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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 98SE limits?
"Pat" wrote in message
... On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 21:23:30 -0800, Ron Martell wrote: Pat wrote: On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 20:51:51 -0800, "Johnny" wrote: Windows 98SE limits? What is the limit on the size of hard drive? What is the maximum size of ram that 98SE can use? Thanks Johnny 128GB (137 GiB) is the max drive size. However, there are ways around this. Check out www.48bitlba.com. A patch to allow large drives is available he http://members.aol.com/rloew1/. I'm using a 160GB drive on my 98FE system. What do you do about SCANDISK and DEFRAG? Do you have some third party replacement for these that will work with drives larger than 128 gb? Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada I'm using the ME versions for both. So far no problems. I use the Intel Application Accelerator for W98 compatibility. DOS Scandisk seems to work fine, too. That said, I have yet to stored any data in the possible trouble zone above the 128gb limit (which is in the last partition on the drive). Win Explorer sees the entire disk as does PowerDesk, the WE replacement I use, although this may not matter. My bad in my previous post. Should be 128 GiB and 137 GB. -- Pat Trouble spot is 128GB of data or more, not any particular partition size or partition location relation. This sum, 128GB of data, is for the entire hard disk, not just a partition. Hard disk capacity realization is another subject which is woven in your post. This is not the same thing. -- Lil' Dave Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg Else you will be absorbed |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 98SE limits?
Pat wrote:
I understand that. I was just saying that I won't hit 128gb of data until the last partition is about 1/3 filled. Even if all the prior partitions are completely filled I will still be under 128 GB of data. I suppose one could scatter enough data between the partitions to exceed 128gb. In my case with 5 partitions that would mean filling them to over 90% each. Which isn't likely for me since I like to keep 20-25% of a partition empty. However, none of this should be a problem using Intel's Application Accelerator since it provides 48bit LBA support. ScanDisk and Defrag may be another issue, though. Reinstalling Windows could also be a problem since the Accelerator cannot be installed until the OS is installed. AFAIK, no slipstreaming of the Accelerator onto a CD-ROM with W98. Okay. You have your hard drive partitioned, and no one partition/logical is larger than 128 gb. That will work, provided your hardware (e.g. BIOS) will recognize the drive. But a 160 gb drive as a single partition will not run Scandisk or Defrag even with the Windows Me versions. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006) On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 98SE limits?
Pat wrote:
I understand that. I was just saying that I won't hit 128gb of data until the last partition is about 1/3 filled. Even if all the prior partitions are completely filled I will still be under 128 GB of data. I suppose one could scatter enough data between the partitions to exceed 128gb. In my case with 5 partitions that would mean filling them to over 90% each. Which isn't likely for me since I like to keep 20-25% of a partition empty. However, none of this should be a problem using Intel's Application Accelerator since it provides 48bit LBA support. ScanDisk and Defrag may be another issue, though. Reinstalling Windows could also be a problem since the Accelerator cannot be installed until the OS is installed. AFAIK, no slipstreaming of the Accelerator onto a CD-ROM with W98. Okay. You have your hard drive partitioned, and no one partition/logical is larger than 128 gb. That will work, provided your hardware (e.g. BIOS) will recognize the drive. But a 160 gb drive as a single partition will not run Scandisk or Defrag even with the Windows Me versions. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006) On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 98SE limits?
Pat wrote:
Good to hear. I have been slightly concerned that I might be setting myself up for disaster. Glad to hear ScanDisk and Defrag are good to go. While researching installing this drive I heard somewhat confusing/conflicting reports on these utilities. The BIOS is updated for 48bit LBA support. The actual limits for Scandisk and Defrag are based on the number of clusters, and the actual limit is about 4.1 million (2^22 or thereabouts). The 128 gb (binary) or 137 billion byte maximum is predicated on the use of a 32K cluster size. With a 4K cluster size you will run into problems with Scandisk and Defrag with drives/partitions as small as 17 gb. Good luck Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006) On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 98SE limits?
Pat wrote:
Good to hear. I have been slightly concerned that I might be setting myself up for disaster. Glad to hear ScanDisk and Defrag are good to go. While researching installing this drive I heard somewhat confusing/conflicting reports on these utilities. The BIOS is updated for 48bit LBA support. The actual limits for Scandisk and Defrag are based on the number of clusters, and the actual limit is about 4.1 million (2^22 or thereabouts). The 128 gb (binary) or 137 billion byte maximum is predicated on the use of a 32K cluster size. With a 4K cluster size you will run into problems with Scandisk and Defrag with drives/partitions as small as 17 gb. Good luck Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006) On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 98SE limits?
You will probably have a problem with that as a 36 gb partition should have
a 32 kb cluster size. http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=229154 This article is one of the best I've seen on the W98 large drive problem: http://www.48bitlba.com/win98.htm -- 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 "Pat" wrote in message ... On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 12:13:08 -0800, Ron Martell wrote: Pat wrote: Good to hear. I have been slightly concerned that I might be setting myself up for disaster. Glad to hear ScanDisk and Defrag are good to go. While researching installing this drive I heard somewhat confusing/conflicting reports on these utilities. The BIOS is updated for 48bit LBA support. The actual limits for Scandisk and Defrag are based on the number of clusters, and the actual limit is about 4.1 million (2^22 or thereabouts). The 128 gb (binary) or 137 billion byte maximum is predicated on the use of a 32K cluster size. With a 4K cluster size you will run into problems with Scandisk and Defrag with drives/partitions as small as 17 gb. Good luck Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada Interesting, the C: drive is 4.66Gib with 4k clusters and the other four vary a little around 36GiB with 16K clusters. Any problems with that? Looks like it should be OK to me. -- Pat |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 98SE limits?
You will probably have a problem with that as a 36 gb partition should have
a 32 kb cluster size. http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=229154 This article is one of the best I've seen on the W98 large drive problem: http://www.48bitlba.com/win98.htm -- 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 "Pat" wrote in message ... On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 12:13:08 -0800, Ron Martell wrote: Pat wrote: Good to hear. I have been slightly concerned that I might be setting myself up for disaster. Glad to hear ScanDisk and Defrag are good to go. While researching installing this drive I heard somewhat confusing/conflicting reports on these utilities. The BIOS is updated for 48bit LBA support. The actual limits for Scandisk and Defrag are based on the number of clusters, and the actual limit is about 4.1 million (2^22 or thereabouts). The 128 gb (binary) or 137 billion byte maximum is predicated on the use of a 32K cluster size. With a 4K cluster size you will run into problems with Scandisk and Defrag with drives/partitions as small as 17 gb. Good luck Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada Interesting, the C: drive is 4.66Gib with 4k clusters and the other four vary a little around 36GiB with 16K clusters. Any problems with that? Looks like it should be OK to me. -- Pat |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 98SE limits?
Pat wrote:
Interesting, the C: drive is 4.66Gib with 4k clusters and the other four vary a little around 36GiB with 16K clusters. Any problems with that? Looks like it should be OK to me. Should be no problems relating to the number of clusters. 36 gb divided by 16K means there are approximately 2.25 million clusters on the drive, well below the maximum. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006) On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 98SE limits?
Pat wrote:
Interesting, the C: drive is 4.66Gib with 4k clusters and the other four vary a little around 36GiB with 16K clusters. Any problems with that? Looks like it should be OK to me. Should be no problems relating to the number of clusters. 36 gb divided by 16K means there are approximately 2.25 million clusters on the drive, well below the maximum. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006) On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 98SE limits?
"Ron Badour" wrote:
You will probably have a problem with that as a 36 gb partition should have a 32 kb cluster size. http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=229154 The values in that article are excessively conservative. Insofar as Scandisk and Defrag are concerned you can use: 4K clusters for drives up to 16 gb 8K clusters for drives up to 32 gb 16K clusters for drives up to 64 gb 32K clusters for drives up to 128 gb. I don't know why Microsoft chose the values they did for this article, but if you follow the logic used with the other cluster sizes then the limit for 32K clusters should be 64 gb whereas in fact it is 128 gb. Experimentation has shown that the values I gave above do work. This cluster size issue used to come up very frequently a few years ago, when many people were replacing their hard drives with larger models. Often they would use a drive cloning utility to copy the entire content of the old drive to the new one and by doing so the new drive would often end up with the same cluster size as the old drive. So if a 4 gb drive with 4K clusters was cloned to a new 17 gb drive it could result in a 4K cluster size on the new drive, creating more than 4.1 million total clusters and therefore neither Scandisk or Defrag would work. Good luck Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006) On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
891711/MS05-002 Updated (fixed) for Win9x | David H. Lipman | General | 80 | April 21st 05 10:12 PM |
FAQ: Win98 users: Upgrading to WinXP, IE6, etc. | JM | Setup & Installation | 6 | July 26th 04 01:44 PM |
FAQ: Win98 users: Upgrading to WinXP, IE6, etc. | JM | Improving Performance | 6 | July 26th 04 01:44 PM |
Can't read Windows 98se drive on Win Me system | Robert | General | 7 | July 17th 04 07:01 PM |
Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-024 - Vulnerability in Windows Shell Could Allow Remote Code Execution (839645) | Gary S. Terhune | General | 2 | July 14th 04 05:06 AM |