![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||
| Welcome
to Tech Support Forum home to more then 136,000 problems solved. Issues
have included: Spyware, Malware, Virus Issues, Windows, Microsoft,
Linux, Networking, Security, Hardware, and Gaming Getting your
problem solved is as easy as: 1. Registering for a free account 2. Asking your question 3. Receiving an answer Registered members: * See fewer ads. * And much more..
|
| Want to know how to post a question? click here | Having problems with spyware and pop-ups? First Steps |
|
|||||||
| Hard Drive Support Support Forum for hard drives; Western Digital, Seagate, Maxtor, Toshiba |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2
OS: win 2k
|
Volume empty ?!
Hi guys,
i have a problem concerning my harddisc (Maxtor diamondmax 160GB). Few days ago i've tried to delete some files from my harddisc, using windowscommander - suddenly this program meant that one file is protected. i thought great, so i pressed win+e for the explorer and then i was surprised - the harddisc was completly empty. All files were gone. i made a reboot and during the bootup the system meant that there is no OS. i was a bit confused, so took another HDD with an older OS to get access to the problemharddisc but i still can't see any files on it. so i've done so far: when i want to write a new MBR using the win2k bootcd, the screen becomes blue -> inaccessible device. using GetDataback all files were found (around 30k), but it could rescue only 5 files ... that was awesome. using partition magic 8.0 - harddisc was not accessable because there is no filesystem powermax from maxtor itself - complete selfcheck - successful, everything is okay i also used a tool named testdrive, also this meant that everything is okay. further i saw that mostly all programes showed the wrong size of the harddisc, appr. it was 136GB but i don't think that is the limition of 48bit, because another HDD (160GB) is correctly recognized with 150GB. i am desponed, i don't know what i can do next. all my datas are on this HDD, now i'm playing with it for 4 days. maybe someone here knows some tricks or programmes or the likes. ps. please excuse my english :) |
|
|
|
| Important Information |
|
Join the #1 Tech Support Forum Today - It's Totally Free!
TechSupportForum.com is a leading support website for your computer needs. We offer free, friendly and personalized computer support. Why pay to have your computer fixed when you can do it for free. Join TechSupportforum.com Today - Click Here |
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Manager, Design
|
Fear not!
I'll address your post in reverse. The 150GB on your 160GB is a phenomenon that all hDDs have. It's due to the way the data is actually segmented on the HDD. My 160GB SATA drive actually only gives me 149GB to use. 48-bit LBA doesn't fix that, it's just how it works. What is sounds like to me is a corruption of your drive in the area where the FAT is stored. If that's bad then you won't be able to use that drive for anything.
__________________
![]() ![]() ----------------------------- There are no dumb questions, unless a customer is asking them. Help in the fight against cancer and other serious illnesses. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Omaha, The Center of the Universe
Posts: 7,632
OS: WinXP, Win2K3
|
Quote:
If your 160GB was setup with DDO then, yes, your OS or your HDD controller does not need to be able to support 48 bit LBA. And, yes you still may have a problem with seeing over 136GB on any drives added to the system. What I would do is add the drive to a system that you know supports 48 bit LBA (Win2K SP3 and up, WinXP SP1 and up, and an updated controller) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2
OS: win 2k
|
okay thats a good idea
i've forgot that winxp (with no SP) can't handle 48bit, but it has no problem when it is connected via USB (the second drive which has 160GB was it). now i have enabled 48bit with the known registrymodification, and 'ontrack recovery' does a scan at work. i hope that this can help. thanks for your help so far. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|