TmEE Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 On my PIII I created a partition that is little less than 128GBytes and a second one that used the remaining space. The second partition I always kept alone, except when I was running Win XP, I generally held backup archives on that partition. For a while I used a DDO that Seagate provided but it caused me difficulties on my DOS stuff I was doing at that time because of the extra memory it needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rloew Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 I wrote a DDO called BOOTMAN that is on my website.It takes up a lot less space than the Disk Manufacturers DDOs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaclaz Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 There's more.This is only the minimum to get a system to work.The last Partition must start below 128GiB and cover all of the remaining Space. Otherwise Ghost Partitions may appear and potentially cause problems.If the Hard Drive goes into compatability mode, for ANY reason, corruption is almost guaranteed.The rules I listed previously also apply to Windows NT, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, and 8.If you want to use a LBA28 BIOS without a DDO, good luck to you.And again, no real issues if one uses some common sense and does things "properly", and is not "obsessed" with using the entire space of the hard disk.If one has a LBA28 BIOS, that is a VERY OLD machine, manufactured around 2001 or before, most probably with a very limited amount of RAM, and most probably the ONLY OS that would run smoothly on it - apart Win9x would be NT 4.00, 2K already needs in my experience 128 Mb of Ram to "behave" (provided that one uses not a "modern" browser or a recent AV suite, otherwise the bare minimum becomes 256 Kb).And of course anything later than 2K (possibly included 2K) will be slow as molasses.BTW, since the "official" LBA48 is part of the ATA-6 standard ("officially" dated 2003 but adopted earlier by most manufacturers), a motherboard not supporting it would be at the most ATA-5, i.e. with UDMA/66 speed.jaclaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rloew Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 I have a Tyan S1590 manufactured in 1998. It supports 384MB of RAM, enough for later OSes.I Patched the BIOS to provide LBA48 support.I have seen Motherboards as late as 2003 with faulty LBA48 support. I'm sure they can handle XP.And again, no real issues if one uses some common sense and does things "properly", and is not "obsessed" with using the entire space of the hard disk.I repeat, good luck to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaclaz Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 I repeat, good luck to you.Thanks , but I need it not.Luck (if needed) is for the future.What I was talking about was experience (past).If you prefer I had in the past enough luck already to be able - with the exception of a few disk drive hardware failures (and even in those cases without actual data loss as I had valid backups) never lost (apparently) not even a single byte of data in any accident connected with LBA28, LBA48 or their good or bad/defective implementation in any BIOS of any machine I happened to own (or use or repair/set up).Everything can happen (always) but after some 20 years playing with PC's, when something never happens I feel authorized to say that it is a bit unlikely (as said if some common sense is used).In my simplicity I believe that anyone running today obsolete software (no offence whatever intended to the good Win9x/Me lovers) on obsolete hardware (and again no offence whatever intended for those peeps that - BTW like myself - have fun in using/re-using such things) should be aware (or made so) of the possible issues/limits and of the possible solutions/workarounds but - with all due respect - your posts about these issues sound a tidbit "catastrophical" to me.jaclaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rloew Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 I repeat, good luck to you.Thanks , but I need it not.Luck (if needed) is for the future.What I was talking about was experience (past).If you prefer I had in the past enough luck already to be able - with the exception of a few disk drive hardware failures (and even in those cases without actual data loss as I had valid backups) never lost (apparently) not even a single byte of data in any accident connected with LBA28, LBA48 or their good or bad/defective implementation in any BIOS of any machine I happened to own (or use or repair/set up).Everything can happen (always) but after some 20 years playing with PC's, when something never happens I feel authorized to say that it is a bit unlikely (as said if some common sense is used).In my simplicity I believe that anyone running today obsolete software (no offence whatever intended to the good Win9x/Me lovers) on obsolete hardware (and again no offence whatever intended for those peeps that - BTW like myself - have fun in using/re-using such things) should be aware (or made so) of the possible issues/limits and of the possible solutions/workarounds but - with all due respect - your posts about these issues sound a tidbit "catastrophical" to me.jaclazIt sounds like you are fairly quick in moving to newer hardware and software for your critical systems. This would significantly reduce your window of vulnerability. By the time there were a significant number of LBA48 Hard Drivesbig enough to justify using them, LBA48 BIOSes were available.Even with the vulnerability, the risk is relatively low, but the corruption, especially when caused by the BIOS, IScatastrophic. Backups won't work if you haven't had a chance to make them, or if you have unknowingly corrupted files and backed them up to all of your backup media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTS Posted August 7, 2013 Author Share Posted August 7, 2013 (edited) If this ever happens again the first thing I need to do, is run a recovery program, instead of Error checker. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................So here is my take, I reinstalled windows and used the USP3, and installed. I have not breached the 128Gig limit. Otherwise I do not care anymore becuause this is pure looney tunes. I will get back to this topic to see if the patch worked or not. I also see their is a patch floatingaround that you have to pay for as well, which is also reasonable. ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Why do i feel this is pure looney insanity? Because Microsoft on purposely limited windows 9x and Me. Even limited the usage of scandisk and fdisk. Imagine how many user tools are out their for FAT32 and is limited because nobody ever thought about usageof 200GB or 2TB drives? ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................To top things off I am from the 2d, VHS generation. Thinking back to all my struggles with downloading, Windows was never meant to be used for anything of that sort. 4000MB is alot of space for a file size, and I remember back when I thought 12MB was a big file. I don't want to think about the past anymore, especially after the last ten years. ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................So my final decision is just to leave it alone, for now, and get back to it at a later date. Win98 is auwsome but l have to deal with programming etc and stuff. Edited August 7, 2013 by ROTS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now