cannie

Clone easily Windows 98 and XP in the same computer.

179 posts in this topic

- The ATA or PATA hard drive must have at least two primary partitions (for XP1-XP2) and one extended partition with previously defined logical units (we shall use them for Windows 98 and all possible program files, keeping in C drive as few things as possible). All partitions and logical drives must be formatted using format.com, before installing Windows XP because it only allows 32 GB under FAT32 format.

- Notwithstanding this, thinking about the future it is very convenient that when running format.com we do not create primary partitions bigger than 32 GB, dividing also the remaining capacity of the HD left for the extended partition into several logical units, respecting that limit for each one of them. This way in case of need we have the possibility of reformatting any damaged unit using the XP file manager, because even when it manages greater drives it only allows formatting FAT32 below the 32 GB limit. Dividing the HD has additional advantages: distributing our files into diverse drives increases the security or our data, reduces fragmentation, increases desfragmenting speed and produces a faster and more reliable computing.

Just for the record, there are formatting utilities available capable of formatting FAT32 volumes, here:

GUI:

http://tokiwa.qee.jp/EN/Fat32Formatter/index.html

Command line:

http://www.ridgecrop.demon.co.uk/index.htm?fat32format.htm

GUI:

http://www.ridgecrop.demon.co.uk/index.htm?guiformat.htm

This said, there are REASONS why Microsoft self-limited FAT32 volumes to 32 Gb:

http://www.allensmith.net/Storage/HDDlimit/FAT32.htm

a 32KB cluster size is a bit (read very) large, when you have to deal with small/medium sized files.

So, unless you know what you are doing and you have an actual need for it, FAT32 volumes are better sized below said 32 Gb.

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This said, there are REASONS why Microsoft self-limited FAT32 volumes to 32 Gb:

http://www.allensmith.net/Storage/HDDlimit/FAT32.htm

a 32KB cluster size is a bit (read very) large, when you have to deal with small/medium sized files.

So, unless you know what you are doing and you have an actual need for it, FAT32 volumes are better sized below said 32 Gb.

:whistle:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This said, there are REASONS why Microsoft self-limited FAT32 volumes to 32 Gb:

http://www.allensmith.net/Storage/HDDlimit/FAT32.htm

a 32KB cluster size is a bit (read very) large, when you have to deal with small/medium sized files.

So, unless you know what you are doing and you have an actual need for it, FAT32 volumes are better sized below said 32 Gb.

:whistle:
Well, the main reason for it is that, at some point in time, Microsoft determined that 2,097.152 (a.k.a. 2 MiB) clusters is the best compromise between wasted slack-space build-up and speed. With 32 kiB clusters this means 64 GiB. Yet, in the present, our hardware is much better than that used back then, so the size of the FAT-32 array or the number of clusters are of much less concern now, in what regards speed. So the real limit is where the software tools we're used to work with break. The DOS programs NDD (from NU 2002), SCANDISK, FORMAT & FDISK (from DOS 8, i. e. the DOS part of Win ME) are known to work ok with FAT-32 disks up to 500 GB. The Windows programs are the limit, IMHO: SCANDKSW (from Win ME) works OK up to 26.4 million clusters (26,389,392 clusters), while NDD32 (v. 18.0.0.62, from NSW 2005, or higher) works OK up to 7.8 million clusters (7,813,813 clusters). That's where I set my personal limit: 7,813,813 * 32 KiB = 238 GiB. With smaller partitions I usually use the (NT-family only) fat32format.exe to change the default cluster to a smaller value, usually half the default, while keeping the total number of clusters at 6 million or less. I have been doing this since I found about fat32format (in 2007), and never had any problem because of this, neither on Win 98Se nor on Win XP. For a more extensive discussion of the numbers I used here one may refer to the hdd size limits? thread and the links provided therein. While I'm fully aware that this is a matter where YMMV, 32 GiB is way too little for FAT-32, whatever arguments one might wish to use to defend it. Microsoft did that to push people into its proprietary, extensively undocumented, NTFS (which is a good file system also, but is far from being *THE SOLUTION* :D ). BTW, I've never had any success with using the undocumented /Z switch to force the DOS FORMAT to use the cluster size I wanted it to use. So I think that if someone has the time for it, a port of fat32format (which is open source) to Win 9x/ME is quite welcome and timely. Edited by dencorso
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW Paragon NTFS for Windows 95, 98 and ME is free in case anyone is interested. I am not sure this has already been mentioned. I can't comment on it as I have not tested it.

http://www.paragon-software.com/home/ntfs-win98/

AFAIK it can only be used if you run Windows 98 from a HD to repair another HD, but never if you only have a single HD.

If you try it under dualboot and two XP primary partitions, as explained in this tutorial, Windows 98 doesn't work any more as soon as you convert to NTFS any of both XP units.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if anything damages on the anyone OS

it can be solved by anotherone OS

that's great help for one another

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW Paragon NTFS for Windows 95, 98 and ME is free in case anyone is interested. I am not sure this has already been mentioned. I can't comment on it as I have not tested it.

http://www.paragon-software.com/home/ntfs-win98/

AFAIK it can only be used if you run Windows 98 from a HD to repair another HD, but never if you only have a single HD.

If you try it under dualboot and two XP primary partitions, as explained in this tutorial, Windows 98 doesn't work any more as soon as you convert to NTFS any of both XP units.

I was under the impression it could be used under any configuration apart from running the 9x system on NTFS of course.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the real limit is where the software tools we're used to work with break. The DOS programs NDD (from NU 2002), SCANDISK, FORMAT & FDISK (from DOS 8, i. e. the DOS part of Win ME) are known to work ok with FAT-32 disks up to 500 GB. The Windows programs are the limit, IMHO: SCANDKSW (from Win ME) works OK up to 26.4 million clusters (26,389,392 clusters), while NDD32 (v. 18.0.0.62, from NSW 2005, or higher) works OK up to 7.8 million clusters (7,813,813 clusters). That's where I set my personal limit: 7,813,813 * 32 KiB = 238 GiB.

I am surprised Norton Disk Doctor is so limited compared to Scandisk. Anyway excellent information :thumbup

You are mentioning Disk Doctor of higher version than the one in Systemworks 2005. I was thinking this was the last version compatible with 9x systems. Is this incorrect ?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those files are from NSW Premier 2005. What I do is a custom, very trimmed, install of NSW 2003 and then update the files related to Windoctor and NDD32 by hand up to v. 18. Queue has shown that up to v. 19 NU files work with 9x/ME, but neither he nor I do know whether the installer actually also works because he also updates by hand from a lower version. The premier 2005 is the highest version I own, so I'm meaning to install it on one of my XP machines as soon as I have time, to be able to apply the updates pointed to by RetroOS, so I can get up to v. 18.0.3.11. Read more about all this here (it's the selfsame thread I had already pointed to in my previous post, read it all, it's worth it). BTW, to decide which files I must update for Windoctor and NDD32, what I do is to trace them with Dependency Walker v. 2.2.6000 and jot down the list of dependencies found. Incidentally, Symantec Ghost 11.0.2.1573 is the latest version able to work with 9x/ME, but also has to be installed by hand (it has the downside that you can't buy less than 5 licences, because it's part of the corporate Symantec Ghost Solution Suite 2.0, but I do have 5 computers under my daily care, so it serves me just right).

Edited by dencorso
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Added in the first post the paragraph G). - HOW TO CREATE A BOOT CD TO USE IT INSTEAD OF THE BOOT FLOPPY USING NERO.

HTH.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Added in the first post the paragraph G). - HOW TO CREATE A BOOT CD TO USE IT INSTEAD OF THE BOOT FLOPPY USING NERO.

A small addition, if I may:

2.- HOW TO CREATE A BOOT CD FOR EACH ONE OF THE TWO XP UNITS:

- Insert an empty floppy and copy from C: into it the files NTLDR, NTDETECT.COM and BOOT.INI (this floppy may also be used by itself as emergence boot floppy).

- Edit BOOT.INI to establish timeout=0, and delete any mention to Windows 98.

- Open NERO in the option BOOT CD-ROM, and keep unit A: as source of boot files.

- Burn the CD.

The floppy needs to be formatted under 2K/XP in order to have the "proper" bootsector invoking NTLDR.

The "full reference to create such an "emergency floppy" is given here:

http://www.xxcopy.com/xxcopy33.htm

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/305595/en-us

A similar bootfloppy for Vista/Server2008/Windows 7 is detailed here:

http://www.multibooters.co.uk/floppy.html

This said, I personally would use grldr as the no-emulation bootsector and would create a .iso with mkisofs, containing any number of floppy images to be loaded through grub4dos.

Also, if you don't have Nero, IMGBURN is a very good, small FREEWARE app to do the same:

http://www.imgburn.com/

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Added in the first post the paragraph G). - HOW TO CREATE A BOOT CD TO USE IT INSTEAD OF THE BOOT FLOPPY USING NERO.

A small addition, if I may:

The floppy needs to be formatted under 2K/XP in order to have the "proper" bootsector invoking NTLDR.

The text has been modified accordingly.

Thank you jaclaz!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you jaclaz!

You are welcome. :)

Another small thing that you may want to think about:

Q: Why do you want to make an "emergency" CD/DVD with a "simple" floppy image?

A: Because either of the following is true:

  1. That machine has NOT a floppy drive.
  2. That machine has a floppy drive but it doesn't work.
  3. That machine has a floppy drive, it does work, but I have no floppies handy.
  4. That machine has a floppy drive, it does work, and I have lots of floppy media, but I don't trust floppies.

If you answer 1., 2. or 3. it may be useful some reference to using a floppy image instead of a "real" floppy and floppy drive, and to tools like Ken Kato's VFD or Olof Lagerkvist's IMDISK (NT based systems only) or Winimage (Shareware, both Win9x/ME and NT based) or,(only DOS/Win9x/Me) use grub4dos to map a floppy image.

Keep up the good work! :thumbup

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi jaclaz!

I forgot to say in the first post why to use a CD instead of a floppy, so it has been completed with your second suggestion. Once more "four eyes see more than two".

Edited by cannie
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi jaclaz!

I forgot to say in the first post why to use a CD instead of a floppy, so it has been completed with your second suggestion. Once more "four eyes see more than two".

OMG! after sending the previous post I've noticed that instead of sending a new post I deleted the existing one in which I answered yours. Please accept my excuses, jaclaz.

Thank you very much for your corrections! :thumbup

Best wishes.

cannie

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.