WD Jumper Settings Q?

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

asdf wrote:
> my 80 Gb WD sits by itself on the IDE channel.
> Now, I'm getting conflicting informaiton about jumper settings.
> On the drive itself it says to set a jumper on a secon row of pins from the
> left(for master).
> On the WD website it says however that if the drive is by itself on the
> channel to
> put no jumper on pins at all. So justs checking for other people's
> configurations are for
> WD that sits by itself on IDE channel.
>
> Thank You
>
>
>
If the drive is by itself on the IDE(ATA) controller, as master,
then leave the drive unjumpered.

If there is also going to be a IDE(ATA) device on that
controller as a slave,
then you need to jumper the WD 80GB as master.

So it needs to be jumpered only if there
is another device on that controller.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

asdf <dfsa@sadf.com> wrote in message
news:2Rz3e.14390$wt2.7627@fe12.lga...

> my 80 Gb WD sits by itself on the IDE channel.
> Now, I'm getting conflicting informaiton about jumper settings.

Yeah, one of WD's stupiditys.

> On the drive itself it says to set a jumper on
> a secon row of pins from the left(for master).

> On the WD website it says however that if the drive is by itself on the
> channel to put no jumper on pins at all. So justs checking for other
> people's configurations are for WD that sits by itself on IDE channel.

What is on the drive often works, but that depends on the motherboard.

The web site config is safer and is more strictly correct.

Getting it wrong will just result in the drive not being visible.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

well, drive not being visible is easily correctable.
What worries me more is that i won't get performance out of wronly
jumpered drive as happened to be before.

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3b87avF6f8n2pU1@individual.net...
>
> asdf <dfsa@sadf.com> wrote in message
> news:2Rz3e.14390$wt2.7627@fe12.lga...
>
> > my 80 Gb WD sits by itself on the IDE channel.
> > Now, I'm getting conflicting informaiton about jumper settings.
>
> Yeah, one of WD's stupiditys.
>
> > On the drive itself it says to set a jumper on
> > a secon row of pins from the left(for master).
>
> > On the WD website it says however that if the drive is by itself on the
> > channel to put no jumper on pins at all. So justs checking for other
> > people's configurations are for WD that sits by itself on IDE channel.
>
> What is on the drive often works, but that depends on the motherboard.
>
> The web site config is safer and is more strictly correct.
>
> Getting it wrong will just result in the drive not being visible.
>
>

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

asdf <dfsa@sadf.com> wrote in message
news:b7C3e.21063$_33.339@fe09.lga...

> well, drive not being visible is easily correctable.

> What worries me more is that i won't get performance
> out of wronly jumpered drive as happened to be before.

That doesnt happen with that WD jumper, its
either visible and works fine or it isnt visible.


> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3b87avF6f8n2pU1@individual.net...
>>
>> asdf <dfsa@sadf.com> wrote in message
>> news:2Rz3e.14390$wt2.7627@fe12.lga...
>>
>> > my 80 Gb WD sits by itself on the IDE channel.
>> > Now, I'm getting conflicting informaiton about jumper settings.
>>
>> Yeah, one of WD's stupiditys.
>>
>> > On the drive itself it says to set a jumper on
>> > a secon row of pins from the left(for master).
>>
>> > On the WD website it says however that if the drive is by itself on the
>> > channel to put no jumper on pins at all. So justs checking for other
>> > people's configurations are for WD that sits by itself on IDE channel.
>>
>> What is on the drive often works, but that depends on the motherboard.
>>
>> The web site config is safer and is more strictly correct.
>>
>> Getting it wrong will just result in the drive not being visible.
>>
>>
>
>

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I see. You're probably right.
The situation with the drive working, but poorly, did happen with Maxtor.

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3b8drtF6f9r86U1@individual.net...
>
> asdf <dfsa@sadf.com> wrote in message
> news:b7C3e.21063$_33.339@fe09.lga...
>
> > well, drive not being visible is easily correctable.
>
> > What worries me more is that i won't get performance
> > out of wronly jumpered drive as happened to be before.
>
> That doesnt happen with that WD jumper, its
> either visible and works fine or it isnt visible.
>
>
> > "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:3b87avF6f8n2pU1@individual.net...
> >>
> >> asdf <dfsa@sadf.com> wrote in message
> >> news:2Rz3e.14390$wt2.7627@fe12.lga...
> >>
> >> > my 80 Gb WD sits by itself on the IDE channel.
> >> > Now, I'm getting conflicting informaiton about jumper settings.
> >>
> >> Yeah, one of WD's stupiditys.
> >>
> >> > On the drive itself it says to set a jumper on
> >> > a secon row of pins from the left(for master).
> >>
> >> > On the WD website it says however that if the drive is by itself on
the
> >> > channel to put no jumper on pins at all. So justs checking for other
> >> > people's configurations are for WD that sits by itself on IDE
channel.
> >>
> >> What is on the drive often works, but that depends on the motherboard.
> >>
> >> The web site config is safer and is more strictly correct.
> >>
> >> Getting it wrong will just result in the drive not being visible.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>