Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (
More info?)
"kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:8mtv21pai4ij6cvk3qrpsloq81p77hraog@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 02:02:55 GMT, "John E. Carty"
> <jecarty@NOSPAMsbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>>but Fdisk being DOS based, does it recognise large drives, say 160gb?
>>>
>>> no it doesn't recognize them as 160GB, it recognizes them as
>>> segments of 64MB, so a pseudo-160GB drive (~ 150GB) would
>>> show up as roughly (150 - 64 - 64 = ) 22 GB, but yes, it'll
>>> work on large drives if you keep that issue in mind.
>>
>>
>>The latest version of fdisk will easily recognize a 160GB drive and
>>correctly report its size, it was the older (Win98) version that displayed
>>partition sizes over 64GB incorrectly, but could still be used as long as
>>you used percentages instead of MB's to create your partitions. Fdisk can
>>create partitions up to 512 GB's
>>
>
>
> Can I have a link to that? I was once aware of the fix for
>> 64GB apparently, as I have it archived several times but
> checking MS's 'site it apparently doesn't support 48bit LBA,
> drives over 137GB,
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;263044
>
> Is there yet another patch or are they being conservative
> when they claim no support beyond 137GB? I know I've used
> FDISK to partition larger drives but don't recall when it
> did report sizes correctly so much as when it didn't (which
> could've just been due to an old copy of FDISK instead of
> the more recent).
I know the WinMe version I use correctly shows the drive/partition sizes of
both my drives which are larger then 137GB, and here is where Microsoft
states it has a partition creation limit of 512GB's
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;280737