Should W2k be like this?

Message

Rex · #1 Post by **Rex** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 6:26 pm

Hi there,

I have an Thinkpad T20 and T22. The T20 had W98SE, the T22 currently has W2k (Fat32.)

The T22, FAT32 W2k works fine; files open quickly, hibernation works as it should, defragging seems to be pretty good.

I have decided to upgrade the T20 to W2k (NTFS) as a clean install and get up to speed with NTFS. The OS partition is about 7 gb and about 25% of that is occupied at the moment.

1 But (and here is the thing,) program files seem to be slow to open.

2 Hibernation works until resume, when I get a blue screen message that is too quick to read but something about cluster incompatibility and hibernation dumps, then I have the chance to boot from zero.

3 Defragged the hd (did not speed up file opening) but there are dozens of files in the middle of the graphic display that are not only fragmented (couple of them have over 200 fragments) but they are listed as 'Locked files.'

Have I done something wrong? I thought a clean install was 'clean' but my hd looks pretty untidy at the moment.

Very grateful for any advice as I am not a happy NTFS bunny and thinking of starting again with FAT32.

Rex

Rex · #2 Post by **Rex** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 3:49 am

Moderator,

I think this post should be in the Windows OS forum. I will copy and paste it there and you are welcome to delete it from this forum.

Rex

BillD · #3 Post by **BillD** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 4:40 am

With older smaller HDD's I'd go with FAT32....

mattyprice4004 · #4 Post by **mattyprice4004** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 5:36 am

It could be a memory issue, as I have had some very weird issues caused by dodgy memory.

Try putting the memory out of another compatible (PC100) laptop into the T20, and see what happens. You may be surprised!

Rex · #5 Post by **Rex** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:10 pm

I could take the memory from my T22 but I am not aware of there being a memory problem previously with the T20.

MY T22 with 20 gb hd and W2k (FAT32) seems to run very well but the T20 with 12gb hd (NTFS) does not. On booting, the hd seems to run forever, unlike the FAT32 installation.

I have imaged the NTFS install and think I will try again with FAT32 and see what difference there is. Can always restore the NTFS image is necessary.

Rex

Should W2k be like this?

Should W2k be like this?

Who is online