Cixert

Well, that's what I want to check. What is true and what is false. According to that link I have to use H2wtest to verify units. I have already mentioned that in one of the units I have stopped that test at 624 GiB. But I still don't want to confirm that this capacity is real. I will upload all results tests. Until now I have been trying to make the drives visible in Windows XP, unfortunately I have not succeeded and I do not understand why. The result on XP is the same as with the Seagate 5TB external box converted to MBR. The device manager recognizes and installs the hardware, but neither the drive nor the partitions are visible, except in this case I can take the hard disk out of the box and connect it with another adapter. On these drives with supposedly 12 and 16 TB, these are displayed in the device manager... ... but only 2 programs recognize that there is a disk drive installed in XP, MiniTool Partition Wizard and EaseUS Partition Master, but both show the drive as a 2 TB "Bad Disk". Afaik I have to conclude that some drives with more than 2 TB are not possible to install on XP with Microsoft drivers due to the adapter firmware. It seems that there are certain adapters type that on XP are limited to 2TB. It is somewhat strange, because I have 8 TiB external hard drives working with USB adapters on XP, but not all adapters work. Some with MBR +2TB do not work on XP but do work on NT 6-10 and others do not work on any operating system. I will be left wondering why. I have tried to install the Universal ATA Driver (UniATA), but I have not succeeded yet, it seems that it is necessary to edit the .inf file adding the Hardware ID. so that my unit is recognized. http://alter.org.ua/en/soft/win/uni_ata/uni_ata.php Does anyone know another updated driver for disk drives in XP?

Data disk manager with various programs in Windows Seven Do you see any reason why the disks are not compatible with Windows XP? Are both drives SSD? USB Flash Drive 16 TB original partition GPT exFAT SSD Drive 12 TB & USB Flash Drive 16 TB converted to MBR FAT32 with cluster 256 KiB Despite the drive being visible in Windows Seven, DiskGenius says "hidden", other programs do not say "hidden". I have already removed the hidden attribute and converted them to NTFS with 1 TB capacity, but they are still not visible in XP. SSD Drive 12 TB disk SSD Drive 12 TB FAT32 partition USB Flash Drive 16 TB disk USB Flash Drive 16 TB FAT32 partition

Reserved

On pages like Aliexpress or others you can find very low-cost USB Flash drives and SSD drivers. This is surprising with capacities from 2 to 128 TB compared to the capacities of drives from well-known brands such as Kingston, Sandisk, Crucial, etc. which are between 8GB and 256 GB for USB Flash Drives. It is said in Internet forums that this is impossible, that inside the SSD box there are a couple of large nuts to give weight, that the capacity is not real. I have a friend who assures that the capacity is real. I think that a 16 TB SSD drive is possible, it will depend on the number of cells capable of recording. If we record a Kingston 256 GB SSD several times, this gives a total of several TB. So the manufacturer can increase the capacity by 16 TB allowing it to be recorded only 2 times. With this we already have the same 256 GB unit with 16 TB capacity. This is determined by the cells type it contains: SLC (single level cell) MLC (multilevel cell) TLC (Triple Level Cell) To clear up doubts, I have bought several for a price between 3 and 12 euros, a similar price in dollars. The first suggestive deception is that the units are offered for 1 euro / 1 dollar, but at the time of paying it turns out to be a promotion for a single unit with high shipping costs and the price is the same as what I have reported 3 / 12 € Pay close attention to the basket and when paying, the prices and products paid may not match!!! So far I have received 2 units: -SSD Drive 12 TB https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005006997442760.html -USB Flash Drive 16TB https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005006845793050.html And I have started to carry out the first tests. However, I have 2 additional problems. 1-Many of the recommended test programs do not recognize the units. 2-Windows XP installs the drivers in Device Manager but does not show any hard drive in Disk Manager, nor partitions, nor hard drive. Other test programs give uneven results, these units could be of real capacity or not, I am still not clear. Performing a capacity test with "H2testw" from Windows Seven, the 12 TB SSD unit is only filled with 8 GiB, however on the USB Flash drive I stopped the test when 634 GiB had been completed. In order to verify the real capacity, I want to copy images from several TB to these drives as a backup of my current disks. But before continuing I want to solve the compatibility problem with Windows XP. Why are these drives not visible in Windows XP Disk Manager? The drives come with a GPT partition table, indicating that the first initial sector alignment is the 4096, with an 4096 bytes physical sector size. To try to solve the problem I have converted the unit to MBR, I have changed the initial sector to 63, 256, 2048... And I have also reduced the partition size to 1 TiB but the result is the same. Why can't Windows XP handle these drives? In the next post I will publish the tests that I carry out. My first suspicion is that both, the USB Flash Drive and the SSD drive, are removable SSD drives. How can I know what cells types they have?

As far as I know, Google forked Webkit2 to Blink in 2013. But several companies continued to work with webkit2. Chromium can be compiled in both Webkit2 and Blink. Browsers XP compatible that have been compiled in webkit 2 from Chromium are: -360 Extreme Explorer -Google Chrome 27.0.1453.116 (latest Webkit 2 except MAC) -Liebao aka Cheetah Secure Browser by Kingsoft -Opera browser in 2013 (in 2014 Blink engenie) -QQ Browser -Sogou Explorer Otter Browser is not based on Chromium it is based on Apple Webkit same as Safari

So can we conclude that the 1 year time bomb starts on the version's production date? Or what date does the time bomb start?

It's not that I'm very clear on how to differentiate one from the other, but 360 Extreme Explorer uses Webkit2 engine.

Sorry, I confused the terms. I meant a VL-VOL-VLK copy. These do not have a repair console or the option to install with repair.

Sorry for my ignorance, Supermium rendering uses Blink engine or Webkit2 engine?

I just discovered Supermium 122. I've been testing it for 3 days on original Windows XP Professional SP3 and I have been pleasantly surprised. The first day I noticed that everything was going very fast, however on the second day I noticed that the tabs wait a few seconds before opening a URL. The tab remains blank for a few seconds and then the page opens. I don't know if it is because Supermium is configured by default so that the page is not displayed until the download is complete or that I have touched something inappropriate in the settings. I would like to know who is behind the creation of Supermium, if it is a company or free development team. The downloads on Github are from the "win3ss" profile and according to what he says, he has created the company "Legace Software Corporation" Are these responsible for the creation and development of Supermium?

Thanks, I'll try it. I feel like I didn't express myself well with the BIOS update. What I mean is that when installing XP with the old BIOS version, ACPI was not installed by default and neither was it installed once the BIOS was updated. Unless I press F5 during the CD-ROM boot process and choose the correct HALL. Greetings

Thanks, now that I use that method I haven't had any problems again, well except for one. If I edit a post to change a URL, the new link preview deletes 2 or 3 paragraphs and I see no way to solve it, except by changing the address to which the original URL points. Be very careful with this, we can delete part of the written text if we don't pay attention and click on edit. I don't understand why so many changes in the forum that only cause problems and prevent old browsers from working.

I open this specific thread after having commented on it in this other one https://msfn.org/board/topic/186134-ntldr-is-missing-when-updating-the-bios/#comment-1264144 because the matter does not seem easy to resolve. Unlike Windows 2000, Windows XP does not have options to change the HAL in Device Manager. So to make a HAL change it is necessary to change the 2 kernel files (normal and PAE) and the HAL.dll library to the correct version. A while ago I mentioned how to do it https://msfn.org/board/topic/177962-activate-all-processor-cores-at-startup/?do=findComment&comment=1156790 and it works without problems from ACPI uniprocessor to ACPI-APIC uniprocessor or ACPI-APIC multiprocessor and vice versa. It also works if it is change from the previous ones to Standard PC (non-ACPI) and I think that in that case it is possible to return to the ACPI version. But not if the original Windows XP installation was done as Standard PC, the previous method does not work to switch to ACPI, since the BSOD 0x7B occurs. This website https://falconfour.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/how-to-switch-windows-xp-hal-_back_-from-standard-pc-to-acpi-the-clean-way/comment-page-1/ describes a method so that the option to change to HAL ACPI in Windows XP appears in the device manager in the Computer section, but the result is the same BSOD 0x7B. A possible solution would be to reinstall XP with the repair option but I have a VL-VOL-VLK copy and the repair option does not come, so another parallel XP has been installed in C: but the new copy neither has ACPI installed. I am testing with an old motherboard with Slot 1 and 440BX chipset. After updating the BIOS, the Windows XP installation still does not set ACPI by default. When installing XP it is possible to choose the correct HAL when the installation CD during boot says "press F6 if you want to change the hard drive drivers", then by pressing F5 instead of F6 a menu appears after a few seconds to choose the HAL . Other way I have found to install ACPI on this computer is by pasting a system image with ACPI created from another computer, so it works without problems, If we have the knowledge of how to transfer XP installations images from one computer to another. I want to find a method to directly change the HAL from Standard PC to ACPI in the same XP installation and without reinstalling. I think the BSOD occurs because the ACPI drivers are missing: -ACPI fixed feature button. -ACPI power button. -Microsoft system compatible with ACPI So I would like to find a way to install these drivers or modify the registry so that ACPI works. I think that if those drivers are installed and the correct ACPI information is entered into the registry (for example by extracting it from another computer) the system would work. I still have to try the ACPI 2.0 method, I have to look at it calmly, I don't quite understand it so I don't know if this method would work. https://msfn.org/board/topic/183464-compiling-acpi-v20-driver-for-windows-xp-sp3-and-windows-2003-sp2-x32x64/

Have you tried the HAL "Standard Equip with C-Step i486"? If you press F5 when starting the Windows XP installation CD, when it says press F6 to install hard drive drivers, a menu appears after a few seconds to choose the HAL layer and one of the options is that, if press F5. I am not very clear if this HAL is for a review of Intel 80486 processors or refers to other processors.

Thanks @Tripredacus, I have tried to repair XP but I have a volume OEM copy and the repair option does not come, so another parallel XP has been installed in C: Now that I have the BIOS updated, the new copy neither has ACPI installed. The only new thing is that it has installed a tab called APM, but without any advantage. It neither suspends nor hibernates. Thanks @genieautravail, the only way I have found to install ACPI on this computer is by pasting a system image with ACPI created from another computer, so it works without problems. I am reading this method https://falconfour.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/how-to-switch-windows-xp-hal-_back_-from-standard-pc-to-acpi-the-clean-way/comment-page-1/ But the result is the same as the method that I have and that I published here. https://msfn.org/board/topic/177962-activate-all-processor-cores-at-startup/?do=findComment&comment=1156790 If Windows XP never had ACPI, when switching from Standard PC to ACPI so BSOD 0x7B occurs due to the drivers lack. If it go from ACPi to Standard PC and then from Standard PC to ACPI, there is no problem. I still have to try the ACPI 2.0 method, I have to look at it calmly, I don't quite understand it https://msfn.org/board/topic/183464-compiling-acpi-v20-driver-for-windows-xp-sp3-and-windows-2003-sp2-x32x64/ @Damnation with v7777 acpi.sys you were referring to this link? EDIT: I am opening a new post to address this specific issue. https://msfn.org/board/topic/186159-change-hal-from-standard-pc-to-acpi-pc/

REASON I think I have found the reason why the BIOS updates only supported hard drives aligned to 2048 and the error NTLDR is missing aligned to 63 occurred. And the cause is the usual one on slot 1 motherboards "a RAM memory bad contact". I was having more and more problems, hard drives when starting Windows that sometimes wouldn't read a file and finally the Windows CD-ROM said it wouldn't read a file when booting. Curiously, once Windows started, there were no problems, only files were missing from the boot. The BIOS said that I had 392 MiB RAM, but I removed and cleaned the SD-RAM modules and it turned out that I have 512 MiB RAM. Now the disks aligned to sector 63 are read, well except for a Seagate 40 GB that does not boot at either 63 or 2048. The funny thing is that it does boot if I first detect in the BIOS a Seagate with 20 GB and change the hard drive without updating information. In any case, the latest BIOS update v3.08 continues to cause several start attempts on all hard drives when resetting the system. Which v3.07 doesn't do. The problem is that only v3.08 supports hard drives with +32GB. In conclusion, this motherboard is very very problematic as a whole. Edit: To boot Windows from the Seagate 40 GB hard drive in Award BIOS, go to the IDE HDD AUTO DETECTION option and detect it. Then go to the STANDARD CMOS SETUP option and change the "Mode" option from LBA to AUTO, if in the SECTOR column it marks 255, change the value to 63.

They gave me a double penalty for posting a link to a browser compatible with Windows 7 that supposedly had pirated content. They told me it was permanent, but now I don't see it on my profile. It doesn't let me put some links to the forum but it does let me put some links outside the forum I think.

I have inserted another hard drive with a XP portable with ACPI installed. Now, with the original BIOS old version the BSOD 0xA5 with the message "ACPI not fully supported" occurs, so I updated the BIOS and now the system boots correctly. So the computer is compatible with ACPI. On the original hard drive I think the problem is that the ACPI.sys driver is not installed. It does not appear in the XP boot process even though I have changed the HAL to ACPI. So I conclude that in a original Standard PC installation it is not possible to change to HAL ACPI. Do you know if there is a way to install ACPI.SYS on a Standard PC installation? (then I would change the HAL files)

I don't know if this message that appears in the post is correct. It seems that this board does not have APIC and that the IRQs are limited. The strange thing is that when I installed Windows XP it identified the board as "Standard PC" and not "ACPI PC". I try to install the HAL ACPI manually and the following blue screen occurs. I don't know if it affects the fact that when installing Windows XP the acpi .sys driver will not be installed and if now I have to install this driver manually in addition to the HAL.

I will try it. Currently I also have the problem that the system does not allow me to post links that link to the MSFN forum itself. I don't understand the reason and if it happens to anyone else.

Thanks, I didn't know that. I will look at it. Although this seems like it's for modern hardware, it's not my circumstance...

SOLVED It's a strange hard drive alignment problem. I have verified that the partition is active with WinPE. From this all the data on the hard drive is perfectly accessible. However, I have booted a CD with MiniTool Partition Wizard Home 8.1.1 and I see that it does not indicate any active partitions. When I click on the "Boot Active partition" option, MiniTool tells me that it could not find the Windows installation. It's weird, with the Windows installation CD I can log into repair mode. Then I clicked on MiniTool on the align partitions option. Now the partition has been aligned to LBA 2048. I don't remember how much this one was aligned to before, surely 63. When I rebooted the error persisted, but I clicked in the BIOS on the "IDE HDD Auto Detection" option and then Windows XP began to boot. It is a strange problem, also with the BIOS update the hard drives have a hard time being detected, when I restart these make noises trying to boot for several seconds, with the BIOS old version it does not happen. There is no problem if I start the computer directly, the problem is when resetting. In any case, updating the BIOS has not solved the problem I was trying to solve. ACPI does not work for me on Windows XP. The HAL installed is Standard PC and if I install the HAL with ACPI when XP starts up it gives me a blue screen. Updating the BIOS did not solve it.

What browser and version are you using? I have tried Chrome 109 and Fifrefox 110.10.0 ESR. I hit refresh the page and the written text disappears.

I am trying right now with the boot order, I am putting in the bios that starts with: C: D: E: F: And nothing, the result is the same. I am starting a virtual XP on CD-ROM, I am going to try to align the partition with Minitool Partition Wizard. Edit: Minitool Partition Wizard Free cannot be executed in Winpe. Paragon Alingnment Test says it is aligned. It is a IDE Hard Disk Maxtor with 10GB

Forbidden You don't have permission to access this resource. " The worst of all, is that after writing a long message with the phrase "Boot .ini" there is no possibility of recovering the message, everything written is erased forever . The problem also happens if I edit a post and in the edition I add or modify an URL link.