Performance 933 BIOS settings

[news.rcn.com]

Is there some trick involved in getting a secondary hard drive recognised on
a Performance 933? I tried putting AUTO in the BIOS (amibios dated 7/7/2000)
(and saving the configuration of course when it asked me if I wanted to do
this) and nothing I can do will let it see any secondary hard drive on POST
at all. I also tried telling it to configure it as USER but it didn't let
me enter settings so I figured that AUTO was better; I did also try ATAPI
but this didn't make any difference.

The drive I am trying to use is a 27 Gig DiamondMax 30 VL Ultra ATA 100 but
I can't see the size being anything of a problem as the primary drive is an
80 Gig drive. I also tried another drive but the POST wouldn't see that one
either so I suspect it is nothing to do with the drive itself. The POST
does see the secondary IDE CD ROM master and the slave. The only thing I
haven't tried is configuring the secondary IDE drive as cable select but I
cant see that making any difference (except that I never figured what cable
select meant if you can always manually configure the drives as master and
slave with the appropriate jumpers)

I HAVE jumpered the drive correctly and can feel the drive throbbing
slightly indicating that it is connected and working but nothing I can do
will let the unit see the drive.

The only thing I can see is that I Have installed XP where the unit had 98
on it before. But that shouldn't prevent it seeing the hard drive

It also cant see the network card which was working before I changed the
primary hard drive and reinstalled the OS, all of which went perfectly and
without problems, Except for this hard drive problem and the network card.

(Partition Commander restart disc couldn't see either drive either but I
didn't see any logical inconsistency in that if the POST cant see them)

 

[Jack]

Try this:
http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/disc/howto/install_xp_disk_mgmt.html

Jack

 

[Rod Speed]

Is there some trick involved in getting a secondary hard drive recognised on a
Performance 933?

Nope. Might be worth checking if its got an updated bios.

I tried putting AUTO in the BIOS (amibios dated 7/7/2000) (and saving the
configuration of course when it asked me if I wanted to do this) and nothing I
can do will let it
see any secondary hard drive on POST at all.

You need to have the drive jumpered correctly,
and have a viable ribbon cable too.

You do sometimes have to jumper the OTHER drive
correctly too, particularly when the master is a WD.

You do sometimes see a particular pair of drives
refuse to coexist on a particular cable too. The
best test for this possibility is to put it on the other
cable, even if only temporarily for a test.

Does the drive show up on the black bios screen at boot time ?

I also tried telling it to configure it as USER but it didn't let me enter
settings

Some bios can be a bit quirky on how to enter the numbers.

so I figured that AUTO was better;

Its best to use AUTO, much safer.

I did also try ATAPI but this didn't make any difference.

Thats for the optical drives.

The drive I am trying to use is a 27 Gig DiamondMax 30 VL Ultra ATA 100 but I
can't see the size being anything of a problem as the primary drive is an 80
Gig drive.

Yes, the size shouldnt be the problem.

You sure its a viable drive ? Does it show
up with the master physically disconnected ?

I also tried another drive but the POST wouldn't see that one either so I
suspect it is nothing to do with the drive itself.

Yeah, that's certainly likely.

The POST does see the secondary IDE CD ROM master and the slave. The only
thing I haven't tried is configuring the secondary IDE drive as cable select
but I cant see that making any difference

It is possible that a defective cable will see
cable select work and not master/slave.

(except that I never figured what cable select meant
if you can always manually configure the drives as master and slave with the
appropriate jumpers)

Its basically a way of not needing to change the jumpers
and have the master and slave determined by the
connector used by the drive instead of by jumpers.

I HAVE jumpered the drive correctly and can feel the drive throbbing slightly
indicating that it is connected and working but nothing I can do will let the
unit see the drive.

Just try the possibilitys. See if it can be seen with master
physically disconnected. See if can be seen on the other
ribbon cable. See if a different cable allows it to be seen.

The only thing I can see is that I Have installed XP where the unit
had 98 on it before. But that shouldn't prevent it seeing the hard drive

Yes, that wont be relevant to it being seen by the bios at boot time.

It also cant see the network card which was working before I changed the
primary hard drive and reinstalled the OS, all of which went perfectly and
without problems, Except for this hard drive problem and the network card.

Try resetting the cmos, it may have got scrambled.

(Partition Commander restart disc couldn't see either drive either but I
didn't see any logical inconsistency in that if the POST cant see them)

Yes, if the drive isnt visible on the black bios screen at
boot time, there is some more fundamental problem.

 

[Rod Speed]

Try this:
http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/disc/howto/install_xp_disk_mgmt.html

Nothing to do with why it doesnt show up in the bios at boot time.

 

[Zvi Netiv]

Is there some trick involved in getting a secondary hard drive recognised on
a Performance 933? I tried putting AUTO in the BIOS (amibios dated 7/7/2000)
(and saving the configuration of course when it asked me if I wanted to do
this) and nothing I can do will let it see any secondary hard drive on POST
at all. I also tried telling it to configure it as USER but it didn't let
me enter settings so I figured that AUTO was better; I did also try ATAPI
but this didn't make any difference.

Is the problem drive recognized by the BIOS when connected as first? Is the
existing drive recognized when connected as secondary? Trying the above may
give a clue where the problem is.

The drive I am trying to use is a 27 Gig DiamondMax 30 VL Ultra ATA 100 but
I can't see the size being anything of a problem as the primary drive is an
80 Gig drive. I also tried another drive but the POST wouldn't see that one
either so I suspect it is nothing to do with the drive itself. The POST
does see the secondary IDE CD ROM master and the slave. The only thing I
haven't tried is configuring the secondary IDE drive as cable select but I
cant see that making any difference (except that I never figured what cable
select meant if you can always manually configure the drives as master and
slave with the appropriate jumpers)

I HAVE jumpered the drive correctly and can feel the drive throbbing
slightly indicating that it is connected and working but nothing I can do
will let the unit see the drive.

The only thing I can see is that I Have installed XP where the unit had 98
on it before. But that shouldn't prevent it seeing the hard drive

It also cant see the network card which was working before I changed the
primary hard drive and reinstalled the OS, all of which went perfectly and
without problems, Except for this hard drive problem and the network card.

(Partition Commander restart disc couldn't see either drive either but I
didn't see any logical inconsistency in that if the POST cant see them)

Don't change too many parameters on the same run when troubleshooting. You
won't be able to isolate which one caused the desired change.

Regards, Zvi

 

[Tom Clydesdale]

First find out if your BIOS and system are set up for cable select;

If cable select is the arrangement then BOTH drives should be set up as
cable select and the drive assignment is determined by their position on the
cable itself (i'm not sure which is the master location - it would have been
the one connected when the system was received).

If NOT cable select then the drives should be plugged with the old one as
master (boot drive) and the new one as slave.

Good luck!

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

Thanks for displaying your total and utter cluelessness.

 

[news.rcn.com]

Thanks for your help everyone but this problem is getting worse: I have done
what everyone suggests but now all I can establish is that (1) the slave
drive works properly when configured as a master. It wont work in any other
mode on this computer despite the drive manufacturer's suggested jumper
settings.
(2) the original drive now won't work as master or slave even as originally
configured wherever it is put on the cable.
(3) Cable select doesn't seem to work on this IDE cable although latterly I
discovered that the slave plug is coming off the cable so I will replace the
cable.

But that doesn't explain why the new drive is seen by the POST as master
while the one which worked before I started changing this system suddenly
isn't seen when put on the master plug?

And I have tried every combination of BIOS configuration, usually either
AUTO for IDE or LOAD DEFAULTS AND EXIT. Which does let me boot to a
Partition Commander screen where I can see the newer drive in all its glory.

And annoyingly, I cant figure out from the Gateway site whether there is any
later bios than the July 7th 2000 AmiBios one which is on the unit (does
anyone have a link to a later one please? Gateway won't assist without a
serial number which is buried deep at the back of a not-easily-removable
unit)

Is this just a dud design which they want to keep quiet about or is Gateway
as difficult as this with all their computers when you try to navigate
through their site for information? (they weren't exactly helpful when I
wanted to mechanically reset the power switch on my Solo 5300 either)

First find out if your BIOS and system are set up for cable select;

(the BIOS is shtum on that one and unhelpful at best on most else but surely
ALL systems should work with an IDE cable with two connectors and one master
with one slave???)

If cable select is the arrangement then BOTH drives should be set up as
cable select and the drive assignment is determined by their position on
the cable itself (i'm not sure which is the master location - it would
have been the one connected when the system was received).

If NOT cable select then the drives should be plugged with the old one as
master (boot drive) and the new one as slave.

(as I mentioned, the whole point of this posting is that this simple method
doesnt work)

 

[Rod Speed]

Thanks for your help everyone but this problem is getting worse: I have done
what everyone suggests but now all I can establish is that (1) the slave drive
works properly when configured as a master. It wont work in any other mode on
this computer despite the drive
manufacturer's suggested jumper settings.

(2) the original drive now won't work as master or slave even as originally
configured wherever it is put on the cable.

(3) Cable select doesn't seem to work on this IDE cable although latterly I
discovered that the slave plug is coming off the cable so I will replace the
cable.

Urk, that's almost certainly the problem, just a bad cable.

But that doesn't explain why the new drive is seen by the POST as master while
the one which worked before I started changing this system suddenly isn't seen
when put on the master plug?

Drives dont always behave identically when they arent getting
all the signals they are supposed to be getting from the cable.

And I have tried every combination of BIOS configuration, usually either AUTO
for IDE or LOAD DEFAULTS AND EXIT. Which does let me boot to a Partition
Commander screen where I can see the newer drive in all its glory.

Its not a good idea to be thrashing around like that unless you
have the data you care about fully backed up. If you do manage
to get it to boot with the wrong drive table entry, that can
damage the contents of the drive and be very hard to recover.

And annoyingly, I cant figure out from the Gateway site whether there is any
later bios than the July 7th 2000 AmiBios one which is on the unit (does
anyone have a link to a later one please?

Dont worry about this stuff until a new cable doesnt help.

Gateway won't assist without a serial number which is buried deep at the back
of a not-easily-removable unit)

Is this just a dud design which they want to keep quiet about or is Gateway as
difficult as this with all their computers when you try to navigate through
their site for information?

Its just their stupid ideas about access to the data.

Pinnacle is even worse. I never buy anything that costs much
without reading the manual first. Pinnacle wont even let you
download the manual until you have registered the product,
and you obviously cant do that if you havent bought it yet.

And when I emailed them about the problem, it took the
clowns FOUR MONTHS to even send an auto acknowledgment
of my email and didnt even bother to answer the question.

(they weren't exactly helpful when I wanted to mechanically reset the power
switch on my Solo 5300 either)

Yeah, some operations are completely hopeless.

(the BIOS is shtum on that one and unhelpful at best on most else

Yeah, its not common to have that spelt out clearly.

Many of the motherboards that have RAID onboard dont even say clearly
whether you can use the RAID ports for normal non RAID drives either.

but surely ALL systems should work with an IDE cable with two connectors and
one master with one slave???)

Not all systems do support cable select mode tho.

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

Urk, that's almost certainly the problem, just a bad cable.


Drives dont always behave identically when they arent getting
all the signals they are supposed to be getting from the cable.


Its not a good idea to be thrashing around like that unless you
have the data you care about fully backed up. If you do manage
to get it to boot with the wrong drive table entry, that can
damage the contents of the drive and be very hard to recover.


Dont worry about this stuff until a new cable doesnt help.



Its just their stupid ideas about access to the data.

Pinnacle is even worse. I never buy anything that costs much
without reading the manual first. Pinnacle wont even let you
download the manual until you have registered the product,
and you obviously cant do that if you havent bought it yet.

And when I emailed them about the problem, it took the
clowns FOUR MONTHS to even send an auto acknowledgment
of my email and didnt even bother to answer the question.


Yeah, some operations are completely hopeless.



Yeah, its not common to have that spelt out clearly.

Many of the motherboards that have RAID onboard dont even say clearly
whether you can use the RAID ports for normal non RAID drives either.

Of course.

Not all systems do support cable select mode tho.

Then obviously they should be dumped as they are not ATA compliant (they flout
the ATA standard, to use RodBots terminology) since the ATA spec requires
that they do. If they cut corners with that, what else did they cut corners with.

 

[Rod Speed]

Of course.

Then obviously they should be dumped as they are not ATA compliant

Yet another pig ignorant lie with a system of that vintage, cretin.

(they flout the ATA standard, to use RodBots terminology)

Yet another pig ignorant lie with a system of that vintage, cretin.

since the ATA spec requires that they do.

Yet another pig ignorant lie with a system of that vintage, cretin.

If they cut corners with that, what else did they cut corners with.

Pathetic, really.

Its very likely its just the bad cable, stupid.

 

[news.rcn.com]

Yes, it was probably only a bad cable: I found one in my stock and even
though it is different (it has two small notches towards the ends rather
than one central spline at the side) the system does now work better. And as
I was taking the old cable out, the end connector started to come off the
cable (as well as the slave connector which I had said was coming loose)

But the system still won't identify both drives however configured. It would
identify one OR the other. And even more mystifyingly, if I put the
Partition Commander floppi in and boot off that, the system CAN see both
drives with the master configured as master and the slave configured as
slave.

And even worse, when I tried copying the contents of the 20gig slave drive
to the 80 gig master so that I don't need to unscramble all this
mystification, it copied most of the drive and then gave an I/O error and
the 80 gig master drive stopped working almost completely. It tests OK on
the Hitachi utility but doesn't work in the computer which reboots
continuously when it is about to go into windows (NO it hasn't suddenly got
that worm which causes this: I know because another problem this unit has
suddenly deveoloped is that it has suddenlys topped recognising the exisence
of the internal Netgear WiFi card). I havent tried fdisk /mbr yet. Is
there really no way of finding if there is a later BIOS trhan the one I
have? This MIGHT have some effect on the problem. Is Gateway the sort of
company where some tech support person would point you towards the correct
link if you call enough times and speak to enough people who wont help? Or
are they trained not to assist if they can get out of it and get the
customer off the line as soon as possible?

 

[Rod Speed]

Yes, it was probably only a bad cable:

Its clearly more than just that.

I found one in my stock and even though it is different (it has two small
notches towards the ends rather than one central spline at the side)

Cant understand that bit.

the system does now work better. And as I was taking the old cable out, the
end connector started to come off the cable (as well as the slave connector
which I had said was coming loose)

That basically means you are too rough with the
cable, pulling it off the drive using the ribbon itself.

But the system still won't identify both drives however configured. It would
identify one OR the other.

That indicates that that pair dont like to coexist on the one cable.
You can find that it will work if you reverse the master/slave config,
making the old master the slave and the old slave the master.

And even more mystifyingly, if I put the Partition Commander floppi in and
boot off that, the system CAN see both drives with the master configured as
master and the slave configured as slave.

Was the previous failure to see both drives at
once the black bios screen at boot time or in Win ?

If both drives dont show up on the black bios screen,
check the drive type for both drives, should be AUTO.

If both drives still arent seen by the bios, I'd wipe
both drives with something like clearhdd and start
over from scratch. Its likely that there is some shit
in the MBR, that can confuse some systems.

And even worse, when I tried copying the contents of the 20gig slave
drive to the 80 gig master so that I don't need to unscramble all this
mystification, it copied most of the drive and then gave an I/O error
and the 80 gig master drive stopped working almost completely. It tests OK on
the Hitachi utility but doesn't work in the computer
which reboots continuously when it is about to go into windows

What does the Win event log say about what is triggering the reboot ?

(NO it hasn't suddenly got that worm which causes this: I know because another
problem this unit has suddenly deveoloped is that it has suddenlys topped
recognising the exisence of the internal Netgear WiFi card).

I havent tried fdisk /mbr yet.

I'd try wiping both drives completely and starting
over if you dont care about the data on the drives.
Completely eliminate any possibility of remnants
of a bios overlay or even a virus etc.

Is there really no way of finding if there is a later BIOS trhan the one I
have?

Yes there is, post back the very long number
usually on the bottom of the black bios screen
at boot time. You should be able to hit the
pause button so you can write it down.

And include the Everest display of the motherboard details.

This MIGHT have some effect on the problem.

Yes, it could certainly be some wart in the bios.

Is Gateway the sort of company where some tech support person would point you
towards the correct link if you call enough times and speak to enough people
who wont help?

Cant say I have ever tried that route with them.

Or are they trained not to assist if they can get out of it and get the
customer off the line as soon as possible?

Not so much trained as many do attempt to brush the
caller off like a dead fly with the more complicated problems.

It should certainly be possible to work out
if you are running the latest bios available.

 

[news.rcn.com]

That basically means you are too rough with the
cable, pulling it off the drive using the ribbon itself.

That was, as usual, an extremely helpful reply, even down to this bit which
is indicative of my not caring about a cable which I had to throw away
anyway. Still I AM slightly surprised that at what was probably the first
attempt ever to take the cable out of the mobo, this happened. But of course
you are entirely correct about the way I yanked the cable out.

You can find that it will work if you reverse the master/slave config,
making the old master the slave and the old slave the master.

Hadnt thought about that one! I was always worried about running an OS off
a slave drive but I am not sure why.

Was the previous failure to see both drives at
once the black bios screen at boot time or in Win ?

The BIOS wont recognise that there are two drives there which made it
mystifying that Partition Commander woudl let me work with both at the same
time as surely even a floppy start will rely on some form of reading of the
Basic In and Out System?

If both drives dont show up on the black bios screen,
check the drive type for both drives, should be AUTO.

Yes, I coulndt configure either of them any other way but when I do, they
are recognised for exactly what they are

If both drives still arent seen by the bios, I'd wipe
both drives with something like clearhdd and start
over from scratch. Its likely that there is some shit
in the MBR, that can confuse some systems.

This is more than likely but there is some data on the drives which I cant
wipe or (at the moment) get off. A few gig of it. Do I Have to go through
the whole procedure of installing XP again, then before the install, TRYING
to get to the restore console and trying fixmbr? After all, this is an OS
which I had only just installed on the 80 gig drive to get it to work! I
wouldnt have thought that there was much wrong with the MBR or whatever it
is called when you are using NTFS

What does the Win event log say about what is triggering the reboot ?

Where is the log and can I read it using BartPE?

Yes there is, post back the very long number
usually on the bottom of the black bios screen
at boot time. You should be able to hit the
pause button so you can write it down.

And include the Everest display of the motherboard details.

(cant get into Windows to run Everest and can't figure out from the Gateway
site what the mobo is: Possibly a Bryant but equally possibly something
else. Gateway seems to change them so often that one wonders if they arent
all similar with slightly different components or BIOSs or with slight
updates to accomondate newer processors)

 

[Rod Speed]

That was, as usual, an extremely helpful reply, even down to this bit which is
indicative of my not caring about a cable which I had to throw away anyway.
Still I AM slightly surprised that at what was probably the first attempt ever
to take the cable out of the mobo, this happened.

I'm not, but then that is because I understand how
those connectors are assembled. Its one area
where the basic design has some real downsides.

But of course you are entirely correct about the way I yanked the cable out.

Hadnt thought about that one! I was always worried about running an OS off a
slave drive but I am not sure why.

Yeah, its generally best to have the boot drive as the master,
just because the other config isnt anything like as common so
you are taking a bit of a risk that it might produce some problems
when say installing a new OS etc. I was just suggesting it as
a test, not necessarily as the final config. If it does work that
way, you can then consider alternate configs like putting the
slave original slave on the other ribbon cable and putting one
of the optical drives thats presumably on the secondary cabe
on the primary cable as slave etc. Thats a much more common
config. The main downside with it is that it can be mechanically
impossible due to the distance between the drive connectors.

The BIOS wont recognise that there are two drives there which made it
mystifying that Partition Commander woudl let me work with both at the same
time as surely even a floppy start will rely on some form of reading of the
Basic In and Out System?

Doesnt have to, whatever is run from the floppy can basically
do what it likes as far as driving the drives is concerned.
Obviously the diagnostics that are normally run from a
floppy or a pseudo floppy from the CD bang on the drives
directly and so they arent limited by what the bios can see.

I have no idea what Partition Commander does in that
regard. It may even just fiddle with the drive type entry
directly once its decided what drives are physically
present. Thats how the bios overlays do it.

Yes, I coulndt configure either of them any other way but when I do, they are
recognised for exactly what they are

Presumably you mean one at a time there.

This is more than likely but there is some data on the drives which I cant
wipe or (at the moment) get off. A few gig of it.

OK, that certainly complicates things. In that case I'd just try
reversing the master/slave relationship first, esssentially because
its much more likely to be that that crap in the MBR etc.

Do I Have to go through the whole procedure of installing XP again, then
before the install, TRYING to get to the restore console and trying fixmbr?

No, I was suggesting that to get the drives seen by the bios at boot time.

After all, this is an OS which I had only just installed on the 80 gig drive
to get it to work! I wouldnt have thought that there was much wrong with the
MBR or whatever it is called when you are using NTFS

This is all before the OS is booted at
all, getting the drives seen by the bios.

It isnt essential that the bios does see both drives. XP does its own
scan for drives and since Partition Commander does see both drives
fine, its quite possible that XP will too, even when the bios doesnt.

Again, not an ideal config, but may be viable if it isnt
practical to have the two drives on different ribbon
cables and you dont want to just swap the master and
slave relationship and install XP on the new master etc.

Thats a real worry, it may be that even if XP does see both
drives even when the bios doesnt, its still not a viable config.

Where is the log

Computer Management, Event viewer.

You'll have to come up in safe mode to be able to get there.

You can turn off the auto reboot on serious errors by right
mouse clicking on My Computer, even in the start menu,
selecting propertys/advanced tab/startup and recovery.
Again in safe mode in your situation.

and can I read it using BartPE?

Presumably, havent tried tho.

(cant get into Windows to run Everest

There is an everest plugin for BartPE.

and can't figure out from the Gateway site what the mobo is: Possibly a Bryant
but equally possibly something else. Gateway seems to change them so often
that one wonders if they arent all similar with slightly different components
or BIOSs or with slight updates to accomondate newer processors)

Its more likely they change them as what they can get cheap changes.

 

[news.rcn.com]

"Thats a real worry, it may be that even if XP does see both
drives even when the bios doesnt, its still not a viable config."

Well I finally managed to obviate some of these mystifying problems last
night while watching television: I did manage to copy all of the info on the
secondary drive which I needed to keep onto an extended partition on the 80
gig drive, which should be about as big as I need in the foreseeable future.
But then a different problem arose on the primary partition which I hadn't
changed:

Suddenly the computer wont boot to Windows from that primary partition at
all. It POSTs, then gives a black screen while it is thinking about what to
do next and doesn't do anything at all. I went back into Partition Manager
and tried seeing if the primary partition was still bootable and it was but
no go. Now I cant do anything with the computer.

I don't think that this is as bad as it seems as I had only just installed
XP on that drive so presumably I can repair the installation or if the worst
comes to the worst, copy all data onto the extended partition which I just
created with BartPE and reinstall XP. But it IS a bit annoying. Anything
you ever did with Partition Manager in the old days left an unbootable
system which could be easily cured by running fdisk /mbr but I am not so
sure that is so easy in XP? May try Restore Console and fixmbr, assuming
this wont screw up the relationship between the partitions but I assume it
will see what is there and write the proper MBR for whatever I have. (And I
should be able to notice if it threatens to format the drive rather than the
C partition on which it might repair or reinstall)

 

[Rod Speed]

"Thats a real worry, it may be that even if XP does see both
drives even when the bios doesnt, its still not a viable config."

Well I finally managed to obviate some of these mystifying problems
last night while watching television: I did manage to copy all of the
info on the secondary drive which I needed to keep onto an extended
partition on the 80 gig drive, which should be about as big as I need
in the foreseeable future. But then a different problem arose on the
primary partition which I hadn't changed:

Suddenly the computer wont boot to Windows from that primary
partition at all. It POSTs, then gives a black screen while it is
thinking about what to do next and doesn't do anything at all. I went
back into Partition Manager and tried seeing if the primary partition
was still bootable and it was but no go. Now I cant do anything with
the computer.

I don't think that this is as bad as it seems as I had only just installed XP
on that drive so presumably I can repair the installation or if the worst
comes to the worst, copy all data onto the extended partition which I just
created with BartPE and reinstall XP. But it IS a bit annoying.

More than that, its the evidence of some serious
problem that is corrupting the contents of that drive.

Kludging around that is not a good idea, its
guaranteed to bite you later if you do that.

Looks like you've managed to stomp on something
that is a fundamental part of the boot process. The
XP boot is a lot more complicated than just having
the partition active and it looks like some other part
of that process has got stomped on.

Tho you do need to try a safe mode boot, you did
say elsewhere that the wireless AP went missing,
it may just be stalling at the point where the driver
for that cant make sense of what it can see of the AP.

Anything you ever did with Partition Manager in the old days left an
unbootable system which could be easily cured by running fdisk /mbr but I am
not so sure that is so easy in XP?

Yes, its much more complicated than that with XP.

May try Restore Console and fixmbr, assuming this wont screw up the
relationship between the partitions but I assume it will
see what is there and write the proper MBR for whatever I have.

Yes, but the more important question is
how it got clobbered in the first place.

You're likely to be able to make it bootable, if only by using
and install in place of XP over the top of the current install. But
just kludging it like that will do nothing to stop it happening again.

(And I should be able to notice if it threatens to format the drive rather
than the C partition on which it might repair or reinstall)

Correct.

I'd try a safe mode boot to see if its just stalling with the
driver not being able to see the wireless AP properly first.

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

I'm not, but then that is because I understand how
those connectors are assembled. Its one area
where the basic design has some real downsides.



Yeah, its generally best to have the boot drive as the master,
just because the other config isnt anything like as common so
you are taking a bit of a risk that it might produce some problems
when say installing a new OS etc. I was just suggesting it as
a test, not necessarily as the final config. If it does work that
way, you can then consider alternate configs like putting the
slave original slave on the other ribbon cable and putting one
of the optical drives thats presumably on the secondary cabe
on the primary cable as slave etc. Thats a much more common
config. The main downside with it is that it can be mechanically
impossible due to the distance between the drive connectors.



Doesnt have to, whatever is run from the floppy can basically
do what it likes as far as driving the drives is concerned.
Right.

Obviously the diagnostics that are normally run from a
floppy or a pseudo floppy from the CD bang on the drives
directly and so they arent limited by what the bios can see.

Which isn't necessarily limited by a BIOS so may well be done
through BIOS. Some diags use their own drivers and so may have
comments included that say they only work on a limited number of
controllers and some diags bypass the bios and may have comments
that they only work on the mobo chipset internal IDE controller.

I have no idea what Partition Commander does in that regard.
Right.

It may even just fiddle with the drive type entry
directly once its decided what drives are physically present.

Through bios.

Thats how the bios overlays do it.

That is pure nonsense. Thanks for that little insight in your 'knowledge'.

 

[Rod Speed]

Some psychopath claiming to be
just the usual pathetic excuse for a troll thats all it can ever manage.