thinkpads.com Support Community Forum Index Bill Morrow's thinkpads.com Open Forum - The Original Thinkpad Support Forum
Follow ThinkpadsForum on Twitter
 Support this forum, shop at newmodeus.com
 Support the forum, shop at newmodeus.com
 The thinkpads support forum is now hosting legacy model ThinkPad driver and driver updates..
A link is provided in the MENUBAR just above for registered forum members only..

If you so wish:
Donate using PayPal

It is currently Mon Nov 24, 2014 4:28 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 630 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 21  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 10:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 9:32 pm
Posts: 26
Location: Perth, Australia
Got another reply from the IBM rep just then:

Hello
Thank you for your email
As i have mention its just a limitation of the BIOS software, and not a limitation of the hardware.
Personally I dont beleive that it will cause a issue to the machine.
But IBM's policy is that we cant guarantee you that it will be safe as the 100gig HDD is not supported by BIOS.
As you have mentioned yes, drives are getting larger and the BIOS will have to change to reflect this.
As to when we will update the BIOS to reflect this ?. I cannot give you a exact timeframe, but it should be in the near future.


So it is prob safe and the bios update might not be too far off, but after now setting my 60gb/7k back up, and liking the speed again, i am going to stick with it, until thi BIOS update is available. Keeps my warranty etc intact too.

Phil.

_________________
T61p (6460-74M): 2.4GHz T7700, 4096MB RAM, 160gb/7k and 100gb/7k, 15.4" WUXGA - The best computer i have ever had!
T43p (2668-H2A): 2.13GHz, 2048MB RAM, 100gb/5k, 100gb/5k HDD, 15" UXGA - The second best computer i ever had!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 2:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 12:19 am
Posts: 8
Just ran the "Software Installer" to update my T43 and this prompted me to upgrade my BIOS so you may find that this new version supports the disk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:02 pm
Posts: 16
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
Hi all,

I'm jumping into this conversation pretty late in the game. What I am told by IBM is that the problem relates to the SATA->PATA conversion they do to allow use of the Sonoma chipset. (I think this is mentioned upthread...)

Until/unless Seagate and other non-IBM sanctioned HD vendors fiddle their firmware, the problem will persist. My Seagate guy is digging into it, but I'm not optimistic.

It's a BS design. Makes me miss my R40. Hope someone can point out where I'm wrong.

Z.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:05 pm
Posts: 11
zoltanthegypsy wrote:
Hi all,
I'm jumping into this conversation pretty late in the game. What I am told by IBM is that the problem relates to the SATA->PATA conversion they do to allow use of the Sonoma chipset. (I think this is mentioned upthread...)

Correct.
zoltanthegypsy wrote:
Until/unless Seagate and other non-IBM sanctioned HD vendors fiddle their firmware, the problem will persist. My Seagate guy is digging into it, but I'm not optimistic.

Why Seagate or any other vendor would fix an IBM bug ? This is not gonna happen...
zoltanthegypsy wrote:
It's a BS design. Makes me miss my R40. Hope someone can point out where I'm wrong.
Z.

Sorry I cannot. Cheers,
Gilles


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 8:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:02 pm
Posts: 16
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
ruymbeke wrote:
Why Seagate or any other vendor would fix an IBM bug ? This is not gonna happen...


I guess my point is that _only_ Seagate can fix it :( The IBM BIOS change didn't cause the problem; it just flagged it. It is caused by the (idiotic) hardware SATA to PATA converter used in my T43. Hoping that a new BIOS will fix things is a waste of energy. Getting rid of the BIOS warning just leaves you with a slow and potentially unstable 100G system.

If, however, Seagate can change a few lines of code in their next firmware build, then maybe...

OTOH, Seagate doesn't seem to do field firmware upgrades, so we are stuck with (rather small) paperweights.

Z.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 12:56 pm 
Offline
Sophomore Member

Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 2:19 am
Posts: 174
zoltanthegypsy wrote:
ruymbeke wrote:
It is caused by the (idiotic) hardware SATA to PATA converter used in my T43.

Agreed.
Quote:
If, however, Seagate can change a few lines of code in their next firmware build, then maybe...

Why would Seagate change their working code? As far as I can tell, there is nothing wrong or broken with their drive. The ball is clearly in IBM's court -- either offer a SATA/PATA adapter upgrade, improved BIOS, or a direct SATA interface. I don't see any of these happening, which is too bad.

We are basically stuck with a proprietary hard drive interface that is supported only by a few hand-picked IBM drives.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 1:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:02 pm
Posts: 16
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
Ground Loop wrote:
Why would Seagate change their working code? As far as I can tell, there is nothing wrong or broken with their drive.


Only if they like the IBM aftermarket. Granted it's a feeble hope.

Ground Loop wrote:
The ball is clearly in IBM's court -- either offer a SATA/PATA adapter upgrade, improved BIOS, or a direct SATA interface. I don't see any of these happening, which is too bad.


If you force me to be realistic, I can't disagree - except that it is probably not fixable in BIOS, which just makes it even less likely :(

Ground Loop wrote:
We are basically stuck with a proprietary hard drive interface that is supported only by a few hand-picked IBM drives.


Yep, and that has some nasty implications for HD replacement after warranty, future upgrades, etc. I'm negotiating with IBM now to return my T43. We will see how that goes. What a pisser.

Z.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Not just a Seagate issue
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 1:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 11:08 am
Posts: 2
Location: Switzerland
This issue is not really so much about a Seagate drive in the T43 machines, as it is about the difficulty (impossibility?) of upgrading hard drives not purchased directly from IBM. It is a problem even for those drives that are supposed to be supported by the current firmware upgrade version 10, released in April 2005. I purchased the T43p with the idea of using a bigger but slower hard drive (80/5K), and using the one they supplied with the machine (60/7K) for something else. If I had known about this firmware problem, I would not have purchased this machine. I was using BIOS version 1.08 until upgrading a few days ago to 1.22. My experience may be useful to others, perhaps saving the time I wasted on this issue:

* I ordered the T43p from IBM and a Hitachi travel star 80/5K (HTS548080M9AT00) from a less expensive supplier. The 60/7K Hitachi (HTS726060M9AT00) that came in the machine of course worked fine. On booting with the 80/5K drive, however, I got the infamous 2010 error message. I found and tried the firmware upgrade disk 13, which supports that drive (FWHD3313.exe). I ran it on a bootable CD, and when that didn’t seem to work properly, I tried again with a USB floppy, but the message in both instances said the firmware required no update. IBM tech support was less than useless, contradicting the notes to the firmware upgrade. I returned the hard drive for a replacement.

* The supplier suggested that the newer (June 2005) 100/5K Hitachi travel star (HTS541010M9AT00) was worth trying before replacing the 80/5K Hitachi. Still getting the 2010 error message and based on postings in this forum, I tried using escape after the 2010 message. I was able to use the rescue-recovery CDs to install a factory version of XP. I don’t know whether this would have been stable, but XP did install. I was not delighted by the prospect of installing all the software and data again, especially on a machine that starts each boot with warning, and so I used Partition Magic version 8 to copy the single primary active partition of the working 60/72K drive onto the 100/54K drive. With the cloned partition on the 100GB drive, after pressing esc in response to the 2010 error, the T43p progressed through the boot until I gave it my logon and password. Then it immediately went to a prolonged shutdown sequence. (Logon and password were okay, since I got the expected error message when I gave a wrong password.)

* I had access to two other 60/7K hard drives in other machines (HTS706060M9AT00). I tried the firmware upgrade and found on one, it recognized that the drive needed a firmware upgrade, which I applied. The upgrade process concluded with a message stating the upgrade was successful, but when I rebooted and checked, the firmware version had not in fact been changed (remained MH40A60A instead of upgrading to MH40A6GA), and firmware again indicated it should be upgraded. I repeated that process several times with the same result. In the second hard drive of the same type, the firmware stated no upgrade was needed. Only the drive (same type, 60/7K) that came with the machine works in the T43p, and that has the firmware version specified in the firmware upgrade notes, MH40A6GA.

* I also have access to an older (May 2003) Toshiba drive (40/5K) (MK4019GAX) that is supposed to be supported by the IBM firmware upgrade, disk 15 (FWHD3315). Although the firmware identified version FA003E of the firmware, which it should have upgraded to version FA004B (according to the firmware upgrade notes), the firmware instead returned a message stating no upgrade is needed for yet another T43-2010-error drive.

Bottom line: The hard drive that came with the machine from IBM works. Four other hard drives that are allegedly supported with upgradable firmware, according to IBM/Lenovo firmware upgrade notes, did not work. Using escape in response to the 2010 error message yields unpredictable results (and for a 100GB drive, which is the carrot that motivated this topic, that means a lot of data and programs to keep on an expensive, unreliable system). I will forget the 100GB drives for now, and will request a replacement for the original 80GB drive that was supposed to work.

I expect many other people will be buying fancy new hard drives that they will not be able to use on their T43 machines. The quality of support on this issue from IBM/Lenovo, which remains gutsy enough to advertise their technical support as a selling point, has been abysmal. It is difficult to know why such a problem has been introduced: greed for securing a proprietary upgrade market or just incompetence? I would be curious to hear about the wonderful benefits of the innovation of this SATA/PATA bridge, which others have identified earlier in this thread as the cause of the problem. Are there any?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 5:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:02 pm
Posts: 16
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
tpf wrote:
It is difficult to know why such a problem has been introduced: greed for securing a proprietary upgrade market or just incompetence? I would be curious to hear about the wonderful benefits of the innovation of this SATA/PATA bridge, which others have identified earlier in this thread as the cause of the problem. Are there any?


Just a WAG: it lets IBM use the Sonoma chipset w/a PATA drive. Newer chipset + cheaper drive.

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt (for now). Stupidity, not greed.

Z.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 8:45 pm 
Offline
Junior Member
Junior Member

Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 7:58 pm
Posts: 457
Location: South Dakota
Funny...I seem to remember the Sonoma chipset has two IDE channels, which can both support a primary & secondary device. It seems strange the DVD-Multiburner is a completely native PATA solution.

Why didn't they just do the same thing with the primary hdd, instead of the SATA>PATA chip???

_________________
Vista Business on T43 w/ Dell 2405FPW @ 1920 x 1200
Thinkpad T43 (2687-DSU) | PM 2.0GHz @ 1.068v | 100GB Hitachi 7K100 | 2.0GB Dual-Channel | X300 64MB | 14.1" SXGA | DVD+RW | Intel 2915 ABG | ThinkDock II & Mini-Dock |


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:30 pm 
Offline
Sophomore Member

Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 2:19 am
Posts: 174
JHaislet wrote:
Why didn't they just do the same thing with the primary hdd, instead of the SATA>PATA chip???


A very very good question.

The chipset does indeed have a native PATA controller, and two IDE channels. One is used for the slim bay, obviously, which is why the slim hard drive adapter works fine with any drive.

Why, oh why, did they not use the other channel for the internal drive?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2005 5:03 am 
Offline
Junior Member
Junior Member

Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 7:58 pm
Posts: 457
Location: South Dakota
The only thing I can think of is they did it to take advantage of the 266MB/s SATA interconnect into the Northbridge. But come on IBM, we're talking about slow *****Expletives removed by Moderator***** 5400 & 7200rpm HDD's. Neither of which could even saturate an ATA-66 connection, much less the ATA-133 connection...

dumb, dumb, dumb...

_________________
Vista Business on T43 w/ Dell 2405FPW @ 1920 x 1200
Thinkpad T43 (2687-DSU) | PM 2.0GHz @ 1.068v | 100GB Hitachi 7K100 | 2.0GB Dual-Channel | X300 64MB | 14.1" SXGA | DVD+RW | Intel 2915 ABG | ThinkDock II & Mini-Dock |


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2005 9:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:02 pm
Posts: 16
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
Ground Loop wrote:
The chipset does indeed have a native PATA controller, and two IDE channels. One is used for the slim bay, obviously, which is why the slim hard drive adapter works fine with any drive.


As I read it the ICH6-M has two SATA ports and 1 IDE channel.

Just another WAG: the SATA IDE legacy shadow registers emulate IDE channel 0, forcing the primary HD onto SATA. It's there in the specs, but I don't feel like digging that deep just to *****Expletives removed by Moderator*****. Whether this is forced by Intel, or chosen by IBM, it remains a profoundly dumbass design.

Monday the battle with IBM customer service begins...

Z.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2005 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 27
Location: WY
I have a 80G 5k100 bought in April. I installed dual boot (xp and fc4). It works without any problem, at least until now(ofcause with 2010 error).

_________________
Thinkpad T43 PM 1.86GHz 1GB 100GB X300 14.1" SXGA DVD Intel 2915 ABG WinXP/FC4


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:02 pm
Posts: 16
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
Anyone know if the 2010 error is triggered by an actual probe of the drive's capabilities, or by a BIOS drive whitelist? (not the firmware updater whitelist but one in T43 BIOS).

If the former, there's some _small_ hope for the aftermarket.

Just curious.

So far IBM customer service won't take the T43 back. I have escalated it. We shall see...

Z.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 1:23 am 
Online
*Senior* Admin
*Senior* Admin

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 9:40 pm
Posts: 6891
Location: ThinkPadLand
if a sufficient number of T43 owners return their thinkpads to lenovo/ibm there might be a fix forthcoming.. the speed of which would be in proportion to the number of returned thinkpads..
though, knowing the ibm part of the lenovo/ibm mindset, they might just ignore the whole issue..

[I changed the title of this thread to more accurately describe this problem]

_________________
Bill Morrow, kept by parrots :parrot: & cockatoos
Sysop - forum.thinkpads.com

*
She was not what you would call refined,
She was not what you would call unrefined,
She was the type of person who kept a parrot.
~~~Mark Twain~~~


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 12:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:05 pm
Posts: 11
Hello, here is some update:
I just got a voicemail from Amazing, IBM 2nd level tech support, who is a very nice guy really trying to help
(amazing_AT_us.ibm.com, 1-800-426-7378+1+2, ext: 58110)
According to Amazing the IBM Project engineering people deny the fact that the T43 has a design problem,
and claim that this issue is only because of the Seagate drive.
So my guess is that they are not even planning for a bios fix nor a hardware recall.
If we all ask for a massive return of these buggy laptops against a full refund, they may consider doing something.
IBM Thinkpads are now just as bad as the other cheap ones, but they are not even cheap...
Please help me to let people know about it !
Personnaly, I am very disapointed by IBM, I will never recommend them again to anybody !
Cheers, Gilles


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 2:53 pm 
Offline
Sophomore Member

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:33 pm
Posts: 212
Location: switzerland
The 2010 message is not only for the seagate. I have to escape this ennoying (to be polite) message every time i boot my t43p. And i put a toshiba 1032GAX (100GB, 5400rpm, 16mb cache). So this is certainly not a seagate issue but an IBM's.

_________________
17.06.05:
t43p (2668G4G), PM750, 2Go dual, 1032GAX (100gb/5k/16mb) 2010 error msg, SXGA+ 14.1", V3200, DVD-RW, GBeth, Intel abg, bt, 9 cells, XPPro/Ubuntu, Fingerprint,
800MHz-0.7Vcore, LCD min -> 13Watts


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:29 pm 
Offline
Sophomore Member

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:59 pm
Posts: 157
keku wrote:
I put a new OEM Hitachi HGST548080M9AT0 into my T43p, if you buy a 80gb HDD from IBM all you get is same HDD made by Hitachi with same manufacturer's part number, an extra sticker with IBM FRU/ASM.

I'm getting 2010 warning and even IBM put a check so I can't update the firmware. I even tried changing checksum to replace my firmware version with so called IBM's approved firmware. there is some other check that prevents it.

Now I'm on BIOS 1.03 for time being utill either IBM or hitachi solves this problem.

This is crazy.


Well it's just not seagate, even Hitachi Drives with same Manufecturer's number are having this issue.


Last edited by keku on Thu Aug 18, 2005 11:41 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:30 pm 
Offline
Sophomore Member

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:59 pm
Posts: 157
Well it's just not seagate, even Hitachi Drives with same Manufecturer's number are having this issue.


Last edited by keku on Thu Aug 18, 2005 11:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 11:08 am
Posts: 2
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
I changed the title of this thread to more accurately describe this problem.

The revised topic title is a step in the right direction, but still understates the problem. Even the drives that Lenovo/IBM sanctions do not upgrade with their new firmware, and they persistently indicate an error.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2005 8:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 3:22 pm
Posts: 21
Location: Columbus, Ohio - USA
Hello all,

I had the 2010 warning when trying to install a Dell OEM HGST548080M9AT0 into my T43. What I did was use a T40 to update the firmware on the drive and then install it into the T43. I image you can use any other T series laptop to update the firmware then it should work with out getting the 2010 warning.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 18, 2005 2:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:02 pm
Posts: 16
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
BillMorrow wrote:
[I changed the title of this thread to more accurately describe this problem]


Hmmm, that seems to have broken my new post notification for this thread. Is that normal? Should I take it personally?

Z.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2005 5:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:02 pm
Posts: 16
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
Well, I guess I turned mercenary on this one :(

I went a couple more rounds with tech support just for the exercise. Have to say I'm disappointed. None of the techs I spoke to could even understand the problem. They have always been great in the past, although come to think of it I haven't asked for tech help before - just warranty repairs.

The chance of a tech fix was nil, but I had to give them one last try. Failing that, I called the customer satisfaction dept and asked to return the T43. Since I bought it ~ 3 months ago, they wouldn't authorize a return, but cheerfully escalated me to the next level. At 3 levels up, I spoke to a very friendly individual who said he understood the problem, and would authorize a return. The problem as I described it to him is that Lenovo is publishing specs that indicate the T43 uses an industry standard drive when in fact it requires a proprietary drive. Hope that was close enough...

When I said it was a shame to return an otherwise nice machine he offered to pay for the Seagate drive I couldn't use, since I had bought it specifically to upgrade the T43. (Don't know if he would have taken back the T _and_ paid for the Seagate).

In the end we agreed that I would keep the T43 and he would send me an IBM/Lenovo 80G drive for it - his treat - and I would keep the stock 60G drive as a spare. The 100G Seagate is now in the R40 where it works just fine. (In fact, the Seagate in the R is somewhat faster than the stock drive in the T - ????)

It's certainly not a fix, but seemed reasonably generous. It might make sense for others to pursue return or compensation. That way Lenovo gets pressure from the sales/satisfaction side as well as from the tech side. YMMV.

Sorry for the long post but it seemed appropriate to report back on my particular resolution to this mess. I will continue to monitor the tech side of the issue.

Keep on telling the truth,
Z.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2005 7:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:05 pm
Posts: 11
zoltanthegypsy wrote:
... I called the customer satisfaction dept and asked to return the T43...

Very well done ! Which number did you call and which person did you talk to ? I would like to ask for the exact same thing... Thx, Gilles


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2005 9:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:02 pm
Posts: 16
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
ruymbeke wrote:
Which number did you call and which person did you talk to ? I would like to ask for the exact same thing...

I'm not quite comfortable sending the entire world directly to this guy without his OK. It might be just as well to bang on as many people as possible anyway. If other case resolution "owners" (the people who can resolve things) don't come through let me know and I will ask my contact.

The USA number I used for customer "satisfaction" is 866.428.4465. I got to the individual w/authority to do something by insisting on escalation with each person I talked to. They were all friendly, and so was I :) I got that number from tech support. If you are outside the US, perhaps local tech support can supply a customer satisfaction/service number.

Z.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 7:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 6:51 pm
Posts: 35
Location: Austin, TX
Just to add to this case...

I bought the T43 2668-75U two weeks ago and tried to swap the HD for my FC4 linux drive (HTS548080M9AT00, A53A) and ran into the same error.

I essentially followed Javamon and Henrik's procedure
http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=13113&highlight=drive+firmware+error
and I was able to boot without error. The only trick with my particular drive was that the checksum wasn't reported anywhere online. So, after some playing around...

Make Disk 13, then I edit the file MRLA5HA.tbl and change "A55A" to "A53A" in the Parameter Table and
Code:
#Checksum Table
9AAA3CF1


and edited FW.PRO file for my HDD and A55A to
Code:
"HTS548080M9AT00","MG4OA53A","MG4OA5HA","MG4IA5HA.bin","hfui12L.exe","IA5HA","/u MRLA5HA.tbl","FWHD3313"


and booted the system with disk to flash. Exit to command prompt and type
Code:
hfui12H IA5HA -pm MG4IA5HA.bin /f MRLA5HA.tbl

It showed success and ended the program fine. My linux booted fine after that.

Unfortunately, I didn't use it long enough to see if data corruption would occur, because together with problems with LCD and noisy fan, I ended up returning it for T42p. I think T43 series is a great machine (maybe need time to mature a little) and I might consider T43/p with flexview again later on.

Just my $0.02


Last edited by Ojisan on Thu Sep 01, 2005 7:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 3:39 pm 
Offline
Sophomore Member

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:59 pm
Posts: 157
is it HGS548080M9AT00 OR
it is HTS548080M9AT00 drive made by Hitachi (80 GB 5400 RPM) I tried same thing and received error invalid customer code.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 7:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 6:51 pm
Posts: 35
Location: Austin, TX
keku wrote:
is it HGS548080M9AT00 OR
it is HTS548080M9AT00 drive made by Hitachi (80 GB 5400 RPM) I tried same thing and received error invalid customer code.


oops, I had a typo,
Quote:
HD for my FC4 linux drive (HGS548080M9AT00, A53A) and ran into the same error.


which should have said: HTS548080M9AT00. It's edited now. Also try,
Code:
hfui12H IA5HA -pm MG4IA5HA.bin /u /f MRLA5HA.tbl

or try updating within the program that autostarts.

I'm certain of the changes in the file as I still have the floppy. I'm starting to forget the procedures... :oops:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2005 5:56 am 
Offline
Sophomore Member

Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 7:23 pm
Posts: 153
Man I'm So afraid now. I'm using Hitachi 60GB 7200rpm, unable to update the firmware. Only using them for few days. I hope there is no problem with corruption :(
anybody here with hitachi 60GB 7200rpm with corruption already? how long has it been before corruption occurs?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 630 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 21  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group