Can an acer aspire one aoa150 run windows Me

[loblo]

Hmmm....

AFAICR isn't there a limitation of partition size, regardless of size of HDD with the patches?

I'm referring to the "wrap-around" problem we encountered with the 98SE stuff (I had "participated" in that topic).

No, but as disk maintenance tools don't work correctly above 120GB it's preferable to limit partitions to that size.

And anyway if we are speaking about a drive connected to a SATA controller, all the LBA48 talk is irrelevant to the issue.

Edited April 14, 2014 by loblo

[loblo]

I can access the bootlog.txt file in safemode, and also it is long. What exactly am I supposed to look for in the file.

The last line will tell you at which point the boot process stopped. If you compare it with bootlog.prv you can see if if any changes you made allowed the boot process to carry on further or not.

Edited April 14, 2014 by loblo

[Flasche]

Scrolled to bottom of bootlog.txt, and the last loadfail is webding.ttf, and the last load success is msgsrv32.exe .

[dencorso]

Hmmm....

AFAICR isn't there a limitation of partition size, regardless of size of HDD with the patches?

I'm referring to the "wrap-around" problem we encountered with the 98SE stuff (I had "participated" in that topic).

No, but as disk maintenance tools don't work correctly above 120GB it's preferable to limit partitions to that size.

And anyway if we are speaking about a drive connected to a SATA controller, all the LBA48 talk is irrelevant to the issue.

Which tools? FORMAT. SCANDISK and the Ranish Partition Manager all work OK up to about 1TiB (where DOS itself has a subtle bug). Hence up to 1TB (not 1 TiB), those three tools, at least should be safe to use. Norton/Symantec Ghost from 2003 to 11.5.1 are also safe to use in those conditions.

[loblo]

Which tools? FORMAT. SCANDISK and the Ranish Partition Manager all work OK up to about 1TiB (where DOS itself has a subtle bug). Hence up to 1TB (not 1 TiB), those three tools, at least should be safe to use. Norton/Symantec Ghost from 2003 to 11.5.1 are also safe to use in those conditions.

Mmmh, I was under the strong impression that it had been established that scandisk/defrag choked on partitions bigger than 120GB but I am probably wrong then.

[dencorso]

I probably can locate the main thread it was discussed in... Edit <some time later>: the jump-back link at the right upper corner in the quote below works as intended and will get one to the quoted thread if clicked upon.

From the present thread and from hdd size limits?, I think I have enough material to create this summary of what we do know at present about the limits of the different programs related to HDD formating, partitioning and maintenance, so here it goes:

The limit for NDD32.EXE (up to v. 19.0.1.8, from NSW 2008) is somewhere between 7.8 and 7.9 million clusters, or somewhere between 61.0 and 61.7 thousand sectors per FAT (as I now believe it crashes when reading the FATs to a buffer in memory).

The limit for SCANDSKW.EXE (4.90.0.3000) is somewhere between 26.4 and 26.6 million clusters, or somewhere between 206.1 and 207.7 thousand sectors per FAT. It crashed with Marius '95 1 TB raid single partition (link), although 98-Guy has reported it works up to 31.2 million clusters (follow the links inside this post).

SCANDISK.EXE from Win ME works, at least, up to 1 TB, according to Marius '95, and to 31.2 million clusters, according to 98-Guy (both these limits are about the same, for a 1 TB partition, using 32 kiB clusters, has about 31 million clusters).

NDD.EXE for DOS (2002 ..10E) also is reported by the same users as having the same limits as those of SCANDISK.EXE, but that's now doubtful, because it crashes for wsxedcrfv with 22.9 million clusters. In any case, Marius '95, for whom it worked, said it was very slow, so maybe he just didn't wait enough time for it to crash...

FORMAT.EXE works up to, at least 1018 GiB, but above 1TiB a divide error occurs, according to RLoew, in the present thread.

And the limit of Petr's fixed FDISK (based on the FDISK contained in this update: KB263044, which has a numerical display bug) is 512 GB, according to Microsoft (KB280737), and confirmed in the present thread. Suitable alternatives are The Ranish Partition Manager, although it is not adequate to format the partitions it creates, because of defaulting to 16 kiB clusters, or the Free FDISK v. 1.2.1, or Symantec's GDISK (not free), or RLoew's RFDISK (not free).

This other thread also has a little more info, which boils down to: the recommended source for those utilities remains BHDD31.

[submix8c]

Errr... it MAY have been the one that rloew also participated in that had the wrap-around bug when using some combo of Logical Drives in an Extended Partition. As I said, there were several of us involved in that. Not really sure if it also involved NTFS paritions or not. Something about the pointers incorrectly being translated. No time to find it now, but it WAS a problem. (NOT SATA!) "Ghost" drive letters was also part the subject AFAICR. I nearly blew my OS/Data due to it.

Gotta bounce a little and go. Just pointing out another "potential" glitch (may not be tagged anywhere in the "pinned" list).

edit - AHHH! I believe this is the one.

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/153194-installation-of-2tb-hard-disk/

and another related.

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/144947-phantom-drive-letter/

and another (find "phantom").

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/118119-patched-iosys-for-9xme/page-2

You may not have a problem after all?

Edited April 14, 2014 by submix8c

[Flasche]

I'm going to do a reinstall with acpi removed (setup /p i) I'll post results here.

[rloew]

The LBA48 issue applies to SATA as well as PATA. SATA supporting BIOSes are new enough not to have the LBA48 problem but Windows 9x still would. The LBA48 Patch is separate from my SATA Patch. Partition size is not limited by the LBA48 issue, total disk size is.

Windows 98 SCANDISK/DEFRAG is limited to 128GB Partitions. Use Windows ME SCANDISK/DEFRAG for larger Partitions.

[Flasche]

The LBA48 issue applies to SATA as well as PATA. SATA supporting BIOSes are new enough not to have the LBA48 problem but Windows 9x still would. The LBA48 Patch is separate from my SATA Patch. Partition size is not limited by the LBA48 issue, total disk size is.

Windows 98 SCANDISK/DEFRAG is limited to 128GB Partitions. Use Windows ME SCANDISK/DEFRAG for larger Partitions.

Well I am using windows Me so that shouldn't be an issue, though I use the 98se boot disk for the /s command. Not sure how relevant the 98se boot disk part is, but what ever.

[dencorso]

The 149GB report is not an issue. 160GB = 149GiB. Some BIOSes report GB, some report GiB without making it clear which

The LLXX Patches do not support SATA, only large hard drives.

SATA? Are you sure? The Acer Aspire One AOA150 is based on a ICH7-M, for sure, so it might have a SATA150 or a Ultra-DMA 133 or 100 HDD.

Hats off to you, RLoew! It actually is a SATA-300 HDD (which must work at SATA150, because of the southbridge limitation)!

Here's a detailed description of the dis- and re-assembly of an Acer Aspire One AOA150 having a 120 GB HDD (a SATA one, for sure).

So... RLoew's SATA patch will be needed, besides (and, in fact, on top) od LLXX's modded ESDI_506.PDR. There's no avoiding it.

[Flasche]

The 149GB report is not an issue. 160GB = 149GiB. Some BIOSes report GB, some report GiB without making it clear which

The LLXX Patches do not support SATA, only large hard drives.

SATA? Are you sure? The Acer Aspire One AOA150 is based on a ICH7-M, for sure, so it might have a SATA150 or a Ultra-DMA 133 or 100 HDD.

Hats off to you, RLoew! It actually is a SATA-300 HDD (which must work at SATA150, because of the southbridge limitation)!

Here's a detailed description of the dis- and re-assembly of an Acer Aspire One AOA150 having a 120 GB HDD (a SATA one, for sure).

So... RLoew's SATA patch will be needed, besides (and, in fact, on top) od LLXX's modded ESDI_506.PDR. There's no avoiding it.

Great . Where can I find this patch, and how much is it.

[dencorso]

At RLoew's. US$11.

[Flasche]

At RLoew's. US$11.

He can expect an order with in the next two weeks.

[submix8c]

Please note that my comment/links indicate an entirely different problem (with associated warnings by rloew, myself, jaclaz, dencorso, et al). As long as you don't have such conditions you should be safe.

As far as the netbook's requirements, I can't remember if the Aspire One KAV60-AOD250 (undoubtedly similar) I worked on at one time allowed for the BIOS to be changed to "PATA" mode (it had a SATA drive as well). Indeed, it had Windows XP Home on it (stock OEM with Recovery Partition and all). Whether that's useful or not, I don't know. Still, the Patch would be well worth it.