Hiya Ian,

30-Oct-99 12:25:00, Ian Moote wrote to DAVE DAVIDSON
          Subject: M$ "screw you" FAT32
 DD>> IM>> I've got a utility here that I wrote for DOS which will
 DD>> blast IM>> the entire MBR off the drive. Send me your E-Mail
 DD>> address.
 IM> DD>
 DD>> Can ya send it to _ME_ as well. I'm the one Andy is trying to
 DD>> help.

 IM> On its way. I nearly missed this -- it was addressed to Andy. [:)

 I got it. Unfortunatly, I'm not at home, and won't be until sometime next
 weekend, so it will be a while before I can try it. Thanks for sending it.

 DD>> The two drives currently in that machine in question are Segate
 DD>> 4.3GB and a Western Digital 2.5GB.

 IM> Be _very_ careful! If you clear the wrong MBR then you're SNAFU'd.
 IM> I'll also send you another two utilities to save and restore your
 IM> MBR's in case you accidentally do the wrong one.

 Can ya 'splain the snafu'd part? It's my understanding that if the MBR is
 lost or corrupted, using FDISK with the /MBR switch, would re-create it.
 Is this wrong? Not trying to be a smart a**, I really don't know that much
 about hard drive dynamics.

 IM> According to Andy's report, FDisk _isn't_ deleting the partitions.
 IM> According to him, when you reboot the FAT32 partition is still
 IM> there. So, is is still there when you reboot?

 Yes. When I run the OS/2 install disks and it gets to FDISK, it shows a
 Type B partition, with the only options available is to delete the
 partition. When I delete it and exit FDISK, the partition doesn't appear
 to be there. However, upon re-booting, it's there again.

 DD>> AR>>> He said he started out by deleting _ALL_ WIN98 stuff, then
 DD>> AR>>> running Seagate's Low Level Format.
 IM> DD>
 DD>> IM>> I haven't used the latest incarnation of SGATFMT*; does it
 DD>> have IM>> a "non-destructive format" option that was used?
 IM> DD>
 DD>> The Seagate format utility I used was destructive. There were at
 DD>> least two warnings I had to acknowlege before it would actually
 DD>> start the process, which with the 10.3GB drive, took almost 12
 DD>> hours!

 IM> Really! Gee, I'd like to get my hands on this drive for an
 IM> afternoon.

 Keep talking like that, and you just might. 

 DD>> AR>>> In typical M$ user fashion he repeats those last steps 1/2
 DD>> a AR>>> dozen times until he become frustrated and blames OS/2,
 DD>> then AR>>> re-installs Win98.
 IM> DD>
 DD>> Correction.... I didn't _blame_ OS/2, I simply stated it wouldn't
 DD>> load on my system.

 IM> What!? [8o You mean Andy is colouring his report of your problem
 IM> which his own preconceptions/assumptions!? I'm shocked! [;*)

 Nah, we know Andy wouldn't do anything like that. I believe he's getting
 as frustrated as I am, at the failed attempts. It's difficult for him or
 anyone else for that matter, to diagnose my problem via long distance.

 DD>> Since I've successfully loaded OS/2 on other machines I had,
 DD>> there obviously has to be something else causing the problem. The
 DD>> question is what!

 IM> Andy reported that FDisk was not removing the FAT32 partition.
 IM> You're the one running the software, does FDisk say that the
 IM> partition is still there or not? How much free space is it
 IM> reporting?

  It's only showing half the HD or around 2GB. I don't remember the exact
  numbers, but it is weird! When the Type B partition is _deleted_ by
  FDISK, OS/2 reports there's not enough room to load Boot Manager or
  anything else.

 DD>> IM>> Sounds like he's in Micro$oft's target market.
 IM> DD>
 DD>> AR>>> Personally I'm getting very tired of hearing him complain
 DD>> AR>>> about OS/2 not installing and how wonderful the M$ AR>>>
 DD>> installation is.
 IM> DD>
 DD>> Not how wonderful MS is just the fact that is does install easier
 DD>> that OS/2 does, even on a "perfect" system.

 IM> What?! [8o You mean Andy is colouring his report of your
 IM> situation!? I'm shocked! [;*) Andy seems to be a very knowledgable
 IM> fellow, but he seems to take it very personal if you aren't
 IM> running the same hardware and software in exactly the way that he
 IM> is.

  Well, maybe.... The machine I'm attempting to install OS/2 on is an
  AMD K6/2-350, PC-100 MB, Award PnP Bios (with the latest flash applied),
  the two HD's mentioned earlier, Soundblaster 16 Sound card, Internal
  ZIP drive and Internal USR Sportster modems (real 56k modems), NEC
  CD-Rom and an S3 video with 4MB onboard and 96MB PC-100 RAM. I'm building
  another machine from scratch also for OS/2, with a Soyo MB, with a Pentium
  120 CPU. That's the machine I wanted to use the 10.3GB Seagate HD in.

  As I mentioned in a previous post, each of the three drives discussed,
  4.3GB Seagate, 2.5 WD and 10.3GB Seagate were installed as a single drive
  while trying to load OS/2, as well as being in a Master/Slave
  configuration. Each with the same results. I spent almost 24 hours trying
  to get OS/2 loaded on that machine.

 IM> There is no such thing as a "perfect" system. In my experience
 IM> Windows 9x installs very well on an "acceptable" system. (That's
 IM> "acceptable" from the point of view of the average, non-technical
 IM> consumer. No offense intended.) It even installs very well on a
 IM> fairly low-quality system. OS/2 does not seem to install very well
 IM> on many "acceptable" systems, but does install very well on a
 IM> system of higher quality.

  Yes, I understand that. With the exception of the HP CD-RW units I have,
  one internal and one external, everything I have is supported by basic
  OS/2 or in the updated drivers or fixpaks.
  The machine currently running the BBS under WIN98 SE, is an AMD K6/2-450
  with 128MB Ram.

 DD>> That I do... I've always appreciated your friendship, help and
 DD>> advice. I think you know that as well.

 IM> You're a very easy-going fellow, Dave! If a friend of mine had
 IM> used me in public the way he did you, he wouldn't be my friend for
 IM> very long. OTOH, if it doesn't bother you then you have a very
 IM> complementary relationship.

  Andy & I have known each other since 1993, when we were both involved in
  beta testing Terminate, with a little "jabbing" at each other since.

 DD>> IM>> Once he _does_ get it installed, who do you think he's going
 DD>> to IM>> call whenever he has a problem with his OS/2 system? [:)
 IM> DD>
 DD>> Obviously, I'll call Andy, 

 IM> What are friends for? [:)

 Hehehehe, my sentiments exactly!

 DD>> The reason for wanting to install OS/2 is simple.... The BBS
 DD>> System I'm using simply isn't up to the task I want to do with a
 DD>> BBS. AdeptXBBS however, is.

 IM> Who told you that? Andy!? Have you actually _seen_ Adept running?
 IM> If not, I think you should get yourself over to Andy's and have
 IM> him give you a demonstration, if he hasn't already.

 No, I was exposed to OS/2 before I met Andy, and a few local Sysop's used
 to run Adept. Now, I'm the only system left in my local area.

 IM> I'm using Adept. So far, if I had to describe it in one word that
 IM> word would be "fantastic", but that doesn't mean that it's ideal
 IM> for you.

 IM> JOOC, what BBS are you using now and what are the shortcomings?

  Well, believe it or not, my _main_ system is Terminate's HOST (I call it
  TerHOST), running under Intermail, with Allfix and Termail. Prior to
  that, I ran Wildcat, ending with the 4.20 Multi line system. I sold my
  complete WC system several months ago. I bought WC4.20M again, via the
  Forsale echo for $10.00, so I have it setup as well, with Intermail,
  Wildmail, Allfix and Golded. I've been running BBS's since 1988.

 DD>> That's one of the reasons why the frustration level rose so high.
 DD>> Unless I'm not doing something properly, I've followed _all_ the
 DD>> suggestions and instructions provided.

 IM> You may not be doing anything wrong at all. You may just have a
 IM> weird problem. Try the utility.

  I'll try it as soon as I get back home. Thanks,


 Have a GREAT one!

 Dave Davidson                        dad50@primary.net
                                      dad500@aol.com

--- Terminate 5.00/Pro*at : _Registered_ _User_ : since 03/93!