hard disk problem - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: hard disk problem

  1. #11
    Member deByte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    82
    I had bad sector problem with a Quantum and a Seagate abt 3 yrs back. This worked for me, I used respective Disk Manager (DM) from Ontrack (or the manufacturer) and I did the zerofill and then the low level format. Bad sector has yet to return.... ::

    rgds
    de

  2. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9
    hello, i dont know where to go to ask for help about my problem.. ive been reading posts here... so i decided to reply with my problem in this post because i dont know where to start... im sorry if im in the wrong place but i really need help, ive been searching somewhere but found nothing even in microsoft's KB.. i just installed win98se and when i boot up this BSOD displays "A fatal exception 0E has occured at 0317:00003D33. etc.." pls help!

  3. #13
    Senior Member The Old Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    364

    Thumbs up

    "Error Messages"... Someone more versed will probably tell you exactly what the problem is, but... I had a similar "take a hike" message during a recent install of W2000Pro. I wrote it down exactly, then went to the MS Knowledge base/discussion page for W2000Pro, entered the phrase into the query box, and bing-bang-boom, here comes three pages of print that told me how to go to two or three dozen system locations, delete about that many instances of another driver program I had, and whadaya think, it fixed the problem. Also, my ISP guys say they benchmarked W98se in several configurations and they believe W98 can't *actually* recognize/use anything over 128meg RAM, even though it does report on the "performance" tab whatever you actually have in Motherboard RAM slots. They say W98 tries to juggle RAM when it's over 128, and the benchmarck goes down to 40% of original at 512meg RAM... but how they described it was way over my bald head. That's why I spent all last weekend changing wife's 'puter OS to W2000Pro, but I have so much stuff on mine I'd eat dirt before I'd reformat and reload. Anyway, you might try the MS Knowledge Base page......

  4. #14
    Senior Member The Old Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    364

    Thumbs up

    "Error Messages"... Someone more versed will probably tell you exactly what the problem is, but... I had a similar "take a hike" message during a recent install of W2000Pro. I wrote it down exactly, then went to the MS Knowledge base/discussion page for W2000Pro, entered the phrase into the query box, and bing-bang-boom, here comes three pages of print that told me how to go to two or three dozen system locations, delete about that many instances of another driver program I had, and whadaya think, it fixed the problem. Also, my ISP guys say they benchmarked W98se in several configurations and they believe W98 can't *actually* recognize/use anything over 128meg RAM, even though it does report on the "performance" tab whatever you actually have in Motherboard RAM slots. They say W98 tries to juggle RAM when it's over 128, and the benchmarck goes down to 40% of original at 512meg RAM... but how they described it was way over my bald head. That's why I spent all last weekend changing wife's 'puter OS to W2000Pro, but I have so much stuff on mine I'd eat dirt before I'd reformat and reload. Anyway, you might try the MS Knowledge Base page......

  5. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9
    i did entered the whole phrase exactly in the query box but it returned no results.. well, thanks for your answer. i find it out that its on my cmos/bios setting under Intergrated Peripherals and set Init Display First to PCI Slot, and it works fine now. i wander why i had to set it that way since my video is onboard... you mean using more than 128MB of RAM is useless on win98? why? is there a site you could recommend to read about maximizing memory on each OS or application to use old man?

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    168
    disk defragmentation removes the bad_sectors of your drives. but i have this experience using disk defragmentation doesn't remove all the bad clusters in my drive which is suppose to be removed. but still, one way to remove bad_clusters in the drive is defrag. if it doesn't work try to re-format the drive.
    \"The more you ignore me... the closer i get!\"

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    485
    Originally posted here by lex
    i did entered the whole phrase exactly in the query box but it returned no results.. well, thanks for your answer. i find it out that its on my cmos/bios setting under Intergrated Peripherals and set Init Display First to PCI Slot, and it works fine now. i wander why i had to set it that way since my video is onboard... you mean using more than 128MB of RAM is useless on win98? why? is there a site you could recommend to read about maximizing memory on each OS or application to use old man?
    Hmm, that seems very odd to me. It implies that you have an AGP slot with something in it (which looks very unlikely), or the BIOS you are running has a bug.

    I have a PC at home that runs fine with 384Mb of RAM under Windows98, and yes, I'm sure it does use it - even if only for things like the HD cache. Try starting System Monitor (or any other tools you may have), and see what happens when you run a memory hungry application. You don't need to run additional software to get the benefits of extra RAM under Windows98 - most of the tweaks make no difference.

    There is an upper limit (>512Mb I believe, and could be 4Gb), before Windows98 gets it's knickers in a twist, and starts doing strange things.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    485
    Originally posted here by protocool
    disk defragmentation removes the bad_sectors of your drives. but i have this experience using disk defragmentation doesn't remove all the bad clusters in my drive which is suppose to be removed. but still, one way to remove bad_clusters in the drive is defrag. if it doesn't work try to re-format the drive.
    I agree that defrag does give your HD a good workout. However, all that defrag does is to read and then write data back to your HD. This will work as it will avoid bad sectors, but the data you get written back could be damaged (depends on whether or not it read the original version of the data correctly).

    Scandisk works by by writing data to every sector and reading back the data it has just written to check that the sector is OK. If you get an error from scandisk this indicates that some sectors on your HD do not work. This in turn indicates that your HD is probably on its last legs - one bad sector is perhaps acceptable. What will happen in the near future is that when you try and read data, you will get a corrupt result, causing all sorts of weird problems.

    And I've seen a few of these weird problems

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •