Computer Required for DVarchive

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

As I have mention in a previous post I have come accross a cheep (ie
free) Pent II computer. I would like to use this computer to store my
DVarchive files.

Specfics: Computer has 2GB hard driven (90% filled)
32 RAM
Network card
Windows 98 SE

I am able to download shows off of the Replay unit to the computer
without any problems.

The Replay unit sees the DVarchive machine but it will not list the
show that I have downloaded.

I am willing to spend $ and add a 120GB hard
I am willing to spend $ and add 256 RAM.

If I make those additions will that solve the problem of the Replay
unit not listing the shows? Or is this just not enough of a computer
to work with the replay unit?

Thanks
BEP
22 answers Last reply
More about computer required dvarchive
  1. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    "bep" <bep17@yahoo.com> wrote:

    > As I have mention in a previous post I have come accross a cheep (ie
    > free) Pent II computer. I would like to use this computer to store my
    > DVarchive files.

    I'm surprised that you were able to download a file at all. A half-hour
    show recorded at standard quality (which takes the least space) would still
    take up 500 MB and, by your stats, you only have 200 MB free.

    Did you search your computer and find the actual file (it will be listed
    as the Show and Episode title)? I doubt that it is there.

    What seems most likely is that DVArchive wasn't able to create the file
    and, instead of telling you that it was out of disk space, just dumped it.

    If you add a larger hard drive, then this shouldn't be a problem.

    How do you intend to use DVArchive? A Pentium II CPU will top out at 450
    MHz, from what I see on Pricewatch.com, and yours is probably slower.

    Because of this, you may have problems streaming the video back to your
    ReplayTV, but you can probably view the shows on the computer itself.


    Jeff


    > Specfics: Computer has 2GB hard driven (90% filled)
    > 32 RAM
    > Network card
    > Windows 98 SE
    >
    > I am able to download shows off of the Replay unit to the computer
    > without any problems.
    >
    > The Replay unit sees the DVarchive machine but it will not list the
    > show that I have downloaded.
    >
    > I am willing to spend $ and add a 120GB hard
    > I am willing to spend $ and add 256 RAM.
    >
    > If I make those additions will that solve the problem of the Replay
    > unit not listing the shows? Or is this just not enough of a computer
    > to work with the replay unit?
  2. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    Jeff Lindstrom wrote:
    > "bep" <bep17@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    > > As I have mention in a previous post I have come accross a cheep
    (ie
    > > free) Pent II computer. I would like to use this computer to store
    my
    > > DVarchive files.
    >
    > I'm surprised that you were able to download a file at all. A
    half-hour
    > show recorded at standard quality (which takes the least space) would
    still
    > take up 500 MB and, by your stats, you only have 200 MB free.
    >
    > Did you search your computer and find the actual file (it will be
    listed
    > as the Show and Episode title)? I doubt that it is there.
    >
    > What seems most likely is that DVArchive wasn't able to create the
    file
    > and, instead of telling you that it was out of disk space, just
    dumped it.
    >
    > If you add a larger hard drive, then this shouldn't be a problem.
    >
    > How do you intend to use DVArchive? A Pentium II CPU will top out
    at 450
    > MHz, from what I see on Pricewatch.com, and yours is probably slower.
    >
    > Because of this, you may have problems streaming the video back to
    your
    > ReplayTV, but you can probably view the shows on the computer itself.
    >
    >
    > Jeff
    >
    >
    >
    > > Specfics: Computer has 2GB hard driven (90% filled)
    > > 32 RAM
    > > Network card
    > > Windows 98 SE
    > >
    > > I am able to download shows off of the Replay unit to the computer
    > > without any problems.
    > >
    > > The Replay unit sees the DVarchive machine but it will not list the
    > > show that I have downloaded.
    > >
    > > I am willing to spend $ and add a 120GB hard
    > > I am willing to spend $ and add 256 RAM.
    > >
    > > If I make those additions will that solve the problem of the Replay
    > > unit not listing the shows? Or is this just not enough of a
    computer
    > > to work with the replay unit?

    The available disk space is after the transfer of the 1 one show. It
    does show up in the DVarchive list on the computer.

    As to the answer to your second question, I was hoping to use the PC to
    stream back to the Replay unit. I do not mind spending a few dollars
    if it will work but I do not want to put more money into this machine
    if it is not capable of steaming back to the Replay unit

    BEP
  3. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    On Mon, 02 May 2005 03:35:56 -0500, Jeff Lindstrom
    <j_r_lind@adelphia.net> wrote:

    >"bep" <bep17@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    >> As I have mention in a previous post I have come accross a cheep (ie
    >> free) Pent II computer. I would like to use this computer to store my
    >> DVarchive files.
    >
    > I'm surprised that you were able to download a file at all. A half-hour
    >show recorded at standard quality (which takes the least space) would still
    >take up 500 MB and, by your stats, you only have 200 MB free.
    >
    > Did you search your computer and find the actual file (it will be listed
    >as the Show and Episode title)? I doubt that it is there.
    >
    > What seems most likely is that DVArchive wasn't able to create the file
    >and, instead of telling you that it was out of disk space, just dumped it.
    >
    > If you add a larger hard drive, then this shouldn't be a problem.
    >
    > How do you intend to use DVArchive? A Pentium II CPU will top out at 450
    >MHz, from what I see on Pricewatch.com, and yours is probably slower.
    >
    > Because of this, you may have problems streaming the video back to your
    >ReplayTV, but you can probably view the shows on the computer itself.
    >
    >
    >Jeff
    >
    >

    DVA will work more smoothly on a faster computer.

    >
    >> Specfics: Computer has 2GB hard driven (90% filled)
    >> 32 RAM
    >> Network card
    >> Windows 98 SE
    >>
    >> I am able to download shows off of the Replay unit to the computer
    >> without any problems.
    >>
    >> The Replay unit sees the DVarchive machine but it will not list the
    >> show that I have downloaded.
    >>
    >> I am willing to spend $ and add a 120GB hard
    >> I am willing to spend $ and add 256 RAM.
    >>
    >> If I make those additions will that solve the problem of the Replay
    >> unit not listing the shows? Or is this just not enough of a computer
    >> to work with the replay unit?

    --
    Mark Lloyd
    has a Replay 5xxx
    http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

    "The idea that there is an invisible being who
    created and still runs this old universe is so
    childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
    believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
    still fall for that scam."
  4. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    [resend]

    Mark, although you are generally very helpful and have provided many
    people with the needed answers on this news group, your response:

    "DVA will work more smoothly on a faster computer."

    Is not one of your more enlightening answers. : )

    I just do not want to throw money into an aging PC if there is no hope
    of it working with DVarcive.

    BEP
  5. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    On 3 May 2005 06:33:31 -0700, "bep" <bep17@yahoo.com> wrote:

    >[resend]
    >
    >Mark, although you are generally very helpful and have provided many
    >people with the needed answers on this news group, your response:
    >
    >"DVA will work more smoothly on a faster computer."
    >
    >Is not one of your more enlightening answers. : )
    >
    >I just do not want to throw money into an aging PC if there is no hope
    >of it working with DVarcive.
    >
    >BEP

    Sorry for the lack of detains. I was in a hurry at that time. I
    usually provide more complete answers.

    While DVA will work on a slower computer (The slowest I've tried is a
    Celeron at 333MHz), there will be unpredicatble delays making computer
    use more difficult. DVA will unpredictably pause for 2-5 seconds. This
    pause wall affect any other software on the computer too. From what
    I've heard, this is not caused by the DVA code itself, but Java.

    The computer I have DVA on now is a P4-2.4GHz. There is no evidence of
    the problem there. You would probably find a slower computer suitable
    if it's dedicated to DVA and you just leave DVA running.

    --
    Mark Lloyd
    has a Replay 5xxx
    http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

    "The idea that there is an invisible being who
    created and still runs this old universe is so
    childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
    believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
    still fall for that scam."
  6. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    On 1 May 2005 20:59:05 -0700, "bep" <bep17@yahoo.com> wrote:

    >As I have mention in a previous post I have come accross a cheep (ie
    >free) Pent II computer. I would like to use this computer to store my
    >DVarchive files.
    >
    >Specfics: Computer has 2GB hard driven (90% filled)
    > 32 RAM
    > Network card
    > Windows 98 SE
    >
    >

    My first DVA machine was a 96meg p166 It worked
  7. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    Thanks for the input.

    I did not realize that Fat 32 was limited to 32GB. I thought the
    limitation was somewhere in the range of 80 - 90 GB drives. I know I
    have a 40GB setting around ( from the old Dish network dishplayer ) I
    will plug that in and try and scrounge up some RAM. I am not sure what
    the slot configuration is for RAM, I will pop the hood and then go on
    my RAM scavager hunt.

    BEP
  8. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    My PC is fairly old, a P2-400 running Win2000, maxed out at 384MB. It
    runs DVArchive adequately, if not peppy. I guess you just want to run
    the server, right?

    32MB will not be enough. I doubt it will even start up. Java apps are
    memory pigs, and even if you have lots, it still seems to run out.
    (I've had DVArchive throw a shoe complaining about memory when there
    stil was 256MB free on the system, go figure. But I use the client more
    than anything.)

    On Windows 98, I expect it would perform a bit better, at the expense of
    reliability.

    What it can't do well is play streamed videos. Local mpegs are fine,
    but streaming via VideoLAN has choppy sound. Only WMP+Elecard worked well.
  9. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    On Tue, 03 May 2005 14:01:56 GMT, ST <tringali@yahoo.com> wrote:

    >My PC is fairly old, a P2-400 running Win2000, maxed out at 384MB. It
    >runs DVArchive adequately, if not peppy. I guess you just want to run
    >the server, right?
    >

    That should work fine. The problems seemsed to occur when I tried to
    use the computer (running DVA) locally as well.

    >32MB will not be enough. I doubt it will even start up. Java apps are
    >memory pigs, and even if you have lots, it still seems to run out.
    >(I've had DVArchive throw a shoe complaining about memory when there
    >stil was 256MB free on the system, go figure. But I use the client more
    >than anything.)
    >

    The system I currently use for DVA has 512MB. That seems to be working
    all right. It streams fine to a Replay.

    >On Windows 98, I expect it would perform a bit better, at the expense of
    >reliability.
    >
    >What it can't do well is play streamed videos. Local mpegs are fine,
    >but streaming via VideoLAN has choppy sound. Only WMP+Elecard worked well.

    --
    Mark Lloyd
    has a Replay 5xxx
    http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

    "The idea that there is an invisible being who
    created and still runs this old universe is so
    childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
    believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
    still fall for that scam."
  10. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    On 3 May 2005 13:59:05 -0700, "bep" <bep17@yahoo.com> wrote:

    >Thanks for the input.
    >
    >I did not realize that Fat 32 was limited to 32GB. I thought the
    >limitation was somewhere in the range of 80 - 90 GB drives.

    FAT32 actually uses 28 bits (and MS knows why). Therefore, the maximum
    number of clusters is about 260,000,000. The maximum cluster size is
    32KB (or 64KB eith Win NT). The maximum size of a FAT32 volume is
    about 8TB (8 Terabytes, or 8192GB) or 16TB on Win NT (such as 2000).

    The use of 16 bits to specify the number of Megabytes would give a
    64MB limit (possibly 32GB with signed arithmetic). 32GB sounds like a
    limit of that particular formatting software. I suppose the limit is
    still here because MS is trying to get people to use NTFS. There is no
    problem with w2k USING a larger FAT32 drive. That (32GB) is just a
    limit of thier formatting software.

    > I know I
    >have a 40GB setting around ( from the old Dish network dishplayer ) I
    >will plug that in and try and scrounge up some RAM. I am not sure what
    >the slot configuration is for RAM, I will pop the hood and then go on
    >my RAM scavager hunt.
    >
    >BEP

    --
    Mark Lloyd
    has a Replay 5xxx
    http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

    "The idea that there is an invisible being who
    created and still runs this old universe is so
    childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
    believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
    still fall for that scam."
  11. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    On Tue, 3 May 2005 20:49:12 +0000 (UTC), General Kireiko
    <douglas@panix.com> wrote:

    >bep <bep17@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >: As I have mention in a previous post I have come accross a cheep (ie
    >: free) Pent II computer. I would like to use this computer to store my
    >: DVarchive files.
    >
    >: Specfics: Computer has 2GB hard driven (90% filled)
    >: 32 RAM
    >: Network card
    >: Windows 98 SE
    >
    >: I am able to download shows off of the Replay unit to the computer
    >: without any problems.
    >
    >: The Replay unit sees the DVarchive machine but it will not list the
    >: show that I have downloaded.
    >
    >: I am willing to spend $ and add a 120GB hard
    >: I am willing to spend $ and add 256 RAM.
    >
    >: If I make those additions will that solve the problem of the Replay
    >: unit not listing the shows? Or is this just not enough of a computer
    >: to work with the replay unit?
    >
    >My first DVA machine was a P2-300 MHz with 192 MB RAM; Win98SE. It ran
    >DVA fine. You should do okay by just spending money on RAM (or finding
    >some RAM which is laying around somewhere.)
    >
    >HOWEVER, there are certain things you should be aware of:
    >
    >1. Win98SE will only recognize FAT32 Partitions.

    As well as, of course, the older versions of FAT, FAt12 and FAT16,

    > Win98SE cannot create
    >partitions greater than 32GB.

    Win ME has no trouble. Since that's jsut a diffence in the FDISK
    utility, maybe someone could sent you that one or you could borrow a
    ME system.

    Neither system has any trouble USING larger FAT32 partitions.

    > Your 120 GB Hard Disk may be overkill. You
    >may have to create several 32MB partitions.
    >
    >2. Using this machine for editing will be pointless. You can only use
    >it as a server / storage.
    >

    Editing is very CPU-intensive and is best done on a fast machine.

    >-Doug

    --
    Mark Lloyd
    has a Replay 5xxx
    http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

    "The idea that there is an invisible being who
    created and still runs this old universe is so
    childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
    believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
    still fall for that scam."
  12. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    On Tue, 3 May 2005 21:07:15 +0000 (UTC), General Kireiko
    <douglas@panix.com> wrote:


    >My statement regarding FAT32 paritions not being larger than 32GB is not
    >100 percent correct.

    I don't think it is any percent "right".
    I have an 80 in this machine and it is running fine. My other machine
    has a 40 in it. Both are running 98 SE. It was running 95 OSR2 before
    and that worked too.
  13. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    Mark Lloyd <mlloyd@5xxxmail.com5xxx> wrote:

    > The computer I have DVA on now is a P4-2.4GHz. There is no evidence of
    > the problem there. You would probably find a slower computer suitable
    > if it's dedicated to DVA and you just leave DVA running.

    The DVArchive documentation says that, if you plan to run it
    continuously, you should use the Server version. That requires more
    memory, right?

    I run the regular version. It occaisonally complained at 64 MB, so I
    setit to 128 MB, but I don't run it all the time.


    --
    Jeff

    ===================================================================
    NOTE: Remove underscores from my e-mail address to reply personally.
  14. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    General Kireiko <douglas@panix.com> wrote:

    > HOWEVER, there are certain things you should be aware of:
    >
    > 1. Win98SE will only recognize FAT32 Partitions. Win98SE cannot
    > create partitions greater than 32GB. Your 120 GB Hard Disk may be
    > overkill. You may have to create several 32MB partitions.

    I have Win98SE and one of the many partitions on two separate drives is
    60GB. I am running it off a SIIG ATA133 Controller card (which may be the
    reason) but I don't recall any limitation other than the 132GB limit for
    FAT32.


    --
    Jeff

    ===================================================================
    NOTE: Remove underscores from my e-mail address to reply personally.
  15. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    gfretwell@aol.com wrote:

    > On Tue, 3 May 2005 21:07:15 +0000 (UTC), General Kireiko
    ><douglas@panix.com> wrote:
    >
    >>My statement regarding FAT32 paritions not being larger than 32GB is not
    >>100 percent correct.
    >
    > I don't think it is any percent "right".
    > I have an 80 in this machine and it is running fine. My other machine
    > has a 40 in it. Both are running 98 SE. It was running 95 OSR2 before
    > and that worked too.

    I remember now. It's not an OS issue, it is a hardware issue for
    motherboards earlier than 1995-1996. I saw this when I tried and failed to
    format an 80GB drive on an older computer (running Win98SE) at work; the
    drive formatted just fine on a newer machine (also running Win98SE).


    --
    Jeff

    ===================================================================
    NOTE: Remove underscores from my e-mail address to reply personally.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    "bep" <bep17@yahoo.com> wrote:

    > Thanks for the input.
    >
    > I did not realize that Fat 32 was limited to 32GB. I thought the
    > limitation was somewhere in the range of 80 - 90 GB drives. I know I
    > have a 40GB setting around ( from the old Dish network dishplayer ) I
    > will plug that in and try and scrounge up some RAM. I am not sure what
    > the slot configuration is for RAM, I will pop the hood and then go on
    > my RAM scavager hunt.

    Now that I have had my memory jogged, I remember a hardware limitation on
    motherboards earlier than 1995 or 1996 (which will almost certainly apply
    to your Pentium II cpu).

    You can get an ATA hard disk interface card which will not only increase
    allowable hard disk size but will also increase speed (be sure to set DMA).
    These cards have been included for free in some retail hard drive packages
    for disk sizes over 132GB. You can also buy the card separately (I use the
    SIIG brand ATA133 controller).

    Card prices range from $20-$40.


    --
    Jeff

    ===================================================================
    NOTE: Remove underscores from my e-mail address to reply personally.
  17. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    On Wed, 04 May 2005 02:34:46 -0500, Jeff Lindstrom
    <j_r_lind@adelphia.net> wrote:

    >Mark Lloyd <mlloyd@5xxxmail.com5xxx> wrote:
    >
    >> The computer I have DVA on now is a P4-2.4GHz. There is no evidence of
    >> the problem there. You would probably find a slower computer suitable
    >> if it's dedicated to DVA and you just leave DVA running.
    >
    > The DVArchive documentation says that, if you plan to run it
    >continuously, you should use the Server version. That requires more
    >memory, right?
    >
    > I run the regular version. It occaisonally complained at 64 MB, so I
    >setit to 128 MB, but I don't run it all the time.

    I get the schedule from DirecTV, and want to keep 2 weeks of listings
    (like the Replay). This takes a lot of memory. I currently have it set
    to use 192MB (for some reason it says 191MB).

    I run mine continuously and don't see problems very often, although
    sometimes (about every 2 weeks to 2 months), the guide can get messed
    up and require resetting. This involves deleting the "DVA TV.XML" file
    and re-entering the guide settings (injcluding deselecting unwanted
    channels).

    --
    Mark Lloyd
    has a Replay 5xxx
    http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

    "The idea that there is an invisible being who
    created and still runs this old universe is so
    childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
    believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
    still fall for that scam."
  18. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    On Wed, 04 May 2005 02:46:29 -0500, Jeff Lindstrom
    <j_r_lind@adelphia.net> wrote:

    >gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
    >
    >> On Tue, 3 May 2005 21:07:15 +0000 (UTC), General Kireiko
    >><douglas@panix.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>>My statement regarding FAT32 paritions not being larger than 32GB is not
    >>>100 percent correct.
    >>
    >> I don't think it is any percent "right".
    >> I have an 80 in this machine and it is running fine. My other machine
    >> has a 40 in it. Both are running 98 SE. It was running 95 OSR2 before
    >> and that worked too.
    >
    > I remember now. It's not an OS issue, it is a hardware issue for
    >motherboards earlier than 1995-1996. I saw this when I tried and failed to
    >format an 80GB drive on an older computer (running Win98SE) at work; the
    >drive formatted just fine on a newer machine (also running Win98SE).

    There ae TWO different limitations here, and people are getting them
    mixed up.

    #1 is a hardware limitation. Older systems were often limited to 32GB
    because the interface to ATA drives supportes just 26 bits for sector
    addressing. Since a hard disk sector holds 512 bytes, this limited the
    disk size to 32GB. This problem is likely to keep the computer from
    booting. To get arould this, some drives (including my first >32GB
    drive) could be limited to 32GB than you use "drive overlay software".
    You could also use a add-on ATA interface card.

    #2 is a software limitation. Some software (particularly HD
    partitioning utilities) could not handle more than 64GB because of the
    use of 16 bit values to indicate home many megabytes the disk held
    (2^16=65536, 65536MB=64GB). Some versions of FDISK (including the one
    in Windows ME) would handle larger partitions, but would just not
    display right. Usually, this limitation applies to partitioning (and
    maybe to high-level formatting) only and will not stop you from USING
    a larger disk. Note that in a particular program, this limit may be
    32GB because of the use of signed arithmetic.

    An add-on card will help with #1 but will have no effect on #2. A
    formatting program may halp with #2 but will have no effect on #1.

    --
    Mark Lloyd
    has a Replay 5xxx
    http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

    "The idea that there is an invisible being who
    created and still runs this old universe is so
    childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
    believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
    still fall for that scam."
  19. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    General Kireiko wrote:
    > 1. Win98SE will only recognize FAT32 Partitions. Win98SE cannot create
    > partitions greater than 32GB. Your 120 GB Hard Disk may be overkill. You
    > may have to create several 32MB partitions.

    Interesting, espically since I'm using a IBM Thinkpad, 366Mhz P2, Win-98
    SE and a SIXTY GIG hard drive, the drive was originally partitioned into
    one 59.xx Gig Partition by Win-98se (the rest being used by hidden
    system stuff, IE: Boot sector) but was re-partationed by Acronis True
    Image into 40 and 20 Gig sections, Win-98 has no issues with this.

    On another computer it partationed a drive to 80 Gigs (all it had) again
    without issues... Till other issues caused them to blow away my win-98
    (Without cause) and "upgrade" to eXtra Painful (xp) which also has no
    problems

    In addition I have some external drives 80, 120 and 160 Gig, again
    Win-98se has no problems with any of these drives, it actually
    partationed and formatted the 120 Gig drive.
    --
    John F Davis, in Delightful Detroit. WA8YXM(at)arrl(dot)net
    "Nothing adds excitement like something that is none of your business"
    Diabetic? http://community.compuserve.com/diabetes
  20. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    Bep,,, I don't know what the limit is, I have fat-32 drives from 20 to
    160 Gig and all play nice with win-98se

    bep wrote:
    > Thanks for the input.
    >
    > I did not realize that Fat 32 was limited to 32GB. I thought the
    > limitation was somewhere in the range of 80 - 90 GB drives. I know I
    > have a 40GB setting around ( from the old Dish network dishplayer ) I
    > will plug that in and try and scrounge up some RAM. I am not sure what
    > the slot configuration is for RAM, I will pop the hood and then go on
    > my RAM scavager hunt.
    >
    > BEP
    >

    --
    John F Davis, in Delightful Detroit. WA8YXM(at)arrl(dot)net
    "Nothing adds excitement like something that is none of your business"
    Diabetic? http://community.compuserve.com/diabetes
  21. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    Figured it out.....

    General Kireiko wrote:
    > My statement regarding FAT32 paritions not being larger than 32GB is not
    > 100 percent correct. The 32GB limit is a Microsoft legacy issue. The
    > disk tools supplied with Win9x are still based on 16-bit DOS, so they can
    > only create partions up to 32GB. There are thrid party tools available
    > which will create FAT32 partitions greater than 32 GB which can also be read
    > by Win98. I do not personally know of any.

    Win-98se has two options during F-Disk partationing of the disk

    Enable large disk support Yes/No

    NO- You got limits. YES, Well,,, I have yet to find the limits and
    I've partationed and formatted disks up to 160 Gig (That is a single
    partation of 159.xx Gigs plus a bit for the drive's boot sector)

    I'm sure that there is a limit,,, But I have yet to see it, Adcom shipps
    drives of 200 Gig, formatted Fat32, one partation. I have installed a
    brand new 120 Gig drive in an external shell and using win-98se
    partation and formatted it 120 Gig, I have yet to try larger drives but
    if I do I'm very sure it will work.
    --
    John F Davis, in Delightful Detroit. WA8YXM(at)arrl(dot)net
    "Nothing adds excitement like something that is none of your business"
    Diabetic? http://community.compuserve.com/diabetes
  22. Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

    On Wed, 04 May 2005 20:01:35 GMT, John in Detroit
    <Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

    >Figured it out.....
    >
    >General Kireiko wrote:
    >> My statement regarding FAT32 paritions not being larger than 32GB is not
    >> 100 percent correct. The 32GB limit is a Microsoft legacy issue. The
    >> disk tools supplied with Win9x are still based on 16-bit DOS, so they can
    >> only create partions up to 32GB. There are thrid party tools available
    >> which will create FAT32 partitions greater than 32 GB which can also be read
    >> by Win98. I do not personally know of any.
    >
    >Win-98se has two options during F-Disk partationing of the disk
    >
    >Enable large disk support Yes/No
    >
    >NO- You got limits. YES, Well,,, I have yet to find the limits and
    >I've partationed and formatted disks up to 160 Gig (That is a single
    >partation of 159.xx Gigs plus a bit for the drive's boot sector)
    >

    I have used FDISK to partition several 40GB-120GB drives as well as
    one 250GB.

    >I'm sure that there is a limit,,,

    It's probably 2TB (2048GB), the largest drive that Windows can handle
    (the limit for 32-bit sector pointers).

    > But I have yet to see it, Adcom shipps
    >drives of 200 Gig, formatted Fat32, one partation. I have installed a
    >brand new 120 Gig drive in an external shell and using win-98se
    >partation and formatted it 120 Gig, I have yet to try larger drives but
    >if I do I'm very sure it will work.

    --
    Mark Lloyd
    has a Replay 5xxx
    http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

    "The idea that there is an invisible being who
    created and still runs this old universe is so
    childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
    believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
    still fall for that scam."
Ask a new question

Read More

Ptv Replaytv Computers ReplayTV