, just the usual signs IMO when
it's not working.
> Honest, everything you've reported thus far (that I've read) suggests
> hardware failure, either in the disk itself or the cable, controller,
> etc. Only decent way of diagnosing that kind of thing is to swap
> things around physically.
The last data sure sounds like it. I realize a hard disk has to *start*
failing sometime, maybe it's now.
It was mentioned that format does not totally remove previous contents.
So it really matters each time you format, that it is a risk for later
data integrity? And wiping the hard disk is the only real way to start
over?
Before I give up on this hard drive, I would plan to run a wipe utility
to truly clean off the past few weeks of activity and make a fresh start.
Advice?
ms
dadiOH
> It was mentioned that format does not totally remove previous
> contents. So it really matters each time you format, that it is a
> risk for later data integrity?
No.
___________
> And wiping the hard disk is the only
> real way to start over?
No.
ms
@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
> ms wrote:
>
>> It was mentioned that format does not totally remove previous
>> contents. So it really matters each time you format, that it is a
>> risk for later data integrity?
>
> No.
> ___________
>
>> And wiping the hard disk is the only
>> real way to start over?
>
> No.
>
Can you explain in each case?
ms
ms
@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
> ms wrote:
>
>> It was mentioned that format does not totally remove previous
>> contents. So it really matters each time you format, that it is a
>> risk for later data integrity?
>
> No.
> ___________
>
>> And wiping the hard disk is the only
>> real way to start over?
>
> No.
>
And if wiping does not make the hard drive ready for a fresh start, what is
a way to do that?
ms
Ben Myers
http://members.shaw.ca/rinocanada/hdutils.htm
I've tested it on one of my systems and it seems to work,
although I don't have a computer with a Fujitsu drive,
which is required. Also, as I mentioned in a previous
post, you might try using fdisk to create a partition
within the 8 gigabyte boundary. DOS should ignore
the space above 8 gigabytes and Windows 98 doesn't
normally use BIOS for disk access, so once Windows
is installed, you may be able to see the entire disk.
Ben
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4ov2tnF...@individual.net...
Gary S. Terhune
"It's the HDD. Get a new one. But just to be sure, try it on a different
controller with a different cable." With all the foolin' around you done,
other evidence suggests that it isn't the HDD at all, but rather something
else: Motherboard controller, IDE cable, or even something more basic: RAM
or something else on the mobo. I would check those before giving up on the
HDD. If you swap the HDD to Secondary controller (Master), using a different
cable, and you *still* get the same errors, *that's* when I'd say it's time
to try a new HDD. If you *still* get errors, then we'd have to assume it's
something else on the mobo. Note that the CD drive cable *may* not be proper
for this testing, since many box builders use a simpler cable for CD drives,
not one that will support LBA. (Somewhere in there, you should also check
HDD jumper(s) for proper configuration.)
Those partition labels BING is inserting are *not* correct. They should all
be MBR-1, MBR-2, etc. And Scandisk's reporting errors on those new
partitions backs up that diagnosis. But again, the evidence suggests that
perhaps it's not the drive itself.
As dadiOH says, the answer to both your questions is "No". The only thing
that changes when you Format is that you wipe the FATs (File Allocation
Tables) and rebuild them, and all previous info about file locations gets
destroyed.
Imagine a warehouse full of shelves. The only way you know where things are
on those shelves is to refer to a catalog that says some certain box is
located on some certain shelf at some certain location on that shelf. If you
toss the catalog and start with a fresh one, the boxes still remain, but
they're useless to you since you have no way of locating them. What you
*can* do is start storing new boxes, using the new catalog to keep track of
where they are. When you go to store the box, if there's already a box
there, you simply shove in the new one and the old one falls off the back,
fading into nothing as it goes (as an ex-warehouse manager, I can tell you
that that's an image that gives me warm fuzzies.)
Now, you can't even just wander around the warehouse and find things. You're
restricted to using the catalog *unless* you use special tools (perhaps a
cool set of glasses) that permit you to do so, that allow you to see the
boxes that are still there but not in the catalog. Those boxes are
meaningless to your new catalog system and box storage, but they are still
there. That's what's meant when people say that formatting doesn't remove
all previous data, and this only matters if you are concerned that someone
else may come in with special tools and steal your old boxes. Again, those
old boxes are meaningless and invisible to the new catalog. Partitions, in
this analogy, are different warehouses in the same building, and the MBR
(along with PBRs if Extended partitions are involved) is a master catalog
with the names of the warehouses in the building and some simple data about
the physical structure of each one, how big it is, how it's laid out, etc.)
I would *not* run any more tools on this drive. I'd accept the data that's
being presented as showing that something is definitely wrong with HDD, or
Controller, or Cable, or SomethingElse. You can go out and buy a new drive
and toss it i, and I'm betting that you'll still have the same problem. It's
not a *sure* bet, but one I'd lay a few bucks on. So why not check those
things *before* you try a new drive?
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4p1g9lF...@individual.net...
Gary S. Terhune
controller "all by itself" is what's got you stuck. Please let go of these
preconceived conclusions and instead *assume* that *anything* may have gone
wrong. That's the only sane way to approach this case. Assume that it could
be *anything* and then test to find out what, without skipping any steps
just because you don't "believe" there's anything wrong with the cable, etc.
Heck, cables come loose. It's a fact of life.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4ov2tnF...@individual.net...
> Franc Zabkar <fza...@iinternode.on.net> wrote in
> news:2p8ji2td0c2a6pjpd...@4ax.com:
>>
dadiOH
> All the evidence points to something wrong in hardware. Normally
> I'd say, "It's the HDD. Get a new one. But just to be sure, try it
> on a different controller with a different cable."
Or even in another computer - you do have one IIRC - as a second
drive. If it works fine in computer #2 you know that some other
hardware in computer #1 is flaky; if it doesn't work in computer #2
you know to toss the drive.
dadiOH
>> I'd suspect that there is something wrong with your IDE cable, or
>> your HD's or motherboard's IDE connector, probably at pin 13 or
>> pin 8.
>>
>
> IMO not here, the computer had worked, I installed the OS, nothing
> has happened to the internal cables since then. I know anythings
> possible, but I really doubt it.
Remember that boot floppy that "couldn't be bad"?
dadiOH
dadiOH wrote:
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> All the evidence points to something wrong in hardware. Normally
>> I'd say, "It's the HDD. Get a new one. But just to be sure, try it
>> on a different controller with a different cable."
>
> Or even in another computer - you do have one IIRC - as a second
> drive. If it works fine in computer #2 you know that some other
> hardware in computer #1 is flaky; if it doesn't work in computer #2
> you know to toss the drive.
Meant for ms, not you Gary...I was piggy backing.
dadiOH
______________
Gary S. Terhune
accept that. Who'd want an 8MB (not GB) partition, anyway?
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"Ben Myers" <benj...@mindR-e-m-o-v-Espring.com> wrote in message
news:%23q96SsH...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Gary S. Terhune
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"dadiOH" <dad...@guesswhere.com> wrote in message
news:OVNVUJI7...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
real@hotmail.com MEB
All of the above sounds strikingly similar to:
From: "MEB" <meb@not re...@hotmail.com>
References: <4mm41rF...@individual.net>
<ONJdEOv...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl> <4mqulcF...@individual.net>
<epMw0N4...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl> <4mrkmmF...@individual.net>
<uHktnc51...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl> <4mttr7F...@individual.net>
<OByuwoE2...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl> <4mu7l6F...@individual.net>
Subject: Re: Hangs on POST screen
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 22:16:16 -0400
Keywords: checking a hard drive,hard drive failure,unable to access hard
drive
Lines: 116
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Message-ID: <OTJTszG2...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
NNTP-Posting-Host: AC92CB70.ipt.aol.com 172.146.203.112
Path: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl
Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:813466
Okay, Mike, humor me:
Apparently you have the floppy drive setup per your "the floppy drive light
came on", (did you hear the seek noise also?) If not you still may have a
floppy problem. Re-check its cabling and connections.
I know you don't want to disconnect cables and such, so, try this (you did
check the battery didn't you, per your previous post and my posting?):
1. go back into the bios reset all channels (hard drives) to "auto" detect,
e.g. remove the hard settings.
Save and try the startup again with the disk in the floppy drive. (some bios
/ hard drive configurations do not like "hard" settings) If it starts, go to
5.
2. If no start: disconnect the power cord, either from the back of the comp
or from the receptacle, ground yourself to metal on the case to remove
static before disconnecting; (re-)open the case; check your cables/ribbons
first - just in case; if none loose, and all connections appear tight, then
(here's the dig) disconnect the hard drive from it's ribbon/cable. Reconnect
the disk to the secondary hard drive connection, get the stripe/indicator
set properly on the ribbon/cable on the board and drive, reconnect the comp
to electric. Make sure that it is also set to auto detect in the bios.
Restart the computer with the disk in the floppy drive. If it starts (gets
to the dos prompt); go to 3. If not go to 4.
3. Check the hard disk with fdisk /status. Look for first partition and it
is active. If so , shut down the computer, disconnect the electric again
after grounding yourself to a safe metallic part of the case; move the
secondary hard drive cable/ribbon to the primary/first connector. Replace
the old primary cable/ribbon with a new one, put it on the secondary. Check
any connections and cards you may have bumped or moved for proper seating;
reconnect the power connection; retest via fdisk /status. If still working,
GO to 5. If it shows no active partition or some other failure, go to 5.
4. If the computer will not respond with the changed hard drive ribbon
cables, you may have intermittent or permanent hard drive failure.
As you had access the disk at least once (the NTLDR failure) and you have
now checked all connections and the bios/cmos again, it's time to determine
whether the disk should be replaced, and saved or not.
5. Download from the net, one or two of these tools to check the hard disk:
hard drive tools and recovery - This tool will probably be sufficient for
the preliminary testing of the hard drive, make sure you do the extended
search for partitions during the testing process.
http://www.cgsecurity.org/
Testdisk can be used to recover old MBR from (hidden) backups on the hard
disk and recovery may work from there with this tool or others..
http://www.cgsecurity.org/testdisk-6.3.dos.zip comes with some basic and
extended info,,
http://www.hdat2.com/ Another tool which supplies the abilities you need to
test the disk.
hdat2 - DOS hard drive testing, diagnostics, and repair tool. Supports PATA
[(older disks) ATA, IDE, EIDE, DMA, UDMA] SATA, SCSI, RAID, and USB drives.
Pick up the hdat2en_4_51.pdf on the site.
Hard Drive Guru - Yet another tool which will test disks and more.
http://www.hddguru.com
MHDD - hard drive management
English documentation has been moved to http://mhdd.com
English FAQ: http://mhddsoftware.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4261
6. Whichever one(s) you pick, you will have, and can supply, additional
information for the parties helping to diagnose your problem. Do not be
shocked if you find a viable partition of XP - NTFS still on the hard disk,
and many of its now corrupted folders and files.
7. Post back what you find out about the disk, BEFORE re-trying fdisking and
formatting, or installing the operating system.
--
MEB
signature removed
_______________
END PRIOR POST
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4mu7l6F...@individual.net...
| "dadiOH" <dad...@guesswhere.com> wrote in news:OByuwoE2GHA.4752
| @TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:
|
| > ms wrote:
| >
| >> Hate to start disconnecting and reconnecting. It did work fine. I
| >> feel sure the A drive is OK, the BIOS never gets to look for it.
| >>
| >> Looking at the above, same old question. How to get past BIOS
| >> screen and see the A prompt,
| >
| > The floppy drive should be rattled right after the BIOS memory check.
| > In addition, it should be listed in the devices found by the BIOS. Is
| > it being rattled? Is it listed? How many BIOS screens do you
| > normally have? Finally, doesn't anyone around here ever snip???????
| >
|
| Thanks, a good tip.
|
| Yes, the floppy drive light came on, drive A was checked, during the BIOS
| check. As you can see from my BIOS data, the floppy drive is correctly
| listed in BIOS.
|
| As to snipping, if they do it, I do it. But I assume many here don't as
| they keep track of earlier responses that way.
|
| ms= Mike Sa
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/
BLOG http://peoplescounsel.spaces.live.com/ Public Notice or the "real
world"
"Most people, sometime in their lives, stumble across truth.
Most jump up, brush themselves off, and hurry on about their business as if
nothing had happen." Winston Churchill
Or to put it another way:
Morpheus can offer you the two pills;
but only you can choose whether you take the red pill or the blue one.
_______________
"Gary S. Terhune" <grys...@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:Ol01rcI7...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
ms
Gary, a very good analagy, I haven't much experence inside a box but have
to learn sometime.
This computer isn't that important to me that I would buy another hard
drive, but will do some cable swapping. It may take a little while, hope
you will see it when I post back.
Thanks again.
ms
Gary S. Terhune
of that Everest thread (and in prior threads.) Why you didn't INSIST on Mike
following through on those suggestions before launching into the almost
incomprehensible thread that followed is what boggles my mind.
My purpose in trying to limit this thread is to *focus* on the correct
procedures, not to have this thread end up like the other one.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"MEB" <meb@not re...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23opw%23HJ7G...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
real@hotmail.com MEB
I was overruled by those who thought they knew better, that thought they
were experts.
If you want to reset the disk, then look to those tools. You WILL have to
hard reset that drive.
Again, good luck, I think I've about had my fill of this newsgroup.
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/
BLOG http://peoplescounsel.spaces.live.com/ Public Notice or the "real
world"
"Most people, sometime in their lives, stumble across truth.
Most jump up, brush themselves off, and hurry on about their business as if
nothing had happen." Winston Churchill
Or to put it another way:
Morpheus can offer you the two pills;
but only you can choose whether you take the red pill or the blue one.
_______________
"Gary S. Terhune" <grys...@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:%23$eGX7M7G...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Gary S. Terhune
I do not agree that the drive was in any way "damaged" by anything suggested
here, or that it needs "resetting". As I understand it, the machine was
working fine until some "corruption" occurred, at which point the case
landed here. Nothing I've seen convinces me that anything has changed since
then. Either some other hardware component has gone belly up (or simply come
loose) or the HDD is plain broke.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"MEB" <meb@not re...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uYT%23tdO7G...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Gary S. Terhune
on to 3, 4, etc., was contraindicated, and *that's* where the real problems
started. I'm not going to get back into that same argument about the tools
you suggested and especially not about your understanding of the way disks
work. Other more knowledgable people than I have already put the lie to most
of what you claim to be true. (And if you eventually prove otherwise in
*those* threads, feel free to update this one. You certainly haven't done so
to date. All you've done is make wild claims and then sit back and watch
others prove, *again* that you're wrong. Frankly, Jeff's patience, in
particular, amazes me.)
The purpose of *this* thread is to get Mike to start back at the beginning
with steps 1 and 2 (and a perhaps few others that do *not* include
additional scans of the HDD.) The variety of results from BING and FDISK
pretty much prove that if it *is* the drive, it's certainly nothing a
"reset" would fix (whatever that is.) If that were the case, the results
from BING partitioning would be repeatable. They're not.
Fortunately, Mike seems to have gotten the message. Let's see where that
takes him, OK?
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"MEB" <meb@not re...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uYT%23tdO7G...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Gary S. Terhune
> Again, good luck, I think I've about had my fill of this newsgroup.
Heh, didn't even see that line until now. Really, when you debate the way
you do, is it any wonder you're going to get called on it? Every time you've
been asked to provide a *single* reference to prove some claim of yours, or
been asked to detail what tests *you* have performed, you are curiously
silent and instead leap to some other argument that is equally unsound.
Don't worry, as you can probably tell, we've about had our fill of you, too.
real@hotmail.com MEB
boot sector virus created, it just happens to be the OS, now how did they
accomplish their task?
As for Jeff, let's see, he claimed and recommended ZAP and WIPE, then fdisk
and format, those WERE DISCREDITED by others, then the manufactures disk,
DUH, and has STILL not stated what his supposed viewing tool is...
Get real Gary and good bye.
And remember you were told to reset the disk....
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/
BLOG http://peoplescounsel.spaces.live.com/ Public Notice or the "real
world"
"Most people, sometime in their lives, stumble across truth.
Most jump up, brush themselves off, and hurry on about their business as if
nothing had happen." Winston Churchill
Or to put it another way:
Morpheus can offer you the two pills;
but only you can choose whether you take the red pill or the blue one.
_______________
"Gary S. Terhune" <grys...@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:exzT6MP...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Gary S. Terhune
your own complaints on that regard. Hell, you haven't even answered the one
I put to you in this thread.
Quote:
From what I read, MS used the Maxtor utility to "scan only" which I
interpret to be Read Only. How in blazes would that damage the disk? (Please
keep your answer to a single short paragraph, perhaps with references that
back up your claim.)
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"MEB" <meb@not re...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:O1JqAdP7...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
ms
> beginning with steps 1 and 2 (and a perhaps few others that do *not*
> include additional scans of the HDD.) The variety of results from BING
> and FDISK pretty much prove that if it *is* the drive, it's certainly
> nothing a "reset" would fix (whatever that is.) If that were the case,
> the results from BING partitioning would be repeatable. They're not.
>
> Fortunately, Mike seems to have gotten the message. Let's see where
> that takes him, OK?
>
Please explain what you meant by "reset"
I realize you said "(whatever that is.)" but I haven't seen that term
before. The only reset I know in W98SE is scanreg/restore, a great one. But
the OS has to be installed to use it.
ms
dadiOH
> "Gary S. Terhune" <grys...@mvps.org> wrote in
>>
>> The purpose of *this* thread is to get Mike to start back at the
>> beginning with steps 1 and 2 (and a perhaps few others that do
>> *not* include additional scans of the HDD.) The variety of results
>> from BING and FDISK pretty much prove that if it *is* the drive,
>> it's certainly nothing a "reset" would fix (whatever that is.) If
>> that were the case, the results from BING partitioning would be
>> repeatable. They're not.
>>
>> Fortunately, Mike seems to have gotten the message. Let's see where
>> that takes him, OK?
>>
>
> Please explain what you meant by "reset"
>
> I realize you said "(whatever that is.)"
Which means he doesn't know either (nor do I) so ask MEB.
real@hotmail.com MEB
Franc seems good at posting links and using formulas, but I think he fails
to grasp all the information he presents (or maybe he's really a sly one).
Though these related to Linux (from Franc), the principals are applied to
hard disks and in other OSs as well.
http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/Large-Disk-6.html Disk geometry, partitions
and overlap
http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/Large-Disk-7.html Translation and Disk
Managers
http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/Large-Disk-9.html CONSEQUENCES
http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/Large-Disk-10.html DETAILS
http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/Large-Disk-11.html Clipped Disks
So it would appear that the prior activity caused conflict on the disk
between the BIOS, the controller, and the disk coding.
The disk has been essentially software clipped.
The problem: the disk was not designed to be clipped in that fashion. For
information on what improper CHS settings cause, perhaps look to the hard
drive manufacturers site, or some of the old information concerning such.
Disks which are designed for "hardware" clipping, do so either with the
manufacturers setup tool or a jumper (or perhaps via the OS which then
controls the translation such as in XP and Linux). Disks may be "software"
clipped (partitioned or otherwise) as long as the disk is properly accessed
via the bios AND the controller AND the tool. Though as is noted pursuant
the 137 gig aspect of 98 and attempts to use larger drives, the disk may
give or cause errors when doing so.
The Maxtor tool could do nothing but read the controller chip (around 10
gig) and BIOS for information, and attempt to use that upon a disk which was
set improperly in the BIOS (clipped at around 8 gig). In doing so, it used
the access through the controller and BIOS presented as proper by the comp
(both conflicting each other), and apparently performed
"verify/read/write/verify" operations (standard disk verification process).
Had it not been accessing the disk (using just verify/read/verify), it
would not have corrupted the Windows installation, it might, though, have
returned numerous errors due to the conflicting BIOS and controller.
So it seems you have determined that this thread will follow the others
with lengthy discussion. Does this clarify it or do you intend to debate
this as well while Mike is left in the lurch again.
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/
BLOG http://peoplescounsel.spaces.live.com/ Public Notice or the "real
world"
"Most people, sometime in their lives, stumble across truth.
Most jump up, brush themselves off, and hurry on about their business as if
nothing had happen." Winston Churchill
Or to put it another way:
Morpheus can offer you the two pills;
but only you can choose whether you take the red pill or the blue one.
_______________
"Gary S. Terhune" <grys...@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:%23DlD8iP...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Gary S. Terhune
list of tools that use that word to describe their function(s). I presume it
includes a low-level wipe and perhaps flashing the ROM (firmware or
semi-hard-coded chip similar to BIOS chip) in the HDD. But it's not relevant
to this discussion *until* you verify that the drive has the same problems
when connected to a different controller, using a different cable, or better
yet, when inserted into a different machine altogether. If the drive is
still flaky when those underlying hardware have been determined not to be
the cause, then it might be time to play with other tools. The only
alternative left would be the trash can.
I'm again guessing that MEB is referring to one or more of the tools found
here.
http://hddguru.com/content/en/software/
I don't know them and can't recommend. But if the above tests (1st
paragraph)prove it's the drive that's faulty, and you still can't get the
Fujitsu tools to recognize the drive when properly detected by BIOS, I'd
recommend that you resign that drive to the toy bin, never to be used in
anything other than a disposable system. Hell, I would probably have done so
long ago. I just figure you're going through all this turmoil as an academic
exercise.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4p479vF...@individual.net...
Gary S. Terhune
Whatever, I'm outta here. I only succumbed to this thread extension when I
thought I'd finally convinced Mike to start back at step one. IOW, I
considered the original thread dead and was willing to ferret out your own
duplicity.
If/When Mike has finished the gross diagnostics of his system without
finding anything else wrong, and stilol can't get th eFujitsu tool(s) to
properly recognize the drive after BIOS has done so, then my recomendation
is that he toss the drive. The fact that he is back already, without doing
any of those preliminary steps, indicates to me that he's not serious about
resolving the problem properly, but is instead looking for some magic
bullet. You do him a disservice by sugggesting that there even *is* such a
thing.
The drive started going bad *before* Mike ran any tools, Maxtor or
otherwise. If the tools contributed to furthering that drive failure, it was
almost certainly due to additional exercising of the drive under incorrect
parameters. Nothing you describe below supports your previous argument that
the Maxtor tool caused any of the symptoms Mike is currently seeing. Yes,
read/write might have destroyed data in the "user accessible" portions of
the drive if assumed parameters were wrong, but that's the extent of it, and
said tools weren't recommended until *after* the drive was already
scrambling data, which was perhaps because the BIOS parameters had been
inadvertently changed. Anything that the Maxtor tool might have done was
undone by repartitioning and/or rewriting the MBR under correct parameters.
Your own arguments, below, do nothing but support that thesis.
As usual, your debating technique stinks. Use lots of tech jargon to hide
the fact that you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You can read
and cite all the technical articles you want to, but it is emminently clear
that you don't understand much if any of the material, and you certainly
don't appear capable of following a logical set of diagnostic procedures to
their obvious conclusions.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"MEB" <meb@not re...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%238IVYTU...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
real@hotmail.com MEB
may not be as it appears, well I've been bucking a cold (or is it pneumonia)
for about three weeks now. My attitude hasn't been not very good to put it
mildly (can't breathe, not enough oxygen to the brain though that is no
excuse).
You are correct, he needs to do the hardware analysis FIRST and Report the
outcome.
There is no "magic bullet", though when you get it diagnosed hardwarewise,
there may be some software help available if it is a usable drive and normal
activity does not work.
Please help him, and I will fade to black (and nurse whatever this is)...
unless YOU ask, promise!
--
MEB
_______________
"Gary S. Terhune" <grys...@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:ONItxFV7...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Gary S. Terhune
Peace Brother.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"MEB" <meb@not re...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23GZ8UsW...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
ms
> I don't know what it means, for sure. I don't see anything in MEB's
> long list of tools that use that word to describe their function(s). I
> presume it includes a low-level wipe and perhaps flashing the ROM
> (firmware or semi-hard-coded chip similar to BIOS chip) in the HDD.
> But it's not relevant to this discussion *until* you verify that the
> drive has the same problems when connected to a different controller,
> using a different cable, or better yet, when inserted into a different
> machine altogether. If the drive is still flaky when those underlying
> hardware have been determined not to be the cause, then it might be
> time to play with other tools. The only alternative left would be the
> trash can.
>
> I'm again guessing that MEB is referring to one or more of the tools
> found here.
> http://hddguru.com/content/en/software/
> I don't know them and can't recommend. But if the above tests (1st
> paragraph)prove it's the drive that's faulty, and you still can't get
> the Fujitsu tools to recognize the drive when properly detected by
> BIOS, I'd recommend that you resign that drive to the toy bin, never
> to be used in anything other than a disposable system. Hell, I would
> probably have done so long ago. I just figure you're going through all
> this turmoil as an academic exercise.
>
It has gotten to be a learning experience for me. And I got somewhat
used to fdisk and BING. Now to learn inside the box. I will keep records
of cable orientation, as I understand some connectors can be inserted
either way.
ms
Gary S. Terhune
sketches, even. Go slow and look all over for attachment points like screws
tab and notch affairs, whatever. Case designers are a weird lot. Understand
each structure before you dismantle it. Plan your attack thoroughly at each
step of the way.
Also remember to *always* have one hand holding the metal frame while you
work. No, you won't be able to do some things this way, but if you try to,
you'll do it often enough to minimize the threat of static electrical
discharge. I get real intimate with the hardware and tools I use,
practically fondling them, just to make sure. Even when using a wrist strap.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4p5en9F...@individual.net...
ms
> You and others suggested the same and similar things up near the
> beginning of that Everest thread (and in prior threads.) Why you
> didn't INSIST on Mike following through on those suggestions before
> launching into the almost incomprehensible thread that followed is
> what boggles my mind.
>
> My purpose in trying to limit this thread is to *focus* on the correct
> procedures, not to have this thread end up like the other one.
>
A good thought, Gary.
In future, I will stay focused only on my computer issue, not try to
follow someone else's agenda. PCR and David A were very helpful, and
others, in my real purpose early to get the machine running in W98. The
other agenda was an exercise to find out why the hard drive did not show
it's full capacity. That was not important to me, it was not my issue. In
trying the procedures to do that, it reduced this machine to a doorstop,
and made long threads.
I will get into the box and work with the cables, thanks for the advice
in the other message. Whatever the result, as it may be a week or more,
this ng moves so fast that I will post a new thread to at least tell my
status.
One other question.
When I tried to install W98SE, Scandisk said it fixed errors, a clear
message, but the next time I tried install, Scandisk showed exactly the
same errors, "fixed" them a second time.
So it didn't really fix errors?
Comment?
ms
dadiOH
> I will get into the box and work with the cables
A bit of basic info...
1. Drives have two cables going into them...
(a) the data cable from the motherboard. It is wide and flat.
Terminal ends are generally "keyed" so they can only be inserted one
way. For several years, drives have use 80 wire data cables;
previously, they used 40 wire cables. The two look similar but the
traces (striations on the cable) of the wires on the 80 wire cable are
much finer. I mention this because you may have a 40 wire data cable
too being used for CD drives.
The data cable is attached to the motherboard. There are two other
terminals on the cable...one at the end and another about midway. If
your drive is jumpered as Master or CS (see below) use the end
terminal. If as Slave, use the middle. You would only set a drive as
slave if there were to be two drives on the same data cable.
There are two data terminals on the motherboard - one primary, the
other secondary. If you disconnect them note which is primary...it
would be the one to which the "C" drive is connected.
(b) the power supply cable. It is small, has (AFAIK) four wires
going into the plug which is shaped so it can only be inserted one
way.
2. The drives are normally secured in their bay within the case by
four small bolts, two per side. Once the bolts are removed, the drive
just slides out. Keep your fingers off the bottom of the drive. Some
cases have bays that can easily be removed (the whole thing, including
drive(s)). If you are just temporarily putting in a drive, it needn't
be bolted into its bay (nor need the one being usurped be
removed)...just set it wherever as long as the two cables can be
attached.
3. Drives have a jumper on the back. The "jumper" is just a small
piece of plastic about 1/8 wide X a bit more high and has two holes in
it which fit over pins on the back of the drive. There are various
possible jumper positions depending on how the drive is to be
seen/used...Master, Slave, CS (Cable Select) and - possibly - others.
You need to assure that the jumper is in the correct position.
There is no uniformity in jumper positions manufacturer to
manufacturer but there is usually an embossed diagram on the back of
the drive. You can also check positions at the drive manufacturer's
site.
The jumper can be fussy to remove/replace because of the small
size...tweezers help.
ms
@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:
Thanks, dadiOH, that is the kind of detail that really helps while
working on it.
ms
Gary S. Terhune
going to find the same errors as it did during a previous installation
attempt, providing that Format is again used. Format/Scandisk marks the "bad
clusters" as unusable in the FATs. (FATs equate to the warehouse catalog
from my previous analogy.) When you reformat, the FATs are erased and
created anew, meaning that all the info on the previously marked bad
clusters is lost and has to be recreated, also.
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
"ms" <m...@invalid.com> wrote in message news:4p6peeF...@individual.net...