Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
What's with that?
After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
"Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
Carl Lucas wrote:
> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
> What's with that?
>
> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>
> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing. This
may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS
setup, can it see the full capacity of the drive?
It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000
SP4 and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
Grinder wrote:
> Carl Lucas wrote:
>> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
>> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
>> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
>> What's with that?
>>
>> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
>> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
>> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>>
>> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
>
> To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing. This
> may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS
> setup, can it see the full capacity of the drive?
>
> It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000
> SP4 and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
The Bios does see it as a Western Digital 160. How do I enable it in
Windows? I suppose I'll have to reformat it also.
Carl Lucas wrote:
> Grinder wrote:
>> Carl Lucas wrote:
>>> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
>>> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
>>> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
>>> What's with that?
>>>
>>> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
>>> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
>>> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>>>
>>> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
>> To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing. This
>> may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS
>> setup, can it see the full capacity of the drive?
>>
>> It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000
>> SP4 and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
>
> The Bios does see it as a Western Digital 160.
> How do I enable it in
> Windows?
What version and service pack are you using? If it's below the limits
I've mentioned, I would start by upgrading to the appropriate service pack.
Carl Lucas wrote:
> Grinder wrote:
> > Carl Lucas wrote:
> >> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
> >> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
> >> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
> >> What's with that?
> >>
> >> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
> >> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
> >> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
> >>
> >> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
> >
> > To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing. This
> > may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS
> > setup, can it see the full capacity of the drive?
> >
> > It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000
> > SP4 and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
>
> The Bios does see it as a Western Digital 160. How do I enable it in
> Windows? I suppose I'll have to reformat it also.
If you're using Windows XP, just install the Service Pack like
Grinder said. Either SP1 or SP2 will do. You don't have to
enable 48-bit addressing yourself - at least I don't have to on
my machine.
--
Alan Kakareka
Data Recovery Service
786-253-8286 cell http://www.247recovery.com
--
<pjdd@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
news:1154295060.546590.267550@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
>
> Carl Lucas wrote:
>> Grinder wrote:
>> > Carl Lucas wrote:
>> >> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital
>> >> 160
>> >> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
>> >> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
>> >> What's with that?
>> >>
>> >> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative
>> >> Tools",
>> >> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
>> >> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>> >>
>> >> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
>> >
>> > To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing.
>> > This
>> > may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS
>> > setup, can it see the full capacity of the drive?
>> >
>> > It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000
>> > SP4 and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
>>
>> The Bios does see it as a Western Digital 160. How do I enable it in
>> Windows? I suppose I'll have to reformat it also.
>
> If you're using Windows XP, just install the Service Pack like
> Grinder said. Either SP1 or SP2 will do. You don't have to
> enable 48-bit addressing yourself - at least I don't have to on
> my machine.
>
pjdd@rediffmail.com wrote:
> Carl Lucas wrote:
> > Grinder wrote:
> > > Carl Lucas wrote:
> > >> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
> > >> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
> > >> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
> > >> What's with that?
> > >>
> > >> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
> > >> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
> > >> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
> > >>
> > >> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
> > >
> > > To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing. This
> > > may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS
> > > setup, can it see the full capacity of the drive?
> > >
> > > It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000
> > > SP4 and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
> >
> > The Bios does see it as a Western Digital 160. How do I enable it in
> > Windows? I suppose I'll have to reformat it also.
>
> If you're using Windows XP, just install the Service Pack like
> Grinder said. Either SP1 or SP2 will do. You don't have to
> enable 48-bit addressing yourself - at least I don't have to on
> my machine.
Just installed SP1. (Different topic but my son says he's heard some
not too good things about SP2.) Now I get 149.05 gig. It said, as I
reformatted it, that the size was 152,625. Just confused why it's not
closer to 160 gig. Any input?
clucas@adelphia.net wrote:
> pjdd@rediffmail.com wrote:
>> Carl Lucas wrote:
>>> Grinder wrote:
>>>> Carl Lucas wrote:
>>>>> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
>>>>> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
>>>>> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
>>>>> What's with that?
>>>>>
>>>>> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
>>>>> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
>>>>> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>>>>>
>>>>> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
>>>> To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing. This
>>>> may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS
>>>> setup, can it see the full capacity of the drive?
>>>>
>>>> It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000
>>>> SP4 and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
>>> The Bios does see it as a Western Digital 160. How do I enable it in
>>> Windows? I suppose I'll have to reformat it also.
>> If you're using Windows XP, just install the Service Pack like
>> Grinder said. Either SP1 or SP2 will do. You don't have to
>> enable 48-bit addressing yourself - at least I don't have to on
>> my machine.
>
> Just installed SP1. (Different topic but my son says he's heard some
> not too good things about SP2.) Now I get 149.05 gig. It said, as I
> reformatted it, that the size was 152,625. Just confused why it's not
> closer to 160 gig. Any input?
Drive manufacturers consider 1GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes, but Windows
thinks that 1GB = 1024^3 bytes. So 152,625MB (in Windows) =
160,038,912,000 bytes
Grinder wrote:
> clucas@adelphia.net wrote:
>> pjdd@rediffmail.com wrote:
>>> Carl Lucas wrote:
>>>> Grinder wrote:
>>>>> Carl Lucas wrote:
>>>>>> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western
>>>>>> Digital 160
>>>>>> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up
>>>>>> shows
>>>>>> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
>>>>>> What's with that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative
>>>>>> Tools",
>>>>>> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the
>>>>>> drive as
>>>>>> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
>>>>> To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing.
>>>>> This
>>>>> may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS
>>>>> setup, can it see the full capacity of the drive?
>>>>>
>>>>> It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000
>>>>> SP4 and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
>>>> The Bios does see it as a Western Digital 160. How do I enable it in
>>>> Windows? I suppose I'll have to reformat it also.
>>> If you're using Windows XP, just install the Service Pack like
>>> Grinder said. Either SP1 or SP2 will do. You don't have to
>>> enable 48-bit addressing yourself - at least I don't have to on
>>> my machine.
>>
>> Just installed SP1. (Different topic but my son says he's heard some
>> not too good things about SP2.) Now I get 149.05 gig. It said, as I
>> reformatted it, that the size was 152,625. Just confused why it's not
>> closer to 160 gig. Any input?
>
> Drive manufacturers consider 1GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes, but Windows
> thinks that 1GB = 1024^3 bytes. So 152,625MB (in Windows) =
> 160,038,912,000 bytes
>
>
>> Drive manufacturers consider 1GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes, but Windows
>> thinks that 1GB = 1024^3 bytes. So 152,625MB (in Windows) =
>> 160,038,912,000 bytes
>>
>>
>
> Thanks!
There's a class action under way now, claiming WD uses misleading size
figures. You can join if you've bought a WD drive recently. Only the
lawyers get any money! :-)
Windows XP with Service Pack 1 has the 48 bit addressing.
"Grinder" <grinder@no.spam.maam.com> wrote in message
news:ck9zg.866512$084.32494@attbi_s22...
> Carl Lucas wrote:
>> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
>> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
>> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
>> What's with that?
>>
>> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
>> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
>> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>>
>> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
>
> To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing. This
> may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS setup,
> can it see the full capacity of the drive?
>
> It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000 SP4
> and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
>
"VWWall" <vwall@DEADearthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bLczg.219$xp2.10@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink .net...
> Carl Lucas wrote:
>
>>> Drive manufacturers consider 1GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes, but Windows
>>> thinks that 1GB = 1024^3 bytes. So 152,625MB (in Windows) =
>>> 160,038,912,000 bytes
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>
> There's a class action under way now, claiming WD uses misleading size
> figures. You can join if you've bought a WD drive recently. Only the
> lawyers get any money! :-)
>
> --
> Virg Wall
Only the
> lawyers get any money! :-):o
Been that way for years!
As for the OP;
You still need to run their software to change registry settings in windows.
> pjdd@rediffmail.com wrote:
>> Carl Lucas wrote:
>> > Grinder wrote:
>> > > Carl Lucas wrote:
>> > >> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
>> > >> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
>> > >> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
>> > >> What's with that?
>> > >>
>> > >> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
>> > >> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
>> > >> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>> > >>
>> > >> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
>> > >
>> > > To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing. This
>> > > may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS
>> > > setup, can it see the full capacity of the drive?
>> > >
>> > > It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000
>> > > SP4 and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
>> >
>> > The Bios does see it as a Western Digital 160. How do I enable it in
>> > Windows? I suppose I'll have to reformat it also.
>>
>> If you're using Windows XP, just install the Service Pack like
>> Grinder said. Either SP1 or SP2 will do. You don't have to
>> enable 48-bit addressing yourself - at least I don't have to on
>> my machine.
> Just installed SP1. (Different topic but my son says he's heard some
> not too good things about SP2.) Now I get 149.05 gig. It said, as I
> reformatted it, that the size was 152,625. Just confused why it's not
> closer to 160 gig. Any input?
That size is correct. Microsoft uses the wrong units:
Side note: If you do not install SP2, Windows will destroy your
data at some point, unless you only use the first 128GB of the
drive. It is a knowen issue.
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Frodo <No_Spam_I@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Windows XP with Service Pack 1 has the 48 bit addressing.
Not completely. MS screwed it up. You will get data loss
if you use more than the first 128GB of the driove.
Arno
> "Grinder" <grinder@no.spam.maam.com> wrote in message
> news:ck9zg.866512$084.32494@attbi_s22...
>> Carl Lucas wrote:
>>> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
>>> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
>>> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
>>> What's with that?
>>>
>>> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
>>> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
>>> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>>>
>>> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
>>
>> To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing. This
>> may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS setup,
>> can it see the full capacity of the drive?
>>
>> It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000 SP4
>> and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
>>
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Tom <Tom@invalid.com> wrote:
> On Jul 31 2006, Arno Wagner wrote:
>>> Just installed SP1. (Different topic but my son says he's heard some
>>> not too good things about SP2.) Now I get 149.05 gig. It said, as I
>>> reformatted it, that the size was 152,625. Just confused why it's not
>>> closer to 160 gig. Any input?
>>
>> That size is correct. Microsoft uses the wrong units:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix
> I would suggest you re-read the article. Microsoft is not using the
> "wrong units", it is the drive manufactures that are presenting drives
> sizes which are technically wrong for the purpose of making the capacity
> look larger.
Acftually they are required to use SI units and prefixes
by law in the civilised world (not the US, it seems).
Arno
> Microsoft on the other hand, is showing you the correct
> actual values in Giga-Bytes and Bytes.
> Using the articles value of 30,064,771,072 Bytes, it could also be
> binary converted to read as:
> All of these equal the same amount. The article talks about this, and
> how the drive manufactures try to confuse some people. And, it
> absolutely doesn't do anyone any good to display only one converted
> value for everything.
>> Side note: If you do not install SP2, Windows will destroy your data
>> at some point, unless you only use the first 128GB of the drive. It is
>> a knowen issue.
"Arno Wagner" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:4j6ck7F6gtl5U2@individual.net
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage clucas@adelphia.net wrote:
>
> > pjdd@rediffmail.com wrote:
> > > Carl Lucas wrote:
> > > > Grinder wrote:
> > > > > Carl Lucas wrote:
> > > > > > Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
> > > > > > gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
> > > > > > the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
> > > > > > What's with that?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
> > > > > > "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
> > > > > > 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
> > > > >
> > > > > To fully use drives larger than 127GB, you need 48-bit addressing. This
> > > > > may not be implemented by your PC's BIOS. If you go into your BIOS
> > > > > setup, can it see the full capacity of the drive?
> > > > >
> > > > > It also must be enabled within windows. That comes with Windows 2000
> > > > > SP4 and higher, or Windows XP SP2 and higher.
> > > >
> > > > The Bios does see it as a Western Digital 160. How do I enable it in
> > > > Windows? I suppose I'll have to reformat it also.
> > >
> > > If you're using Windows XP, just install the Service Pack like
> > > Grinder said. Either SP1 or SP2 will do. You don't have to
> > > enable 48-bit addressing yourself - at least I don't have to on
> > > my machine.
>
> > Just installed SP1. (Different topic but my son says he's heard some
> > not too good things about SP2.) Now I get 149.05 gig. It said, as I
> > reformatted it, that the size was 152,625. Just confused why it's not
> > closer to 160 gig. Any input?
>
> That size is correct. Microsoft uses the wrong units:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix
>
> Side note: If you do not install SP2, Windows will destroy your
> data at some point, unless you only use the first 128GB of the drive.
Hey babblebot, how can you use diskspace over 128GiB if Windows shows
only 128GiB.
And it's quite stupid of you to mock Microsoft and then use the same wrong
units yourself.
Tom <Tom@invalid.com> wrote:
> On Jul 31 2006, Arno Wagner wrote:
>
>>> Just installed SP1. (Different topic but my son says he's heard some
>>> not too good things about SP2.) Now I get 149.05 gig. It said, as I
>>> reformatted it, that the size was 152,625. Just confused why it's
>>> not closer to 160 gig. Any input?
>>
>> That size is correct. Microsoft uses the wrong units:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix
>
> I would suggest you re-read the article.
No need.
> Microsoft is not using the "wrong units",
Fraid so.
> it is the drive manufactures that are presenting
> drives sizes which are technically wrong for the
> purpose of making the capacity look larger.
Nope, the SI standard is the decimal GBs,
so the hard drive manufacturers are correct.
> Microsoft on the other hand, is showing you the
> correct actual values in Giga-Bytes and Bytes.
Nope, the SI standard GB is the decimal form.
> Using the articles value of 30,064,771,072 Bytes,
> it could also be binary converted to read as:
> All of these equal the same amount. The article talks about this,
> and how the drive manufactures try to confuse some people.
The article is just plain wrong on that.
> And, it absolutely doesn't do anyone any good
> to display only one converted value for everything.
That is the SI standard and the hard drive manufactures
make it VERY clear that they are using decimal GBs.
>> Side note: If you do not install SP2, Windows will
>> destroy your data at some point, unless you only use
>> the first 128GB of the drive. It is a knowen issue.
> That's a load of crap.
What is ? If 48LBA support is not provided, you will get corruption.
c <cfphillips@remove.cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> "VWWall" <vwall@DEADearthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:bLczg.219$xp2.10@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink .net...
>> Carl Lucas wrote:
>>
>>>> Drive manufacturers consider 1GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes, but Windows
>>>> thinks that 1GB = 1024^3 bytes. So 152,625MB (in Windows) =
>>>> 160,038,912,000 bytes
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>
>> There's a class action under way now, claiming WD uses misleading
>> size figures. You can join if you've bought a WD drive recently. Only the lawyers get
>> any money! :-)
>>
>> --
>> Virg Wall
>
> Only the
>> lawyers get any money! :-):o
>
> Been that way for years!
>
> As for the OP;
>
> You still need to run their software to change registry settings in windows.
Windows XP can ONLY recognize harddrive sizes up to 137 GB unformatted UNTIL
you load SP2.
--
DaveW
----------------
"Carl Lucas" <clucas@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:KcqdncrPLdUihlDZnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d@adelphia.com ...
> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital 160
> gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up shows
> the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126 gig.
> What's with that?
>
> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative Tools",
> "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed the drive as
> 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>
> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
> Windows XP can ONLY recognize harddrive sizes up to 137 GB unformatted UNTIL you load
> SP2.
SP1 is fine too.
> ----------------
> "Carl Lucas" <clucas@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> news:KcqdncrPLdUihlDZnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d@adelphia.com ...
>> Have a Dell Dimension 8300 desktop. Just installed a Western Digital
>> 160 gig hard drive without any problems. An issue is that the set up
>> shows the drive as 160 gig. However in Windows it shows it as a 126
>> gig. What's with that?
>>
>> After I installed it I went to "Control Panel", "Administrative
>> Tools", "Computer Management", "Disk Management". There it showed
>> the drive as 126 gig. Of course I had to format it so I did.
>>
>> So why is it shown as 126 and not 160?
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 09:38:28 +1000, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>DaveW <somewhere@zero.org> wrote:
>
>> Windows XP can ONLY recognize harddrive sizes up to 137 GB unformatted UNTIL you load
>> SP2.
>
>SP1 is fine too.
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 12:43:42 +1000, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>kony <spam@spam.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> DaveW <somewhere@zero.org> wrote:
>
>>>> Windows XP can ONLY recognize harddrive sizes
>>>> up to 137 GB unformatted UNTIL you load SP2.
>
>>> SP1 is fine too.
>
>> The registry hack works too.
>
>Nope, if you dont have the drivers that support
>48bit LBA, no change in the registry will fix that.
>
Yes I believe you're right, though the driver was part of
some prior patch too so a system could still do it without
SP1.
On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 23:17:20 GMT, Garrot <no1@home.today>
wrote:
>Rod Speed wrote:
>
>> What is ? If 48LBA support is not provided, you will get corruption.
>>
>>
>
>Would this explain why my 160Gb HDD corrupted after I formatted it with
>Partition Magic 8 NTFS 3.1 instead of in XP SP2?
No, regardless of how you'd formatted it, it would be
windows writing beyond the 128GB area on the drive.
"kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message news:h110d2d9oq27fcb3nhotu50rkh3d5789gf@4ax.com
> On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 23:17:20 GMT, Garrot <no1@home.today>
> wrote:
>
> > Rod Speed wrote:
> >
> > > What is ? If 48LBA support is not provided, you will get corruption.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Would this explain why my 160Gb HDD corrupted after I formatted it with
> > Partition Magic 8 NTFS 3.1 instead of in XP SP2?
> No, regardless of how you'd formatted it, it would be
> windows writing beyond the 128GB area on the drive.
Not if Windows would not have allowed it to format to
a size bigger that 128GiB in the first place.
Once that safeguard is out of the way by using another product
that ignored the limit the system thinks that the requested block address
is valid and it falls flat on it's face trying to address it without using
48-bit LBA addressing.
> No, regardless of how you'd formatted it, it would be
> windows writing beyond the 128GB area on the drive.
No, I was using SP2. This was on a secondary HDD and not the system HDD.
I had formatted it in PM8 and when I booted to XP it wanted to run a
chkdsk on it. Everything seemed fine until a few hours later I went to
download a file to it in Opera and Opera froze. Forced Opera to close
with task manager. Looked at explorer and noticed my D: drive was
missing. Booted up PM8 and had it check the drive. PM reported cross
linked files and corrupted files. Deleted the existing partiton so it
was RAW again. Booted to XP and had it do a format. Drive has been fine
since.
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 05:08:39 GMT, Garrot <no1@home.today>
wrote:
>kony wrote:
>
>> No, regardless of how you'd formatted it, it would be
>> windows writing beyond the 128GB area on the drive.
>
>No, I was using SP2.
That's not a guarantee.
>This was on a secondary HDD and not the system HDD.
That doesn't matter.
>I had formatted it in PM8
Formated or partitioned?
>and when I booted to XP it wanted to run a
>chkdsk on it.
From the last time you'd done something to it?
>Everything seemed fine until a few hours later I went to
>download a file to it in Opera and Opera froze. Forced Opera to close
>with task manager. Looked at explorer and noticed my D: drive was
>missing. Booted up PM8 and had it check the drive. PM reported cross
>linked files and corrupted files. Deleted the existing partiton so it
>was RAW again. Booted to XP and had it do a format. Drive has been fine
>since.
There is some addt'l factor not revealed yet, as I can tell
you with certainty that I have (without this problem you
had):
1) Partitioned with PM8
2) Formatted with PM8 (and/or, for different drives-)
3) Formatted later with WinXP
4) Had no problem with chkdsk, nor corruption.
WD Hard Drive Size Issue 
Linear Mode
