Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote

>>> 1. First the system started locking up for about
>>> 3-4 days (or 4-5 day?) then won't boot

>> Thats likely when the partition table got stomped on.

> Hard drive is what I think

Yeah, could be with that master/slave changing if that did actually happen.

> and also hoping the problem is hard drive than either mboard or CPU

Very unlikely indeed to be the cpu, they usually work or they dont.

>>> 2. After the first several locking up it gave the option
>>> to press F1 to continue and it ran for few hrs.

>> Some bios will do that if it gets confused about the
>> cpu params for some reason, essentially gets you to
>> confirm that the cpu params are appropriate with F1.

> F1 to continue is the problem I have with my grandkids' system,
> for some reason none of my systems like Maxtor drive (it's 250GB)
> so I took it off my system and installed on my grandkids' system.
> And about 95-99% it pasues at botting and give the 2 options.

> 1. F1 to continue without Maxtor 250GB

Does it actually name the drive like that or is it
actually asking about booting with no hard drive ?

> 2. DEL to go to CMOS to enable it (again)
> for system to recognize the Maxtor.

You can get that effect with elderly systems that expect
the drive to spin up quite quickly and dont allow enough
time for the drive to spin up in the hard drive polling phase.

You may be able to fix that by turning off the quick memory
check in the bios. That takes longer and so gives the drive
more time to spin up before it polls for drives.

The Everest SMART report should list the spin up
time and you may find that that is longer than normal.

It can be longer than normal if the 12V rail is below spec too.
Best to check that with a multimeter if you have one, the
voltages shown in the bios if it can do that arent that accurate.

> For some reason I just don't have any luck with Maxtor drive,
> I don't remember the exact size but my first Maxtor was under
> 100MB (probably around 60-60MB?), then I moved up to
> around 180MB (?), then around 350-380MB, and the last
> one was about 500MB then I decided to stop using Maxtor.

You arent alone on that. And they have a real tendency
to die early if they dont get adequate cooling too.

> One thing, all Maxtor HD had 5-yrs warrantee and Maxtor
> replaced without question asked, I just toss the older one
> cuz they became too small to upgrade to karger drive.
> Then 16-20 years later, I guessed it would get
> better so I decided to give 250GB Maxtor a try.

> This one worked on my system for about 3 months before
> I acted up, Maxtor replaced it and I decided not to install on
> my system, so I tried to install in the external case enclosure
> and I can't get it to work.. then I decided to install it on my
> grandkids' system and have been getting the F1 = continue <bg>

I'd put a stake thru its heart too |-)

You sure you stopped that furious drunken grave dancing you were warned about ?

> Hahaha that's my old F1 story <g>

>>> 3. CMOS still recognize the 100GB but changed from Master to Slave

>> Thats the really weird bit. I meant to suggest checking the
>> drive jumpering before and managed to forget to do that.

> I know it's so weird so I don't want to re-partition or re-format the
> HD hoping some weird idea may pop out, and to have the chance
> to know the main reason causing the problem. IOW, I don't care
> about the HD as I already got the 500GB ready to replace it

Yeah, I prefer to understand what's going on rather than just give up.

>> If both drives arent correctly jumpered, quite a few pairs will come
>> up fine even with incorrect jumper settings. Its possible that with
>> incorrect jumper settings you might get a different result on some
>> boots.

> Yup! both HDs have to have correct jumper for them to work 1-2 years before,

Nope. Plenty of drives will work fine with incorrect jumpering.

> and about 6 months on newer system, and still working now
> (after it decided to work again). And yes, I did check the
> jumper and even changed the cable but none worked until
> I changed the fan of video card (it's still too weird...

You can get an effect like that with an intermittent fault,
either a flakey jumper which doesnt always make good
contact with the pins, or a drive which has a dry joint
or cracked trace associated with the jumper pins.

> and I still think may be something else not the fan ..

Cant see how it could possibly be the fan.
Its gotta be a coincidence.

I guess a bad fan might conceivably load down the 12V
rail to below specs, but its regulated down to lower
voltages on the motherboard so that shouldnt affect the
motherboard. Might affect the hard drive tho in theory, but
its used for the rotation motor, not the logic on the hard drive.

> but who knows?).

>> The other possibility is a flakey cable
>> with the drives jumpered for cable select.

>> Another obvious possibility is either a flakey jumper itself, too loose,
>> or a dry joint or cracked trace associated with the jumpers on one drive.

>>> and won't boot

>> That may just be due to either the bios now attempting
>> to boot the wrong drive once the master/slave stuff has
>> changed, or due to the relatively complex NT boot process
>> getting confused by the master/slave stuff changing.

>>> 4. After I replaced the dead fan of the
>>> video card the system works again,

>> I bet that's a coincidence and whatever flakeyness caused
>> the master/slave stuff to change changed back again and
>> would have done that even if you hadnt changed the fan.

>>> but the 100GB drive becomes 56GB.

>> Likely thats just a damaged partition table and may well
>> have happened earlier, when it would no longer boot.

> .. and I didn't (still haven't) even have the chance to look
> at the the partition to fix or change the partition ... so,
> whatever damaged/changed the partition, and whatever
> fixed the damaged partition is still a mystery <g>

It didnt necessarily ever get fixed. When the master/slave was
back the way it was initially, that may well have allowed it to
boot when it couldnt boot with it the wrong way around, and the
partition table blemish just affects the size reported at the OS level.

>>> Everest and CMOS still recognize 100GB but not Windows.

>> Because the partition table is damaged.

>>> Also, Everest recognizes as 100GB drive but also report 56GB total.

>> Because it gets the data from the drive itself, and from the partition table too.

>>> I checked (a little) drive C: to find any strange folder or file
>>> (since I just reinstalled Win XP few weeks and only use this for
>>> Windows so don't have lot of junks) and didn't find any, I also
>>> SORTED by SIZE hoping to detect easier but can't find any large file
>>> either.

>> I bet its the partition table thats the problem.

>>> But didn't check very closely so I am not 100% sure,
>>> so right now partition is the only thing left ... but still
>>> can't figure out how or what can change the partition

>> Likely that happened when the master/slave changed.

>>> (but seem like it did fool the CMOS about the Mster/Slave ...
>>> but how it changed them back to normal??????).

>> You could certainly get that with something intermittent in what determines
>> the master/slave, the jumpering or bad cable if cable select is used.

>>> It's just so weird <bg>

>> You should put heaps of garlic into the case and drive a
>> stake thru its 'heart' at midnight on a night of the full moon |-(

> It's already too late now (it's late Sunday evening), next
> Sunday I will spray it with the Holly Water for good <g>

Holy Water works better.