New hard drive issue... PLEASE HELP

[mmq2004]

i recently purchased a segate 250gb internal hdd (16mb cache version)...

so i go plug it in and decide to format it with the highly reliable Gparted liveCD, no problems there i get my 5x20Gb and 3x50gb partitions set out in NTFS.

all pleasad and wanting to fill up the new drive with the old drive's stuff i go into windows (as the new drive's a slave) and here i hit a brick wall...

B***dy windows, it won't recognise all the partitions!

it recognised the 5x20gb partitions but only 1 out of the 3 50gb partitions.

puzzeld, i now open up paragon partition manager 8 and that thing confuses me further, this is why...

as some of you will know, partition manager has two main views 'Disk view' and 'volume explorer'

In Disk View the prog is telling me that the total size is 127gb!!! and it doesn't show the missing partitions at all.

i try the Volume Explorer view and here the prog is telling me something else !!!! it's recognising the correct total size of 232gb (as 250gb i know i wont get) BUT it still isn't telling me what happened to the other partitions !?!?!?!

Im stumped, PLEASE PLEASE somebody help.

[vehelpfulguy]

What operating system ?

Why do you need 8 different partitions on the drive ?

[vehelpfulguy]

Is this your problem.

Do you need 48 bit LBA ?

http://www.largeharddrivesupport.windowsreinst all.com/index.htm

[mmq2004]

to vehelpfulguy:
firstly thnx for a very prompt reply. i chose more partitions as i think its safer, but then again im not as experienced maybe u can shed some light on this :-)

secondly the hard-drive im replacing is a maxtor 200gb and there were no problems recognising it when it was working, now its starting to get bad sectors..hence move to seagate :-)

any more suggestions?

[rojash]

I can't really imagine any reason why five partitions would be safer - it will certainly waste a lot of disk space. On a disk of that size I would usually have two partitions (just because I find it convenient in organisational terms).

[Kerplunk]

You should never answer a question with a question.
veunhelpfulguy is at it again !!

[kempie]

Of course you should answer a question with a question if more information is required to reach a conclusion.

Do you not agree?

[mmq2004]

i agree in some cases, including my case..

but i still haven't got anything concrete to go by...

[rojash]

I don't know what this vendetta is that kerplunk seems to have against VHG. I agree that sometimes his/her answers can be a bit brusque (like mine), but of course if people wnat a comprehensive answer, they need to post comprehensive details, and if they don't, it makes sense to ask them fro more information.

mmq2004, my advice to you is. Don;t bother about this problem, as there is no possible benefit in the configuration you are trying to implement. Just repartition the disk as one or two volumes.

[vehelpfulguy]

kerplunk, you really are a prat.

If you cant add anything useful go off to the CBeebies site which is more at your level.

[dodgyshirt]

Insults aside, take a look at this page which could explain your problem.

http://maxtor.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/maxtor.cfg/ php/enduser/olh_adp.php?p_faqid=960

[mmq2004]

dodgyshirt: THANKYOU THANKYOU

Exactly what i wanted. Windows XP SP1+ is supposed to support large drive natively but htis is not the case as i have SP2.

i also have an intel board and its the application accelerator which solved the problem, i looked further into this and apparently the windos XP large drive driver is 'dodgy' and that's why intel had to intervene and they made a driver which not only makes the system recognise the full capacity but also makes the DVDRW drives write faster (and ive tried it, it works)

anyway many thanks to theanswerbank members, beats any tecchy forum by miles (i'm saying this cus after extensive forum surfing this is the only place ive had answers which worrk ! )