Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Windows 2000 is really dumb....
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

 
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
squanto
Guru
Guru


Joined: 20 Apr 2002
Posts: 524
Location: Rochester, NY, USA

PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:22 am    Post subject: Windows 2000 is really dumb.... Reply with quote

Well, since it is "off the wall" here goes.
I just finished building my brother's new computer, 2000XP 256Mbram 30gig 7200 maxtor drive, gf4 ti 4200. One problem i see, the processor is idling around 59 degree C. I for all goodness sake hope it doesn't fry itself. My 1600 runs a cool 35 degree idle, although I have nice cooler and the 2000 has amd spec cooler on it. Gonna have to get a new one, and some more case fans.
Now for the fun:
I am "trying" to install windows 2000 on it cause that is what he wants (insert flagrent violence against me here ). When I get to the format part, it says that it is formatting 29306MB on 8057 disk 0 at id 1 on bus 0 on atapi.
Now, I know windows is retarded, but it is telling me that it is making a partition that is completely not possible. It fails when I try to use fat32, but succeed with ntfs. Hopefully I can update the bios on the mobo and then make windows un-stupid and have it find all 30 gigs or my brother is gonna be pissed as he paid for a 30gig drive.
And to think, installing windows2k has now officially taken me longer than my most recent gentoo install from booting cd to having a gnome session open.
And people say gentoo takes a long time to install ;)
I hate windows.
And now back to our regularly scheduled programming...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
squanto
Guru
Guru


Joined: 20 Apr 2002
Posts: 524
Location: Rochester, NY, USA

PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:29 am    Post subject: Re: Windows 2000 is really dumb.... Reply with quote

Well, now it tells me that on my 8 gigs that it finds, there are 4 partitions:
unpartitioned: 82gigs
unpartitioned: 24gigs
C: 83gigs
unknown: 26gigs

Wow! I got a huge drive and didn't even know it... I hope the drive isn't defective...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pigeon
Guru
Guru


Joined: 21 Jun 2002
Posts: 307

PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've had my 1.4GHz tbird for a little over a year now. It idles at 55 degrees C, goes up to 66 or so under load. Haven't ever had a problem with it. I'm kinda thinking about one of those prefab watercooling cases.

And FYI, Microsoft capped Win2k and WinXP so they can't partition or format a fat32 partition above about 30 gigs or so. (unsure on the exact cap) Windows 98 does it just fine, however, and once formatted, Win2k will grudgingly install itself on it. So try formatting the partition with an old Win9x installation disk and then install 2k on the newly formatted drive. However, it sounds like your problem is either with the drive or in the BIOS, or maybe even Win2k just being retarded. You might try looking at your MB's manufacturers site and seeing if there's an issue with your brand of HD or something similar, and also make sure the drive is set up correctly in the bios. Also, consider pulling the drive out and putting into your box as a slave, and partitioning it that way.

ps- why fat32 over ntfs? Kinda like choosing Minix instead of ReiserFS or ext3...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
zhenlin
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 09 Nov 2002
Posts: 1361

PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 10:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Erm. HDD 30 GB = 30,000,000,000 bytes. Win2k GB=1024^3. Think.


27.93967723846436GB should be about right. Which is about 28610.2294921875MB. Then again, maybe windows itself is slighly broken. Don't forget, the partition table, journal (NTFS), indexes (NTFS) and directory take quite a bit of space. As for NTFS over FAT32, tell him that NTFS has journalling (say, autorepairing filesystem), security, encryption and compression built right in. (encrypt xor compression though) (Not to tell him: NTFS is slower because of all the security checks and auditing, possibly journalling as well)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DArtagnan
l33t
l33t


Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 942
Location: Israel, Jerusalem

PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 11:02 am    Post subject: Re: Windows 2000 is really dumb.... Reply with quote

squanto wrote:
Well, since it is "off the wall" here goes.
I just finished building my brother's new computer, 2000XP 256Mbram 30gig 7200 maxtor drive, gf4 ti 4200. One problem i see, the processor is idling around 59 degree C. I for all goodness sake hope it doesn't fry itself. My 1600 runs a cool 35 degree idle, although I have nice cooler and the 2000 has amd spec cooler on it. Gonna have to get a new one, and some more case fans.
Now for the fun:
I am "trying" to install windows 2000 on it cause that is what he wants (insert flagrent violence against me here ). When I get to the format part, it says that it is formatting 29306MB on 8057 disk 0 at id 1 on bus 0 on atapi.
Now, I know windows is retarded, but it is telling me that it is making a partition that is completely not possible. It fails when I try to use fat32, but succeed with ntfs. Hopefully I can update the bios on the mobo and then make windows un-stupid and have it find all 30 gigs or my brother is gonna be pissed as he paid for a 30gig drive.
And to think, installing windows2k has now officially taken me longer than my most recent gentoo install from booting cd to having a gnome session open.
And people say gentoo takes a long time to install ;)
I hate windows.
And now back to our regularly scheduled programming...


Try recompile win2k with your own CFLAGS ;-)
_________________
All for one and one for All
--

MACPRO machine...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
squanto
Guru
Guru


Joined: 20 Apr 2002
Posts: 524
Location: Rochester, NY, USA

PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well... After carefully examining every suggestion so far, I treid recompiling windows. It didn't like that and it bitch slapped me. So no go there.

I got 98 installed on it fine, so I will try to put 2k over the top of 98. 98 sees the drive as 30gigs and partitions it with entire 30.
One thing I notice though with win98 and my athlon 2000xp is that seti is slower than death. and when I say death I mean death. The newly built windows 98 boxen took 8 hours last night to complete 40% of a WU while my 1600 almost got 2 full WU's done, running gentoo of course ;)
After I do homework today I will try to change the cflags around, maybe use -fomitframepointer and compile with -O2 this time.... :mrgreen:

Chose fat32 over ntfs cause ntfs sucks in my opinion. I have had compatibility problems with some things and ntfs, and notice that fat seems to hold up better on my mom's computer that runs 2k than ntfs did.
Although I will probably just chose which ever type will actually format the damn thing.

Pigeon: do you know what the thermal breakdown temp for the athlons are?
I remember reading that it is around 70 C, so that is the only reason I am scared. With the case side on under load it stays around 64.5C and at idle it is about 58-60C.I may wind up just getting a nother case fan and a Tt cooler for it, just to be safe...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
buckminst
n00b
n00b


Joined: 18 Jul 2002
Posts: 22
Location: Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:43 pm    Post subject: Fat32 filesystem size limit Reply with quote

It's not just a MS lockdown: When I got my IBM 40gb drive, the partitioning tool it came with limits Fat32 to 32GB, as does PartitionMagic. The reason, though is simply this:

Beyond 32GB, the cluster size jumps again. You think you have wasted space NOW...

Up to the 32GB boundary, Fat32 cluster size is 16K. Beyond the 32GB boundary, the cluster size is 32K. A 1 byte file, therefore, would waste 32K of your disk. That much wasted space, is insane.

NTFS, on the other hand, does tail-packing, thus no wasted space, at any disk size.
The journalling aspect of NTFS is a new one on me though... though that's kinda cool =)
_________________
Curtis Hogg [ buckminst at inconnu dot islug dot org ]

Sattinger's Law: "It works better if you plug it in!"
This post sponsored by: Frungy, the sport of kings!

Registered Linux User #202758 Sept/1997
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
squanto
Guru
Guru


Joined: 20 Apr 2002
Posts: 524
Location: Rochester, NY, USA

PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

buckminst: thanks, I never knew that.
I didn't realize that ntfs had journaling either, but guess you learn 2 new things every day ;)
I am going to try to get it working in 2k this afternoon after I get a nap. Staying up till 5am is not conducive to making computers work.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lemming
n00b
n00b


Joined: 07 Aug 2002
Posts: 57
Location: Kanab, UT

PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What I hate most about Windows installs are the long waits between questions.
In the time it took me to do 2 semi-complicated Redhat installs, the windows install was still figuring out how long it would take to reboot. Grrr.

Obligtory note: Work machines that I had to have RH Advanced server loaded onto for testing purposes. The Windows .NET on the other hand, was just to see if Windows would have the same PCI-X problems we saw with Linux on Itanium. (When we can get it loaded, maybe we'll have a clue...) Let's just say I was gibbering by the end of the day. :evil:
_________________
-mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
squanto
Guru
Guru


Joined: 20 Apr 2002
Posts: 524
Location: Rochester, NY, USA

PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well since both 98 and XP install onto this box without problems, I have come to teh conclusion that 2k just doesn't like my maxtor drive. It is some new fangled drive, cause it is really thin, like 2/3 of the normal thickness of an ide drive. I suppose it would cool better as more air can flow around it when there are a bunch of drives present.
XP is now running, temps under seti load ar steady at 63 C now, idles around 58 C. Guess it will do fine without a new cooler.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nalin
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 27 Sep 2002
Posts: 172
Location: Long Beach

PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2002 6:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

under windows and a cheap fan my athlon 1400 ran just above 65C for a year or so....generally the bios (award) would kill the box when I restarted, so I got a new fan and heatsink and all is well now (~50C on full load)...
Would recomend putting money into a decent fan or even watercooling, as youll get better proformance out of processor (energy/power flows with less resistence at cooler temps, incedentally a good though somewhat older read on this is Issac Asimov's nonfiction book 'Frontiers'. He suggests that in the not so distant future powerlines might be cooled with liquid nitrogen because eventually the monatary loss caused by heat will be negligable compared to the cost of cooling the lines).
As for the drive issues, I have a coulple of WD 40 gigs which work well with w2k, though my primary partition is ntfs ~5gig, and if memory serves I did a clean install but kept my partitions, as the other ones had some stuff I wanted to preserve...out of curisity did you ever try to partition with (c/s)fdisk, though i know this is not an ideal solution it might do the trick with less hassel provided one is framiliar with the software, i would think that it would be a trivial matter to make a fat32 primary partition and a couple of extended partitions...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
squanto
Guru
Guru


Joined: 20 Apr 2002
Posts: 524
Location: Rochester, NY, USA

PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2002 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cfdisk wouldn't read the partition table, I wound up partitioning with fdisk and got xp to install fine.
The computer is for my brother and temps seem to stay around 63 C so under 100% load. I think I will just leave the default cooler on it since he will only be playing games on it and I doubt he will overheat it up over 70 C where amd says not to tread.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Matje
l33t
l33t


Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 617
Location: Hasselt, Belgium

PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2002 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I believe that NTFS takes about 5 MB of journalling space, not sure about that though, could be 50 too, anyway, the reason it says 29306 MB is like zhenlin said... It's a trick played by harddrive resellers, they say 30 GB but they "forget" that 1 GB == 1024 MB, 1 MB == 1024 kB, 1 kB == 1024 B. That way, customers pay more than they think they're paying :-) It's like bags of potato chips, half filled with air :-)

BTW, I once placed a new cooler but forgot to plug it in, my XP1600+ warmed too 'bout 75 ° before I noticed, but it still works. Will not try that again though ;-)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yarrick
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 05 Jun 2002
Posts: 304
Location: Malmö, Sweden

PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2002 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bah, 75 degrees celsius? my duron 700 survived 95+ degrees twice. Had some problems with the power supply to the fan due to a home-made voltage selector (7-12 V). The CPU at last died of core crunch by my heavy 92mm fan-aluminium cone-HSF.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum