Go Back   PCMech Forums > Windows Support > Windows Legacy Support (XP and earlier)

Need Some Help? Type Your Keywords Here:

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 07-10-2003, 06:49 AM   #1
Member (9 bit)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Fribourg, Switzerland
Posts: 273
Question Win 98 / XP on a 80GB drive

OK, as I'm going to installll a new mobo and HDD, I need some advice on the best way to do it. I have Win 98 SE and an upgrade version of XP Home. IIRC, 98 doesn't recognise a HDD >64 GB (correct?), so what I was intending to do was first partition the HDD to 1 x 20GB and 2 x 30GB, fdisk all 3 with NTFS, install 98 on the 20GB partition and immediately upgrade to XP. Will this work or won't 98 install on NTFS? (not sure why I think this, just heard it somewhere)
__________________

Desktop:
Gigabyte EP35 DS3R, Intel Core Duo E8400 3.0 Ghz, Asus EAH5850 1GB, Western Digital 750 GB 7200rpm 16 MB cache, Corsair 4 GB DDR2 800, Thermaltake 650W PSU, Antec 900 Case, Windows 7 64 bit on Corsair 80GB SSD


HTPC:
Asus P5QL PRO, Intel Core2Duo E5300 2.8 Ghz, Sapphire HD4550 512MB, Samsung HD103UJ 1TB F1 7200rpm 32MB, Mushkin XP2-8500 2x2GB DDR2-1066, Be Quiet! Straight Power BQT E6-400W 80plus, Lite-On IHOS104-37 BluRay ROM, Silverstone La Scala SST-LC10B-E, Windows 7 64 bit
vacanthead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 06:55 AM   #2
Barefoot on the Moon!
Staff
Premium Member
 
Force Flow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Northeastern USA
Posts: 13,385
win 9x won't work on an NTFS file system. It can't see NTFS partitions, either. NTFS can see FAT32 file systems, though.
__________________
There are two secrets to staying young, being happy, and achieving success. You have to laugh and find humor every day, and you have to have a dream.
Force Flow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 06:56 AM   #3
Member (10 bit)
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Jacksonville Beach, FL
Posts: 879
I may be wrong, but I beleive that under FAT32 windows 9x can recognize drives and partitions up to 2 terabytes, although I do not know if they will have problems addressing all that space or not.

but it's a moot point because 98 can't see NTFS file systems.
yellohut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 07:10 AM   #4
Member (9 bit)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Fribourg, Switzerland
Posts: 273
What do you suggest I do then? Fdisk the 20GB with FAT32, and the others with NTFS? Then when I go to upgrade the 98, XP will ask me how I want to format the partition, so I just choose NTFS?
vacanthead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 08:21 AM   #5
Member (14 bit)
 
bailey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Christmas, Florida
Posts: 10,661
creat two partitions

install w98 first

install xp second on the second partation

you will then have a dual boot system

xp does not have to be ntfs

it will work ok as fat 32

then both systems can read and write to each other in windows explore.
bailey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 08:48 AM   #6
9mm wins.
 
minsonngo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Behind my Glock 34.
Posts: 4,544
Yellohut, FAT32 can recognize up to only 128GB whereas NTFS can recognize up to 2TB. FAT16 can recognize up to 2GB.
minsonngo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 08:49 AM   #7
Barefoot on the Moon!
Staff
Premium Member
 
Force Flow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Northeastern USA
Posts: 13,385
All of my O/S's (with the exception of Mandrake) are FAT32 and they all work fine. Haven't run into the 2GB file size limitation too often; only when film editing or using the MS backup tool.

[edit]: I thought a FAT32 system could recognize 2TB.
Force Flow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 08:50 AM   #8
Member (9 bit)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Fribourg, Switzerland
Posts: 273
Quote:
Originally posted by bailey
creat two partitions

install w98 first

install xp second on the second partation

you will then have a dual boot system

xp does not have to be ntfs

it will work ok as fat 32

then both systems can read and write to each other in windows explore.
bailey, that's exactly what I have now (but on a smaller, slower HDD), but I never use 98 and as I'm upgrading to a 1 GB RAM system, isn't that much RAM going to cause problems in 98? Isn't NTFS a more efficient filing system than FAT32? (here I go, demonstrating my ignorance again)
vacanthead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 08:57 AM   #9
Professional gadfly
 
doctorgonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 6,364
Send a message via MSN to doctorgonzo
NTFS is more efficient than FAT32.

Here is how I would do it:

5 GB Win98 partition, FAT32, install Win98.

Install WinXP, put it on a 10GB partition, NTFS.

Break up the other 65GB into whatever partitions you want (data, games, mp3s, whatever) and format them all in FAT32 so both OSs can see them.
doctorgonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 09:11 AM   #10
Member (14 bit)
 
bailey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Christmas, Florida
Posts: 10,661
there is a fix for w98 to work with over 512 meg of ram but can't think of it right now
bailey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 09:11 AM   #11
Member (13 bit)
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,700
You don't "have" to install Win98 to be able to install XP from the XP upgrade CD.

Just start XP setup and you will be asked to place the Win98 CD in the CD-Rom to prove you qualify. Then you can continue to install XP.

HTH
mike breck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2003, 10:37 AM   #12
Member (7 bit)
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 76
mike is right. that's how i did it.
swhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2003, 06:13 AM   #13
Member (9 bit)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Fribourg, Switzerland
Posts: 273
OK, I successfully installed the new Mobo and HDD (went for the 120 GB). Installed XP as suggested by our Scottish friend and all went swimmingly. Thanks for the advice guys. One quick question, what's the actual rated speed of an AMD XP 2600+ ?. I thought it was 2.13 Ghz, but AIDA32 only says it's 2.07 GHz (or something like that).
vacanthead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2003, 09:16 AM   #14
Member (12 bit)
 
andyms18a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: essex
Posts: 2,252
my 2600 runs at 2.83ghz
__________________
Join the PcMech.com Folding@Home Team and Help Save Lives! Click Here!
Life only looks greener on the other side of the fence
andyms18a is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2003, 09:28 AM   #15
Member (9 bit)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Fribourg, Switzerland
Posts: 273
2.83? Jesus, you must overclock the sheet out of it!
vacanthead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2003, 10:12 AM   #16
Member (1 bit)
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: england
Posts: 1
MICROSOFT HAS REALESED A NEW VERSION OF FDISK THAT ALLOWS IT FOR FIND AND FORMAT DRIVES AT 120-138gb IN SIZE, I KNOW THIS BECAUSE I HAVE HAD TO FIND THIS OUT MYSELF BECAUSE I COULD NOT GET WINDOWS TO ACCEPT MY 120GB HDD. SO I WENT LOOKING. AND ITS ON MICROSOFTS WEBSITE.
justin1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2003, 11:52 AM   #17
Member (12 bit)
 
RayH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,437
The problem with using hard drives larger than 64 MB with Windows 98SE startup disks is that the Fdisk reads the size of the drive MINUS 64 MB.

This site has the patch for the W9x startup disks to read the correct size of a new drive:

http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;q263044

Actually, until I found this patch, on a dual boot, I'd create a 5 GB primary, active DOS partition. Install Windows 98SE and then let Partition Magic create the rest. It was actually faster than formatting a hard drive!

As for dealing with 512 RAM limits of Windows 98:

http://forum.pcmech.com/showthread.p...8+512+MB+limit

I still like dual boot Windows 98SE/XP machines. Windows XP does have a Windows 98 emulator. But it doesn't always work as advertised. It's just a backup.
RayH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2003, 12:26 PM   #18
Member (12 bit)
 
andyms18a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: essex
Posts: 2,252
Quote:
Originally posted by vacanthead
2.83? Jesus, you must overclock the sheet out of it!
sorry mistype 2.083 gh not 2.83
andyms18a is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Still Need Help? Type Your Keywords Here:


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:45 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2