Convert FAT32 file system to NTSF?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Joe Starin - 29 Jun 2006 13:56 GMT

Recently took an older (4+ years) Dell, upgraded the RAM and upgraded the OS
from ME to XP Home SP2. Every so often, I get a random crash, the system
immediately reboots and Windows proceeds to check the file system. After
that's done, I get a quick message saying that Windows recovered from a
serious (or other word) crash. Then everything runs like normal. Could go
days or weeks w/o a crash. Very clean PC. No dust or bad fans. 1.6GHz, 60GB
HD, 1GB RAM.

Should I have changed the file system to NTFS before installing XP? Can I do
it now w/o reformatting? A poster on one of the XP newsgroups offered this
advice to another poster, but I wanted to run it by the gurus here to
confirm that it's a good idea for me:

<begin quote>

"Yes, there is one way to convert FAT32 to NTFS without wiping out my disk
with a reformat. Simply follow steps below

Click on:
Start - Run - type "cmd"- At the prompt type "CONVERT C:/FS:NTFS"

<end quote>

Thanks, as always. Joe Starin

Signature

Joseph R. Starin
2025 Radcliffe Drive
Westlake, Ohio 44145-3246
440.223.TEXT (8398)
email: joestarin@ameritech.net
blog: www.joecalled.blogspot.com

Reply to this Message

John John - 29 Jun 2006 14:12 GMT

Read this before you proceed, you don't want to end up with 512 byte
clusters! http://aumha.org/win5/a/ntfscvt.htm

John

> Recently took an older (4+ years) Dell, upgraded the RAM and upgraded the OS
> from ME to XP Home SP2. Every so often, I get a random crash, the system
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
> Thanks, as always. Joe Starin

Reply to this Message

Noel Paton - 29 Jun 2006 16:03 GMT

Joe
It's extremely likely that converting your filesystem to NTFS will NOT
change the performance - and every chance that the system will crash during
the process, resulting in total loss of data!
Fix the problem first - then worry about NTFS!!!!!

Signature

Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's

> Recently took an older (4+ years) Dell, upgraded the RAM and upgraded the
> OS from ME to XP Home SP2. Every so often, I get a random crash, the
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
> Thanks, as always. Joe Starin

Reply to this Message

Joe Starin - 29 Jun 2006 19:23 GMT

Good point. For some odd reason, the very random crashes only occur when I
add the second stick of 512 RAM, boosting the RAM from 768 to 1G. When the
two 512 sticks are installed together, the very random problem occurs, even
though the sticks test okay. But, replace one of the 512s with an original
256 and no probs at all. Can't figure it out. Wife needs extra memory for
Photoshop, InDesign, etc. Hmmmm. Joe

Thanks for your replies, Noel and John.

> Joe
> It's extremely likely that converting your filesystem to NTFS will NOT
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>>
>> Thanks, as always. Joe Starin

Reply to this Message

Noel Paton - 29 Jun 2006 19:40 GMT

Ah!! - this sounds like a mismatch problem!!
Check that the two 512MB sticks are of the same type at least (there are all
sorts of timing issuesthat may come into play - see if the SPD data is the
same for each stick)
It may be that the board is especially sensitive - in which case it's best
to attempt to source RAM from the same batch (let alone manufacturer!).
It may also be that your board is just not capable of running with that much
RAM, due to power issues, or other problems which don't surface until you
have that amount of RAM installed.

You have already used the [vcache] MixFileCache tweak, I assume??

Signature

> Good point. For some odd reason, the very random crashes only occur when I
> add the second stick of 512 RAM, boosting the RAM from 768 to 1G. When the
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>>>
>>> Thanks, as always. Joe Starin

Reply to this Message

Joe Starin - 29 Jun 2006 20:26 GMT

It appears that both 512 modules may not be identical, although they appear
so, have identical numbers stamped on them, and have identical PC133 SDRAM
stickers on them. The one module bears the word Elpida, and has chips made
in China. The other module has no name, has alternating chips made in both
China and Malaysia, and has PC100 printed on every chip, even though a
sticker on the module says PC133 SDRAM. Both were purchased at the same time
from the same eBay vendor (who had a very high feedback score and thousands
of prior sales.) Did I get duped here? Joe

> Ah!! - this sounds like a mismatch problem!!
> Check that the two 512MB sticks are of the same type at least (there are
[quoted text clipped - 46 lines]
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, as always. Joe Starin

Reply to this Message

Noel Paton - 29 Jun 2006 20:43 GMT

I wouldn't say duped - merely that you didn't pay enough for what you needed
(which was matched RAM) ....or didn't ask the right questions of the vendor.
I doubt very much that you can have any comeback on the vendor, unless his
ad specified that they were matched (even somewhere like BestBuy or PCWorld
will sell unmatched RAM given half a chance - and with more realistic
chances of comeback!).
It's worth having a word with the vendor, and seeing if he can do anything
for you - otherwise you may have to write it off to experience, and buy a
matched pair, while selling the 'old' pair (separately! <g>)

The fact that the chips on one stick have PC100 printed on them could give
you some comeback in law - depending on the wording of the ad (was it sold
as PC133?), and how determined you get. What are the other numbers on the
chips, or stick? It's often possible to trace the chips through Google to
find out what their provenance is, and their true speed - but it does sound
as if they are chips that were manufactured as PC100, which someone found
'could' run at PC133 speeds..... but not in the same system as true PC133
RAM.

Sorry I can't help more :( (I don't even have any PC133 of that size here!)

Signature

> It appears that both 512 modules may not be identical, although they
> appear so, have identical numbers stamped on them, and have identical
[quoted text clipped - 56 lines]
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, as always. Joe Starin

Reply to this Message

Joe Starin - 29 Jun 2006 21:34 GMT

Actually, you've helped immensely, Noel. (You, too, John John.)

I did return one 512 stick already (tested poorly via RAM test), asking the
vendor to replace it with an exact match to the remaining good stick. Got
something that looked identical, but after putting both under a magnifying
glass, I noticed the differences mentioned. The vendor has been responsive
once, so I'll try again.

No other wording or numbers on the RAM, other than what I already noted.
Yes, they were sold as PC133, which is what my PC calls for. Appears that at
least one was a PC100, huh?

If no joy, it's not the end of the world. The memory was inexpensive and if
I can't get a refund, I'll find new homes for the RAM (just not the same
homes.) I'm glad to at least have an answer.

BTW, you mentioned that "I don't even have any PC133 of that size here!" I
know where you can get a few sticks <VBG>.

Nice speaking with you again.

Cheers,

Joe Starin

>I wouldn't say duped - merely that you didn't pay enough for what you
>needed (which was matched RAM) ....or didn't ask the right questions of the
[quoted text clipped - 79 lines]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks, as always. Joe Starin

Reply to this Message

Noel Paton - 29 Jun 2006 21:47 GMT

You're welcome, Joe - seems like you've got a genuine vendor there, so keep
him sweet! (but hungry <g>)

Signature

> Actually, you've helped immensely, Noel. (You, too, John John.)
>
[quoted text clipped - 105 lines]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks, as always. Joe Starin

Reply to this Message