As OtheHill said, at newegg, which I have dealt with and completely satisified, oem means no hardware as well like brackets screws and the like. I personally have had good luck with Western Digital.

0

Here ya go...and thanks again. Property Value Model P4i65G BIOS Vendor American Megatrends Inc. BIOS Version P1.30 Firmware Version 101.114

0

I can't determine if that motherboard has any BIOS updates that would make it 48 bit LBA compliant. I suggest you email Asrock and ask them about it. Supply the information you posted in #8. Below is a link for your board. Asrock contact info is available at a link on that page. http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.a...

0

I sent a Tech Request to Asrock to see what they say. In the meantime I found this in their FAQ: http://www.asrock.com/support/faq.a... *** Begin Included Text *** Question (Q&A-32): I would like to use a big capacity Hard Disk on ASRock motherboard. I wonder how large of capacity can ASRock motherboard support at most?(6/23/2005) Answer:ASRock motherboards support 48-bit LBA mode hard drive. At present, ASRock motherboards have no limitation for the capacity of Hard Disk, so you can use over 127GB or 137GB Hard Disk on them. If you want to get a full capacity under Windows XP/2000, please make sure that your operating system can support 48-bit LBA mode. Please refer to the following link: http://www.asrock.com/support/QA/TS... *** End Included Text *** The pdf at the link above says: 5. Q: I have a drive that is larger than 137 GB but the operating system only recognizes 128 GB or 137 GB. How can I fix this? A: First, The OS (for example Windows series) should be able to support 48-bit LBA mode that enables the system to run and manipulate big drive, namely, only Windows 2000 and Windows XP could achieve this goal. Secondary, install Service Pack to let OS support large than 137GB HDD. 1. Windows XP, please download and installed the latest Service Pack 1, this can support big drive directly. For further information, please refer to Microsoft’s Product Support Site: http://support.microsoft.com/defaul... Since I am running SP3 on this machine, does this mean that I can just drop the 160Gb drive in and run it?

0

Look at the link below for further explanation of 48 bit LBA compliance. In the meantime, the answer to your question is MAYBE. I am sure that all current motherboards made by anyone are 48 bit compliant. What is of concern is if your motherboard, which was made in 2001, is now or can be made, 48 bit compliant. WinXP original release was NOT 48 bit compliant. That means that if you install original WinXP on a system which includes a compliant motherboard you still won't see more than 127GB. Even after installing a service pack the first partition of 127GB will remain the same unless changed by means of a partition manager. So, the WinXP thing can be solved. What I don't currently know is if your motherboard is or can be 48 bit compliant. Going back to your question in #4. The method used by WD and other makers is called a drive overlay. Basically it is a way to trick the BIOS into using all the drive space. The problem with that is that eventually you may need to migrate that drive to another system for any number of reasons. When you do, that system will not be able to readily read the data. Therefore, most folks here would recommend against using an overlay. You can always install an add-in controller card which would allow you to use any size drive. Cards come in both IDE and SATA or both flavors. If that interests you post back for links. http://www.48bitlba.com/index.htm

0

It's never as simple as we would like it to be...there are always "buts"! You said: "That means that if you install original WinXP on a system which includes a compliant motherboard you still won't see more than 127GB. Even after installing a service pack the first partition of 127GB will remain the same unless changed by means of a partition manager." But what if: WinXP (either original, or SP1, I don't recall) was installed on one motherboard by the manufacturer, then upgraded to SP2, then the motherboard was replaced with the Asrock and the techs got the same OS running, and then XP was upgraded to SP3. What the heck does that do to the 48 bit status? Nevermind - don't bother answering. I'm going to get the 80Gb drive, use the WD software to clone it and hope the girls either move out or marry a computer geek before they fill up the drive. Thanks for sticking with me on this one.

0

One last question: After re-reading your last post, something else just occured to me. If I simply dropped this 160Gb drive in the sytem and didn't bother worrying about the 48 Bit issue, would I at least end up with 127 GB of storage? (minus the standard 5% or so, of course) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ... Pricewise, even if I don't see the full 160, the price/gig drops from .48 to .35. Looking at it another way, the difference between 80GB and 127GB is a 60% increase in disk space for only a 15% price increase. Seems cost effective to me.

0

If you already have an OS running on the system and install a second hard drive Windows will see the entire drive, assuming the BIOS is 48 bit LBA compatible. Are you are thinking of running a 160GB drive and getting only 127GB? If so, that is a bad idea. Running a large drive on a system that is not 48 bit LBA compliant will eventually result in data loss or corruption. This is true even when WinXP sees the entire drive. For example, you install a 250GB drive as a second drive on your current WinXP sp3 rig. Suppose the BIOS reports only 127GB. WinXP will still see the entire 233GB actual space. However, using it will result in data loss or corruption. If you really want an additional hard drive here is what I suggest you do. Buy the drive and install it. If the BIOS doesn't recognise the entire drive then install a PCI based controller card. If you want to carry that thought one step further, buy a SATA drive and SATA controller card. That way the hard drive will migrate to a new system much easier. Virtually all latest generation boards have either ONE or NO IDE controllers. Most have one, which gives you connection for TWO drives. Conversely, virtually all new motherboards have at least 4 SATA ports. Some as many as 8 ports. So going SATA gives to better options for future use of the drive. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ... http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ... http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...

0

Just in passing.......... I copied this from a post in another forum earlier today.......... "Last night I lost my external hard drive. It's a western Digital. I've heard of at least 5 people losing their WD in the past couple months. It was a 500 gig and almost full of important - to me - files. What happened was - I have a private share program that is associated with it. It threw an error and closed. I reopened it and it tossed up a blurb that said the folder associated with it was corrupt. At that point, people could still see and use the other folder on the drive that they downloaded from. but none of the files I was downloading showed up. so I decided to try to start the program again - with the same result - and I opened folders in the hard drive - they opened at that point - but would not let me move any files - they said 0 bytes unable to move. I could get into properties. It said 0 free space and 0 used space. so I turned it off. so - now what do I do? what can I do? my thoughts are that first - I need to buy another external - not a WD. so - what brand should I look at - and I can't afford much more than $100.00. I've been browsing egghead, tigerdirect, and buy.com. also looked at Costco on line." Things here that flashed my "bias". WD has three year warranty. Seagate has five year warranty. "more than $100." should not be necessary! I see nothing in the info you posted that would indicate a problem running a 160GB (or larger)drive. I would buy an ide drive based on cost per GB per month warranteed service based on needs for your use. The worst scenario...... you would have to purchase an ide controller to drop in one of your PCI slots to handle the large drive.

0

Via the Asrock Support website, I asked this question: I am running XP-Home SP3 with the following Motherboard and BIOS: Asrock P4i65G BIOS Vendor American Megatrends Inc. BIOS Version P1.30 Firmware Version 101.114 I would like to install a 160Gb EIDE internal harddrive as the boot drive in this system. Is this Motherboard/BIOS 48 bit LBA compliant? If not, can it be upgraded to use the larger drives? The answer I received was as follows: Hi, You should be able to upgrade to 160GB HD no problem. So, I'm going to go for it. Stay tuned!

0

Just a comment cuffy, That was an external hdd in that post. I recall reading it before because I have the same drive(also a 250gb) and they are connected via usb.

0

Derby, you notice Asrock didn't come right out and answer your question directly. For your sake I hope they are right. However, it is important to watch the POST screens after installing a 160GB drive to verify the BIOS sees the ENTIRE drive. Why are you stopping at 160GB? The sweet spot is 250-500GB for price. Once you exceed the 127GB threshold it doesn't matter any more.

0

OTH - I hear what you are saying re: the Asrock reply. I kind of thought the same thing but opted to lean in the positive direction and order the drive. I have since checked with some folks familiar with that motherboard who are also confident that it will see the entire drive. They also offered suggestions similiar to yours as to how to check and what to do if it doesn't. In any case, it was $53, shipped. I'll either get it to work or sell it for $40 and consider the $13 as the cost of a lesson learned. ;-)

0

Derby If the full 160GB doesn't show during the POST screens buy this and install in an available PCI slot on the motherboard. That controller card will support two hard drives of any size. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...

0

Done! Well, almost. Office 2000 is asking for the install CD, which of course isn't where it should be. I'm sure it'll turn up. I have one last question. All I'm looking for is for someone to tell me if these instructions are worded badly, or if I'm just not understanding them correctly. Here is what it says at the WD download site...note the sentences in bold: Description The downloadable Data Lifeguard Tools now comes in both DOS and Windows versions and was written specifically for the installation of Western Digital EIDE hard drives. If your computer system already has a hard drive installed with an operating system of Windows 98SE or greater, you should use the Windows version of Data Lifeguard for best results. The DOS version is required if installing a hard drive in a new system without existing operating system support. If you plan on copying the contents of a boot drive, Western Digital recommends using the DOS version of Data Lifeguard Tools. The way I read those instructions, I should use the DOS version since I installed a new drive and wanted to copy the contents of the original boot drive to it. Well, I downloaded the DOS version and created a floppy. The program said that it formatted the drive and was copying all the files from the boot partition to the new drive. However, it failed sometime shortly after it was 15% into the copy process. 1 wasted hour. So, silly me, I tried it again. Went to bed when it was at 18% (at least an hour later) and got up in the morning to the same "An error occurred, some files weren't copied." When I looked at the drive via Windows, the File System was listed as RAW. So I decided to try the Windows version. This time it sailed through the copy process in less than 2 hours and when I removed the old drive, the system booted right up. Why would the instructions say If you plan on copying the contents of a boot drive, Western Digital recommends using the DOS version of Data Lifeguard Tools when clearly, the Windows version is the correct version to use? Could have (should have!) been done last night and not wasted half my morning.

0

Your old hard drive is a BOOT drive. It is a matter of semantics. Why did you transfer the files over. Why not just run both drives?

0

I'm not sure I see where the semantics are. Yes, my old drive is a boot drive. I wanted the new drive to be the boot drive, thus I needed to copy "the contents of a boot drive" as per the description. The description says "WD Western Digital recommends using the DOS version" when copying the contents of a boot drive. Seems pretty straight forward to me, except, of course, that doesn't work! I didn't want to run both drives for 2, maybe 3 reasons: 1 - The old drive is the original drive from what used to be an eMachine before the MB was replaced. It is much slower than the new drive, something that was evident as soon as I booted from the new drive. 2 - It's my young daughters' machine as it's much easier for them to use a single drive than having to deal with multiple drives. I'm sure I'd be up there fixing/finding things when they couldn't figure out where stuff went. 3 - My son needs some more space on his machine and I'm more comfortable with him dealing with multiple drives than the girls.

0

Below is an excerpt from the Western Digital Support site relating to Data Lifeguard Tools. Western Digital EIDE hard drives. If your computer system already has a hard drive installed with an operating system of Windows 98SE or greater, you should use the Windows version of Data Lifeguard for best results. The DOS version is required if installing a hard drive in a new system without existing operating system support. It does state to use the Windows version in your situation. I do see the confusion though, as the next sentence says what you posted.

0

OTH, Your excerpt is exactly what I posted earlier, except that I included the first and last sentence of the paragraph. As you noted, it is the last sentence: If you plan on copying the contents of a boot drive, Western Digital recommends using the DOS version of Data Lifeguard Tools. that seems to supercede the previous ones. If you have A, use A. If you don't have A, use B. However, if you're going to do C, then use B, even though you obviously have A. I think I'll drop a note to WD support to see what they say. Thanks for your help with this...so far everything seems to be working fine (and faster!) except for Office 2K, which works once you cancel past the request for the installation CD. Apparently there is an issue with Office 2K being able to find a certain file (data1.msi) if a drive is swapped or a drive letter is changed. The only way to repair it is with the original CD. I'm guessing they are trying to prevent people from cloning Office across multiple drives.

0

You are losing track of the bigger computing picture. There are MANY other operating systems in use besides Windows. I take the message to mean if you are moving Windows then use the Windows version. If you are using another OS the use the DOS version.

0

There's nothing like a spirited debate to keep the brain healthly! ;-) I see your point and I had considered that, which is why I used A, B and C, not Windows. If the last sentence said "If you plan on copying the contents of a boot drive that contains an OS other than Windows, Western Digital recommends using the DOS version of Data Lifeguard Tools" then I think there would be less confusion. By simply saying "a boot drive" with no qualifier, it appears to be (at least to me) all inclusive. In addition, they use the word "recommends" in that sentence. If you had an OS other than Windows, what other choice would you have? You couldn't use the Windows version if you were running UNIX, could you? Wouldn't that make it a "must", not a recommendation? And finally, look at the choices they offer you: Use the Windows version if you have Windows. Use the DOS version if you have no OS. Use the DOS version if you want to copy a boot drive. What would I use if I wanted to set up the drive as additional storage on a UNIX system? I have an OS, it's not Windows, and I don't want to copy a boot drive. All in all, I think the description is poorly written and could (did!) lead to confusion.

0

I agree, I think your thoughts about contacting WD about it are good.

0