If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
Ammammata wrote:
Il giorno Sat 16 Dec 2017 08:26:40p, ** ha inviato su microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio . Vediamo cosa ha scritto: This is an old IBM brand computer from about 2001 an almost seventeen-years-old computer is like a Ford Model T you can't ask the hardware to be fully functional after so much time it's your mistake to pretend to work safely with it imho I have a few 18 year old machines, still in mint condition. No complaints. The installed OS still runs, just like it used to. These machines use a lot of electricity though. One machine I measured some time ago, it used 150W just sitting there doing nothing. Like it was a V8 car with big fins on the back :-) The machines back then, had hardly any power-saving features. That's one reason they make poor choices if your electricity is expensive. ******* They won't boot off a DVD though, because when the machines were invented, DVDs didn't exist, and nobody prepared for the arrival of DVDs. I even put a DVD drive in the machines to test this. I was disappointed, but not surprised. On earlier computers, some of the booting process is done by "hard drive emulation". The BIOS converts other device types to "look like" a hard drive. And part of that methodology involves "fixed size disks". So when the DVD came along, it was much larger than anything the designers had anticipated. Amongst other problems. I don't think the BIOS knows what the DVD command set looks like either. It wasn't an El Torito problem I was seeing, it was a physical layer problem - the BIOS just didn't want to touch the drive. One other quirk someone else in the newsgroups tested at the time, is they inserted a SATA PCI card into the machine. And the BIOS just ignored it, and the OS couldn't use it. So again, if you use hardware cards the BIOS has never heard of, there will be problems. But these really aren't surprises. It's to be expected things like this will happen. I was booting something just yesterday, and in the boot log on the screen it said "18493843248 GB disk". Then the next line said "this is a really big disk". No ****. So again, modern software is never prepared for surprises, even if the software was written in 2017. I don't know how the booting OS in that case, had managed to query the disk drive, but it got an absurdly large (wrong) size from it. No software is really "prepared for infinity and beyond" :-) The main problem with old computers, is there's no decent web browser to use on them. That's why the machines sit in the Junk Room. Paul |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
In message , Paul
writes: [] I like to draw pictures for people. For a single IDE drive, it *always* goes on the end, like this. Mobo X --------------+--------+ | | Master Cable_Select (if 80 wire, CS is allowed) IF I understood the Wikipedia article, some 40 wire cables _did_ allow CS, by omitting line 28 between the remote connectors, and master having to be the middle one, with the unterminated bit of cable providing all the reflections you'd expect )-:. Probably why CS wasn't used much in the early days. I _think_ I _do_ remember seeing 40 wire IDE cables where the cable between the remote connectors was two ribbons, i. e. had a gap in it - not a twist like a floppy connector, just a gap, which had I looked closer I'd have seen was the omitted line 28. (Presumably line 28 was just connected to 0 or 5V on the mobo.) When you add a second drive, it can be like this. Or, you can run CS on both drives, if you are using an 80 wire cable (with that twist in it). I didn't want to junk (Not a twist, just an omission. Apparently often done by just omitting the insert on the middle connector's line 28.) up the diagram, by adding CS to the table for both drives. Mobo X --------------+--------+ | | Slave Master Master with Slave (some brands have a distinction on the jumpers) (I'd forgotten that! Wonder why.) Do *not* do this, as the end of the cable constitutes a stub and causes excess reflections and corrupted data. Mobo X --------------+--------+ | | Oopsy ULooz Even in the best of circumstances, the signals on that cable look horrible. The signals look more horrible in that last case. Must have been even worse with the 40 line cables! [] -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf A biochemist walks into a student bar and says to the barman: "I'd like a pint of adenosine triphosphate, please." "Certainly," says the barman, "that'll be ATP." (Quoted in) The Independent, 2013-7-13 |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
In message , Paul
writes: wrote: I have no problem with SATA drives. I dont think they would work for Win98 though. One thing about them, I dont understand why the data cable Some BIOS/MOBOs can make them "look like" an [E]IDE drive. I don't know if that would make W98 be able to use them. has so few wires compared to the IDE cables, and even more puzzling why the power connectors have all those pins, when there is still only 5V 12V and a copule grounds needed (4 wires). Why do they have all them pins? Why didnt they just use the common 4 pin connecters they have used for years. All that did is make power supplies more complicated and the need to buy adapters to use older power supplies. The SATA 7 pin data uses TX+,TX-,RX+,RX-, and those are differential serial connections. The data travels serially, a bit at a time, like a modem. Yes, the clue is in the S (and the P in the alternative name for [E]IDE, PATA). [] So that's how they squeezed down the data cable, by going serial. [] The 15 pin power is 5 groups of 3 pins each. A pin carries 1 ampere of current. Three pins carry 3 amps. And 3 amps is just enough for the +12V source, to run the hard drive motor. At one time, some hard drives would draw 3 amps for the first ten seconds, until the spindle was up to speed. So the contact count for power, was made generous enough to run existing hard drives. It seems an odd choice to me, to use small contacts, and then use a lot of them. Fair enough, I suppose, if you're feeding power through an existing multiway connector (though many connectors, e. g. DIN 41612, manage fine with varying pin sizes - I suppose not really on if you're using ribbon cable, though, as you'd need special ribbon), but in the case of the SATA connector, it's a separate connector anyway, so why not just use bigger pins! But it's settled now, so I suppose we're stuck with it. But I share James's dissatisfaction with it - the power connector being bigger than the data one, without it being obvious that's the reason because it has bigger pins, feels odd. [] -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf A biochemist walks into a student bar and says to the barman: "I'd like a pint of adenosine triphosphate, please." "Certainly," says the barman, "that'll be ATP." (Quoted in) The Independent, 2013-7-13 |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
In message , Paul
writes: [] I have a few 18 year old machines, still in mint condition. No complaints. The installed OS still runs, just like it used to. Yes, in the support department I worked in until March, we had one that, when you turned it on, did a ticking memory test (remember those?), until it got up to its massive 4M (IIRR) of memory, and then loaded DOS 4.x from its (10M it might have been) hard disc. It was one of those heavy old machines with a machined metal case, and the huge power lever switch on the side - original IBM style I think. It was kept to test equipment (the company made avionics) of the same vintage; since it worked, and we only got those units in once in a blue moon, it was not worth rewriting all the software and redesigning the test hardware to run on anything more modern. [] I was booting something just yesterday, and in the boot log on the screen it said "18493843248 GB disk". Then the next line said "this is a really big disk". What, those actual words? I like it when I come across someone with a sense of humour! [] The main problem with old computers, is there's no decent web browser to use on them. That's why the machines sit in the Junk Room. Indeed. Or rather, there are decent web browsers for them, but there are few websites that will now run with those browsers. (As a browser, Firefox 2 - or even Netscape 6 to 9 - are fine. It's just that web pages these days are mostly made using compilers that assume more capabilities on the part of the browser, even when not necessary.) Such machines can have standalone uses, such as the one above described, or controlling hardware (such as machine tools), or even as servers - print, storage, etc. - in even more modern networks, they don't _have_ to sit in the junk room. (There are even the usual stories about servers - the story usually says Linux - which have been walled up somewhere, and continued for years.) Paul -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf (please reply to group - they also serve who only look and lurk) (William Allen, 1999 - after Milton, of course) |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 07:56:17 -0500, Paul wrote:
Ammammata wrote: Il giorno Sat 16 Dec 2017 08:26:40p, ** ha inviato su microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio . Vediamo cosa ha scritto: This is an old IBM brand computer from about 2001 an almost seventeen-years-old computer is like a Ford Model T you can't ask the hardware to be fully functional after so much time it's your mistake to pretend to work safely with it imho I have a few 18 year old machines, still in mint condition. No complaints. The installed OS still runs, just like it used to. These machines use a lot of electricity though. One machine I measured some time ago, it used 150W just sitting there doing nothing. Like it was a V8 car with big fins on the back :-) The machines back then, had hardly any power-saving features. That's one reason they make poor choices if your electricity is expensive. ******* They won't boot off a DVD though, because when the machines were invented, DVDs didn't exist, and nobody prepared for the arrival of DVDs. I even put a DVD drive in the machines to test this. I was disappointed, but not surprised. On earlier computers, some of the booting process is done by "hard drive emulation". The BIOS converts other device types to "look like" a hard drive. And part of that methodology involves "fixed size disks". So when the DVD came along, it was much larger than anything the designers had anticipated. Amongst other problems. I don't think the BIOS knows what the DVD command set looks like either. It wasn't an El Torito problem I was seeing, it was a physical layer problem - the BIOS just didn't want to touch the drive. One other quirk someone else in the newsgroups tested at the time, is they inserted a SATA PCI card into the machine. And the BIOS just ignored it, and the OS couldn't use it. So again, if you use hardware cards the BIOS has never heard of, there will be problems. But these really aren't surprises. It's to be expected things like this will happen. I was booting something just yesterday, and in the boot log on the screen it said "18493843248 GB disk". Then the next line said "this is a really big disk". No ****. So again, modern software is never prepared for surprises, even if the software was written in 2017. I don't know how the booting OS in that case, had managed to query the disk drive, but it got an absurdly large (wrong) size from it. No software is really "prepared for infinity and beyond" :-) The main problem with old computers, is there's no decent web browser to use on them. That's why the machines sit in the Junk Room. Paul Interesting. I never knew these old computers could not handle DVDs. I've never used much optical media of any sort, so I never even thought about it. I do somewhat question where the dividing line is as far as power hungry computers, VS those which are less hungry. This old machine never seems to throw out much heat. It's a basic Pentium with coppermine processor. The original power supply was 100W, which was too small as soon as I added extra HDDs and other stuff. That PS failed, so I replaced it with a 350W supply which I have used since. However some of the old dual core machines were power hogs. I knew someone with a Dell dual core machine that had 3 fans. You did not dare run that thing in hot weather if the house had no AC. One of the fans died in that machine and it was hot enough to fry an egg on it. I replaced the fan for that person. What amazed me was that machine running XP home ed. was 5 times slower than my 2001 machine I am using right now. I actually thought the CPU had gotten so hot that it was fried, but I was told that machine had always been that slow. A few years later I acquired 2 similar machines. One was identical, the other similar. Both of them were also very slow, and ran very hot. I have since learned that those early dual core Dell machines were always slow and were lousy computers. (Because of that, I'd never buy a Dell). Although I never measured the power draw on those machines, I know that heat is power consumption and those beasts were almost like electric heaters. I am sure they sucked lots of power. But the newer stuff runs cooler even with quad cores and a lot more power needs. So, I kind of wonder if my 2001 machine is really not all that bad on power use??? You got that right as far as no browser support anymore.... I keep hoping someone will create a browser for them, but I wont hold my breath. I do have to keep asking why the internet is so bloated these days. It actually worked better in the old days and was 10X more useful back then. nd no, it's NOT videos thats causing the problems. I can run darn near any video on this old computer with no problems, unless I am defragging or running a HDD scanner at the same time. (Using Win98). Of course the video software matters too. I use Media Player Classic. Simple to use with no crap and no bloat. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
Il giorno Tue 19 Dec 2017 12:12:01p, ** ha inviato su
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio . Vediamo cosa ha scritto: You sound like one of todays spoiled rotten youth who cant stand to have anything more than 2 years old bull**** [cutting all the trash talk you wrote] I'm 50yo, my home personal computer is a 10+ yo laptop where I put an SSD to make it faster than light, and I'm saving money for my twins, using free software (linux mint) this doesn't mean that my opinion is what I wrote above: at *work* I have an updated (4yo) computer just because my job requires such a device; at home I make daily backups because I know that sooner or later the hw will die and to close this discussion, my 1993 486dx still runs windows nt4, the 1996 double pentium-pro runs w2k and the [unknown] thinkpad 380ED, with MSDOS 6, allows me to play Duke Nukem 3D whenever I want. r cre ohban znab, irqv qv naqner nssnaphyb, r cevzn qv cneyner znyr qv dhnyphab snv nyzrab svagn qv vasbeznegv fh puv fvn r pbfn snppvn, pbtyvbar -- /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ T /-\ -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- - -=- http://www.bb2002.it ............ [ al lavoro ] ........... |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
Il giorno Tue 19 Dec 2017 01:56:17p, *Paul* ha inviato su
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio news1b29f$2hp$1@dont- email.me. Vediamo cosa ha scritto: I was booting something just yesterday, and in the boot log on the screen it said "18493843248 GB disk". Then the next line said "this is a really big disk". I remember, running a game on my old 486 with 20Mb RAM, the message shown on screen: "Please check your RAM because there must be an error" -- /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ T /-\ -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- - -=- http://www.bb2002.it ............ [ al lavoro ] ........... |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Paul writes: wrote: I have no problem with SATA drives. I dont think they would work for Win98 though. One thing about them, I dont understand why the data cable Some BIOS/MOBOs can make them "look like" an [E]IDE drive. I don't know if that would make W98 be able to use them. Intel provided that mode specifically for legacy OSes. Because it shows up in I/O Space for the registers, and it uses INT14 and INT15 for the interrupt coming from those logic blocks. It looks exactly like a crusty old IDE Southbridge. That was Compatible IDE mode. I managed to install Win98SE on an Asrock VIA board with a Core2 processor, and it screams. Even though it only can use one core of the processor. So yes, you can run Win98 on at least some modern hardware. I think the Compatible mode disappeared at some point. The Native IDE mode, the registers are in PCI space, and the interrupts fall where-ever the equivalent of INTA would go. WinXP has a driver for that, in-box I believe. WinXP doesn't have an ACPI driver, which comes later in time. It seems an odd choice to me, to use small contacts, and then use a lot of them. Fair enough, I suppose, if you're feeding power through an existing multiway connector (though many connectors, e. g. DIN 41612, manage fine with varying pin sizes - I suppose not really on if you're using ribbon cable, though, as you'd need special ribbon), but in the case of the SATA connector, it's a separate connector anyway, so why not just use bigger pins! But it's settled now, so I suppose we're stuck with it. But I share James's dissatisfaction with it - the power connector being bigger than the data one, without it being obvious that's the reason because it has bigger pins, feels odd. [] It was designed as a backplane connector, with the 7 and 15 portions in a fixed relation to one another. Kinda a 22 pin connector with a gap. The wafer design means it can be made as cheaply as USB. Just extend the PCB of the hard drive, to make some contacts. While the personal computer application rates the connector at 50 insertions, I would expect the backplane application, with the extra guidance provided by the packaging, the insertion count would be a lot higher. The backplane doesn't have to do any "pinching" to hold the connector on. Paul |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Corrupted COMCTL32.DLL | Herbert Chan | General | 2 | January 15th 06 04:11 AM |
Corrupted Winsock | jfs7 | Software & Applications | 1 | October 4th 04 06:16 AM |
Corrupted directories | lanman | General | 4 | September 7th 04 05:56 PM |
corrupted files ?? | bkelran | General | 2 | July 7th 04 07:25 AM |
corrupted file | [email protected] | Disk Drives | 1 | July 1st 04 12:07 AM |