Is running the disk checker in the GUI mode (right_click the
drive->Properties->Tools->Error-checking) the same as running CHKDSK in a
DOS box?

I ran the GUI mode (including Scan_for_and_attempt_recovery_of_bad_sectors)
and got no errors on an external USB drive, but running CHKDSK in a DOS box
found errors. I was having problems accessing files on the drive.

==
C:\Documents and Settings\Aloke>chkdsk i: /x /f /r
The type of the file system is FAT32.
Volume BACKUP created 9/27/2003 2:33 PM
Volume Serial Number is 196B-13E6
Windows is verifying files and folders...
Windows replaced bad clusters in file \Archana PC\Archana on
1_16_06\01160005.GHS of name (null).
Windows replaced bad clusters in file \new PC\a.zip of name (null).
File and folder verification is complete.
Windows is verifying free space...
Free space verification is complete.
Windows has made corrections to the file system.
245,051,840 KB total disk space.
18,208 KB in 87 hidden files.
154,592 KB in 4,793 folders.
103,105,472 KB in 58,386 files.
96 KB in bad sectors.
141,773,440 KB are available.

32,768 bytes in each allocation unit.
7,657,870 total allocation units on disk.
4,430,420 allocation units available on disk.
==

What gives? Why didn't the GUI method find and fix the problems?

--
Aloke
----
to reply by e-mail remove 123 and change invalid to com

There should be no difference.

I am concerned about your drive, however. It does have physical damage
to it. It could be either a one time deal, or symptomatic of a failing
drive. You should backup ASAP. And start looking around for a
replacement.


Aloke Prasad wrote:
> Is running the disk checker in the GUI mode (right_click the
> drive->Properties->Tools->Error-checking) the same as running CHKDSK in a
> DOS box?
>
> I ran the GUI mode (including Scan_for_and_attempt_recovery_of_bad_sectors)
> and got no errors on an external USB drive, but running CHKDSK in a DOS box
> found errors. I was having problems accessing files on the drive.
>
> ==
> C:\Documents and Settings\Aloke>chkdsk i: /x /f /r
> The type of the file system is FAT32.
> Volume BACKUP created 9/27/2003 2:33 PM
> Volume Serial Number is 196B-13E6
> Windows is verifying files and folders...
> Windows replaced bad clusters in file \Archana PC\Archana on
> 1_16_06\01160005.GHS of name (null).
> Windows replaced bad clusters in file \new PC\a.zip of name (null).
> File and folder verification is complete.
> Windows is verifying free space...
> Free space verification is complete.
> Windows has made corrections to the file system.
> 245,051,840 KB total disk space.
> 18,208 KB in 87 hidden files.
> 154,592 KB in 4,793 folders.
> 103,105,472 KB in 58,386 files.
> 96 KB in bad sectors.
> 141,773,440 KB are available.
>
> 32,768 bytes in each allocation unit.
> 7,657,870 total allocation units on disk.
> 4,430,420 allocation units available on disk.
> ==
>
> What gives? Why didn't the GUI method find and fix the problems?
>
> --
> Aloke
> ----
> to reply by e-mail remove 123 and change invalid to com

> What gives? Why didn't the GUI method find and fix the problems?

1. In My Computer or Windows Explorer, right-click the volume you want to
check, and then click Properties.
2. On the Tools tab, click Check Now.
3. You need to check one or both boxes.

o To run Chkdsk by using the /f parameter, select the Automatically fix file
system errors check box, and then click Start.

o To run Chkdsk by using the /r parameter, select the Scan for and attempt
recovery of bad sectors check box, and then click Start.

When you check *no* boxes it's the same thing as running chkdsk with no
switches, without /f or /r. That is the same as running CHKDSK in read-only
mode.

Running CHKDSK in read-only mode is a waste of time and prone to not
accurately reporting information. CHKDSK in read-only mode does not
require a reboot and might report spurious errors because it cannot lock the
drive.

[[Chkdsk might not accurately report information in read-only mode.]]
From...
Chkdsk
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...b_tol_pwfd.asp

[[If you run chkdsk without the /f command-line option on an active
partition, it might report spurious errors because it cannot lock the
drive.]]

[[Using chkdsk with open files
If you specify the /f command-line option, chkdsk sends an error message if
there are open files on the disk. If you do not specify the /f command-line
option and open files exist, chkdsk might report lost allocation units on
the disk. This could happen if open files have not yet been recorded in the
file allocation table. If chkdsk reports the loss of a large number of
allocation units, consider repairing the disk.]]
From...
Chkdsk
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx

[[In read-only mode, CHKDSK quits before it completes all three phases if it
encounters errors in earlier phases, and CHKDSK is prone to falsely
reporting errors. For example, CHKDSK may report disk corruption if NTFS
happens to modify areas of a disk while CHKDSK is examining the disk. For
correct verification, a volume must be static, and the only way to guarantee
a static state is to lock the volume. CHKDSK locks the volume only if you
specify the /F switch (or the /R switch, which implies /F). You may need to
run CHKDSK more than once to get CHKDSK to complete all its passes
in read-only mode. ]]
From...
An Explanation of the New C and I Switches That Are Available to Use with
Chkdsk.exe
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;314835

To take advantage of all the Chkdsk parameters, use the command-line version
of Chkdsk.

Describes how to use the chkdsk command at the command line.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/h.../en/chkdsk.asp

Understanding what CHKDSK does
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/3148...23120121120120
From...
An explanation of the new /C and /I Switches that are available to use with
Chkdsk.exe
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314835

--
Hope this helps. Let us know.

Wes
MS-MVP Windows Shell/User

In news:(E-Mail Removed),
Aloke Prasad <(E-Mail Removed)> hunted and pecked:
> Is running the disk checker in the GUI mode (right_click the
> drive->Properties->Tools->Error-checking) the same as running CHKDSK in a
> DOS box?
>
> I ran the GUI mode (including
> Scan_for_and_attempt_recovery_of_bad_sectors) and got no errors on an
> external USB drive, but running CHKDSK in a DOS box found errors. I was
> having problems accessing files on the drive.
>
> ==
> C:\Documents and Settings\Aloke>chkdsk i: /x /f /r
> The type of the file system is FAT32.
> Volume BACKUP created 9/27/2003 2:33 PM
> Volume Serial Number is 196B-13E6
> Windows is verifying files and folders...
> Windows replaced bad clusters in file \Archana PC\Archana on
> 1_16_06\01160005.GHS of name (null).
> Windows replaced bad clusters in file \new PC\a.zip of name (null).
> File and folder verification is complete.
> Windows is verifying free space...
> Free space verification is complete.
> Windows has made corrections to the file system.
> 245,051,840 KB total disk space.
> 18,208 KB in 87 hidden files.
> 154,592 KB in 4,793 folders.
> 103,105,472 KB in 58,386 files.
> 96 KB in bad sectors.
> 141,773,440 KB are available.
>
> 32,768 bytes in each allocation unit.
> 7,657,870 total allocation units on disk.
> 4,430,420 allocation units available on disk.
> ==
>
> What gives? Why didn't the GUI method find and fix the problems?
>
> --
> Aloke
> ----
> to reply by e-mail remove 123 and change invalid to com

I contacted Maxtor, but their warranty on external drives is for only 1
year. They don't provide any low-level format utility for this drive.

I'll probably get a WD drive as a replacement.

When I had bad sectors on a Seagate internal drive, they replaced it without
even asking about the date of purchase.
--
Aloke
----
to reply by e-mail remove 123 and change invalid to com

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> There should be no difference.
>
> I am concerned about your drive, however. It does have physical damage
> to it. It could be either a one time deal, or symptomatic of a failing
> drive. You should backup ASAP. And start looking around for a
> replacement.
>
>
> Aloke Prasad wrote:
>> Is running the disk checker in the GUI mode (right_click the
>> drive->Properties->Tools->Error-checking) the same as running CHKDSK in a
>> DOS box?
>>
>> I ran the GUI mode (including
>> Scan_for_and_attempt_recovery_of_bad_sectors)
>> and got no errors on an external USB drive, but running CHKDSK in a DOS
>> box
>> found errors. I was having problems accessing files on the drive.
>>
>> ==
>> C:\Documents and Settings\Aloke>chkdsk i: /x /f /r
>> The type of the file system is FAT32.
>> Volume BACKUP created 9/27/2003 2:33 PM
>> Volume Serial Number is 196B-13E6
>> Windows is verifying files and folders...
>> Windows replaced bad clusters in file \Archana PC\Archana on
>> 1_16_06\01160005.GHS of name (null).
>> Windows replaced bad clusters in file \new PC\a.zip of name (null).
>> File and folder verification is complete.
>> Windows is verifying free space...
>> Free space verification is complete.
>> Windows has made corrections to the file system.
>> 245,051,840 KB total disk space.
>> 18,208 KB in 87 hidden files.
>> 154,592 KB in 4,793 folders.
>> 103,105,472 KB in 58,386 files.
>> 96 KB in bad sectors.
>> 141,773,440 KB are available.
>>
>> 32,768 bytes in each allocation unit.
>> 7,657,870 total allocation units on disk.
>> 4,430,420 allocation units available on disk.
>> ==
>>
>> What gives? Why didn't the GUI method find and fix the problems?
>>
>> --
>> Aloke
>> ----
>> to reply by e-mail remove 123 and change invalid to com
>

I did check the 2nd box (Scan_for_and_attempt_recovery_of_bad_sectors) in
the GUI. Thus my puzzlement about why that did not catch the errors (which
were there for sure). The surface scan took place because it took almost 30
min for the GUI check (and the subsequent CHKDSK check).
--
Aloke
----
to reply by e-mail remove 123 and change invalid to com


"Wesley Vogel" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ejHg$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> What gives? Why didn't the GUI method find and fix the problems?
>
> 1. In My Computer or Windows Explorer, right-click the volume you want to
> check, and then click Properties.
> 2. On the Tools tab, click Check Now.
> 3. You need to check one or both boxes.
>
> o To run Chkdsk by using the /f parameter, select the Automatically fix
> file
> system errors check box, and then click Start.
>
> o To run Chkdsk by using the /r parameter, select the Scan for and attempt
> recovery of bad sectors check box, and then click Start.
>
> When you check *no* boxes it's the same thing as running chkdsk with no
> switches, without /f or /r. That is the same as running CHKDSK in
> read-only
> mode.
>
> Running CHKDSK in read-only mode is a waste of time and prone to not
> accurately reporting information. CHKDSK in read-only mode does not
> require a reboot and might report spurious errors because it cannot lock
> the
> drive.
>
> [[Chkdsk might not accurately report information in read-only mode.]]
> From...
> Chkdsk
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...b_tol_pwfd.asp
>
> [[If you run chkdsk without the /f command-line option on an active
> partition, it might report spurious errors because it cannot lock the
> drive.]]
>
> [[Using chkdsk with open files
> If you specify the /f command-line option, chkdsk sends an error message
> if
> there are open files on the disk. If you do not specify the /f
> command-line
> option and open files exist, chkdsk might report lost allocation units on
> the disk. This could happen if open files have not yet been recorded in
> the
> file allocation table. If chkdsk reports the loss of a large number of
> allocation units, consider repairing the disk.]]
> From...
> Chkdsk
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx
>
> [[In read-only mode, CHKDSK quits before it completes all three phases if
> it
> encounters errors in earlier phases, and CHKDSK is prone to falsely
> reporting errors. For example, CHKDSK may report disk corruption if NTFS
> happens to modify areas of a disk while CHKDSK is examining the disk. For
> correct verification, a volume must be static, and the only way to
> guarantee
> a static state is to lock the volume. CHKDSK locks the volume only if you
> specify the /F switch (or the /R switch, which implies /F). You may need
> to
> run CHKDSK more than once to get CHKDSK to complete all its passes
> in read-only mode. ]]
> From...
> An Explanation of the New C and I Switches That Are Available to Use with
> Chkdsk.exe
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;314835
>
> To take advantage of all the Chkdsk parameters, use the command-line
> version
> of Chkdsk.
>
> Describes how to use the chkdsk command at the command line.
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/h.../en/chkdsk.asp
>
> Understanding what CHKDSK does
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/3148...23120121120120
> From...
> An explanation of the new /C and /I Switches that are available to use
> with
> Chkdsk.exe
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314835
>
> --
> Hope this helps. Let us know.
>
> Wes
> MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
>
> In news:(E-Mail Removed),
> Aloke Prasad <(E-Mail Removed)> hunted and pecked:
>> Is running the disk checker in the GUI mode (right_click the
>> drive->Properties->Tools->Error-checking) the same as running CHKDSK in a
>> DOS box?
>>
>> I ran the GUI mode (including
>> Scan_for_and_attempt_recovery_of_bad_sectors) and got no errors on an
>> external USB drive, but running CHKDSK in a DOS box found errors. I was
>> having problems accessing files on the drive.
>>
>> ==
>> C:\Documents and Settings\Aloke>chkdsk i: /x /f /r
>> The type of the file system is FAT32.
>> Volume BACKUP created 9/27/2003 2:33 PM
>> Volume Serial Number is 196B-13E6
>> Windows is verifying files and folders...
>> Windows replaced bad clusters in file \Archana PC\Archana on
>> 1_16_06\01160005.GHS of name (null).
>> Windows replaced bad clusters in file \new PC\a.zip of name (null).
>> File and folder verification is complete.
>> Windows is verifying free space...
>> Free space verification is complete.
>> Windows has made corrections to the file system.
>> 245,051,840 KB total disk space.
>> 18,208 KB in 87 hidden files.
>> 154,592 KB in 4,793 folders.
>> 103,105,472 KB in 58,386 files.
>> 96 KB in bad sectors.
>> 141,773,440 KB are available.
>>
>> 32,768 bytes in each allocation unit.
>> 7,657,870 total allocation units on disk.
>> 4,430,420 allocation units available on disk.
>> ==
>>
>> What gives? Why didn't the GUI method find and fix the problems?
>>
>> --
>> Aloke
>> ----
>> to reply by e-mail remove 123 and change invalid to com
>

I think it better under DOS. I know if Scandisk fails and has an error that
scandisk can't complete the scan and fix errors, then I run Command prompt,
type the drive letter, and CHKDSK /r and it finds and fixes the problems.
Sometimes it will do it under XP in a DOS window, other times it asks if it
can reboot and do it during the bootup routine.

I've had to do this far more often for a USB HD, in fact I'm having 2nd
thoughts on the reliability of USB HD's in general. Check out my post right
before yours.

Gerry Peters

On 2 Jul 2006 15:37:26 -0700, "(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>There should be no difference.

Try it on FATxx volumes... I suspect this is the real reason why FATxx
is considered "risky" on XP.

>I am concerned about your drive, however. It does have physical damage

Agreed...

>It could be either a one time deal, or symptomatic of a failing
>drive. You should backup ASAP. And start looking around for a
>replacement.

One-time deal? I would never assume so. Let's say it's a head crash;
chances are the head's alignment and signal strength may be affected,
and/or the sealed airspace may be polluted with abrasive debris.

>Aloke Prasad wrote:

>> I ran the GUI mode (including Scan_for_and_attempt_recovery_of_bad_sectors)
>> and got no errors on an external USB drive, but running CHKDSK in a DOS box
>> found errors. I was having problems accessing files on the drive.

That has been typical mileage with FATxx in XP, especially comparing
GUI "check for errors" with DOS mode Scandisk.

>> C:\Documents and Settings\Aloke>chkdsk i: /x /f /r
>> The type of the file system is FAT32.

Then yes, expect that mileage. This has little to do with FATxx, and
everything to do with the uselessness of NT's file system tools.

>> Volume BACKUP created 9/27/2003 2:33 PM
>> Volume Serial Number is 196B-13E6
>> Windows is verifying files and folders...
>> Windows replaced bad clusters in file \Archana PC\Archana on
>> 1_16_06\01160005.GHS of name (null).
>> Windows replaced bad clusters in file \new PC\a.zip of name (null).

Consider both files to be suspect (this is why it's important to log
such reasults!)

>> File and folder verification is complete.
>> Windows is verifying free space...
>> Free space verification is complete.
>> Windows has made corrections to the file system.
>> 245,051,840 KB total disk space.
>> 18,208 KB in 87 hidden files.
>> 154,592 KB in 4,793 folders.
>> 103,105,472 KB in 58,386 files.
>> 96 KB in bad sectors.
>> 141,773,440 KB are available.
>> 32,768 bytes in each allocation unit.

Thus 3 x bad clusters. At the least, I'd check the hD using HD Tune
(all tests) free from www.hdtune.com

>> What gives? Why didn't the GUI method find and fix the problems?

As I say, that has been *typical* mileage with the GUI "check disk"
and both FAT16 and FAT32. I tested this and verified results by
creating deliberate file system anomolies via DiskEdit in DOS mode
(e.g. editing FAT chaining from 23,24,25 to 23,23,25), and found the
GUI "check for errors" took no time at all and found nothing, whereas
Scandisk took longer and found exactly what you'd expect it to find.

It's almost as if the GUI check is merely testing the two error flags
within the file system; the same ones used by AutoChk on startup...



>------------------------ ---- --- -- - - - -
On a bad day I'm tired and irritable.
On a good day I'm just tired.
Sorry if this is a bad day
>------------------------ ---- --- -- - - - -

Thank you all for your help.

My immediate goal is to take the drive to work and copy all the data to
another external drive.
Then I'll buy another such drive (not Maxtor, though).

I need the portability, as I use the drives to Ghost my 3 home PC's.
--
Aloke
----
to reply by e-mail remove 123 and change invalid to com

"cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 2 Jul 2006 15:37:26 -0700, "(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>There should be no difference.
>
> Try it on FATxx volumes... I suspect this is the real reason why FATxx
> is considered "risky" on XP.
>
>>I am concerned about your drive, however. It does have physical damage
>
> Agreed...
>
>>It could be either a one time deal, or symptomatic of a failing
>>drive. You should backup ASAP. And start looking around for a
>>replacement.
>
> One-time deal? I would never assume so. Let's say it's a head crash;
> chances are the head's alignment and signal strength may be affected,
> and/or the sealed airspace may be polluted with abrasive debris.

I ordered this product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822173023

Not bad for 7200 rpm 300 GB drive.

I'll try to replace the Maxtor drive (in the enclosure, which should still
be OK) with another "internal" drive.

I copied all my data over without loss.

I have 2 follow-up Q's:

1. Is there a good 3rd party utility that's better than CHKDSK? Spinrite?

2. Who is making good reliable drives thesedays?
--
Aloke
----
to reply by e-mail remove 123 and change invalid to com

"Gerry Peters" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>I think it better under DOS. I know if Scandisk fails and has an error that
> scandisk can't complete the scan and fix errors, then I run Command
> prompt,
> type the drive letter, and CHKDSK /r and it finds and fixes the problems.
> Sometimes it will do it under XP in a DOS window, other times it asks if
> it
> can reboot and do it during the bootup routine.
>
> I've had to do this far more often for a USB HD, in fact I'm having 2nd
> thoughts on the reliability of USB HD's in general. Check out my post
> right
> before yours.
>
> Gerry Peters
>
>

On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 21:58:32 -0500, "Gerry Peters"

>I think it better under DOS. I know if Scandisk fails and has an error that
>scandisk can't complete the scan and fix errors, then I run Command prompt,
>type the drive letter, and CHKDSK /r and it finds and fixes the problems.

Any problem "fixed" only by /r is almost certain (I'd say, certain) to
be a physically ill HD, for which there is no "fix" other than
replacement (preferably via warranty, heh)

>Sometimes it will do it under XP in a DOS window, other times it asks if it
>can reboot and do it during the bootup routine.

C: generally needs the second.

>I've had to do this far more often for a USB HD, in fact I'm having 2nd
>thoughts on the reliability of USB HD's in general. Check out my post right
>before yours.

Yep, my impression is that external HDs die like flies, even after you
exclude mishandling and user-failure factors. I'd treat an
externall-enclosed HD as if it were as flaky as a diskette or
paint-on-plastic CDR/DVDR, and make sure I have another copy of the
content elsewhere if it isn't still on an internal HD as well.

As to HDs with "just one bad cluster" (e.g. as "fixed" by ChkDsk /r or
Scandisk surface scan etc.) I might use them to carry wads of stuff
across the room, but that is about all.



>-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Tip Of The Day:
To disable the 'Tip of the Day' feature...
>-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -