Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Red_XIII
The XP problem with the hard disk seems to be different, and was affected slower than the 98 i have installed now.
|
I'm sorry, but I do not quite understand what you mean by that. If you mean the hard drive corruption is reaching it more slowly, that is more or less natural; certain physical parts of the hard drive are affected more quickly than others.
Quote:
Great, Scandisc decides to delete C:\Windows\Command.
There goes another folder, another day.
|
ScanDisk won't do that unless you confirm it to. If there was corruption in that folder, it is not as if you could do much to save it anyway.
Quote:
|
Anyway, I'm thinking about reversing the master + slave positions, so my 20GB, which has XP installed on it, fully working, to master, and this messed up 98 with er all my backup files on it, to heck :P, rather a slave driver.
|
I am not sure what you mean by that either, but it is probably a good idea. Still, no matter whether it is slave or master, the second hard drive will still be corrupt. I would recommend imaging the corrupting hard drive, but it may be too late for that - the file linking system could be so far "down the road" that it might copy corrupted contents, too.
Quote:
Also, should i degrade my XP to 98 on my second hard drive?  It'd take longer, but IMHO, XP's more stable, but slower?
|
XP takes a better computer. I would, however, advise you that under XP, a 20GB hard drive will fill up fairly quickly.
Quote:
And furthermore  how the heck does the windows I have installed on the 1st HDD, no matter how partitioned, always crashes by deleting stuff inside the Windows folder? Maybe it doesn't like primary partitions?
|
You mean ScanDisk is deleting it? That means that those files reside on a part of the hard drive that is corrupted. They are pretty much dead in the water, anyway.
Good luck with the hard drive switching. I really would recommend considering a new, bigger hard drive - say around 60GB or so - if you are going to run XP.
~ Traft
|