Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


  • Content count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About risk_reversal

Profile Information

  • OS
    XP Home
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

809 profile views
  1. Boot Issues

    Yes. Thanks. I will download them and have a play. Since I am testing at least I can break anything ! I have never used the XP Disk Manager. Only GParted and BootIt. Cheers
  2. Boot Issues

    Hi, Not sure this belongs in this in this section but here goes. I recently ran into an issue in aligning my new SSD drive. The problem revolved around moving and growing partitions which resulted in boot errors. I managed to resolve the problem but wanted to make sure that my solution was sound so that I could rely on it in the future. To this end I was wondering if I detailed what I did whether someone very much more knowledgeable could offer some advice. I received a new SSD drive to upgrade my current HDD (non ssd). I cloned all the partitions with Clonezilla, the partitions are in the following order: XP, Win 7 and a data partition. Everything went ok and I could boot into both o/s from the SSD. I then proceeded to check the alignment of the SSD drive which showed that the SSD was not aligned correctly (in System Properties). I used GParted (have used it before) to move the partitions as per this article. http://blog.eracks.com/2012/08/proper-alignment-of-your-ssd-using-gparted-open-source-software/comment-page-1/ However, upon trying to boot into XP, I got the following message (as per screenshot). Win 7 would not boot either At this point I did try to use the recovery console on XP and Win 7 but will skip detailling this for now. I then decided to move the partitions back to where they were before. XP booted ok but with Win 7 I needed to use the recovery disc method to fix it. In any case at this point both o/s partitions were booting fine. I read through several posts and some were advocating the use of Mini Tool Partition Wizard (free). I downloaded this tool and installed it on XP. I proceeded to open the software and align the XP (1st partition) which it did correctly. Mini Tool Partition Wizard said that the Win 7 did not require alignment. There were no issues booting to XP or Win 7 after using Mini Parttion Tool Wizard.. I also used Mini Tool Partition Wizard to test and move the Win 7 partition along the disc, which it did correctly and again there were no booting issues. It moved Win 7 within XP ie no reboot. So any reason why Gparted is giving boot errors when I try to align / move partitions? Should I just be using Mini Tool Partition Wizard as it seems to work? Was this the better way. Not sure what to make of it as I have read many post about users who run into boot problems when they resize their partitions especially if they dual boot XP and Win 7 As I said at the beginning of my post I wanted to make sure that what I did was correct, for future use. Sorry for long post and many thanks for any info provided Cheers
  3. Windows 7 - Drive Lettering

    Thanks jaclaz, I am now completely and totally convinced to leave the drive lettering as is. Cheers
  4. Windows 7 - Drive Lettering

    Did try did Disk Management in Win 7. It wouldn't let me move any. Yeah. I tried and it said no. Ok. Best leave it alone. In XP, I did manage to change the drive letter of Win 7 from E:\ to Z:\. However this is on a test system. I was just trying to tidy it up so as to look more orderly, but perhaps better not to touch anything and change any associations. Cheers and thanks
  5. Windows 7 - Drive Lettering

    Hi, I wonder if someone can please help. I dual boot XP & Win 7. The HDD lettering in Win 7 (In My Computer) is as follows. Is there any way to change the partition / drive lettering? Basically, I wanted to have XP as C:\ and Win 7 as D:\ [the drive lettering on DATA (E:\)] is fine. Here is a pic taken from the net where the Win 7 boot / active partition is not labelled as C:\ but as E:\. Also, can someone please tell me if that is possible in XP. This is my current layout. I wanted to have the following: XP on C:\ is fine. But I wanted to have Win7 as D:\ and DATA on E:\ Can this also be done please? Many thanks for any info provided Cheers
  6. Old Mobo running XP - SSD / SATA III compatibility

    Many thanks for your reply and info jaclaz. Let me ask you a final question. If I get say a SATA III replacement drive and the throughput of the new drive is say 120MB/s. Since the bandwidth of the PCI bus is only a max of 133MB/s what is going to happen to the data flow along the PCI bus if I am using other devices located on the PCI bus at the same time or if I am copying data from one HDD to the other. For clarity although I have 2 HDDs in my rig, I use the 2nd HDD to copy and save the data from the 1st disc as well as making images of the system partition. Many thanks for your help
  7. Old Mobo running XP - SSD / SATA III compatibility

    Many thanks for your reply jaclaz Although I am currently running two SATA II HDDs on the onboard Promise Controller, I have used the limiting jumpers on the HDDs (at the back) to restrict them to SATA I speed. Both drives are Seagates, one is the ST3500514NS it's an Enterprise drive. I have never tried the drives without the limiting jumper. The reason being that my Asus motherboard also has the Via on board SATA controller (chipset VT8237) which is not compatible with SATA II HDDs. At the time there were many posts about data corruption on the Via SATA controller with SATA II HDDs and the only way to make them work was by limiting them to SATA I. With this corruption in mind, I made the perhaps false but logical move to limit my HDDs to SATA I even though there was no evidence to the contrary when putting them on the onboard Promise Controller. I though the minor speed boost was not worth the safety aspect. I did however take into account the following: 1. That there was a possibility that the onboard Promise Controller may not be compatible and 2. As you are probably aware the onboard Promise Controller 20378 shares the PCI bus with other PCI devices and runs at 133MB/s (at 32 bit which my board has). If a drive is going to be using 150MB/s+ then a bottleneck would inevitably occur on the PCI bus. This could cause issues and potentially data corruption. Setting the Promise Controller to IDE mode in the bios, I beleive, merely allows for HDDs to be used in an individual and separate manner. Year ago I had an MSI KT3 Ultra 2 board which had an older Promise Controller on board with no IDE mode and it was still possible to arrange this set up (ie running 2 independant and separate HDDs in a 1+0 single strip single disc RAID-0) even though the Promise Controller had Raid option only. What I am trying to say is that setting the Promise Controller to Raid or IDE in the bios would merely change only how the drives are to be interpreted by the Promise Controller. There is a post made by a user years ago in the Asus forum who attached SSD and SATA III drives to the same motherboard that I have and put them on the Promise Controller. Both drives were detected by the Promise Controller bios and Windows. He reported that Windows XP now booted in 1/3 of the time. If that is so and all the data was flowing into the PCI bus, then it is logical to assume that the onboard Pomise Controller is not limiting any speed and that all the bandwidth on the PCI bus itself must be being used. Whenever bottlenecks occur, data corruption is never far behing. Do you see what I mean I am not too sure what you are saying. Are saying that selecting IDE mode in the bios for the onboard Promise Controller will only allow drives to run at a theoretical max of 133MB/s? BTW, it I run HD Tune on both of my drives, I get about 75MB/s for each. Which makes me confortable given that the PCI bus can handle up to 133MB/s. Not sure if I am confused but if you have any further thoughts let me know. Cheers
  8. Old Mobo running XP - SSD / SATA III compatibility

    I have run across one post from a user who upgraded his system in this way and stated that the onboard Promise Controller 378 does indeed detect SATA III / SSD and that XP also sees thos HDDs. No further info was provided in terms of the stability of that connection, as far as data corruption is concerned. This is what I would like infomation on.
  9. Hi guys, Wonder if any of you can help. I am running an old rig, Asus A8V Deluxe Rev 2.0. I am trying to upgrade a HDD and wanted to know about SATA compatibilty. My current set up is that I am running 2 SATA II HDDs from the onboard Promise Controller (Sata 378 TX2 plus). The bios is set up to run in IDE mode so the drives run independently (ie non raid). Although my HDDs are SATA II, I have set the jumper on them to work in SATA I mode. My question is not strictly to do with XP but more so in respect of the onboard HW that I am running. Since a lot of you are runnig XP, I am sure that some of you must have older HW as well and perhaps someone has had to solve this problem. Question: Is my onboard Promise Controller able to operate SATA III HDDs and not lead to data corruption of any kind. The Asus forum has an example of someone who has upgraded his drives to SSD / SATA III on the Promise Controller and he reports success. However, the user does not provide any further info and certainly no details of any data corruption that he may have experienced subsequently. So I would ideally like to have real live info as regards this. I don't think that the board manufacturer is important as the onboard Promise Controller SATA 378 was used on many boards of that era. Many thanks for any info provided. Cheers
  10. Discussion On Best Windows 98SE Data Backup Program

    Sorry, misread the OP's requirements which was for data backup. In which case, I use SyncBack. Version 3.2.18 works on 98SE (even through filehippo does not show it under requirements) http://www.filehippo.com/download_syncback/tech/3792/ Good Luck
  11. Discussion On Best Windows 98SE Data Backup Program

    I personally use Images for Dos v1.99. http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/image-for-dos-v1.htm Spartan interface, will do byte for byte copy. The TBI viewer will allow you to view or extract individual files from an image. Does not install but runs from a bootable cd (which I prefer) and will create images directly to external media via usb2 (or burn to CD/DVD). Not free but excellent in my opinion. I did try Acronis prior to that but for some reason I had issues. Good Luck
  12. WIN98SE, recommeded Servicepacks

    If you have usb1.1 then NUSB 2.x (last I beleive 2.4) will be fine. Version3.x will add software for USB2 controller but if you have a mobo with that has that already installed then v2.4 again will be fine. I only ever use version 2.4 irrespective of whether my mobo has usb 1.1 or 2.0. You might also consider using the winME defragmenter. The items I use are. 1. NUBS (it has detected all that I have thrown at it. Cameras, thumb drives, external HDs and USB hub on a Dell monitor) 2. WinME defragmenter 3. KernelEX (to allow you to run quite a few other progs made for XP) 4. RLoew's ram limitation patch (I dual boot 98se & XP with 2gb of ram) other than that I have customised the desktops, icons, etc but all that is merely cosmetics The other limitation as has been mentioned is the 137GB HD size. I overcome this by using a third party onboard Promise controller and hence do not have to rely on the 98SE drivers. Good Luck
  13. Apologies for resurrecting an older thread but as regards formatting tools I use BiNG. Although not freeware, there is a trial period. Furthermore (and similarly to PM which I also use), it can be run from a bootable CD with no installation, which is the way I like to run any partition manager utility. BiNG will detect hard drives connected via USB2 and will allow formats, resizing, etc. My use of PM was superseded to an extent by BiNG simply because I was under the impression that PM8 (which I understand Norton has now dropped from its line up) could only handle max partition sizes of 320GB. On previous PM versions that I used eg PM6 there was also a size limitation officially of 40-50gb but would work to 80gb. Beyond the safe limits PM would just crash the partition on any attempt to create or resize.. I too have external USB drives formatted to FAT32 my largest is 500gb (465GiB) and works fine. Not sure if I feel confident having a larger partition than that. As an aside (and I am sure that a lot of you are well aware of this) one can also use GParted as a (free) partition manager (create, resize, etc) this prog can either be downloaded as a standalone utility or can be run from a Linux Live CD (I particularly like Puppy Linux, which I also have installed on a dual boot system). GParted is quick efficient and as safe as BiNG. Good Luck
  14. KernelEX - Newbie Questions

    Correct. At install I did indeed select the option NOT to enable kernelEX on all executables by default. Cheers
  15. KernelEX - Newbie Questions

    My question was more to do with the procedure that I used, ie is that generally the way to go about it in using KernelEX. If you see what I mean Cheers