defragging a large disc via controller card in Win98

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Will the standard defrag handle the drive with more than 137GB space
and/or data on a controller card?
Do I have to use one of the better defrag proggies?

--
Posted using the http://www.windowsforumz.com interface, at author's request
Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
Topic URL: http://www.windowsforumz.com/General-Discussion-defragging-large-disc-controller-card-Win98-ftopict356301.html
Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse: http://www.windowsforumz.com/eform.php?p=1129192
9 answers Last reply
More about defragging large disc controller card win98
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    duradan wrote:
    > Will the standard defrag handle the drive with more than 137GB space
    > and/or data on a controller card?

    No, W98x defrag nor scandisk will not work with partitions above
    128GB (137 billion bytes) - that is a known limitation. The only way around
    that is easy and recommended to do is re-partition your drive to have
    smaller than 128 GB partitions if you want to use scandisk or defrag with
    W98x

    The other limitation of W98x is as it exists does not support larger than
    137GB drives; however, as you mentioned using a controller card is an
    excellent way to resolve that particular limitation.

    Rick


    > Do I have to use one of the better defrag proggies?
    >
    > --
    > Posted using the http://www.windowsforumz.com interface, at author's
    > request Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
    > Topic URL:
    >
    http://www.windowsforumz.com/General-Discussion-defragging-large-disc-controller-card-Win98-ftopict356301.html
    > Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse:
    > http://www.windowsforumz.com/eform.php?p=1129192
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    I replied this morning, but the MS servers were down for maintenance and of course
    lost my posts, repeated below:

    No. Although you can partition a disk up to 137GB, Win98's native Scandisk and
    Defrag will not function on partitions greater than 127GB. There are no fixes
    available for this limitation, aside from using third-party tools.
    See:
    http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/disc/faq/137_win98.html


    Are you viewing our group using a web browser? I noticed in your headers that you
    are posting through WindowsForumz.com. Do you realise that they are simply sending
    your posts to the Microsoft newsgroups, and you are unnecessarily using a middleman?

    Visit us using a newsreader at:
    news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
    to avoid the middleman - ADVERTISEMENT-FREE!

    How to set up Outlook Express (OE) as a newsreader program to access the Microsoft
    forums:
    http://www.rickrogers.org/setupoe.htm

    http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm

    http://insideoe.tomsterdam.com/resources/communities.htm#setupmsnews
    --
    Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
    http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx


    "duradan" <UseLinkToEmail@WindowsForumz.com> wrote in message
    news:3_1129192_55fa8230da654f8f1d7847670befa9d0@windowsforumz.com...
    > Will the standard defrag handle the drive with more than 137GB space
    > and/or data on a controller card?
    > Do I have to use one of the better defrag proggies?
    >
    > --
    > Posted using the http://www.windowsforumz.com interface, at author's request
    > Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
    > Topic URL:
    http://www.windowsforumz.com/General-Discussion-defragging-large-disc-controller-card-Win98-ftopict356301.html
    > Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse:
    http://www.windowsforumz.com/eform.php?p=1129192
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Maybe its just as well. I mean, when the disk space is that large (like
    over 100 GB), it kinda makes sense to partition it, anyways, doesn't it?

    glee wrote:
    > I replied this morning, but the MS servers were down for maintenance and
    of
    > course lost my posts, repeated below:
    >
    > No. Although you can partition a disk up to 137GB, Win98's native
    Scandisk
    > and Defrag will not function on partitions greater than 127GB. There are
    no
    > fixes available for this limitation, aside from using third-party tools.
    > See:
    > http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/disc/faq/137_win98.html
    >
    >
    > Are you viewing our group using a web browser? I noticed in your headers
    > that you are posting through WindowsForumz.com. Do you realise that they
    are
    > simply sending your posts to the Microsoft newsgroups, and you are
    > unnecessarily using a middleman?
    >
    > Visit us using a newsreader at:
    > news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
    > to avoid the middleman - ADVERTISEMENT-FREE!
    >
    > How to set up Outlook Express (OE) as a newsreader program to access the
    > Microsoft forums:
    > http://www.rickrogers.org/setupoe.htm
    >
    > http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm
    >
    > http://insideoe.tomsterdam.com/resources/communities.htm#setupmsnews
    > --
    > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
    > http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    > http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
    >
    >
    > "duradan" <UseLinkToEmail@WindowsForumz.com> wrote in message
    > news:3_1129192_55fa8230da654f8f1d7847670befa9d0@windowsforumz.com...
    >> Will the standard defrag handle the drive with more than 137GB space
    >> and/or data on a controller card?
    >> Do I have to use one of the better defrag proggies?
    >>
    >> --
    >> Posted using the http://www.windowsforumz.com interface, at author's
    request
    >> Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
    >> Topic URL:
    >
    http://www.windowsforumz.com/General-Discussion-defragging-large-disc-contro
    ller-card-Win98-ftopict356301.html
    >> Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse:
    > http://www.windowsforumz.com/eform.php?p=1129192
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Usually, yes, for most "normal" usage.....but I can see where someone using the
    drive solely for storage of large files (video files, or mp3 or other music files),
    there might not be a reason to have anything but one large partition.
    --
    Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
    http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx

    "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:%23x%23jb5kPFHA.244@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > Maybe its just as well. I mean, when the disk space is that large (like
    > over 100 GB), it kinda makes sense to partition it, anyways, doesn't it?
    >
    > glee wrote:
    > > I replied this morning, but the MS servers were down for maintenance and
    > of
    > > course lost my posts, repeated below:
    > >
    > > No. Although you can partition a disk up to 137GB, Win98's native
    > Scandisk
    > > and Defrag will not function on partitions greater than 127GB. There are
    > no
    > > fixes available for this limitation, aside from using third-party tools.
    > > See:
    > > http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/disc/faq/137_win98.html
    > >
    > >
    > > Are you viewing our group using a web browser? I noticed in your headers
    > > that you are posting through WindowsForumz.com. Do you realise that they
    > are
    > > simply sending your posts to the Microsoft newsgroups, and you are
    > > unnecessarily using a middleman?
    > >
    > > Visit us using a newsreader at:
    > > news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
    > > to avoid the middleman - ADVERTISEMENT-FREE!
    > >
    > > How to set up Outlook Express (OE) as a newsreader program to access the
    > > Microsoft forums:
    > > http://www.rickrogers.org/setupoe.htm
    > >
    > > http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm
    > >
    > > http://insideoe.tomsterdam.com/resources/communities.htm#setupmsnews
    > > --
    > > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
    > > http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    > > http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
    > >
    > >
    > > "duradan" <UseLinkToEmail@WindowsForumz.com> wrote in message
    > > news:3_1129192_55fa8230da654f8f1d7847670befa9d0@windowsforumz.com...
    > >> Will the standard defrag handle the drive with more than 137GB space
    > >> and/or data on a controller card?
    > >> Do I have to use one of the better defrag proggies?
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Posted using the http://www.windowsforumz.com interface, at author's
    > request
    > >> Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
    > >> Topic URL:
    > >
    > http://www.windowsforumz.com/General-Discussion-defragging-large-disc-contro
    > ller-card-Win98-ftopict356301.html
    > >> Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse:
    > > http://www.windowsforumz.com/eform.php?p=1129192
    >
    >
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Yeah, but even 100 GB partitions for video ain't TOO shabby. Granted,
    you might not be able to put ALL your video in one partition, so one could
    make a "partition library", if need be. But admitedly, if you're really,
    really into video, that limitation could be a bit annoying.

    glee wrote:
    > Usually, yes, for most "normal" usage.....but I can see where someone
    using
    > the drive solely for storage of large files (video files, or mp3 or other
    > music files), there might not be a reason to have anything but one large
    > partition. --
    > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
    > http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    > http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
    >
    > "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > news:%23x%23jb5kPFHA.244@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    >> Maybe its just as well. I mean, when the disk space is that large (like
    >> over 100 GB), it kinda makes sense to partition it, anyways, doesn't it?
    >>
    >> glee wrote:
    >>> I replied this morning, but the MS servers were down for maintenance and
    >>> of course lost my posts, repeated below:
    >>>
    >>> No. Although you can partition a disk up to 137GB, Win98's native
    >> Scandisk
    >>> and Defrag will not function on partitions greater than 127GB. There are
    >>> no fixes available for this limitation, aside from using third-party
    tools.
    >>> See:
    >>> http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/disc/faq/137_win98.html
    >>>
    >>> Are you viewing our group using a web browser? I noticed in your
    headers
    >>> that you are posting through WindowsForumz.com. Do you realise that
    they
    >>> are simply sending your posts to the Microsoft newsgroups, and you are
    >>> unnecessarily using a middleman?
    >>>
    >>> Visit us using a newsreader at:
    >>> news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
    >>> to avoid the middleman - ADVERTISEMENT-FREE!
    >>>
    >>> How to set up Outlook Express (OE) as a newsreader program to access the
    >>> Microsoft forums:
    >>> http://www.rickrogers.org/setupoe.htm
    >>>
    >>> http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm
    >>>
    >>> http://insideoe.tomsterdam.com/resources/communities.htm#setupmsnews
    >>> --
    >>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
    >>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    >>> http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
    >>>
    >>> "duradan" <UseLinkToEmail@WindowsForumz.com> wrote in message
    >>> news:3_1129192_55fa8230da654f8f1d7847670befa9d0@windowsforumz.com...
    >>>> Will the standard defrag handle the drive with more than 137GB space
    >>>> and/or data on a controller card?
    >>>> Do I have to use one of the better defrag proggies?
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Posted using the http://www.windowsforumz.com interface, at author's
    >> request
    >>>> Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
    >>>> Topic URL:
    >>>
    >>
    http://www.windowsforumz.com/General-Discussion-defragging-large-disc-contro
    >> ller-card-Win98-ftopict356301.html
    >>>> Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse:
    >>> http://www.windowsforumz.com/eform.php?p=1129192
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    The last two posts are both right. I will end up with about 140GB of data,
    ,MP2, MP3 as well as .mov and MPEG files. It would be nice to have them on
    a single 'drive'. And my useage is anything BUT normal.
    I want one partition, so for now it is a 120GB with open space for later
    addition. I expect I will XP myself sooner or later......bleh

    "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:eB79DLlPFHA.4052@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > Yeah, but even 100 GB partitions for video ain't TOO shabby. Granted,
    > you might not be able to put ALL your video in one partition, so one could
    > make a "partition library", if need be. But admitedly, if you're really,
    > really into video, that limitation could be a bit annoying.
    >
    > glee wrote:
    > > Usually, yes, for most "normal" usage.....but I can see where someone
    > using
    > > the drive solely for storage of large files (video files, or mp3 or
    other
    > > music files), there might not be a reason to have anything but one large
    > > partition. --
    > > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
    > > http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    > > http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
    > >
    > > "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > > news:%23x%23jb5kPFHA.244@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > >> Maybe its just as well. I mean, when the disk space is that large
    (like
    > >> over 100 GB), it kinda makes sense to partition it, anyways, doesn't
    it?
    > >>
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Well, I've separated the video and audio stuff into their own separate
    partitions. That helps.

    Actually, in retrospect, I like the separation there, as the utilities
    associated with them (audio and video) are also delineated that way too, in
    so far as the working directories are concerned. It feels better organized
    to me at this point. I used to have all of it in one partition, but this
    is working out nicely for me, and if you ever opted for doing this, you
    could use all of that drive right now. Anyway, just throwing that idea
    out there. (BTW, I have equal size partitions for both - an easy
    decision)

    Duradan wrote:
    > The last two posts are both right. I will end up with about 140GB of data,
    > ,MP2, MP3 as well as .mov and MPEG files. It would be nice to have them
    on
    > a single 'drive'. And my useage is anything BUT normal.
    > I want one partition, so for now it is a 120GB with open space for later
    > addition. I expect I will XP myself sooner or later......bleh
    >
    > "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > news:eB79DLlPFHA.4052@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    >> Yeah, but even 100 GB partitions for video ain't TOO shabby. Granted,
    >> you might not be able to put ALL your video in one partition, so one
    could
    >> make a "partition library", if need be. But admitedly, if you're
    really,
    >> really into video, that limitation could be a bit annoying.
    >>
    >> glee wrote:
    >>> Usually, yes, for most "normal" usage.....but I can see where someone
    using
    >>> the drive solely for storage of large files (video files, or mp3 or
    other
    >>> music files), there might not be a reason to have anything but one large
    >>> partition. --
    >>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
    >>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    >>> http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.mspx
    >>>
    >>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >>> news:%23x%23jb5kPFHA.244@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    >>>> Maybe its just as well. I mean, when the disk space is that large
    (like
    >>>> over 100 GB), it kinda makes sense to partition it, anyways, doesn't
    it?
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Well, I have to admit, it really isn't so bad. I've got almost all the stuff
    I needed in once place finally in one place. Whew. I have to give some
    credit to Maxtor's MaxBlast software. Made partitioning and formatting a
    breeze and was instant, within seconds. Transfers via it's file transfer was
    also faster than I expected. Cleanup, Scandisk and Defrag went smooth and
    easy with the standard Win98SE proggies.
    I actually can get rid of many duplicates hiding under different names and
    there is some recompiling and recompressing, so it looks like I can get it
    down to 120 and under and one one partition for now as well.
    Thanks for the help guys, I look forward to being able to somehow help back.


    "duradan" <UseLinkToEmail@WindowsForumz.com> wrote in message
    news:3_1129192_55fa8230da654f8f1d7847670befa9d0@windowsforumz.com...
    > Will the standard defrag handle the drive with more than 137GB space
    > and/or data on a controller card?
    > Do I have to use one of the better defrag proggies?
    >
    > --
    > Posted using the http://www.windowsforumz.com interface, at author's
    request
    > Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
    > Topic URL:
    http://www.windowsforumz.com/General-Discussion-defragging-large-disc-controller-card-Win98-ftopict356301.html
    > Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse:
    http://www.windowsforumz.com/eform.php?p=1129192
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    The best way to help us out is to learn about computers and then post here to
    help other people and maybe in the 2000 or XP newsgroup as well.

    "Duradan" wrote:

    > Well, I have to admit, it really isn't so bad. I've got almost all the stuff
    > I needed in once place finally in one place. Whew. I have to give some
    > credit to Maxtor's MaxBlast software. Made partitioning and formatting a
    > breeze and was instant, within seconds. Transfers via it's file transfer was
    > also faster than I expected. Cleanup, Scandisk and Defrag went smooth and
    > easy with the standard Win98SE proggies.
    > I actually can get rid of many duplicates hiding under different names and
    > there is some recompiling and recompressing, so it looks like I can get it
    > down to 120 and under and one one partition for now as well.
    > Thanks for the help guys, I look forward to being able to somehow help back.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "duradan" <UseLinkToEmail@WindowsForumz.com> wrote in message
    > news:3_1129192_55fa8230da654f8f1d7847670befa9d0@windowsforumz.com...
    > > Will the standard defrag handle the drive with more than 137GB space
    > > and/or data on a controller card?
    > > Do I have to use one of the better defrag proggies?
    > >
    > > --
    > > Posted using the http://www.windowsforumz.com interface, at author's
    > request
    > > Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
    > > Topic URL:
    > http://www.windowsforumz.com/General-Discussion-defragging-large-disc-controller-card-Win98-ftopict356301.html
    > > Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse:
    > http://www.windowsforumz.com/eform.php?p=1129192
    >
    >
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

Controller Defragment Microsoft Windows