fdisk that doesn't suck?

[Hognoxious]

I've got an 80GB drive, however win95's (and 98s) fdisk considers it to be
12GB.

In consequence it tends to produce totally crap partitions. Is there any
place that a better version of fdisk (for creating dos partitions - a better
version certainly exists for everything else) can be found?

I tried to search on my XP disk, but search companion searches on c: if I
tell it to search on the CD drive... And I tried the XP setup, but it
produces NTFS partitions when I wanted a FAT32 and a FAT16.

 

[Rob Schneider]

I've got an 80GB drive, however win95's (and 98s) fdisk considers it to be
12GB.

In consequence it tends to produce totally crap partitions. Is there any
place that a better version of fdisk (for creating dos partitions - a better
version certainly exists for everything else) can be found?

I tried to search on my XP disk, but search companion searches on c: if I
tell it to search on the CD drive... And I tried the XP setup, but it
produces NTFS partitions when I wanted a FAT32 and a FAT16.

Buy Partion Magic from Powerquest.

 

[Box134]

Yes, there are other fdisks out there:

http://www.23cc.com/free-fdisk/

http://www.mecronome.de/xfdisk/

I haven't used them, so I can't vouch for them.

 

[Michael Stevens]

I've got an 80GB drive, however win95's (and 98s) fdisk considers it
to be 12GB.

In consequence it tends to produce totally crap partitions. Is there
any place that a better version of fdisk (for creating dos partitions
- a better version certainly exists for everything else) can be found?

I tried to search on my XP disk, but search companion searches on c:
if I tell it to search on the CD drive... And I tried the XP setup,
but it produces NTFS partitions when I wanted a FAT32 and a FAT16.

The one main thing you forgot to mention was why you need to use FDISK?
FDISK will not produce "crap" partitions if you use it within it's intended
design limitations.
Please explain your ultimate objective. What are you trying to achieve?
It is possible you will need to use third party partitioning software.
Click on or copy and paste the link below into your web browser address box
if accessing the newsgroups from the web based newsgroups.
BootIT NG from Terabyte has a full function 30 day trial.
http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/
PartitionMagic from PowerQuest
http://www.powerquest.com/
--

Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
(e-mail address removed)
http://michaelstevenstech.com
For a better newsgroup experience. Setup a newsreader.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm

 

[Thomas Wendell]

Fdisk Does Not Recognize Full Size of Hard Disks Larger than 64 GB
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;263044


--
Reply to group
=================================================
Most learned here on nntp://news.mircosoft.com
Helsinki, Finland (remove _SPAM)
(translations from FI/SE not always accurate)
=================================================

 

[John E. Carty]

I've got an 80GB drive, however win95's (and 98s) fdisk considers it to be
12GB.

In consequence it tends to produce totally crap partitions. Is there any
place that a better version of fdisk (for creating dos partitions - a better
version certainly exists for everything else) can be found?

I tried to search on my XP disk, but search companion searches on c: if I
tell it to search on the CD drive... And I tried the XP setup, but it
produces NTFS partitions when I wanted a FAT32 and a FAT16.

Go to www.bootdisk.com and get a Windows Me disk, as its version of fdisk
will report the size correctly for larger drives. The older versions will
still work fine for larger disks as long as you use percentages to define
your partitions

 

[BananaPannaPoe-]

That is strange. It recognized my 120gig drive without a problem.
And I formated the whole 120gigs as one partition as FAT32.
Somebody is full of shit, and it ain't me.

 

[Alex Nichol]

I've got an 80GB drive, however win95's (and 98s) fdisk considers it to be
12GB.

In consequence it tends to produce totally crap partitions. Is there any
place that a better version of fdisk (for creating dos partitions - a better
version certainly exists for everything else) can be found?

I tried to search on my XP disk, but search companion searches on c: if I
tell it to search on the CD drive... And I tried the XP setup, but it
produces NTFS partitions when I wanted a FAT32 and a FAT16.

Try a WinME start up floppy.

But XP limits the size of FAT 32 partitions it will make to 32 GB for
good reason. Especially do not try to use a larger one for the
partition where Windows lives, and keep them (if you must) just to a
partition where you will handle very large files, like videos, and
nothing else. Even then the limit of a file to 4 GB maximum in FAT 32
may be a problem

 

[Plato]

I've got an 80GB drive, however win95's (and 98s) fdisk considers it to be
12GB.

It's just a cosmetic thing. fdisk will in fact, properly do it's thing
and format and you;ll end up with a perfectly fdisked and formatted 80
gig. The new replacement fdisk for win98x boxes is like only 1000 bytes
larger and just fixes the "reporting error".

 

[Sunny]

I also have two 80Gb hard drives on my PC (FAT 32) but I have partitioned
them using Partition Magic 8.
"C" - 20 Gb (WinME)
"C" - 20 Gb (Hidden, ready to dual boot WinXP)
"E" - 40 Gb (Rest of C Hard Drive)
"D" - 40 Gb (Half second Hard Drive)
"F" - 40 Gb (Rest of D Hard Drive)
"G" and "H" - CDROM and CDRW
L, M, N, O - 6 Card Reader
That's enough to confuse me for now, and far into the future

 

[Alex Nichol]

My wife's PC has two 80Gb hard drives, with WinXP on the 80Gb "C" Drive.
(FAT32) what sort of trouble may I have?

It is much more liable to collapse under the weight of very large
numbers of files, and also will have a very inefficient cluster size
indeed. 64K bytes for every 100 byte file (or *maybe* it will be only
32K - I'm not sure which it actually does at that size)

Either convert to NTFS - which is unlikely to collapse unless the disk
has *major* hardware trouble, or split it to something under 16 K for
the system and programs, and the rest for data. I'd still split a drive
at that size anyway. More extended discussion at
www.aumha.org/win5/a/ntfs.htm and http://aumha.org/win5/a/parts.htm