Enable48BitLBA | Break the 137Gb barrier!

[galahs]

I was just thinking of other ways to get around the limitation. I only said 32GB because that's all WinXP will create for you. Of course you could go higher (upto 137GB) using FDISK.

For extra storage you could use a portable USB2 Hard Disk (formatted to FAT32) as it isn't effected by the limit.

I think this method would be a good option for people that need Win9x for older apps but mostly use Win2k/XP/Vista as their workhorse OS.

How do you hide the other partitions from Win98? (and so that WinXP can still sees it?)

P.S. I have used the patch on non critical machines, but I'm still a touch nervous on recommending this option to anyone who will be storing important information beyond the 137GB barrier.

[atlasrune]

Its my first post. but I couldn't help but noticing

4102226F.ZIP ( 14.1K ) Number of downloads: 1337

^_^

[briton]

Its my first post. but I couldn't help but noticing

4102226F.ZIP ( 14.1K ) Number of downloads: 1337

^_^

I have been suggesting for some time that the sticky gets Moderated to show people which file to download because of that figure.

On the other hand, if you read it, it does state which version is for what. The trouble is that the numbering suggests that one is the "latest" version.

Ah well, if people come to that sticky, read nothing at all and download the wrong file, maybe that is supposed to happen! lol

[briton]

How do you hide the other partitions from Win98? (and so that WinXP can still sees it?)

Well, I boot with XOSL which allows setting which partitions are visible. But XP will see the Win98SE partitions anyway so you don't have to worry about it. That is unless you use Ranish Partition Manager and do the famous (infamous?) delete partition info from the table so that NOTHING can see it!

I believe most boot managers allow hiding of partitions. XOSL just happens to be FREE

[danielc56]

Hi all,

I'm a continuing Win 9x/Win2K user. The MSFN forum posts (and members) have been invaluable in providing information for a user like me. My old 120GB drives are dying, and I want to move to larger hard drives. I've been reading all the threads about large hard drives & Windows 9x.

After reading through just about everything, I've attempted to write down all the relevant information in one place. I'm sure I missed stuff, and got some things wrong as well. Would you mind checking to see if what is missing or incorrect?

There's a few assumptions made about software and hardware:

-a retail copy of Windows 98SE or ME.

-a 'big HDD' that goes above 137/128 GB limit in Windows 98SE or ME (like my just purchased 500GB drive).

-a modern BIOS and IDE controller that are compatible with big HDD's.

-a software driver like IAA, Enable48BitLBA, or other program that allows Windows 98SE or ME to recognize big HDDs (hypothetically with no problems, for this exercise).

Here goes...

---------------Scenario 1 - Installing plain vanilla Windows 98SE/ME to a 'big HDD' with no data---------------

1) FDISK can create partition(s) up the to the first 128GB.

2) Windows Setup can successfully format FAT32 partitions up to the first 128GB.

3) Windows Setup Scandisk will behave normally, with no ill effect to the HDD or install process.

4) Partition(s) completely within the first 128GB behave normally, with no ill effect from Windows Defrag/Scandisk.

5) Unpartitoned space above 128GB will simply remain unrecognized, with no ill effects from Windows Defrag/Scandisk.

---------------Scenario 2 - Installing plain vanilla Windows 98SE/ME to a 'big HDD' with existing data---------------

1a) Windows Setup can create a partition if there's unpartitioned space in the first 128GB of the HDD (using FDISK).

1b) Windows Setup can use an existing partition (if available) within the first 128GB of the HDD.

2a) Creating partition(s) (with FDISK) within the first 128GB won't damage data in the space above the 128GB limit.

2b) Formatting partitions (in FAT32 format) within the first 128GB won't damage data above the 128GB limit.

3) Windows Setup Scandisk MUST be disabled to prevent damaging data above 128GB limit.

4) Scandisk & Defrag *SHOULD NEVER* be run before installing a 48bit LBA driver, to prevent damage to any data above the 128GB limit.

5) Disable "run Scandisk on bad shutdowns" from MSConfig to prevent damage to data above the 128GB limit.

6) Windows simply won't recognize any partition(s) above the 128GB limit, but will leave it(them) untouched as long as 4) & 5) are done..

---------------Scenario 3 - Adding a 'big HDD' to an existing Windows 98SE/ME computer without 48bit LBA support---------------

1) If its a new disk, partitioning/formatting it will only enable the first 128GB usable.

2) If it has existing data, only the first 128GB will be viewable.

3) Scandisk & Defrag *SHOULD NEVER* be run before installing a 48bit LBA driver, to prevent damage to any data above the 128GB limit.

4) Disable "run Scandisk on bad shutdowns" from MSConfig to prevent damage to any data above the 128GB limit.

5) Windows simply won't recognize any partition(s) starting above 128GB, but will leave it(them) untouched as long as 3) & 4) are done...

---------------Scenario 4 - Adding a 'big HDD' to an existing Windows 98SE/ME computer with 48bit LBA support---------------

1) MSConfig can keep "run Scandisk on bad shutdowns" enabled (???)

2) Copying data across the 'old' 128GB-limit partitions (or across multiple 'big HD drives') is possible with no data corruption.

3a) Windows 98 SE Scandisk and Defrag DOESN'T work

3b) Windows ME Scandisk and Defrag DOES (???) work*

*I find this surprising but I'm pretty sure I read a few posts that Windows ME Scandisk/Defrag don't have the same problem as Win98SE, once 48-bit LBA support is enabled.

----------

So that's it. Maybe its all right, or all wrong (probably somewhere in between). Anyway, I'm just hoping to get all the information gathered in one spot. Please let me know of any further things I could expect to deal with in the above scenarios.

Additionally, I still have more questions like:

-In Scenario 3 - does running Scandisk/Defrag corrupt data on the whole drive, or just data above the 128GB limit?

-Are there any unforeseen issues when booting into safe mode?

-Is there a difference in how Scandisk's standard and thorough modes affect a big HDD?

-Is there any worry about data corruption or instability from other Windows system tools?

You guys/girls are great!

First post! woohoo!

danielc56

[galahs]

I know you can use beyond 137GB of a portable USB2 Hard Disk when you use the manufacturers driver.

but what if you just use the Mass Storage Device driver from the unofficial NUSB 3.2 and don't use the Manufacturers driver. Does windows then access the portable disk using windows ESDI_506.PDR ???

Edit: I just checked system properties for:

Storage Device --> USB Disk --> Properties --> Driver File Details

C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\IOSUBSYS\USBMPHLP.PDR

C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VMM32\IOS.vxd

and

Universal Serial Bus Controllers --> USB Mass Storage Device --> Properties --> Driver File Details

C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DRIVERS\USBSTOR.SYS

C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VMM32.VXD (ntkern.vxd)

C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DRIVERS\USBNTMAP.SYS

So it looks like it doesn't need ESDI_506.PDR updated?

Am I correct?

Edited November 10, 2007 by galahs

[oscardog]

Its my first post. but I couldn't help but noticing

4102226F.ZIP ( 14.1K ) Number of downloads: 1337

^_^

I have been suggesting for some time that the sticky gets Moderated to show people which file to download because of that figure.

On the other hand, if you read it, it does state which version is for what. The trouble is that the numbering suggests that one is the "latest" version.

Ah well, if people come to that sticky, read nothing at all and download the wrong file, maybe that is supposed to happen! lol

Perhaps atlasrune was refering to leet, to primarily describe the behavior or accomplishments of others in the community

[Lecco]

Hello folks,

i recently bought a brand new 500GB WD drive. I made one small 10GB partition with fdisk, formatted it and went on with installing W98. Everything OK, I installed all device drivers, no problems so far.

Then I plugged the drive into my existing system:

Intel P4 2.8GHz

MSI MSI 865PE Neo2-P Platinum Edition

256 MB RAM DDR

ATI Radeon 9800

120GB SATA + 80GB ATA drives, both from WD

Win 98 SE

48bit LBA patch from LLXX applied

I made a few partitions with Partition Magic 8.0 as you can see in the picture.

The problem now is: if I try to copy my music collection to the drive J: (HUDBA), after some time, I get BSOD with the following text (I tried to translate it, Im not sure if it is exactly the same as in the english version of W98):

Failure when writing

Cannot write onto the drive J:

Some files could be lost

Press any key

Now Im quite puzzled what it means, if I press a key, the copying continues for a while until the BSOD comes again. Does that mean that the drive I bought is defective?

Any help would be appreciated because now Im stuck and cant use the harddrive properly.

[eidenk]

What does scandisk say about drive J ?

Has it been formated with Partition Magic or Windows ?

Can you copy your files onto other partitions of that disk ?

[Lecco]

What does scandisk say about drive J ?

No problems, I have performed the standard scan.

Has it been formated with Partition Magic or Windows ?

Partition created and formatted with PM.

Can you copy your files onto other partitions of that disk ?

No, i cant.

[dencorso]

i recently bought a brand new 500GB WD drive. I made one small 10GB partition with fdisk, formatted it and went on with installing W98. Everything OK, I installed all device drivers, no problems so far.

Lecco, you have my sympathy. Now, tell us your brand new 500GB WD drive, is it PATA or SATA? Because, if it IS SATA, then LLXX 48bit LBA oughtn't help you in any way (read older posts in this thread, and you'll confirm this). Then your problem is getting the right VSATAVSD.VXD and related files, that is the right SATA driver for Win 98SE. The downside is that, AFAIK, only Via provides one, and I do not know whether it is a generic driver masquerading as product specific, or if not. HTH

Edited November 11, 2007 by dencorso

[Lecco]

The harddrive is SATA. I thought, if I have switched the disk configuration in BIOS to Compatible mode, the harddrive would act like PATA and there will be no problem with it. As I see, I was totally wrong.

I downloaded the VIA raid driver, launching setup brings up only an error message about not having the right hardware. Trying to install the driver manually from Viaraid.zip\VIARAID\SATA\driver\Win98-me didnt help. (or at least I dont think so)

I actually read the whole thread, searching for my answer and got even more confused than before...programming isnt definitely my thing.

[briton]

Its my first post. but I couldn't help but noticing

4102226F.ZIP ( 14.1K ) Number of downloads: 1337

^_^

I have been suggesting for some time that the sticky gets Moderated to show people which file to download because of that figure.

etc...

Perhaps atlasrune was refering to leet, to primarily describe the behavior or accomplishments of others in the community

Well, I hope we all appreciate the accomplishments of the contributors.

However, as one who was misled into thinking that I should download the "latest" version when I first visited this thread, I thought atlasrune was once again highlighting the fact that, comparing the download figures for each version, it would appear that the world has more IBM laptops running Win98SE with >137GB disks than there are desktop PCs doing the same. So unlikely that it seems obvious that most people are downloading the WRONG version. Version 2226 was specifically for IBM laptops with version 2226 of the original Windows file ONLY.

The numbers suggest that most current downloads are by people who are simply grabbing the latest version even though it is the WRONG version.

My advice to ANYONE not sure what to do is to download Autopatcher (this site, other thread) which includes both versions of the Enable48bit patch (IBM laptop and desktop PC) with options menu. If you use that, the only reason I can think of to install the patch individually ahead of autopatching would be either because your Win98SE partition is above the 137GB barrier so the installation fails on reboot (in which case you simply start in DOS and manually switch the file) or because you know that the Win98SE OS will write above the barrier before you can run Autopatcher (rare and requires you to have something else installed which will write there).

My advice to the moderators is to add a note in the download sticky in this thread on each version so that people will see, for example, against 2226F "Only for IBM laptops with version 2226 installed" or similar.

Edited November 11, 2007 by briton

[eidenk]

The harddrive is SATA. I thought, if I have switched the disk configuration in BIOS to Compatible mode, the harddrive would act like PATA and there will be no problem with it. As I see, I was totally wrong.

I downloaded the VIA raid driver, launching setup brings up only an error message about not having the right hardware. Trying to install the driver manually from Viaraid.zip\VIARAID\SATA\driver\Win98-me didnt help. (or at least I dont think so)

I actually read the whole thread, searching for my answer and got even more confused than before...programming isnt definitely my thing.

If your mobo has SATA connectors, the CD that comes with it should have SATA drivers on it.

Actually I wonder if it's possible to access SATA drives at all without them installed.

[galahs]

The harddrive is SATA. I thought, if I have switched the disk configuration in BIOS to Compatible mode, the harddrive would act like PATA and there will be no problem with it. As I see, I was totally wrong.

I downloaded the VIA raid driver, launching setup brings up only an error message about not having the right hardware. Trying to install the driver manually from Viaraid.zip\VIARAID\SATA\driver\Win98-me didnt help. (or at least I dont think so)

I actually read the whole thread, searching for my answer and got even more confused than before...programming isnt definitely my thing.

If your mobo has SATA connectors, the CD that comes with it should have SATA drivers on it.

Actually I wonder if it's possible to access SATA drives at all without them installed.

Yeah I'm sure you need drivers to access a SATA drive on Win98