Can't recognise hard drive as master

[Dave]

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

I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system. Cloned the old
drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be working OK. New drive is a seagate 160
GB.

However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive when I jumper it as
slave. It doesn't seem to like it jumpered as master. Why would this be
?

By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it. So I
thought I should set the new drive up as a master.

As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there any problem running a
single hard drive as a slave ? Any clues as to why it can't be
recognised as a master ?

 

[Bob]

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

On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 14:08:26 GMT, Dave
<AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote:

>I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system. Cloned the old
>drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be working OK. New drive is a seagate 160
>GB.
>
>However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive when I jumper it as
>slave. It doesn't seem to like it jumpered as master. Why would this be
>?
>
>By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it. So I
>thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>
>As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there any problem running a
>single hard drive as a slave ? Any clues as to why it can't be
>recognised as a master ?

What position on the cable do you have it installed? Try putting the
end of the cable in.

 

[Guest]

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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Dave skrev:
> I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system. Cloned the old
> drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be working OK. New drive is a seagate 160
> GB.
>
> However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive when I jumper it as
> slave. It doesn't seem to like it jumpered as master. Why would this be
> ?

I've noticed this some years ago. Just leave the jumper i cable select
position if its the only drive.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCoeEjn1hjZcCMxG0RA0SDAJ0XwGKUA3PJ+8ssqevWeMTTch4rdQCfTg6U
zHa6jRUnp+kyhYgUDczaiIs=
=80+Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

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

Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
news:uBioe.2567$F7.2293@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

> I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
> Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
> working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.

> However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
> when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
> it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?

> By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
> So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.

Is there another drive on the ribbon
cable too, likely not from the below.

> As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
> any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
> Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?

There's three main reasons that you get that result.

The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
and using the middle connector for the drive. Some motherboards
dont handle that very well, basically assuming cable select is used
even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.

The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.

You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
connector should be plugged into the motherboard.

You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon cable.

 

[Dave]

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

In article <3ge8tcFc0fo6U1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
>
>
>
>Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
>news:uBioe.2567$F7.2293@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>> I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
>> Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
>> working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
>
>> However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
>> when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
>> it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
>
>> By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
>> So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>
>Is there another drive on the ribbon
>cable too, likely not from the below.

No other drive, I've got the old drive unplugged for now.

>
>> As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
>> any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
>> Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?
>
>There's three main reasons that you get that result.
>
>The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
>and using the middle connector for the drive.

Just tried both connectors a couple of times each, with same result.

>Some motherboards
>dont handle that very well, basically assuming cable select is used
>even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.
>
>The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
>drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.

Cant get that to work.

>
>You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
>cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
>for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
>connector should be plugged into the motherboard.

Yeah, it is.

>
>You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon cable.
>

Yeah maybe that is it then. I've had this cable for over three years. In that
time, with just the one drive on it, the loose end of cable was tied with a
elastic band. And the cable was sort of crimped up, a bit bent here and
there. Could that lead to a damaged cable over time ?

 

[peter]

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

> No other drive, I've got the old drive unplugged for now.

What happens if you connect the old drive back.
Can it be seen as a master again?

 

[Dave]

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

In article <bZuoe.24978$yG4.1216251@news20.bellglobal.com>,
peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca says...
>
>
>> No other drive, I've got the old drive unplugged for now.
>
>What happens if you connect the old drive back.
>Can it be seen as a master again?
>

Yeah that works. I'm gonna try a new cable tomorrow and check how that
works with the new drive.

 

[peter]

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

> >What happens if you connect the old drive back.
> >Can it be seen as a master again?
> >
>
> Yeah that works. I'm gonna try a new cable tomorrow and check how that
> works with the new drive.

If it works, why do you think it is a cable problem?

 

[Guest]

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

"Dave" <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
news:G3roe.2717$F7.1495@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> In article <3ge8tcFc0fo6U1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>>Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
>>news:uBioe.2567$F7.2293@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>>> I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
>>> Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
>>> working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
>>
>>> However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
>>> when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
>>> it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
>>
>>> By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
>>> So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>>
>>Is there another drive on the ribbon
>>cable too, likely not from the below.
>
> No other drive, I've got the old drive unplugged for now.
>
>>
>>> As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
>>> any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
>>> Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?
>>
>>There's three main reasons that you get that result.
>>
>>The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
>>and using the middle connector for the drive.
>
> Just tried both connectors a couple of times each, with same result.
>
>>Some motherboards
>>dont handle that very well, basically assuming cable select is used
>>even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.
>>
>>The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
>>drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
>
> Cant get that to work.
>
>>
>>You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
>>cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
>>for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
>>connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
>
> Yeah, it is.
>
>>
>>You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon cable.
>>
>
> Yeah maybe that is it then. I've had this cable for over three years. In that
> time, with just the one drive on it, the loose end of cable was tied with a
> elastic band. And the cable was sort of crimped up, a bit bent here and
> there. Could that lead to a damaged cable over time ?

Its more usually damaged by getting it off the old drive,
pulling on the ribbon itself rather than on the body of
the connector that goes into the drive connector.

It could always have been bad, one wire not making good
contact, and that has got disturbed with the drive changing,
or the new drive is more fussy about it with master/slave detection.

 

[Guest]

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

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3gf046Fc3l5rU1@individual.net...
>
> "Dave" <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
> news:G3roe.2717$F7.1495@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> In article <3ge8tcFc0fo6U1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
>>>news:uBioe.2567$F7.2293@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>
>>>> I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
>>>> Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
>>>> working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
>>>
>>>> However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
>>>> when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
>>>> it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
>>>
>>>> By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
>>>> So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>>>
>>>Is there another drive on the ribbon
>>>cable too, likely not from the below.
>>
>> No other drive, I've got the old drive unplugged for now.
>>
>>>
>>>> As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
>>>> any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
>>>> Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?
>>>
>>>There's three main reasons that you get that result.
>>>
>>>The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
>>>and using the middle connector for the drive.

>> Just tried both connectors a couple of times each, with same result.

>>>Some motherboards
>>>dont handle that very well, basically assuming cable select is used
>>>even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.
>>>
>>>The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
>>>drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.

>> Cant get that to work.

Thats evidence of a bad cable.

>>>You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
>>>cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
>>>for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
>>>connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
>>
>> Yeah, it is.
>>
>>>
>>>You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon cable.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah maybe that is it then. I've had this cable for over three years. In that
>> time, with just the one drive on it, the loose end of cable was tied with a
>> elastic band. And the cable was sort of crimped up, a bit bent here and
>> there. Could that lead to a damaged cable over time ?
>
> Its more usually damaged by getting it off the old drive,
> pulling on the ribbon itself rather than on the body of
> the connector that goes into the drive connector.
>
> It could always have been bad, one wire not making good
> contact, and that has got disturbed with the drive changing,
> or the new drive is more fussy about it with master/slave detection.
>

 

[Dave]

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

In article <3gf06sFc1kmcU1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
>
>
>
>"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:3gf046Fc3l5rU1@individual.net...
>>
>> "Dave" <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
>> news:G3roe.2717$F7.1495@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>> In article <3ge8tcFc0fo6U1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
>>>>news:uBioe.2567$F7.2293@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>
>>>>> I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
>>>>> Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
>>>>> working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
>>>>
>>>>> However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
>>>>> when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
>>>>> it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
>>>>
>>>>> By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
>>>>> So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>>>>
>>>>Is there another drive on the ribbon
>>>>cable too, likely not from the below.
>>>
>>> No other drive, I've got the old drive unplugged for now.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
>>>>> any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
>>>>> Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?
>>>>
>>>>There's three main reasons that you get that result.
>>>>
>>>>The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
>>>>and using the middle connector for the drive.
>
>>> Just tried both connectors a couple of times each, with same result.
>
>>>>Some motherboards
>>>>dont handle that very well, basically assuming cable select is used
>>>>even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.
>>>>
>>>>The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
>>>>drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
>
>>> Cant get that to work.
>
>Thats evidence of a bad cable.

Thanks. I'm gonna try a new cable tomorrow and see how that goes.

>
>>>>You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
>>>>cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
>>>>for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
>>>>connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
>>>
>>> Yeah, it is.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon
cable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah maybe that is it then. I've had this cable for over three years. In
that
>>> time, with just the one drive on it, the loose end of cable was tied with
a
>>> elastic band. And the cable was sort of crimped up, a bit bent here and
>>> there. Could that lead to a damaged cable over time ?
>>
>> Its more usually damaged by getting it off the old drive,
>> pulling on the ribbon itself rather than on the body of
>> the connector that goes into the drive connector.
>>
>> It could always have been bad, one wire not making good
>> contact, and that has got disturbed with the drive changing,
>> or the new drive is more fussy about it with master/slave detection.
>>
>
>

 

[Dave]

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

In article <FPwoe.3045$F7.274@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there says...
>
>
>In article <3gf06sFc1kmcU1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>>"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:3gf046Fc3l5rU1@individual.net...
>>>
>>> "Dave" <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
>>> news:G3roe.2717$F7.1495@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>> In article <3ge8tcFc0fo6U1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
>>>>>news:uBioe.2567$F7.2293@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>>
>>>>>> I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
>>>>>> Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
>>>>>> working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
>>>>>
>>>>>> However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
>>>>>> when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
>>>>>> it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
>>>>>
>>>>>> By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
>>>>>> So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>>>>>
>>>>>Is there another drive on the ribbon
>>>>>cable too, likely not from the below.
>>>>
>>>> No other drive, I've got the old drive unplugged for now.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
>>>>>> any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
>>>>>> Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?
>>>>>
>>>>>There's three main reasons that you get that result.
>>>>>
>>>>>The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
>>>>>and using the middle connector for the drive.
>>
>>>> Just tried both connectors a couple of times each, with same result.
>>
>>>>>Some motherboards
>>>>>dont handle that very well, basically assuming cable select is used
>>>>>even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.
>>>>>
>>>>>The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
>>>>>drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
>>
>>>> Cant get that to work.
>>
>>Thats evidence of a bad cable.
>
>Thanks. I'm gonna try a new cable tomorrow and see how that goes.

Well, new cable and it's working as master. BIOS detected straight away. Using
cable select jumpering.

>
>>
>>>>>You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
>>>>>cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
>>>>>for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
>>>>>connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, it is.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon
>cable.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah maybe that is it then. I've had this cable for over three years. In
>that
>>>> time, with just the one drive on it, the loose end of cable was tied with
>a
>>>> elastic band. And the cable was sort of crimped up, a bit bent here and
>>>> there. Could that lead to a damaged cable over time ?
>>>
>>> Its more usually damaged by getting it off the old drive,
>>> pulling on the ribbon itself rather than on the body of
>>> the connector that goes into the drive connector.
>>>
>>> It could always have been bad, one wire not making good
>>> contact, and that has got disturbed with the drive changing,
>>> or the new drive is more fussy about it with master/slave detection.
>>>
>>
>>
>

 

[Dave]

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

In article <bkCoe.42$Nd3.14826@news20.bellglobal.com>,
peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca says...
>
>
>> >What happens if you connect the old drive back.
>> >Can it be seen as a master again?
>> >
>>
>> Yeah that works. I'm gonna try a new cable tomorrow and check how that
>> works with the new drive.
>
>If it works, why do you think it is a cable problem?
>
>

Don't know for sure. Could be combination of cable and drive ? Just tried
a new cable and the BIOS detected it as master straight away. Using cable
select.

 

[Guest]

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

"Dave" <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
news:syWoe.4238$F7.2774@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> In article <FPwoe.3045$F7.274@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
> AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there says...
>>
>>
>>In article <3gf06sFc1kmcU1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:3gf046Fc3l5rU1@individual.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Dave" <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
>>>> news:G3roe.2717$F7.1495@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>> In article <3ge8tcFc0fo6U1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:uBioe.2567$F7.2293@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
>>>>>>> Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
>>>>>>> working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
>>>>>>> when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
>>>>>>> it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
>>>>>>> So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Is there another drive on the ribbon
>>>>>>cable too, likely not from the below.
>>>>>
>>>>> No other drive, I've got the old drive unplugged for now.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
>>>>>>> any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
>>>>>>> Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There's three main reasons that you get that result.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
>>>>>>and using the middle connector for the drive.
>>>
>>>>> Just tried both connectors a couple of times each, with same result.
>>>
>>>>>>Some motherboards
>>>>>>dont handle that very well, basically assuming cable select is used
>>>>>>even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
>>>>>>drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
>>>
>>>>> Cant get that to work.
>>>
>>>Thats evidence of a bad cable.
>>
>>Thanks. I'm gonna try a new cable tomorrow and see how that goes.

> Well, new cable and it's working as master. BIOS
> detected straight away. Using cable select jumpering.

Thanks for the feedback, too rare in my opinion.

Likely the original cable is bad with the cable
select line being the one not making good contact.

It may well have been that all alone, the little prong
things that bite into the ribbon and connect to the
wire can get bent when the cable is made.

>>>>>>You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
>>>>>>cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
>>>>>>for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
>>>>>>connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, it is.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon
>>cable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah maybe that is it then. I've had this cable for over three years. In
>>that
>>>>> time, with just the one drive on it, the loose end of cable was tied with
>>a
>>>>> elastic band. And the cable was sort of crimped up, a bit bent here and
>>>>> there. Could that lead to a damaged cable over time ?
>>>>
>>>> Its more usually damaged by getting it off the old drive,
>>>> pulling on the ribbon itself rather than on the body of
>>>> the connector that goes into the drive connector.
>>>>
>>>> It could always have been bad, one wire not making good
>>>> contact, and that has got disturbed with the drive changing,
>>>> or the new drive is more fussy about it with master/slave detection.

 

[Guest]

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

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3ge8tcFc0fo6U1@individual.net
> Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message news:uBioe.2567$F7.2293@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> > I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
> > Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
> > working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
>
> > However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
> > when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
> > it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
>
> > By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
> > So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>
> Is there another drive on the ribbon
> cable too, likely not from the below.
>
> > As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
> > any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
> > Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?
>
> There's three main reasons that you get that result.
>
> The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
> and using the middle connector for the drive.

> Some motherboards dont handle that very well,

> basically assuming cable select is used

as if it would make any difference

> even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.

Bare nonsense.
If they were expecting (rather than assuming) cable
select, they would issue an error message to that effect.
Cable select is just a grounded line on the end connector and open
on the middle connector. Bios can query the drive whether it is
using M/S or CS for setting drive ID.
But obviously in that case it can address the drive already.

>
> The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
> drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
>
> You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
> cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
> for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
> connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
>
> You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon cable.

 

[Guest]

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

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3gjigbFcrf7kU1@individual.net
> "Dave" <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message news:syWoe.4238$F7.2774@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > In article FPwoe.3045$F7.274@news-server.bigpond.net.au, AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there says...
> > > In article <3gf06sFc1kmcU1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
> > > > "Rod Speed" rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3gf046Fc3l5rU1@individual.net...
> > > > > "Dave" AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message news:G3roe.2717$F7.1495@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > > > > > In article <3ge8tcFc0fo6U1@individual.net>, rod_speed@yahoo.com says...
> > > > > > > Dave AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote in message news:uBioe.2567$F7.2293@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
> > > > > > > > Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
> > > > > > > > working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
> > > > > > > > when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
> > > > > > > > it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
> > > > > > > > So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is there another drive on the ribbon
> > > > > > > cable too, likely not from the below.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No other drive, I've got the old drive unplugged for now.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
> > > > > > > > any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
> > > > > > > > Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There's three main reasons that you get that result.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
> > > > > > > and using the middle connector for the drive.
> > > >
> > > > > > Just tried both connectors a couple of times each, with same result.
> > > >
> > > > > > > Some motherboards
> > > > > > > dont handle that very well, basically assuming cable select is used
> > > > > > > even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
> > > > > > > drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
> > > >
> > > > > > Cant get that to work.
> > > >
> > > > Thats evidence of a bad cable.
> > >
> > > Thanks. I'm gonna try a new cable tomorrow and see how that goes.
>
> > Well, new cable and it's working as master. BIOS
> > detected straight away. Using cable select jumpering.
>
> Thanks for the feedback, too rare in my opinion.
>
> Likely the original cable is bad with the cable
> select line being the one not making good contact.

Doesn't explain why the drive didn't want to play while not using
CS at all.

A CS line not making good contact just gives you either M
or S, depending on the exact moment the drive looks at it
at initialization time. After that it doesn't matter.

>
> It may well have been that all alone, the little prong
> things that bite into the ribbon and connect to the
> wire can get bent when the cable is made.
>
> > > > > > > You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
> > > > > > > cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
> > > > > > > for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
> > > > > > > connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah, it is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon cable.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah maybe that is it then. I've had this cable for over three years. In that
> > > > > > time, with just the one drive on it, the loose end of cable was tied with a
> > > > > > elastic band. And the cable was sort of crimped up, a bit bent here and
> > > > > > there. Could that lead to a damaged cable over time ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Its more usually damaged by getting it off the old drive,
> > > > > pulling on the ribbon itself rather than on the body of
> > > > > the connector that goes into the drive connector.
> > > > >
> > > > > It could always have been bad, one wire not making good
> > > > > contact, and that has got disturbed with the drive changing,
> > > > > or the new drive is more fussy about it with master/slave detection.

 

[Guest]

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

Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:42b24e98$0$76820$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote
>>> AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>>> Dave AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> Dave AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote

>> > > > > > > > I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
>> > > > > > > > Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
>> > > > > > > > working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
>> > > > > > > > when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
>> > > > > > > > it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use
>> > > > > > > > it.
>> > > > > > > > So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Is there another drive on the ribbon
>> > > > > > > cable too, likely not from the below.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > No other drive, I've got the old drive unplugged for now.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
>> > > > > > > > any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
>> > > > > > > > Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > There's three main reasons that you get that result.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
>> > > > > > > and using the middle connector for the drive.
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Just tried both connectors a couple of times each, with same
>> > > > > > result.
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Some motherboards
>> > > > > > > dont handle that very well, basically assuming cable select is
>> > > > > > > used
>> > > > > > > even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave
>> > > > > > > jumpers.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
>> > > > > > > drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Cant get that to work.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thats evidence of a bad cable.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks. I'm gonna try a new cable tomorrow and see how that goes.
>>
>> > Well, new cable and it's working as master. BIOS
>> > detected straight away. Using cable select jumpering.

>> Thanks for the feedback, too rare in my opinion.

>> Likely the original cable is bad with the cable
>> select line being the one not making good contact.

> Doesn't explain why the drive didn't want to play while not using CS at all.

Corse it does.

> A CS line not making good contact just gives
> you either M or S, depending on the exact
> moment the drive looks at it at initialization time.

Its more complicated than that.

> After that it doesn't matter.

>> It may well have been that all alone, the little prong
>> things that bite into the ribbon and connect to the
>> wire can get bent when the cable is made.
>>
>> > > > > > > You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
>> > > > > > > cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
>> > > > > > > for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
>> > > > > > > connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Yeah, it is.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire
>> > > > > > > ribbon cable.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Yeah maybe that is it then. I've had this cable for over three
>> > > > > > years. In that
>> > > > > > time, with just the one drive on it, the loose end of cable was
>> > > > > > tied with a
>> > > > > > elastic band. And the cable was sort of crimped up, a bit bent here
>> > > > > > and
>> > > > > > there. Could that lead to a damaged cable over time ?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Its more usually damaged by getting it off the old drive,
>> > > > > pulling on the ribbon itself rather than on the body of
>> > > > > the connector that goes into the drive connector.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > It could always have been bad, one wire not making good
>> > > > > contact, and that has got disturbed with the drive changing,
>> > > > > or the new drive is more fussy about it with master/slave detection.

 

[Guest]

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

Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:42b24e97$0$76820$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote

>> > I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
>> > Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
>> > working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
>>
>> > However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
>> > when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
>> > it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
>>
>> > By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
>> > So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>>
>> Is there another drive on the ribbon
>> cable too, likely not from the below.
>>
>> > As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
>> > any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
>> > Any clues as to why it can't be recognised as a master ?
>>
>> There's three main reasons that you get that result.

>> The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
>> and using the middle connector for the drive.

>> Some motherboards dont handle that very well,

>> basically assuming cable select is used

> as if it would make any difference

Corse it does.

>> even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.

> Bare nonsense.

We'll see...

> If they were expecting (rather than assuming) cable
> select, they would issue an error message to that effect.

Wrong.

> Cable select is just a grounded line on the
> end connector and open on the middle connector.

Duh.

> Bios can query the drive whether it is
> using M/S or CS for setting drive ID.

> But obviously in that case it can address the drive already.

Have fun explaining the fact that a new cable fixed the problem.

>> The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
>> drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
>>
>> You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
>> cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
>> for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
>> connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
>>
>> You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon cable.

 

[Guest]

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

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3hf7fgFgkdcpU1@individual.net
> Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message news:42b24e97$0$76820$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
> > Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote Dave <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote
>
> > > > I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
> > > > Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
> > > > working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
> > >
> > > > However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
> > > > when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
> > > > it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
> > >
> > > > By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
> > > > So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
> > >
> > > Is there another drive on the ribbon
> > > cable too, likely not from the below.
> > >
> > > > As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
> > > > any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
> > > > Any clues as to why it can't be recognized as a master ?
> > >
> > > There's three main reasons that you get that result.
>
> > > The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
> > > and using the middle connector for the drive.
>
> > > Some motherboards dont handle that very well,
>
> > > basically assuming cable select is used
>
> > as if it would make any difference
>
> Corse it does.
>
> > > even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.
>
> > Bare nonsense.
>
> We'll see...

Oh yeah? Any time soon?

>
> > If they were expecting (rather than assuming) cable
> > select, they would issue an error message to that effect.
>
> Wrong.
>
> > Cable select is just a grounded line on the
> > end connector and open on the middle connector.
>
> Duh.

Yup, Duh.
So obviously no logic on the part of the hostbus adapter involved,
as you appear to imply. No difference in behaviour other than
bios routines looking for telltale signs on the drive themselves.
It would be quite foolish to look for a M/S setting for the sole
purpose of doing a disappearing act.

>
> > Bios can query the drive whether it is
> > using M/S or CS for setting drive ID.
>
> > But obviously in that case it can address the drive already.
>
> Have fun explaining the fact that a new cable fixed the problem.

So it was something else.
A Master checks for a Slave by monitoring some lines (DASP, PIAG)
during initialization. A slave does not.
Defects in those lines are likelier candidates for a Master to fail.

>
> > > The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
> > > drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
> > >
> > > You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
> > > cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
> > > for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
> > > connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
> > >
> > > You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon cable.

 

[Guest]

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

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:42b6cc16$0$4922$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3hf7fgFgkdcpU1@individual.net
>> Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
>> news:42b24e97$0$76820$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
>> > Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote Dave
>> > <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote
>>
>> > > > I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
>> > > > Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
>> > > > working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
>> > >
>> > > > However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
>> > > > when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
>> > > > it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
>> > >
>> > > > By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
>> > > > So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
>> > >
>> > > Is there another drive on the ribbon
>> > > cable too, likely not from the below.
>> > >
>> > > > As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
>> > > > any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
>> > > > Any clues as to why it can't be recognized as a master ?
>> > >
>> > > There's three main reasons that you get that result.
>>
>> > > The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
>> > > and using the middle connector for the drive.
>>
>> > > Some motherboards dont handle that very well,
>>
>> > > basically assuming cable select is used
>>
>> > as if it would make any difference
>>
>> Corse it does.
>>
>> > > even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.
>>
>> > Bare nonsense.
>>
>> We'll see...
>
> Oh yeah? Any time soon?
>
>>
>> > If they were expecting (rather than assuming) cable
>> > select, they would issue an error message to that effect.
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>> > Cable select is just a grounded line on the
>> > end connector and open on the middle connector.
>>
>> Duh.
>
> Yup, Duh.
> So obviously no logic on the part of the hostbus adapter involved,
> as you appear to imply. No difference in behaviour other than
> bios routines looking for telltale signs on the drive themselves.
> It would be quite foolish to look for a M/S setting for the sole
> purpose of doing a disappearing act.

Have fun explaining the fact that a new cable fixed the problem.

>> > Bios can query the drive whether it is
>> > using M/S or CS for setting drive ID.
>>
>> > But obviously in that case it can address the drive already.
>>
>> Have fun explaining the fact that a new cable fixed the problem.
>
> So it was something else.
> A Master checks for a Slave by monitoring some lines (DASP, PIAG)
> during initialization. A slave does not.
> Defects in those lines are likelier candidates for a Master to fail.

Have fun explaining the fact that a new cable fixed the problem.

>> > > The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
>> > > drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
>> > >
>> > > You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
>> > > cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
>> > > for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
>> > > connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
>> > >
>> > > You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire ribbon
>> > > cable.

 

[Guest]

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

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3hoibeFciu8qU1@individual.net
> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message news:42b6cc16$0$4922$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
> > "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3hf7fgFgkdcpU1@individual.net
> > > Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message news:42b24e97$0$76820$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
> > > > Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote Dave
> > > > <AskMeIfYouWannit@somewhere.there> wrote
> > >
> > > > > > I've installed a new, bigger, hard drive in my system.
> > > > > > Cloned the old drive. I'm using XP. Seems to be
> > > > > > working OK. New drive is a seagate 160 GB.
> > > > >
> > > > > > However, the BIOS will only detect the new drive
> > > > > > when I jumper it as slave. It doesn't seem to like
> > > > > > it jumpered as master. Why would this be ?
> > > > >
> > > > > > By the way, the old drive is unplugged, I'm not going to use it.
> > > > > > So I thought I should set the new drive up as a master.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there another drive on the ribbon
> > > > > cable too, likely not from the below.
> > > > >
> > > > > > As I say, seems to work fine as a slave. Is there
> > > > > > any problem running a single hard drive as a slave ?
> > > > > > Any clues as to why it can't be recognized as a master ?
> > > > >
> > > > > There's three main reasons that you get that result.
> > >
> > > > > The most common one is using a modern 80 wire ribbon cable,
> > > > > and using the middle connector for the drive.
> > >
> > > > > Some motherboards dont handle that very well,
> > >
> > > > > basically assuming cable select is used
> > >
> > > > as if it would make any difference
> > >
> > > Corse it does.
> > >
> > > > > even when the drive is jumpered using the master and slave jumpers.
> > >
> > > > Bare nonsense.
> > >
> > > We'll see...
> >
> > Oh yeah? Any time soon?
> >
> > >
> > > > If they were expecting (rather than assuming) cable
> > > > select, they would issue an error message to that effect.
> > >
> > > Wrong.
> > >
> > > > Cable select is just a grounded line on the
> > > > end connector and open on the middle connector.
> > >
> > > Duh.
> >
> > Yup, Duh.
> > So obviously no logic on the part of the hostbus adapter involved,
> > as you appear to imply. No difference in behaviour other than
> > bios routines looking for telltale signs on the drive themselves.
> > It would be quite foolish to look for a M/S setting for the sole
> > purpose of doing a disappearing act.
>
> Have fun explaining the fact that a new cable fixed the problem.

Thanks for confirming that the "Some motherboards dont handle that
very well, basically assuming cable select is used" was just some of your
usual random bullshit.

>
> > > > Bios can query the drive whether it is
> > > > using M/S or CS for setting drive ID.
> > >
> > > > But obviously in that case it can address the drive already.
> > >
> > > Have fun explaining the fact that a new cable fixed the problem.
> >
> > So it was something else.
> > A Master checks for a Slave by monitoring some lines (DASP, PIAG)
> > during initialization. A slave does not.
> > Defects in those lines are likelier candidates for a Master to fail.
>
> Have fun explaining the fact that a new cable fixed the problem.

See the following quote from OP and weep:

>> What happens if you connect the old drive back.
>> Can it be seen as a master again?
>>
> Yeah that works.

Obviously nothing wrong with the Csel line with that drive connected,
whether it was used in Csel or in M/S mode.

>
> > > > > The fix in that situation is to just go with the flow, jumper the
> > > > > drive as cable select, and use the end connector for the drive.
> > > > >
> > > > > You can also get some odd results if you have an 80 wire
> > > > > cable in backwards, with the end connector thats intended
> > > > > for a drive used in the motherboard connector. The blue
> > > > > connector should be plugged into the motherboard.
> > > > >
> > > > > You can also get the result you are seeing with a bad 80 wire
> > > > > ribbon cable.

 

[Guest]

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

Puerile attempt at a troll flushed where it belongs.

Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:42b8c844$1$21964$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...

 

[Guest]

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

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3hs10iFi6eu8U1@individual.net
> Puerile attempt at a troll flushed where it belongs.

Pity you can't flush Google through the toilet as well.

Reams of your pathetic efforts to climb out of that wet paper
bag that you created for yourself recorded for quite some time:

> > > So obviously no logic on the part of the hostbus adapter involved,
> > > as you appear to imply. No difference in behaviour other than
> > > bios routines looking for telltale signs on the drive themselves.
> > > It would be quite foolish to look for a M/S setting for the sole
> > > purpose of doing a disappearing act.
> >
> > Have fun explaining the fact that a new cable fixed the problem.
>
> Thanks for confirming that the "Some motherboards dont handle that
> very well, basically assuming cable select is used", was just an example
> of your usual random bullshit.

> > > So it was something else.
> > > A Master checks for a Slave by monitoring some lines (DASP, PIAG)
> > > during initialization. A slave does not.
> > > Defects in those lines are likelier candidates for a Master to fail.
> >
> > Have fun explaining the fact that a new cable fixed the problem.
>
> See the following quote from OP and weep:
>
> > > What happens if you connect the old drive back.
> > > Can it be seen as a master again?
> > >
> > Yeah that works.
>
> Obviously nothing wrong with the Csel line with that old drive connected,
> whether it was used in Csel or in M/S mode.

>
> Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
> news:42b8c844$1$21964$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...

 

[Guest]

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

Puerile attempt at a troll flushed where it belongs.

Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:42b9bfa4$0$82822$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...

 

[Guest]

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

Puerile attempt at a troll flushed where it belongs.

Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:42ba2423$0$75191$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...