Problem in Windows 98SE after changing hard drive.

Get Seagate's hard drive diagnostic software from their web site and check
the health of the drive.

I have never had a conflict between different brands of hard drives and I
mixed up quite a few different brands.

--
Regards

Ron Badour, MS MVP for W98
Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
Knowledge Base Info:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo

"Stan Hilliard" wrote in message
...
Here is my latest situation.

1) Seagate Support told me to re-initialize the drive by zero-filling
it with the latest version of their DiscWizard Starter Edition, which
I did.

2) Seagate Support told me to use Fdisk to make partitions, but when I
did, Fdisk told me that a 70 GB partition was 10 GB. So I started over
zero filled, and used PartitionMagic to make partitions and copy
partitions.

3) I can see the whole 80 GB drive with Windows Explorer and with
PartitionMagic.

3) I can now successfully boot with the PM recovery diskettes. The
failure due to Disk Manager does not occur. I think that when I
first used DiscWizard to try to make partitions -- that is what put
Drive Manager on the HDD.

4) After copying the Win98 C: partition to the new drive and properly
setting the swap drive, the system was still extremely slow -- that
was my original problem!!!!

5) Performance was finally restored by re-cabling the two HDDs on the
ATA100 card -- as suggested by Seagate Support.

Original (bad)
Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
Primary cable, slave = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)

New (good)
Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
Secondary cable, master = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)

I haven't run the new arrangement long enough to be sure, but I think
that problem is "fixed".

6) I have two further questions:

1) Scandisk says that the Seagate drive has 4 MB in bad sectors. I do
not know if that is real, or if it happened due to the temporary
cabling setup. Is that bad enough to suggest that over time there will
be more problems?

2) I have various other IBM and Western Digital drives that I connect
up to make backups. There should be a more prevention-oriented way to
permanently fix the conflict between the drives. Any suggestions?

I appreciate all the help in tracking this down,
Stan Hilliard

=========
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:51:50 -0500, Stan Hilliard
wrote:

I replaced my 20 G HDD with a 80 G HDD. I copied the partitions from
the old to the new drive with Partition Magic version 6.

skipping a few steps

1) After changing drives, it took 8-10 minutes to boot off the new
drive.

2) The Partition magic "Partitioninfo" utility does not find any
errors with the C: partition. However, Partition Magic "Check for
errors" on drive C: gave this message:

Error - 993. Partition contains open files. Use the operating system
check utility.

3) Scandisk showed about 15 files with this message: (example)

C:\Windows\desktop\hhser~1\develo~1\software\soft wa~2xx&\helpfo~1'
folder cannot be opened because its MS-DOS name, including the names
of any folders it is in, is larger than 66 characters.

Most of these errors involved files in \Windows\ and \Program Files\.

By the way, Scandisk does not have any problem with those same paths
on my old drive.

So I seem to have two problems.
1) Extremely slow performance, and
2) the problem with paths.

What are these problems and how can I correct them.

Sincerely, Stan Hilliard

Very glad to see it is resolved. Not sure why it is better now than when
the 20 GB was a slave. I will refrain from making two guesses, which are
1) it wasn't properly jumpered a Slave & 2) it was messy in it's Active
partition bit. Anyhow, glad all is well. Finally, 3) everything was OK
with 1 & 2, but the disk "overlay" had been unnecessarily loaded.

I guess do as Badour has said, & periodically run the HDD manufacturer's
diagnostic app. If no further bad sectors/tracks/whatever show up, you
are home free. What did Seagate support have to say about it?


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR

"Stan Hilliard" wrote in
message ...
| Here is my latest situation.
|
| 1) Seagate Support told me to re-initialize the drive by zero-filling
| it with the latest version of their DiscWizard Starter Edition, which
| I did.
|
| 2) Seagate Support told me to use Fdisk to make partitions, but when I
| did, Fdisk told me that a 70 GB partition was 10 GB. So I started over
| zero filled, and used PartitionMagic to make partitions and copy
| partitions.
|
| 3) I can see the whole 80 GB drive with Windows Explorer and with
| PartitionMagic.
|
| 3) I can now successfully boot with the PM recovery diskettes. The
| failure due to Disk Manager does not occur. I think that when I
| first used DiscWizard to try to make partitions -- that is what put
| Drive Manager on the HDD.
|
| 4) After copying the Win98 C: partition to the new drive and properly
| setting the swap drive, the system was still extremely slow -- that
| was my original problem!!!!
|
| 5) Performance was finally restored by re-cabling the two HDDs on the
| ATA100 card -- as suggested by Seagate Support.
|
| Original (bad)
| Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
| Primary cable, slave = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)
|
| New (good)
| Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
| Secondary cable, master = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)
|
| I haven't run the new arrangement long enough to be sure, but I think
| that problem is "fixed".
|
| 6) I have two further questions:
|
| 1) Scandisk says that the Seagate drive has 4 MB in bad sectors. I do
| not know if that is real, or if it happened due to the temporary
| cabling setup. Is that bad enough to suggest that over time there will
| be more problems?
|
| 2) I have various other IBM and Western Digital drives that I connect
| up to make backups. There should be a more prevention-oriented way to
| permanently fix the conflict between the drives. Any suggestions?
|
| I appreciate all the help in tracking this down,
| Stan Hilliard
|
| =========
| On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:51:50 -0500, Stan Hilliard
| wrote:
|
| I replaced my 20 G HDD with a 80 G HDD. I copied the partitions from
| the old to the new drive with Partition Magic version 6.
|
| skipping a few steps
|
| 1) After changing drives, it took 8-10 minutes to boot off the new
| drive.
|
| 2) The Partition magic "Partitioninfo" utility does not find any
| errors with the C: partition. However, Partition Magic "Check for
| errors" on drive C: gave this message:
|
| Error - 993. Partition contains open files. Use the operating system
| check utility.
|
| 3) Scandisk showed about 15 files with this message: (example)
|
| C:\Windows\desktop\hhser~1\develo~1\software\soft wa~2xx&\helpfo~1'
| folder cannot be opened because its MS-DOS name, including the names
| of any folders it is in, is larger than 66 characters.
|
| Most of these errors involved files in \Windows\ and \Program Files\.
|
| By the way, Scandisk does not have any problem with those same paths
| on my old drive.
|
| So I seem to have two problems.
| 1) Extremely slow performance, and
| 2) the problem with paths.
|
| What are these problems and how can I correct them.
|
| Sincerely, Stan Hilliard
|

Yes, I have seen this before. Some drives just don't play well with others when you
try to set them up as slave to another.
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"Stan Hilliard" wrote in message
...
Here is my latest situation.

1) Seagate Support told me to re-initialize the drive by zero-filling
it with the latest version of their DiscWizard Starter Edition, which
I did.

2) Seagate Support told me to use Fdisk to make partitions, but when I
did, Fdisk told me that a 70 GB partition was 10 GB. So I started over
zero filled, and used PartitionMagic to make partitions and copy
partitions.

3) I can see the whole 80 GB drive with Windows Explorer and with
PartitionMagic.

3) I can now successfully boot with the PM recovery diskettes. The
failure due to Disk Manager does not occur. I think that when I
first used DiscWizard to try to make partitions -- that is what put
Drive Manager on the HDD.

4) After copying the Win98 C: partition to the new drive and properly
setting the swap drive, the system was still extremely slow -- that
was my original problem!!!!

5) Performance was finally restored by re-cabling the two HDDs on the
ATA100 card -- as suggested by Seagate Support.

Original (bad)
Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
Primary cable, slave = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)

New (good)
Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
Secondary cable, master = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)

I haven't run the new arrangement long enough to be sure, but I think
that problem is "fixed".

6) I have two further questions:

1) Scandisk says that the Seagate drive has 4 MB in bad sectors. I do
not know if that is real, or if it happened due to the temporary
cabling setup. Is that bad enough to suggest that over time there will
be more problems?

2) I have various other IBM and Western Digital drives that I connect
up to make backups. There should be a more prevention-oriented way to
permanently fix the conflict between the drives. Any suggestions?

I appreciate all the help in tracking this down,
Stan Hilliard

=========
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:51:50 -0500, Stan Hilliard
wrote:

I replaced my 20 G HDD with a 80 G HDD. I copied the partitions from
the old to the new drive with Partition Magic version 6.

skipping a few steps

1) After changing drives, it took 8-10 minutes to boot off the new
drive.

2) The Partition magic "Partitioninfo" utility does not find any
errors with the C: partition. However, Partition Magic "Check for
errors" on drive C: gave this message:

Error - 993. Partition contains open files. Use the operating system
check utility.

3) Scandisk showed about 15 files with this message: (example)

C:\Windows\desktop\hhser~1\develo~1\software\soft wa~2xx&\helpfo~1'
folder cannot be opened because its MS-DOS name, including the names
of any folders it is in, is larger than 66 characters.

Most of these errors involved files in \Windows\ and \Program Files\.

By the way, Scandisk does not have any problem with those same paths
on my old drive.

So I seem to have two problems.
1) Extremely slow performance, and
2) the problem with paths.

What are these problems and how can I correct them.

Sincerely, Stan Hilliard

More tests:

1) Here is what Seagate says about the 4mb bad sectors that scandisk
shows: "4mb of bad sectors does not warant the drive for a
replacement. We suggest running our seatools desktop utility to see
if bad sectors are reported during the Full Diagnostics routine."

I ran that SeaTools utility, but I don't think the it did the analysis
that I wanted. I have replied to support.


2) I repeated the earlier master/slave configuration, adjusting the
jumpers accordingly. The incompatibility exists and it is repeated
with two different cables -- my original old cable and the new cable
that came with the new drive. Both are ATA100 cables.


3) Seagate's current SeaTools V3.0 passes the Seagate 80GB drive --
cabled as a lone master on the primary cable.

That utility also passes the IBM 20GB drive -- cabled as a lone master
on the secondary cable.

4) I do not understand why the drive will work together when they are
on different cables but not when they are on the same cable. I do not
know which drive, if either, is at fault. Or if the Promise Ultra
ATA100 card is at fault.

I suspect that somewhere there is a standard or a specification that
must be met in order that drives operate in master/slave configuration
Is there a another utility that will test them with respect to the
properties that might make them incompatible?

Stan Hilliard

=========
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:41:14 -0500, Stan Hilliard
wrote:

Here is my latest situation.

1) Seagate Support told me to re-initialize the drive by zero-filling
it with the latest version of their DiscWizard Starter Edition, which
I did.

2) Seagate Support told me to use Fdisk to make partitions, but when I
did, Fdisk told me that a 70 GB partition was 10 GB. So I started over
zero filled, and used PartitionMagic to make partitions and copy
partitions.

3) I can see the whole 80 GB drive with Windows Explorer and with
PartitionMagic.

3) I can now successfully boot with the PM recovery diskettes. The
failure due to Disk Manager does not occur. I think that when I
first used DiscWizard to try to make partitions -- that is what put
Drive Manager on the HDD.

4) After copying the Win98 C: partition to the new drive and properly
setting the swap drive, the system was still extremely slow -- that
was my original problem!!!!

5) Performance was finally restored by re-cabling the two HDDs on the
ATA100 card -- as suggested by Seagate Support.

Original (bad)
Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
Primary cable, slave = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)

New (good)
Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
Secondary cable, master = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)

I haven't run the new arrangement long enough to be sure, but I think
that problem is "fixed".

6) I have two further questions:

1) Scandisk says that the Seagate drive has 4 MB in bad sectors. I do
not know if that is real, or if it happened due to the temporary
cabling setup. Is that bad enough to suggest that over time there will
be more problems?

2) I have various other IBM and Western Digital drives that I connect
up to make backups. There should be a more prevention-oriented way to
permanently fix the conflict between the drives. Any suggestions?

I appreciate all the help in tracking this down,
Stan Hilliard

=========
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:51:50 -0500, Stan Hilliard
wrote:

I replaced my 20 G HDD with a 80 G HDD. I copied the partitions from
the old to the new drive with Partition Magic version 6.

skipping a few steps

1) After changing drives, it took 8-10 minutes to boot off the new
drive.

2) The Partition magic "Partitioninfo" utility does not find any
errors with the C: partition. However, Partition Magic "Check for
errors" on drive C: gave this message:

Error - 993. Partition contains open files. Use the operating system
check utility.

3) Scandisk showed about 15 files with this message: (example)

C:\Windows\desktop\hhser~1\develo~1\software\sof twa~2xx&\helpfo~1'
folder cannot be opened because its MS-DOS name, including the names
of any folders it is in, is larger than 66 characters.

Most of these errors involved files in \Windows\ and \Program Files\.

By the way, Scandisk does not have any problem with those same paths
on my old drive.

So I seem to have two problems.
1) Extremely slow performance, and
2) the problem with paths.

What are these problems and how can I correct them.

Sincerely, Stan Hilliard

| 4) I do not understand why the drive will work together when they are
| on different cables but not when they are on the same cable. I do not
| know which drive, if either, is at fault. Or if the Promise Ultra
| ATA100 card is at fault.

You said earlier...
The new HDD is a Seagate 80 G ATA100.
The old HDD is/was an IBM 20 G ATA 100.

Well, I know my WD has two Master jumper settings. One is for when a
Slave is attached, & the other for when it is alone on the cable. Can it
be one of those has same? Which was Master & which the slave.

However, I guess it is fine for you to keep it as is with them on
separate cables, as all is well that way. Also, perhaps Seagate Support
will come up with something.


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR

"Stan Hilliard" wrote in
message ...
| More tests:
|
| 1) Here is what Seagate says about the 4mb bad sectors that scandisk
| shows: "4mb of bad sectors does not warant the drive for a
| replacement. We suggest running our seatools desktop utility to see
| if bad sectors are reported during the Full Diagnostics routine."
|
| I ran that SeaTools utility, but I don't think the it did the analysis
| that I wanted. I have replied to support.
|
|
| 2) I repeated the earlier master/slave configuration, adjusting the
| jumpers accordingly. The incompatibility exists and it is repeated
| with two different cables -- my original old cable and the new cable
| that came with the new drive. Both are ATA100 cables.
|
|
| 3) Seagate's current SeaTools V3.0 passes the Seagate 80GB drive --
| cabled as a lone master on the primary cable.
|
| That utility also passes the IBM 20GB drive -- cabled as a lone master
| on the secondary cable.
|
| 4) I do not understand why the drive will work together when they are
| on different cables but not when they are on the same cable. I do not
| know which drive, if either, is at fault. Or if the Promise Ultra
| ATA100 card is at fault.
|
| I suspect that somewhere there is a standard or a specification that
| must be met in order that drives operate in master/slave configuration
| Is there a another utility that will test them with respect to the
| properties that might make them incompatible?
|
| Stan Hilliard
|
| =========
| On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:41:14 -0500, Stan Hilliard
| wrote:
|
| Here is my latest situation.
|
| 1) Seagate Support told me to re-initialize the drive by zero-filling
| it with the latest version of their DiscWizard Starter Edition, which
| I did.
|
| 2) Seagate Support told me to use Fdisk to make partitions, but when
I
| did, Fdisk told me that a 70 GB partition was 10 GB. So I started
over
| zero filled, and used PartitionMagic to make partitions and copy
| partitions.
|
| 3) I can see the whole 80 GB drive with Windows Explorer and with
| PartitionMagic.
|
| 3) I can now successfully boot with the PM recovery diskettes. The
| failure due to Disk Manager does not occur. I think that when I
| first used DiscWizard to try to make partitions -- that is what put
| Drive Manager on the HDD.
|
| 4) After copying the Win98 C: partition to the new drive and properly
| setting the swap drive, the system was still extremely slow -- that
| was my original problem!!!!
|
| 5) Performance was finally restored by re-cabling the two HDDs on the
| ATA100 card -- as suggested by Seagate Support.
|
| Original (bad)
| Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
| Primary cable, slave = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)
|
| New (good)
| Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
| Secondary cable, master = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)
|
| I haven't run the new arrangement long enough to be sure, but I think
| that problem is "fixed".
|
| 6) I have two further questions:
|
| 1) Scandisk says that the Seagate drive has 4 MB in bad sectors. I do
| not know if that is real, or if it happened due to the temporary
| cabling setup. Is that bad enough to suggest that over time there
will
| be more problems?
|
| 2) I have various other IBM and Western Digital drives that I connect
| up to make backups. There should be a more prevention-oriented way to
| permanently fix the conflict between the drives. Any suggestions?
|
| I appreciate all the help in tracking this down,
| Stan Hilliard
|
| =========
| On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:51:50 -0500, Stan Hilliard
| wrote:
|
| I replaced my 20 G HDD with a 80 G HDD. I copied the partitions from
| the old to the new drive with Partition Magic version 6.
|
| skipping a few steps
|
| 1) After changing drives, it took 8-10 minutes to boot off the new
| drive.
|
| 2) The Partition magic "Partitioninfo" utility does not find any
| errors with the C: partition. However, Partition Magic "Check for
| errors" on drive C: gave this message:
|
| Error - 993. Partition contains open files. Use the operating system
| check utility.
|
| 3) Scandisk showed about 15 files with this message: (example)
|
| C:\Windows\desktop\hhser~1\develo~1\software\sof twa~2xx&\helpfo~1'
| folder cannot be opened because its MS-DOS name, including the names
| of any folders it is in, is larger than 66 characters.
|
| Most of these errors involved files in \Windows\ and \Program
Files\.
|
| By the way, Scandisk does not have any problem with those same paths
| on my old drive.
|
| So I seem to have two problems.
| 1) Extremely slow performance, and
| 2) the problem with paths.
|
| What are these problems and how can I correct them.
|
| Sincerely, Stan Hilliard
|

Nope...only W-D has the Master, slave, and single designations.....others use just
master or slave (and of course cable select).
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

"PCR" wrote in message
...
| 4) I do not understand why the drive will work together when they are
| on different cables but not when they are on the same cable. I do not
| know which drive, if either, is at fault. Or if the Promise Ultra
| ATA100 card is at fault.

You said earlier...
The new HDD is a Seagate 80 G ATA100.
The old HDD is/was an IBM 20 G ATA 100.

Well, I know my WD has two Master jumper settings. One is for when a
Slave is attached, & the other for when it is alone on the cable. Can it
be one of those has same? Which was Master & which the slave.

However, I guess it is fine for you to keep it as is with them on
separate cables, as all is well that way. Also, perhaps Seagate Support
will come up with something.


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR

"Stan Hilliard" wrote in
message ...
| More tests:
|
| 1) Here is what Seagate says about the 4mb bad sectors that scandisk
| shows: "4mb of bad sectors does not warant the drive for a
| replacement. We suggest running our seatools desktop utility to see
| if bad sectors are reported during the Full Diagnostics routine."
|
| I ran that SeaTools utility, but I don't think the it did the analysis
| that I wanted. I have replied to support.
|
|
| 2) I repeated the earlier master/slave configuration, adjusting the
| jumpers accordingly. The incompatibility exists and it is repeated
| with two different cables -- my original old cable and the new cable
| that came with the new drive. Both are ATA100 cables.
|
|
| 3) Seagate's current SeaTools V3.0 passes the Seagate 80GB drive --
| cabled as a lone master on the primary cable.
|
| That utility also passes the IBM 20GB drive -- cabled as a lone master
| on the secondary cable.
|
| 4) I do not understand why the drive will work together when they are
| on different cables but not when they are on the same cable. I do not
| know which drive, if either, is at fault. Or if the Promise Ultra
| ATA100 card is at fault.
|
| I suspect that somewhere there is a standard or a specification that
| must be met in order that drives operate in master/slave configuration
| Is there a another utility that will test them with respect to the
| properties that might make them incompatible?
|
| Stan Hilliard
|
| =========
| On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:41:14 -0500, Stan Hilliard
| wrote:
|
| Here is my latest situation.
|
| 1) Seagate Support told me to re-initialize the drive by zero-filling
| it with the latest version of their DiscWizard Starter Edition, which
| I did.
|
| 2) Seagate Support told me to use Fdisk to make partitions, but when
I
| did, Fdisk told me that a 70 GB partition was 10 GB. So I started
over
| zero filled, and used PartitionMagic to make partitions and copy
| partitions.
|
| 3) I can see the whole 80 GB drive with Windows Explorer and with
| PartitionMagic.
|
| 3) I can now successfully boot with the PM recovery diskettes. The
| failure due to Disk Manager does not occur. I think that when I
| first used DiscWizard to try to make partitions -- that is what put
| Drive Manager on the HDD.
|
| 4) After copying the Win98 C: partition to the new drive and properly
| setting the swap drive, the system was still extremely slow -- that
| was my original problem!!!!
|
| 5) Performance was finally restored by re-cabling the two HDDs on the
| ATA100 card -- as suggested by Seagate Support.
|
| Original (bad)
| Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
| Primary cable, slave = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)
|
| New (good)
| Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
| Secondary cable, master = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)
|
| I haven't run the new arrangement long enough to be sure, but I think
| that problem is "fixed".
|
| 6) I have two further questions:
|
| 1) Scandisk says that the Seagate drive has 4 MB in bad sectors. I do
| not know if that is real, or if it happened due to the temporary
| cabling setup. Is that bad enough to suggest that over time there
will
| be more problems?
|
| 2) I have various other IBM and Western Digital drives that I connect
| up to make backups. There should be a more prevention-oriented way to
| permanently fix the conflict between the drives. Any suggestions?
|
| I appreciate all the help in tracking this down,
| Stan Hilliard
|
| =========
| On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:51:50 -0500, Stan Hilliard
| wrote:
|
| I replaced my 20 G HDD with a 80 G HDD. I copied the partitions from
| the old to the new drive with Partition Magic version 6.
|
| skipping a few steps
|
| 1) After changing drives, it took 8-10 minutes to boot off the new
| drive.
|
| 2) The Partition magic "Partitioninfo" utility does not find any
| errors with the C: partition. However, Partition Magic "Check for
| errors" on drive C: gave this message:
|
| Error - 993. Partition contains open files. Use the operating system
| check utility.
|
| 3) Scandisk showed about 15 files with this message: (example)
|
| C:\Windows\desktop\hhser~1\develo~1\software\sof twa~2xx&\helpfo~1'
| folder cannot be opened because its MS-DOS name, including the names
| of any folders it is in, is larger than 66 characters.
|
| Most of these errors involved files in \Windows\ and \Program
Files\.
|
| By the way, Scandisk does not have any problem with those same paths
| on my old drive.
|
| So I seem to have two problems.
| 1) Extremely slow performance, and
| 2) the problem with paths.
|
| What are these problems and how can I correct them.
|
| Sincerely, Stan Hilliard
|

As I stated earlier, some drives just don't play well with others, and I think the
BIOS may be a player in this incompatibilities also. I have heard a lot of reports
of ATA/100 drives giving this sort of trouble, and refusing to co-exist with another
hard drive on the same cable....sometimes even the same brand drive.

FWIW, I have seen such incompatibilities long before the ATA/100 drives appeared,
and I have cabled ATA/100 drives on the same cable with no problem many
times....hence the idea that there may be BIOS factors involved also.

the bad sectors: the drive manufacturer does not consider that alone to be
cause for warranty replacement if the drive passes the diagnostics, but I would be
very wary of trusting my data on a drive that already had 4MB bad sectors. Make
backups, and keep an eye on it....if any more bad sectors appear, run the diags
again.
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

"Stan Hilliard" wrote in message
...
More tests:

1) Here is what Seagate says about the 4mb bad sectors that scandisk
shows: "4mb of bad sectors does not warant the drive for a
replacement. We suggest running our seatools desktop utility to see
if bad sectors are reported during the Full Diagnostics routine."

I ran that SeaTools utility, but I don't think the it did the analysis
that I wanted. I have replied to support.


2) I repeated the earlier master/slave configuration, adjusting the
jumpers accordingly. The incompatibility exists and it is repeated
with two different cables -- my original old cable and the new cable
that came with the new drive. Both are ATA100 cables.


3) Seagate's current SeaTools V3.0 passes the Seagate 80GB drive --
cabled as a lone master on the primary cable.

That utility also passes the IBM 20GB drive -- cabled as a lone master
on the secondary cable.

4) I do not understand why the drive will work together when they are
on different cables but not when they are on the same cable. I do not
know which drive, if either, is at fault. Or if the Promise Ultra
ATA100 card is at fault.

I suspect that somewhere there is a standard or a specification that
must be met in order that drives operate in master/slave configuration
Is there a another utility that will test them with respect to the
properties that might make them incompatible?

Stan Hilliard

=========
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:41:14 -0500, Stan Hilliard
wrote:

Here is my latest situation.

1) Seagate Support told me to re-initialize the drive by zero-filling
it with the latest version of their DiscWizard Starter Edition, which
I did.

2) Seagate Support told me to use Fdisk to make partitions, but when I
did, Fdisk told me that a 70 GB partition was 10 GB. So I started over
zero filled, and used PartitionMagic to make partitions and copy
partitions.

3) I can see the whole 80 GB drive with Windows Explorer and with
PartitionMagic.

3) I can now successfully boot with the PM recovery diskettes. The
failure due to Disk Manager does not occur. I think that when I
first used DiscWizard to try to make partitions -- that is what put
Drive Manager on the HDD.

4) After copying the Win98 C: partition to the new drive and properly
setting the swap drive, the system was still extremely slow -- that
was my original problem!!!!

5) Performance was finally restored by re-cabling the two HDDs on the
ATA100 card -- as suggested by Seagate Support.

Original (bad)
Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
Primary cable, slave = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)

New (good)
Primary cable, master = Seagate ST380013A (80 GB)
Secondary cable, master = IBM DTLA-307020 (20 GB)

I haven't run the new arrangement long enough to be sure, but I think
that problem is "fixed".

6) I have two further questions:

1) Scandisk says that the Seagate drive has 4 MB in bad sectors. I do
not know if that is real, or if it happened due to the temporary
cabling setup. Is that bad enough to suggest that over time there will
be more problems?

2) I have various other IBM and Western Digital drives that I connect
up to make backups. There should be a more prevention-oriented way to
permanently fix the conflict between the drives. Any suggestions?

I appreciate all the help in tracking this down,
Stan Hilliard

=========
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:51:50 -0500, Stan Hilliard
wrote:

I replaced my 20 G HDD with a 80 G HDD. I copied the partitions from
the old to the new drive with Partition Magic version 6.

skipping a few steps

1) After changing drives, it took 8-10 minutes to boot off the new
drive.

2) The Partition magic "Partitioninfo" utility does not find any
errors with the C: partition. However, Partition Magic "Check for
errors" on drive C: gave this message:

Error - 993. Partition contains open files. Use the operating system
check utility.

3) Scandisk showed about 15 files with this message: (example)

C:\Windows\desktop\hhser~1\develo~1\software\sof twa~2xx&\helpfo~1'
folder cannot be opened because its MS-DOS name, including the names
of any folders it is in, is larger than 66 characters.

Most of these errors involved files in \Windows\ and \Program Files\.

By the way, Scandisk does not have any problem with those same paths
on my old drive.

So I seem to have two problems.
1) Extremely slow performance, and
2) the problem with paths.

What are these problems and how can I correct them.

Sincerely, Stan Hilliard

glee wrote in message ...
Nope...only W-D has the Master, slave, and single designations.....others use just
master or slave (and of course cable select).
--
I have a drive on one of my systems
where - IF I remember correctly -
I had to jumper it as Master AND Slave
to get it to work properly.

I don't remember where I picked up that trick,
only that it took me quite a while to get the PC
to recognize and accept that disk.

Until I double-jumpered it, the BIOS recognition
feature would lock up whenever I set the option
to Auto and told it to "Go Fish".

I was about to ditch a perfectly good drive
until I got it to work.

"Hugh Candlin" wrote in message
...

glee wrote in message
...
Nope...only W-D has the Master, slave, and single designations.....others use
just
master or slave (and of course cable select).
--
I have a drive on one of my systems
where - IF I remember correctly -
I had to jumper it as Master AND Slave
to get it to work properly.

I don't remember where I picked up that trick,
only that it took me quite a while to get the PC
to recognize and accept that disk.

Until I double-jumpered it, the BIOS recognition
feature would lock up whenever I set the option
to Auto and told it to "Go Fish".

I was about to ditch a perfectly good drive
until I got it to work.

That's interesting. I've not seen that one before. Amazing what we'll try when we
want to get hardware to function. ;-)
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

Double that's interesting. Still, fine!, only WDs do that! (By personal
experience, I know WD, Maxtor, & Quantum-- & only one of each.)

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR

"glee" wrote in message
...
| "Hugh Candlin" wrote in message
| ...
|
| glee wrote in message
| ...
| Nope...only W-D has the Master, slave, and single
designations.....others use
| just
| master or slave (and of course cable select).
| --
| I have a drive on one of my systems
| where - IF I remember correctly -
| I had to jumper it as Master AND Slave
| to get it to work properly.
|
| I don't remember where I picked up that trick,
| only that it took me quite a while to get the PC
| to recognize and accept that disk.
|
| Until I double-jumpered it, the BIOS recognition
| feature would lock up whenever I set the option
| to Auto and told it to "Go Fish".
|
| I was about to ditch a perfectly good drive
| until I got it to work.
|
| That's interesting. I've not seen that one before. Amazing what
we'll try when we
| want to get hardware to function. ;-)
| --
| Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems
| http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
|
|