usenet@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Remote news user) (07/23/88)
AT-clone). The hard disk is a Seagate ST-225. The problems are: From: pshen@mit-atrp.UUCP (Paul Shen) Path: mit-atrp!pshen 1. The hard disk drive operation light which connects to the disk control board is on only when there is a disk operation. But the light on the hard disk (ST-225) is always on. Is this normal? 2. When the computer system is operating at 12MHz, 0-wait, there is always some bytes of data been changed randomly in the hard disk write operation. This problem happens more often, When there is a long continuous disk operation, like copy a large file from one directory to another directory in the same hard disk. But when I set the system to 12MHz, 1-wait, it works just fine. I have never found any problem under that condition. Is this the problem caused by the disk controller or others? Thanks in advance. Paul pshen@atrp.media.mit.edu
dave@westmark.UUCP (Dave Levenson) (07/25/88)
In article <2810@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>, usenet@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Remote news user) writes: > AT-clone). The hard disk is a Seagate ST-225. The problems are: ... > 1. The hard disk drive operation light which connects to the disk > control board is on only when there is a disk operation. But the light on > the hard disk (ST-225) is always on. Is this normal? Yes, this is normal operation for the AT-type (WA2) controller. The light on the drive only goes out when the other drive (D:) is selected. > > 2. When the computer system is operating at 12MHz, 0-wait, there > is always some bytes of data been changed randomly in the hard disk write > operation... I suggest buying a disk controller designed to operate at 12 MHz with no wait-states. I have tried a 12-MHz 0-wait machine, and I find trouble with the video board (random garbage on the display) unless I insert one wait-state. The disk controller works okay, though. -- Dave Levenson Westmark, Inc. The Man in the Mooney Warren, NJ USA {rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
msriram@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (M.G. SriRam) (08/18/88)
Hi! i would appreciate hearing your comments on the following problem. I have a WYSE PC AT compatible, 12.5 MHz and i installed a SEAGATE ST225 hard disk in it. It worked very well for about 5 months and then it intermittently refused to boot from the hard disk. ie, afte counting up RAM it would hang. Also, when it did come up I would get 'sector not found' errors. The technical person at the place where i bought the hard disk told me that there was nothing wrong with the hardware, and that doing a low-level format on the disk would fix the problem. he also said that such a format should be done as a routine every so often, eg every 9 - 12 months. however, i am not fully convinced about this. what do you think? does it make sense?
tissot@nicmad.UUCP (Kevin Tissot) (08/18/88)
In article <20173@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>, msriram@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (M.G. SriRam) writes: > Hi! i would appreciate hearing your comments on the following problem. I have a > WYSE PC AT compatible, 12.5 MHz and i installed a SEAGATE ST225 hard disk in it. It > worked very well for about 5 months and then it intermittently refused to boot from > the hard disk. ie, afte counting up RAM it would hang. Also, when it did come up > I would get 'sector not found' errors. > The technical person at the place where i bought the hard disk told me that there > was nothing wrong with the hardware, and that doing a low-level format on the disk > would fix the problem. he also said that such a format should be done as a routine > every so often, eg every 9 - 12 months. however, i am not fully convinced about this. > what do you think? does it make sense? 1) We were an OEM for Seagate disk drives (ST-251, ST-251N) for a short while. We switched to Miniscribe because of problems such as the one you mention. (I don't know that the ST-225 would share the same problems as the ST-251, but I do know that Seagate does some tricky things to get 28 ms seek times from a stepper-motor drive) 2) You should *NOT* have to low-level format your drive every 9-12 months unless the drive cannot maintain data due to poor media or mechanical degradation (i.e. the drive is poorly designed). 3) These are my statements and are not the official words of my employer. KT -- =============================================================================== Kevin Tissot {ucbvax,harvard,rutgers}!uwvax!nicmad!tissot ---------------------> {att,decvax,rolls}!nicmad!tissot ===============================================================================
haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) (08/18/88)
In article <20173@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> msriram@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (M.G. SriRam) writes: > The technical person at the place where i bought the hard disk told me > that there was nothing wrong with the hardware, and that doing a > low-level format on the disk would fix the problem. he also said that > such a format should be done as a routine every so often, eg every 9 - 12 > months. however, i am not fully convinced about this. what do you think? > does it make sense? in part it make sense. as the disk ages, the alignment of the heads change and the relationship of the head to the center of the track along with it. thus, a drive may develop errors as time goes by which can be corrected with a periodic low level format. note that a high level format will not work. you must rewrite all of the data on the disk, including address marks, preambles, etc. personally, i think 9 months to a year is a little on the short side. i have not had any trouble with my system in the year i've had it. but, if you are having troubles then perhaps that time frame is needed by your particular drive. -- jfh@rpp386.uucp (The Beach Bum at The Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers) "Never attribute to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity" -- Hanlon's Razor
reza0@ihlpl.ATT.COM (H. Reza Zarafshar) (08/19/88)
In article <20173@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>, msriram@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (M.G. SriRam) writes: >I have a WYSE PC AT compatible, 12.5 MHz and i installed a SEAGATE ST225 >hard disk in it. >It worked very well for about 5 months and then it intermittently refused >to boot from the hard disk. ie, afte counting up RAM it would hang. >Also, when it did come up I would get 'sector not found' errors. > The technical person at the place where i bought the hard disk told me >that there was nothing wrong with the hardware, and that doing a low-level >format on the disk would fix the problem. he also said that such a format >should be done as a routine every so often, eg every 9 - 12 months. however, >i am not fully convinced about this. what do you think? does it make sense? I used to work for a company that sold pc's and they put lots and lots of hard disk drives in the machines they sold ( on the order of 100 or so a week). We found the Seagate ST-225 to have the worst track record of any of the disks we dealt with. The problem we encountered with them was exactly what you are saying. They would work fine for a few months and they would refuse to boot, which we thought was heat sensitive because on the cold machines, if we let them sit turned on for a while, they would then boot by pushin the reset or the 3 finger salute of ctrl alt del. We saw some that would not boot when they were warm also, but would boot if cold. I really think that this is typical of all Seagates, I am basing this on our experience with them. I do not believe that just low level formatting is a good solution. We did try that route and the owner of the computer would come back next week "shouting" at us. We found the best solution to be just replacement. If your dealer is not willing to replace it, I would get a hold of Seagate and have them direct replace it. One thing you want to try and accomplish is getting a new drive not a recondiotioned one, although I am not sure if you can be very successful in that since your warranty probably gives the right to manufacturer for replacement with a reconditioned one. Reza Zarafshar, ihnp4!ihlpl!reza0 (312)979-5104
msriram@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (M.G. SriRam) (08/20/88)
Many thanks to all who responded to my message describing a problem with my SEAGATE St225 20Mb hard disk. The summary seems to be that this particular model has a bad track record and that periodically doing a low level format is neither reasonable nor 100% effective. And i thought SEAGATE was a good brand! i am going to get my dealer to replace this drive with another brand. Any suggestions about a more reliable brand/model of similar capacity? Once again, thanks very much to all those who advised me.
bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (RAMontante) (08/20/88)
reza0@ihlpl.ATT.COM (H. Reza Zarafshar) writes:
-
- ... [Seagate ST-225's] would work fine for a few months and [then] would
-refuse to boot, which we thought was heat sensitive because on the cold
-machines, if we let them sit turned on for a while, they would then boot
-by pushin the reset or the 3 finger salute of ctrl alt del. We saw some
-that would not boot when they were warm also, but would boot if cold.
-I really think that this is typical of all Seagates, I am basing this
-on our experience with them.
I have one of those notorious ST-238/Adaptec-2070 combinations that gave
everyone problems when they first came out, but I thought I'd gotten past
the adolescent blues and that I had a well-behaved, middle-aged drive.
This summer I've learned better. It's been so hot that I finally had to
start using an airconditioner, which because of its placement chills my
machine much better than it chills me. Lo And Behold! My drive is acting
up again. In fact, if I run it without the A/C, it eventually heats up to
the point where I get manymany errors. I have to shut down and let it
cool off. If I let the A/C run overnight with the computer off, and then
power up, I *also* get manymany errors. I have to let it run for a few
minutes until it warms up sufficiently, then it's happy again. So my
harddisk has a fairly narrow successful-operating-temperature range.
Note that both Norton and chkdsk report errors, but these aren't "real" in
that the data is still perfectly accessible if I let the machine settle
into its operating temperature. Wish I'd realized that before I let
chkdsk "recover" my Fastback directory... :-( :-)
--
-- bob,mon (bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu)
-- "Aristotle was not Belgian..." - Wandamintz@hpindda.HP.COM (Ken Mintz) (08/21/88)
> this particular [disk drive] model has a bad track record ....
^^^^^
No pun intended, right? :-)
Ken Mintzegs@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Eric Schnoebelen) (08/21/88)
In article <20389@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> msriram@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (M.G. SriRam) writes: >Many thanks to all who responded to my message describing a problem with my > And i thought SEAGATE was a good >brand! i am going to get my dealer to replace this drive with another brand. I too thought that Seagate was a "good" brand. We had good luck with the 4038 full height drives, as none have died in the last year and a half, and most of ours are at least that old ( knock on wood ). BUT, We recently ( in May ) got two ST-251's which I installed in my 386 unix box as the primary and secondary file systems. About a month or so ago they started generating errors, and this week, they got so common that I gave up and installed a recently rebuilt Maxtor drive ( a 1140/2190, but that is another story ). I have yet to re-format the drives, but I don't think they will come near my unix box again, nor will we order any more of these drives.. The above are my experiences/opinions, and while probably accepted by my employer, they are not his... Eric Schnoebelen John W. Bridges and Associates, Inc. Lewisville, Tx u-word!egs@killer.dallas.tx.us .sig not found: arghhhhhhhhhhh
wfp@dasys1.UUCP (William Phillips) (08/23/88)
In article <11878@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> bobmon@iuvax.UUCP (RAMontante) writes: >I have one of those notorious ST-238/Adaptec-2070 combinations that gave >everyone problems when they first came out, but I thought I'd gotten past >the adolescent blues and that I had a well-behaved, middle-aged drive. Mine, purchased in January '87, seems to have settled down. I haven't (knock on wood) had any significant problems with it in about a year. Added a second ST-238 (R, with green light) in July, which seems OK too (once I figured out that the dealer had given me the wrong cable ;-). There was a batch of really bad 238's made not that long after my old one; unfortunately, I've forgotten the exact dates (approx. 12/??/86 thru 1/??/87). If yours was made then, it might be chronically flaky. >[mention of air-conditioning related problems] I used to have the PC in a centrally air-conditioned house, where the temperature was kept pretty steady most of the time. I had problems then. Since we moved (a year ago) to a house with room air conditioners (and my PC is indeed directly under one), the problems have ceased(!?) Also, when I installed the second 238, I remounted the old one (so that each one is above a floppy, rather than having them stacked), and anticipated problems due to the change in stresses on the housing, which is a notorious source of trouble. However, nothing of the sort happened. I'm basically pretty happy with the Seagate/Adaptec combination. I just wish they had designed an easier way to install the damn things into the cabinet! -- William Phillips {allegra,philabs,cmcl2}!phri\ Big Electric Cat Public Unix {bellcore,cmcl2}!cucard!dasys1!wfp New York, NY, USA !!! JUST SAY "NO" TO OS/2 !!!
awylie@pyr1.cs.ucl.ac.uk (08/23/88)
hello,
I'm having problems with the hard disk on an IBM AT. Having swapped
the controller and re-FORMATed it, the read errors have gone but I find I
have 300KB of bad sectors.
Could it be that the flaky controller caused the BIOS to mark the sectors
as bad even though the media is OK? Deleting and re-creating the partition
does nothing useful. If I do a low-level format will this revive the dead
sectors? Can somebody please tell me the BIOS (?) address to jump to in
order to do the low-level format? (Ive seen it before but never noted it..)
thanks!
Andrew Wylie, University of London Computer Centre,
20 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1DZ, England.
uucp: andrew%uk.ac.ulcc.ncdlab@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk
arpa: andrew%ncdlab.ulcc.ac.uk@cunyvm.cuny.edu
BITNET: andrew@ncdlab.ulcc.ac.uk
JANET: andrew@uk.ac.ulcc.ncdlabsvirsky@ttidca.TTI.COM (William Svirsky) (08/24/88)
In article <20173@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> msriram@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (M.G. SriRam) writes: >The technical person at the place where i bought the hard disk told me >that there was nothing wrong with the hardware, and that doing a >low-level format on the disk would fix the problem. he also said that >such a format should be done as a routine every so often, eg every 9 - >12 months. however, i am not fully convinced about this. what do you >think? does it make sense? This is the theory behind Spin Rite. See the article Re: Disk Technician for more info. -- Bill Svirsky, Citicorp+TTI, 3100 Ocean Park Blvd., Santa Monica, CA 90405 Work phone: 213-450-9111 x2597 svirsky@ttidca.tti.com | ...!{csun,psivax,rdlvax,retix}!ttidca!svirsky
ldh@hcx1.SSD.HARRIS.COM (08/26/88)
>/* Written 1:27 pm Aug 17, 1988 by msriram@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu.UUCP in hcx1:comp.sys.ibm.pc */ >/* ---------- "Hard disk problem" ---------- */ >...I have a >WYSE PC AT compatible, 12.5 MHz and i installed a SEAGATE ST225 hard disk in it. It >worked very well for about 5 months and then it intermittently refused to boot from >the hard disk. ... On a similar note ... I have a true blue PC upgraded to an XT with a seagate 4051 (40M @40mS) which normally works like a charm, but lately it will sometimes fail to boot the system as the drive itself will not spin up. Disconectiing the power cable and reconnecting does not always do the trick (faint sounds of a febble attempt to start up ... but nothing). I was wondering if someone else has had similar problems ... and/of if there is a fix. THANKS! Leo Hinds UUCP: ldh@hdw.harris.com USPS: Harris CSD, ms #156, 2101 W. Cypress Creek Rd., Ft Lauderdale, FL 33309 AT&T: (305)973-5229
dandc@simsdevl.UUCP (Dan DeClerck) (08/27/88)
I've had the same problems with Seagate 4038 on an IBM PC AT (6 Mhz). Occasionally the drive does not spin.. the only solution is to remove the drive, and inertially rotate the spindle, then it seems fine for a while.. I've called Seagate, and they want $275 w/o shipping & handling to fix it. I could almost replace the drive for that cost!! I'm pretty P.O'ed about it. I may just change all the spec's for our existing customer's drives to CDC!! (WE use 4056's now).....
pnelson@antares.UUCP (phil nelson) (08/28/88)
In article <105@simsdevl.UUCP> dandc@simsdevl.UUCP (Dan DeClerck) writes: >I've had the same problems with Seagate 4038 on an IBM PC AT (6 Mhz). >Occasionally the drive does not spin.. the only solution is to remove the drive, >and inertially rotate the spindle, then it seems fine for a while.. >I've called Seagate, and they want $275 w/o shipping & handling to fix it. I >could almost replace the drive for that cost!! I'm pretty P.O'ed about it. >I may just change all the spec's for our existing customer's drives to CDC!! >(WE use 4056's now)..... i have a 20meg MicroScience HH725A that i bought for $50. as is. i was told that it was from a batch of drives with too much (or wrong formula) lubricant on the surface. every time it stopped, the heads stuck to the platter. to get it going, i had to give it a push. did that many times, it needed quite a bit of force sometimes, but never had a head crash. i avoided pushing too much by leaving it running. it's on the shelf now though, i shut it down one day before a thunderstorm and couldn't get it to spin up again. oh well. -- {ames|pyramid}oliveb!tymix!antares!pnelson | Contains: Potentially hazardous OnTyme: QSATS.P/Nelson POTS: (408)922-7508 | questions, Potentially hazardous Disclaimer: Not officially representing | opinions, Potentially hazardous McDonnell Douglas Corporation policy. | comments, Virtual Carcinogens
trr@rayssd.ray.com (Terry R. Raymond) (08/29/88)
In article <47200012@hcx1>, ldh@hcx1.SSD.HARRIS.COM writes: > >>/* Written 1:27 pm Aug 17, 1988 by msriram@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu.UUCP in hcx1:comp.sys.ibm.pc */ >>/* ---------- "Hard disk problem" ---------- */ >>...I have a >>WYSE PC AT compatible, 12.5 MHz and i installed a SEAGATE ST225 hard disk in it. It >>worked very well for about 5 months and then it intermittently refused to boot from >>the hard disk. ... > >On a similar note ... I have a true blue PC upgraded to an XT with a seagate >4051 (40M @40mS) which normally works like a charm, but lately it will sometimes >fail to boot the system as the drive itself will not spin up. Disconectiing the >power cable and reconnecting does not always do the trick (faint sounds of > a febble attempt to start up ... but nothing). I was wondering if someone else > has had similar problems ... and/of if there is a fix. THANKS! > > Leo Hinds I had a problem similar to this with a seagate ST-251. I disconnected and reconnected everything and it hasn't given me any more problems. -- Terry Raymond Raytheon Submarine Signal Division; Portsmouth RI; (401)-847-8000 x5597 smart mailer or arpanet: trr@rayssd.ray.com old dumb mailer or uucp: {decuac,gatech,necntc,sun,uiucdcs,ukma}!rayssd!trr
nathan@eddie.MIT.EDU (Nathan Glasser) (08/30/88)
In article <360@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) writes: >in part it make sense. as the disk ages, the alignment of the heads change >and the relationship of the head to the center of the track along with it. >thus, a drive may develop errors as time goes by which can be corrected >with a periodic low level format. > >note that a high level format will not work. you must rewrite all of >the data on the disk, including address marks, preambles, etc. I am another person who is currently having hard disk problems. I'm planning to (as soon as I get enough floppies) to back up everything I can recover, and then "reformat". I'm not sure what level of format to do. It sounds like from the above comments that I should do the lowest level possible. Assuming I can remember what program it was that did this, and where the program is, I feel like I don't have enough information. There was a list of bad sectors (or something like that) that came with the disk. Assuming I can find this list, I can enter it again, but what about the new problems the disk has? I'm worried that there are new bad sectors, and that the low level format will simply let data be put all over the bad areas again. Is this worry unfounded? Thanks, -- Nathan Glasser fnord nathan@{mit-eddie.uucp, xx.lcs.mit.edu} "A tribble is the only love that money can buy." Presently there is insufficient evidence to conclude that tribbles spread AIDS.
bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (RAMontante) (08/31/88)
A low-level format will search for and avoid bad areas on the hard disk. The value of the manufacturer's list is that it was generated by rigorous testing that may have caught defects the formatter would miss. It may also save some time, since the formatter needn't test those areas. For "plain vanilla" MFM hard disks, Zenith supplies a program called PREP with MSDOS to do the low-level format. I have an Adaptec RLL controller, and it includes a formatting routine in its internal ROM which is used by running DEBUG and starting the code at c800:ccc. disclaimer: this info pertains to my own system, and is based on one of the poorer memories in the western hemisphere. Your mileage may vary. -- -- bob,mon (bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu) -- "Aristotle was not Belgian..." - Wanda
arwall@athena.mit.edu (Anders R Wallgren) (08/31/88)
In article <12193@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>, bobmon@iuvax (RAMontante) writes: >A low-level format will search for and avoid bad areas on the hard >disk. The value of the manufacturer's list is that it was generated by >rigorous testing that may have caught defects the formatter would >miss. It may also save some time, since the formatter needn't test >those areas. Can somebody verify this? It's been intimated to me by a friend in the business that the 'rigorous' testing is nothing more than a low-level format. anders ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Anders Wallgren Back by popular demand: | | arwall@athena.mit.edu Bush-Noriega '88 - A Crack Team! |
karl@ddsw1.UUCP (Karl Denninger) (09/02/88)
In article <6887@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> arwall@athena.mit.edu (Anders R Wallgren) writes: >In article <12193@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>, bobmon@iuvax (RAMontante) writes: >>A low-level format will search for and avoid bad areas on the hard >>disk. The value of the manufacturer's list is that it was generated by >>rigorous testing that may have caught defects the formatter would >>miss. It may also save some time, since the formatter needn't test >>those areas. > >Can somebody verify this? It's been intimated to me by a friend in >the business that the 'rigorous' testing is nothing more than a >low-level format. The "rigorous test" is normally done on analog equipment, and does indeed catch errors that aren't otherwise apparent. You can only get a "go/nogo" indication from a digital signal -- but analog equipment can give you a _value_ which is open to interpretation as ok, marginal, or bad. Note that some of the "defects" on your drive may be _between_ sectors (ie: in the dead space between the end of a sector and the ID mark for the next one). These could _never_ be found by a low level format, since you don't even read/write there in normal operation! As verification, we've used media analysis programs to validate drives before (those that take 48 hours to complete!) -- they almost never catch all of the errors that are on the label, usually due to the error(s) falling between sectors. -- Karl Denninger (ddsw1!karl) Data: (312) 566-8912, Voice: (312) 566-8910 Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality solutions at a fair price"
mweisber@bucc2.UUCP (09/05/88)
:list
Hello. I read your message about the Seagate hard drive. Believe me you are not
alone. I have had several horror storries with Seagate drives. It seems that
they require a wear-in factor, meaning that they need to re re-formatted a
certain number of times periodically. Personally, I would stay away from
Seagate drives for the time being. Miniscribe makes great drives, I have had
them and have never had a problem with them. If you have any other questions
just leave me a note...
- Matt Weisberg -
:SAVE
:done
:end
:z
:finished
:list
/f
:s
:quit
:exit
/EX
:ex
:donw
:donehanj@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (Jining Han) (09/26/89)
A friend's harddisk is on the verge of breakdown: it's a 30 mb Seagate (he could not tell me the model over the phone) on an XT-clone. It started with a lot of bad sectors. Then we reformatted it some months ago and virtually got rid of the bad sectors. But since then the computer gets stuck every time "copy" command is used. I suspected that something is wrong with the RAM, but since "xcopy" works fine, we just ignore the "copy". Two months ago, his computer could not recognize the harddisk any more. First thing I thought of was bad connection, so I asked him to open the case and re-plug everything--that made him happy. But some days ago, things became really bad. "Invalid drive specification" became more and more frequent. Sick of opening the case, he unscrewed the harddisk and made it "external," so that whenever it's not recognized, he gives the harddisk a little knock or shake to wake it up, as he is very sure that some internal connection is making all the trouble. Though he can still use or abuse the harddisk, he is desperately looking for a way out of this agony and sense of insecurity. A new disk seems to be the easiest way out. Yet some questions still remain: 1. Is there any connection between the harddisk breakdown and the "copy" command not being usable? Is there any potential cause for another breakdown if a new one is installed? 2. Assuming that it's safe to install a new one, does he need to change the controller? This question arises because he no longer likes 30 mb disks. What will his controller do to a new 20 mb harddisk (turning it into a 30 mb)? Please do not tell him to throw away the whole computer. It's only two years young. Your help is very much appreciated. Jining Han
robert@hemingway.WEITEK.COM (Robert Plamondon) (09/27/89)
In article <26590@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> hanj@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (Jining Han) writes: > >A friend's harddisk is on the verge of breakdown: it's a 30 mb Seagate >(he could not tell me the model over the phone) on an XT-clone. It >started with a lot of bad sectors. Then we reformatted it some months >ago and virtually got rid of the bad sectors. But since then the >computer gets stuck every time "copy" command is used. I suspected that >something is wrong with the RAM, but since "xcopy" works fine, we just >ignore the "copy". This is what is referred to in technical circles as "bad news." If you always boot from the hard disk, the failure of COPY means that COMMAND.COM or one of the two other system files is corrupted. You can test this by booting off a floppy and seeing if COPY works. Stepper-motor hard disks often degrade gradually over time: stepper inaccuracies turn circular tracks into zig-zags. If this is the problem, a LOW-LEVEL format (which is NOT performed by the DOS FORMAT command) will fix it. >Though he can still use or abuse the harddisk, he is desperately looking >for a way out of this agony and sense of insecurity. A new disk seems >to be the easiest way out. Yet some questions still remain: >1. Is there any connection between the harddisk breakdown and the "copy" > command not being usable? Is there any potential cause for another > breakdown if a new one is installed? > >2. Assuming that it's safe to install a new one, does he need to change the > controller? This question arises because he no longer likes 30 mb disks. > What will his controller do to a new 20 mb harddisk (turning it into a > 30 mb)? The controller could be bad, the hard disk could be bad, DOS could be bad, or something else could be bad. I would check the following: 1. Does he have a power supply rated for 150 watts or above? If not, the overload can cause all sorts of errors, including hard disk errors. 2. Does the system report parity errors? I have a clone that turns parity error detection off by default. Your suspicion of RAM errors may well be right. 3. Reload DOS with the SYS command 4. Pull out all unnecessary cards (all but the drive controllers and display adaptor) and see if the problem goes away. 5. Back up the drive with FastBack or something (anything but DOS BACKUP) and do a low-level format of the drive, followed by a high-level format. 6. If the problems persist, replace the controller card. 7. If the problems persist, find a disk-drive repair company. They can repair your drive, or, if you want a new one, will buy your old one (not for much, but it's better than nothing). 8. Get the drive put back inside the case so the user doesn't continue bashing it to death. 9. His numerological suspicion that 30 MB drives are inherently faulty is silly. 20 MB drives are no more reliable, and are probably less so, since they're all El Cheapo drives. -- Robert -- Robert Plamondon robert@weitek.COM "No Toon can resist the old 'Shave and a Hair-Cut'"
owen@ssf.uucp (Owen Thomas) (11/20/89)
I recently bought a 2nd hard disk for my Taiwanese AT clone. (Seagate 40Mb, fast, MFM). I had no problem installing it, but after a short time I started to get DOS "sector not found" read errors. OK, I thought, run disktest from Norton to find the bad sectors, and patch the files. Anyway, to cut a long story short, I now have screen fulls of bad sectors (about 100 bad sectors at last count and increasing all the time). All the bad sectors are at the start of the disk, and they seem to appear after I do a bit of concentrated work. (eg trying to do a build). I'm using a Western Digital controller (2FD,2HD), and somebody told me that the old WD controllers can't cope with the faster drives and write bad sectors. Does anybody know: Is this true? If so how can I tell if my controller is one of the old types? What can I do, short of changing the drive for a slower one and/or changing the controller? Owen Thomas -- Post: System Software Factors, Chiltern Chambers, Caversham, Reading, England. Mail: owen@ssf.co.uk , or, owen@cs.rhbnc.ac.uk , or, ...!ukc!reading!ssf!owen Phone: +44 734 476644
norlin@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Norman Lin) (11/05/90)
cncst@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Christophe N. Christoff) writes: >I have PC/AT compatible machine with Seagate hard disk paritioned >into drive C and drive D. I ran Norton speed disk for both drives >and I was successful on drive C, and got message saying something >like "incomplete....., run Norton Disk Doctor". Then, I ran >Norton Disk Doctor on drive D. What happened was NDD was trying to >read forever, and never return the control back to DOS. I had to >turn off the machine after very very long time. After I turned on >the machine again, drive D was bad. I cannot use it, and I cannot >even get a directory on the drive D. >How can I fix this problem? I hope I can recover something back >from drive D. Any suggestion I can try? In my experience, the Norton utilities do not work well with non-DOS compatible partitions. In fact, I have had to reformat my entire hard disk because NDD was trying to "fix" the IBM signature on my D: partition. I have a Seagate ST-241-1 (42 meg) partitioned into a DOS (and thus Norton) compatible 32-meg C: partition and a non-DOS (and non-Norton) 10 meg D: partition. If your setup is anything like this, I would highly recommend against trying to use any DOS type utilities on your D: partition. When this happened to me, as I indicated above, I had no success in reclaiming the information on the D: drive. At that time it just seemed simpler to reformat the entire drive rather than take risks with unknown information written in strange places on an unstandard partition. -- \ /\/\ /\/\ +-----------------------------+ /\/\ /\/\ /./ \\ /./\\\ /./\\\ /====|Norman Lin/norlin@129.15.20.2|===/./\\\ /./\\\ /./ \\\/./ \\\/./ \\\/./===| norlin@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu|====/ \\\/./ \\\/./ \/\/ \/\/ \/\/ +-----------------------------+ \/\/ \/\/