"an 1.8-inch IDE SSD"

Gee, I didn't know SSD's had "inches"


Happy Oyster wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:11:41 +0200, Happy Oyster <happy.oyster@ariplex.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 22:31:07 -0700, Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>>
>>> Dell Inspiron Mini
>> What is the size of the flat screen?
>>
>> 9 inch or 10 inch?
>
> If, as I guess, only ONE type of interface was built, is seems to be an 1.8-inch
> IDE SSD:
> http://www.activemp.com/USB_drives/Obama-USB-drive.htm
>
>
> The computer was built AFTER XP was made. So the XP CD will not have süecial
> drivers. My quess is that De´ll, like HP or Fujitsu/Siemens mess up the
> hardware, so either you should try to get the original CDs as a replacement or
> try it with Win 7.
>
> The problem is the drivers, which have to be installed.
>
> Or did you find a source for them? Has anyone else here a Dell Inspirion 9?

On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 19:28:37 -0400, Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com>
wrote:

>"an 1.8-inch IDE SSD"
>
>Gee, I didn't know SSD's had "inches"

Yes, they are replacements for drives with moving parts (rotating discs), so
they must have the same interface and the same "form factor".
--
POLICE - POLIZEI - POLITIE - POLICIA

http://www.ariplex.com/ama/amapolis.htm

So Windows 7 has the SSD drivers to be able to install. INTERESTING. I
need to figure out if it is using SSD or a HDD (which type too). No
wonder the disk size is tiny (7 GB!!).


On 9/18/2009 4:25 PM PT, Barry Watzman typed:

> NO, NO, NO.
>
> The problem is much simpler than that. XP can't access the DESTINATION
> drive (in this case I think it's his SSD) because it's not IDE.
>
> Look, you guys are pointing the finger at the USB CD, and I don't think
> that's where the problem is. During an XP install, some installation
> files are first copied from the install CD to the destination drive (the
> SSD) and then, later, are READ FROM the SSD to be installed or
> "expanded" into other files. And, also, initially the XP install
> accesses the destination drive (SSD) via the BIOS, but later in the
> install access switches to XP's internal drivers, and unless other
> drivers have been added, XP has no internal drivers for non-IDE hard
> drives.
>
> ***IF*** the SSD is "SATA", then getting the F6 sata driver may fix the
> problem. Otherwise, he likely needs a driver(s) that he doesn't have
> and he may be out of luck.
--
"Bother," said Winnie the Pooh, as the ants devoured him.
/\___/\
/ /\ /\ \ Phil/Ant @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
| |o o| | Ant's Quality Foraged Links (AQFL): http://aqfl.net
\ _ / Nuke ANT from e-mail address: philpi@earthlink.netANT
( ) or ANTant@zimage.com
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on his home computer.

In news:V4SdnXe-cLh47ynXnZ2dnUVZ_gVi4p2d@earthlink.com,
Ant typed on Fri, 18 Sep 2009 22:57:57 -0700:
> So Windows 7 has the SSD drivers to be able to install. INTERESTING. I
> need to figure out if it is using SSD or a HDD (which type too). No
> wonder the disk size is tiny (7 GB!!).

No, being an SSD or not has nothing to do with it. As SSD works just
like regular hard drives as far as Windows is concern. What Barry is
talking about is whether it is a PATA or a SATA device? If the latter,
Windows XP doesn't have SATA drivers. So you have to find your own
before Windows will install correctly. Vista and Windows 7 *does* have
SATA drivers, so this is why they will install and why Windows XP
*doesn't*. This problem exists whether it uses a SSD or a mechancial
hard drive. As both drives come in both PATA and SATA versions.

> On 9/18/2009 4:25 PM PT, Barry Watzman typed:
>
>> NO, NO, NO.
>>
>> The problem is much simpler than that. XP can't access the
>> DESTINATION drive (in this case I think it's his SSD) because it's
>> not IDE.
>>
>> Look, you guys are pointing the finger at the USB CD, and I don't
>> think that's where the problem is. During an XP install, some
>> installation files are first copied from the install CD to the
>> destination drive (the SSD) and then, later, are READ FROM the SSD
>> to be installed or "expanded" into other files. And, also,
>> initially the XP install accesses the destination drive (SSD) via
>> the BIOS, but later in the install access switches to XP's internal
>> drivers, and unless other drivers have been added, XP has no
>> internal drivers for non-IDE hard drives.
>>
>> ***IF*** the SSD is "SATA", then getting the F6 sata driver may fix
>> the problem. Otherwise, he likely needs a driver(s) that he doesn't
>> have and he may be out of luck.

--
Bill
Windows 2000 SP4 (5.00.2195)
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC

Re: "As SSD works just like regular hard drives as far as Windows is
concern."

Not entirely true at the driver level. Some SSDs have either an IDE or
SATA connection, but some have interfaces other than either SATA or IDE
(PCI Express, for example). This matters to the OS at the driver level.

BillW50 wrote:
> In news:V4SdnXe-cLh47ynXnZ2dnUVZ_gVi4p2d@earthlink.com,
> Ant typed on Fri, 18 Sep 2009 22:57:57 -0700:
>> So Windows 7 has the SSD drivers to be able to install. INTERESTING. I
>> need to figure out if it is using SSD or a HDD (which type too). No
>> wonder the disk size is tiny (7 GB!!).
>
> No, being an SSD or not has nothing to do with it. As SSD works just
> like regular hard drives as far as Windows is concern. What Barry is
> talking about is whether it is a PATA or a SATA device? If the latter,
> Windows XP doesn't have SATA drivers. So you have to find your own
> before Windows will install correctly. Vista and Windows 7 *does* have
> SATA drivers, so this is why they will install and why Windows XP
> *doesn't*. This problem exists whether it uses a SSD or a mechancial
> hard drive. As both drives come in both PATA and SATA versions.
>
>> On 9/18/2009 4:25 PM PT, Barry Watzman typed:
>>
>>> NO, NO, NO.
>>>
>>> The problem is much simpler than that. XP can't access the
>>> DESTINATION drive (in this case I think it's his SSD) because it's
>>> not IDE.
>>>
>>> Look, you guys are pointing the finger at the USB CD, and I don't
>>> think that's where the problem is. During an XP install, some
>>> installation files are first copied from the install CD to the
>>> destination drive (the SSD) and then, later, are READ FROM the SSD
>>> to be installed or "expanded" into other files. And, also,
>>> initially the XP install accesses the destination drive (SSD) via
>>> the BIOS, but later in the install access switches to XP's internal
>>> drivers, and unless other drivers have been added, XP has no
>>> internal drivers for non-IDE hard drives.
>>>
>>> ***IF*** the SSD is "SATA", then getting the F6 sata driver may fix
>>> the problem. Otherwise, he likely needs a driver(s) that he doesn't
>>> have and he may be out of luck.
>

In news:4AB4C8EE.8040506@neo.rr.com,
Barry Watzman typed on Sat, 19 Sep 2009 08:05:02 -0400:
> Re: "As SSD works just like regular hard drives as far as Windows is
> concern."
>
> Not entirely true at the driver level. Some SSDs have either an IDE
> or SATA connection, but some have interfaces other than either SATA
> or IDE (PCI Express, for example). This matters to the OS at the
> driver level.

I have seen PCI Express slot and many argue that Asus' PCI Express slot
is really a Flash_Con slot and not really a PCI Express. Even though it
looks just like one. But regardless, the Celeron models tends to be IDE
(aka PATA). While the Atom models tends to be SATA type. At least with
Asus models anyway. So while I can't disagree with you, I haven't seen
any that weren't either PATA (IDE) or SATA yet, regardless what type of
slot they use.

--
Bill
Windows 2000 SP4 (5.00.2195)
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC

Happy Oyster wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 22:31:07 -0700, Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>
>> I am trying to install Windows XP cleanly onto an used Dell Inspiron
>> Mini (no idea what model it is; do not have its boxes, manuals, discs,
>> etc.), but its installation keeps failing at cdrom0\i386\asms. The error
>> said it cannot find it, but it is there on the CDs (tried slipstreamed
>> SP2 and SP3, other brands, other burns from other software and drives,
>> etc.). I have to install from an external CD/DVD drive.
>
> The external drive depends on USB.
>
> Win XP is plain ****, mildly put. I fought with it for several weeks. The
> problem is HOW the partitions are organized. The tools for Windows are too
> ****ed stupid to handle all that. The only way I succeeded in the end was to use
> a Linux installation DVD and SUPER-GRUB, a CD for working on the MBR *AND* for
> booting the machine.
>
> Did you ever work a bit with Linux? Do you have a SuSE installation DVD?
>
> How big is the HDD of your machine? What type is it? SSD, IDE, SATA?
> How much RAM has your computer?

If the partition table on any hard drive is ever ever a problem, it is
child's play to wipe it out and get Windows XP to think that the hard
drive is brand new.

To clear the partition table, use any one of:
Ranish (old-style DOS prompt)
CopyWipe
Almost any manufacturer's hard drive diagnostic
AutoClave
Ultimate boot disk

Not sure why one would need to fight a Windows install problem if it had
to do with existing partitions. Or maybe I misunderstood why XP is
"plain ****." It's come a long way since the release of the classic XP
CD... Ben Myers

On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:27:44 -0400, Ben Myers <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote:

>Not sure why one would need to fight a Windows install problem if it had
>to do with existing partitions.

One of the problems is that XP rapes the first partition. I had to use a Linux
DVD to boot and to change the first partition to be of some off Unix type. THIS
XP did not touch and in the first run of the installation copied its stuff to
the second partition where it has to be. Making the first partition invisible
does not work as then XP thinks it is in the first and messes up its boot record
THE WRONG WAY.

First step:

To handle the HDD (has serial ATA) partition the HDD and format the partitions
with Linux. THAT WORKS.


Second step:

Change the type of those partitions XP has to keep its fingers off to some wierd
Unix type.


Third step:

As XP is ****ed stupid, IF you also want a Linux on the machine, install that as
the first OS. THEN install Win XP. This way you can start (with the help of a
boot CD/DVD (like Super-GRUB) into a working system to check the other
partitions, etc.


Fourth step:

XP will mess up the MBR, so with the Linux DVD to boot, use GRUB and get the MBR
stuff back to order.

BUT to get that right, the partition types of "wierd Unix" must be set back to
the right values BEFORE you can work on GRUB.

If you messed up something, then a complete Linux installation will be the last
step.


Problems of the XP installer are that it messes up with partitions, reboot, etc.

To get around this, use a Super-GRUB CD and for doing the second part of the XP
install (which is from HDD): use the CD to boot from the Win XP partition.

This works with serial ATA.


There are TWO CDs which accompany the netbooks. One is the "recovery CD" with
the pure OS (in a miserable state), the other is for the additions, drivers,
etc. That one must be installed after XP is installed.

I called a LG tech suppport because I feared that the OS CD already contains
some special stuff for the machine. But I was told that I could use a totally
neutral XP installation CD because all the specific stuff is on the second CD.

Without the second CD, I'm afraid, one doesn't get very far: It contains the
drivers for the chipsets and without these the machine is cut off even from the
basic hardware...

Aribert Deckers
--
Charles Berliner: Geschichte der Annaëlle

http://www.ariplex.com/ama/ama_anna.htm

In news:b8jab554p21d8ou81sb63mmahr1npc2v93@4ax.com,
Happy Oyster typed on Sat, 19 Sep 2009 23:49:38 +0200:
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:27:44 -0400, Ben Myers <ben_myers@charter.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Not sure why one would need to fight a Windows install problem if it
>> had to do with existing partitions.
>
> One of the problems is that XP rapes the first partition.

It only changes the first active partition. That could be one of four
partitions and it doesn't have to be the first one (with Vista and
Windows 7, it is zillions of partitions). And any Linux partition using
ext2/3, Windows won't touch it. Aribert doesn't even know this.
Otherwise he wouldn't be experiencing any of this.

> I had to
> use a Linux DVD to boot and to change the first partition to be of
> some off Unix type. THIS XP did not touch and in the first run of the
> installation copied its stuff to the second partition where it has to
> be. Making the first partition invisible does not work as then XP
> thinks it is in the first and messes up its boot record THE WRONG WAY.
>
> First step:
>
> To handle the HDD (has serial ATA) partition the HDD and format the
> partitions with Linux. THAT WORKS.
>
>
> Second step:
>
> Change the type of those partitions XP has to keep its fingers off to
> some wierd Unix type.
>
>
> Third step:
>
> As XP is ****ed stupid, IF you also want a Linux on the machine,
> install that as the first OS. THEN install Win XP. This way you can
> start (with the help of a boot CD/DVD (like Super-GRUB) into a
> working system to check the other partitions, etc.
>
>
> Fourth step:
>
> XP will mess up the MBR, so with the Linux DVD to boot, use GRUB and
> get the MBR stuff back to order.
>
> BUT to get that right, the partition types of "wierd Unix" must be
> set back to the right values BEFORE you can work on GRUB.
>
> If you messed up something, then a complete Linux installation will
> be the last step.
>
>
> Problems of the XP installer are that it messes up with partitions,
> reboot, etc.
>
> To get around this, use a Super-GRUB CD and for doing the second part
> of the XP install (which is from HDD): use the CD to boot from the
> Win XP partition.
>
> This works with serial ATA.
>
>
> There are TWO CDs which accompany the netbooks. One is the "recovery
> CD" with the pure OS (in a miserable state), the other is for the
> additions, drivers, etc. That one must be installed after XP is
> installed.
>
> I called a LG tech suppport because I feared that the OS CD already
> contains some special stuff for the machine. But I was told that I
> could use a totally neutral XP installation CD because all the
> specific stuff is on the second CD.
>
> Without the second CD, I'm afraid, one doesn't get very far: It
> contains the drivers for the chipsets and without these the machine
> is cut off even from the basic hardware...

And if you boot up Ubuntu Live and not even touching the hard drive at
all, Ubuntu modifies your Windows partition (happened to me three times
and to somebody else). And when you install Linux after Windows it
screws up your Windows installation.

But what Aribert won't tell you is that UNIX/Linux isn't very useful at
all. Nor is the security very good at all. Rootkits came out first from
the Unix/Linux world and not from the Windows world (by about 15 years).
Some distros doesn't even have a firewall. And Linux doesn't have a
100th of the applications that Windows has. No, Aribert won't tell you
any of this stuff. Why? Because he is afraid too. <grin>

--
Bill
Windows 2000 SP4 (5.00.2195)
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC

My post was sarcastic, not serious. But I don't entirely accept your
far too serious answer. Obviously the form factor has to fit (in some
cases, only the electrical form factor). Besides, you answer:

"it seems to be an 1.8-inch IDE SSD"

suggests that the "SSD" is somehow itself "1.8" and not a replacement
for a 1.8" [rotating platter drive].



Happy Oyster wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 19:28:37 -0400, Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "an 1.8-inch IDE SSD"
>>
>> Gee, I didn't know SSD's had "inches"
>
> Yes, they are replacements for drives with moving parts (rotating discs), so
> they must have the same interface and the same "form factor".

I donlt know that there is such a thing as an "SSD" driver. And, in any
case, drivers are not for the drive itself, they are for the drive
interface port. Vista and Windows 7 have drivers that will work for
SATA ports of most chipsets. Some SSDs use an interface that is neither
SATA nor IDE (I've seen at least some that are PCI Express). I don't
know what the full complement of drivers is for the system drive
(containing the OS) in Windows 7 (or Vista), but the real point was that
XP ONLY had such drivers built-in for IDE drives: Among the interfaces
that it did not support with BUILT-IN drivers were: SATA, SCSI, RAID,
USB, Firewire, PCI-Express. There is a mechanism for adding such
drivers (the so-called "F6 Driver"), but it requires a floppy disk
drive, and absent BIOS emulation support (which most modern motherboards
and laptops do have, but which older ones don't) the floppy disk has to
be "real" and not USB (again, most modern systems, however, do support
USB emulation, and, also in many cases, SATA emulation).

Win7 and Vista definitely has SATA drivers built in. Not sure about any
other versions, but quite possibly).


Ant wrote:
> So Windows 7 has the SSD drivers to be able to install. INTERESTING. I
> need to figure out if it is using SSD or a HDD (which type too). No
> wonder the disk size is tiny (7 GB!!).
>
>
> On 9/18/2009 4:25 PM PT, Barry Watzman typed:
>
>> NO, NO, NO.
>>
>> The problem is much simpler than that. XP can't access the
>> DESTINATION drive (in this case I think it's his SSD) because it's not
>> IDE.
>>
>> Look, you guys are pointing the finger at the USB CD, and I don't
>> think that's where the problem is. During an XP install, some
>> installation files are first copied from the install CD to the
>> destination drive (the SSD) and then, later, are READ FROM the SSD to
>> be installed or "expanded" into other files. And, also, initially the
>> XP install accesses the destination drive (SSD) via the BIOS, but
>> later in the install access switches to XP's internal drivers, and
>> unless other drivers have been added, XP has no internal drivers for
>> non-IDE hard drives.
>>
>> ***IF*** the SSD is "SATA", then getting the F6 sata driver may fix
>> the problem. Otherwise, he likely needs a driver(s) that he doesn't
>> have and he may be out of luck.

In news:h93me1$an5$1@news.eternal-september.org,
Barry Watzman typed on Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:36:47 -0400:
> ... but it requires a
> floppy disk drive, and absent BIOS emulation support (which most
> modern motherboards and laptops do have, but which older ones don't)
> the floppy disk has to be "real" and not USB (again, most modern
> systems, however, do support USB emulation, and, also in many cases,
> SATA emulation)...

Just to be clear... virtually all modern day BIOS *will* totally accept
USB floppy drives as *real* floppy drives. Same is true of USB hard
drives and optical drives as well. That doesn't mean the OS will though.
As that is totally different.

--
Bill
Windows 2000 SP4 (5.00.2195)
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC

On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:29:58 -0400, Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com>
wrote:

>My post was sarcastic, not serious. But I don't entirely accept your
>far too serious answer. Obviously the form factor has to fit (in some
>cases, only the electrical form factor). Besides, you answer:
>
>"it seems to be an 1.8-inch IDE SSD"
>
>suggests that the "SSD" is somehow itself "1.8" and not a replacement
>for a 1.8" [rotating platter drive].

It is what the name says: an SSD with an 1.8-inch form factor and IDE interface.
"1.8 inch" is a form factor of mechanical HDDs.
--
The big "gmt"-scam

http://www.ariplex.com/ama/ama_gmt1.htm

On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 17:22:42 -0500, "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:

>In news:b8jab554p21d8ou81sb63mmahr1npc2v93@4ax.com,
>Happy Oyster typed on Sat, 19 Sep 2009 23:49:38 +0200:
>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:27:44 -0400, Ben Myers <ben_myers@charter.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure why one would need to fight a Windows install problem if it
>>> had to do with existing partitions.
>>
>> One of the problems is that XP rapes the first partition.
>
>It only changes the first active partition. That could be one of four
>partitions and it doesn't have to be the first one (with Vista and
>Windows 7, it is zillions of partitions). And any Linux partition using
>ext2/3, Windows won't touch it. Aribert doesn't even know this.
>Otherwise he wouldn't be experiencing any of this.

I don't give a **** about which type of partitions IN SPECIAL XP can handle. I
chose a very strange one because I did not want to have to try again.

Also, I do not discuss with XP. I roast it.


>> I had to
>> use a Linux DVD to boot and to change the first partition to be of
>> some off Unix type. THIS XP did not touch and in the first run of the
>> installation copied its stuff to the second partition where it has to
>> be. Making the first partition invisible does not work as then XP
>> thinks it is in the first and messes up its boot record THE WRONG WAY.
>>
>> First step:
>>
>> To handle the HDD (has serial ATA) partition the HDD and format the
>> partitions with Linux. THAT WORKS.
>>
>>
>> Second step:
>>
>> Change the type of those partitions XP has to keep its fingers off to
>> some wierd Unix type.
>>
>>
>> Third step:
>>
>> As XP is ****ed stupid, IF you also want a Linux on the machine,
>> install that as the first OS. THEN install Win XP. This way you can
>> start (with the help of a boot CD/DVD (like Super-GRUB) into a
>> working system to check the other partitions, etc.
>>
>>
>> Fourth step:
>>
>> XP will mess up the MBR, so with the Linux DVD to boot, use GRUB and
>> get the MBR stuff back to order.
>>
>> BUT to get that right, the partition types of "wierd Unix" must be
>> set back to the right values BEFORE you can work on GRUB.
>>
>> If you messed up something, then a complete Linux installation will
>> be the last step.
>>
>>
>> Problems of the XP installer are that it messes up with partitions,
>> reboot, etc.
>>
>> To get around this, use a Super-GRUB CD and for doing the second part
>> of the XP install (which is from HDD): use the CD to boot from the
>> Win XP partition.
>>
>> This works with serial ATA.
>>
>>
>> There are TWO CDs which accompany the netbooks. One is the "recovery
>> CD" with the pure OS (in a miserable state), the other is for the
>> additions, drivers, etc. That one must be installed after XP is
>> installed.
>>
>> I called a LG tech suppport because I feared that the OS CD already
>> contains some special stuff for the machine. But I was told that I
>> could use a totally neutral XP installation CD because all the
>> specific stuff is on the second CD.
>>
>> Without the second CD, I'm afraid, one doesn't get very far: It
>> contains the drivers for the chipsets and without these the machine
>> is cut off even from the basic hardware...
>
>And if you boot up Ubuntu Live and not even touching the hard drive at
>all, Ubuntu modifies your Windows partition (happened to me three times
>and to somebody else). And when you install Linux after Windows it
>screws up your Windows installation.
>
>But what Aribert won't tell you is that UNIX/Linux isn't very useful at
>all. Nor is the security very good at all. Rootkits came out first from
>the Unix/Linux world and not from the Windows world (by about 15 years).
>Some distros doesn't even have a firewall. And Linux doesn't have a
>100th of the applications that Windows has. No, Aribert won't tell you
>any of this stuff. Why? Because he is afraid too. <grin>
--
The big "gmt"-scam

http://www.ariplex.com/ama/ama_gmt1.htm

In news:lutab5t3t2e4vl7b9aahfpo5hqe4ktc462@4ax.com,
Happy Oyster typed on Sun, 20 Sep 2009 02:33:27 +0200:
> I don't give a **** about which type of partitions IN SPECIAL XP can
> handle. I chose a very strange one because I did not want to have to
> try again.
>
> Also, I do not discuss with XP. I roast it.

Yes we know Aribert! And I *only* had known you for a little over a
decade. <vbg>

--
Bill
Windows 2000 SP4 (5.00.2195)
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC