proper way to migrate EIDE > SATA ?

[dave xnet]

My PC is reasonably modern, AMD64 4200 x2,
but when I built it, I used existing parts, which included 2 EIDE
drives.

I recently acquired a 250GB SATA drive,
so I decided to migrate the old (30 GB containing 2 xp dual boot
partitions) system drive to the new drive.
I had assumed at this point that a repair install would be necessary.

First, I'm surprised at how flimsy the SATA cable is. I keep
expecting it to click or "snap" nto place, but it feels vague and
slightly loose (compared to eide) when it's pushed in.

I used Acronis True Image V10 to copy the data from one drive to the
other. The partitions were in the same order, although I enlarged
them slightly.

I booted to the recovery console and did BOOTCFG /rebuild, but I don't
think it was necessary. The two systems it "added" to the boot.ini
were the same as those already there, except for some missing
switches.

Both systems in my dual boot setup started up and run
without issues that I can see.
The first time it started, it popped up a message saying It had found
new hardware and asked me to restart.
I neither did a repair install, reinstalled the chipset drivers, or
loaded any special driver for the SATA drive.
(Does it use the same driver as the PATA drives?)

Should I assume everything is OK at this point?
If it is, I'm thinking of installing Vista as a tripple boot to the
unused space in my new drive.
TIA for any info -
Dave

 

[Ron Badour]

As you found out, the only thing you needed to do was transfer the image
from one drive to the other. It sounds like you may have already deleted
the unneeded changes from the boot.ini file so you are ready to try your
next adventure

 

[Patrick Keenan]

My PC is reasonably modern, AMD64 4200 x2,
but when I built it, I used existing parts, which included 2 EIDE
drives.

I recently acquired a 250GB SATA drive,
so I decided to migrate the old (30 GB containing 2 xp dual boot
partitions) system drive to the new drive.
I had assumed at this point that a repair install would be necessary.

First, I'm surprised at how flimsy the SATA cable is. I keep
expecting it to click or "snap" nto place, but it feels vague and
slightly loose (compared to eide) when it's pushed in.

I used Acronis True Image V10 to copy the data from one drive to the
other. The partitions were in the same order, although I enlarged
them slightly.

I booted to the recovery console and did BOOTCFG /rebuild, but I don't
think it was necessary. The two systems it "added" to the boot.ini
were the same as those already there, except for some missing
switches.

Both systems in my dual boot setup started up and run
without issues that I can see.
The first time it started, it popped up a message saying It had found
new hardware and asked me to restart.
I neither did a repair install, reinstalled the chipset drivers, or
loaded any special driver for the SATA drive.
(Does it use the same driver as the PATA drives?)

Should I assume everything is OK at this point?
If it is, I'm thinking of installing Vista as a tripple boot to the
unused space in my new drive.
TIA for any info -
Dave

Simply changing the drive does not require a repair install. It's been
pointed out that the real issue requiring the repair install is a new drive
*controller* which would be found on a different motherboard. If you kept
the same motherboard, this doesnt' apply.

XP has support for some SATA controllers , so if your system booted, yours
is supported.

HTH
-pk

 

[Andy]

My PC is reasonably modern, AMD64 4200 x2,
but when I built it, I used existing parts, which included 2 EIDE
drives.

I recently acquired a 250GB SATA drive,
so I decided to migrate the old (30 GB containing 2 xp dual boot
partitions) system drive to the new drive.
I had assumed at this point that a repair install would be necessary.

First, I'm surprised at how flimsy the SATA cable is. I keep
expecting it to click or "snap" nto place, but it feels vague and
slightly loose (compared to eide) when it's pushed in.

I used Acronis True Image V10 to copy the data from one drive to the
other. The partitions were in the same order, although I enlarged
them slightly.

I booted to the recovery console and did BOOTCFG /rebuild, but I don't
think it was necessary. The two systems it "added" to the boot.ini
were the same as those already there, except for some missing
switches.

Both systems in my dual boot setup started up and run
without issues that I can see.
The first time it started, it popped up a message saying It had found
new hardware and asked me to restart.
I neither did a repair install, reinstalled the chipset drivers, or
loaded any special driver for the SATA drive.
(Does it use the same driver as the PATA drives?)

Should I assume everything is OK at this point?
If it is, I'm thinking of installing Vista as a tripple boot to the
unused space in my new drive.
TIA for any info -
Dave

Run Disk Management, and check the status of the system, boot, and
paging partitions. If they are all on the new drive, then you're okay.

 

[dave xnet]

Run Disk Management, and check the status of the system, boot, and
paging partitions. If they are all on the new drive, then you're okay.

That's an interesting point. My old system was
system disk 30 GB (udma5 - replaced by new SATA))
and 160GB (udma6) data and pagefile.

I had the page on the 2nd disk because it was newer, faster,
bigger and secondly, since I'm running 2 xp's(dual boot) they share
the same pagefile - thus saving me space.

I'm not sure if the newer drive is faster than the old 160gb drive.
They're both listed as udma6 in the device manager.
For now, I've left the page file on the IDE 2nd disk.


Dave