Citizen Bob <spam@uce.gov> wrote
> George Hester <hesterloli@hotmail.com> wrote

>> This is quite strange. For one you want to make
>> sure both drives on that channel are cable select.

> I have no choice based on my setup. I have two removable drive bays,
> one on ch.0 master and the other on ch.0 slave. I have no choice but
> to implement CS - otherwise I would have to open the tray and change
> the jumper everytime I switched drawers.

Try the drive directly connected, not using the removable drive bay.

It wouldnt be surprising if you are seeing one of the real downsides
with removable drive bays, they flout the ATA standard.

>> For another the fact the op sys hangs we need to
>> know when this happens. Does the machine ever get out of the POST?
>
> I said Win2K hangs. It gets out of POST and reports the existence of
> the drive. That tells me it is not a cable select problem.
>
>> This is
>> usually an indication there is a loss of the op sys recognizing the
>> new hardware. That I suspect is the issue.
>
> Yes, I agree. Now, why is that the case? I got the drive from my son
> and it works with XP.
>
>> If it works in XP then is should work in Win2000.
>
> You would think so, but I thought I read where there is some
> incompatibilty issue.
>
>> I would just try again changinhg Master to last connection on Cable
>> (No Cable Select) and put the slave on the first connector (No Cable
>> Select). Try it and see it is not a major overhaul.
>
> I don't understand what you just said. I have said repeatedly that I
> must implement CS on the IDE connection. I have no choice. I cannot
> hard-wire master vs slave.
>
> I'll bet the problem is that Win2K/SP4 does not have an appropriate
> driver for that drive so it hangs. Seagate crap isn't worth the powder
> to blow it to Hell, so I really don't want the piece of shit in my
> computer to begin with. But my son offered it, and so I am obliged to
> try it. Actually I am glad it does not work.