PC Behaving badly

Over the past few months, my system has become unstable. I'm running
Windows XP on a VIA V21G board based system.

The first clue was that once in a while, when I would boot up I'd get the
message "The system has recovered from a serious error" It wanted to send a
report or something, and I usually had to click "don't send" 2 or 3 times,
because it would pop back up.

On the primary IDE/PATA controller, I have a ~ 8 month old Seagate 300 GB
HDD as master, and a BenQ DVD drive as slave. On the secondary IDE
controller, I have a mobile rack with ~ 2 year old Seagate HDD as primary
master, and an old Lite-On CD-ROM drive as slave.

Everything was working fine, but maybe a month after I saw the first
"serious error" message, the system simply wouldn't boot. Hard drive lights
stayed on. I removed the mobile rack drive and was able to boot up fine. I
took the mobile rack drive to a friend's place who had a similar setup,
inserted the drive into his mobile rack, and although his system would boot,
it could not see my drive.

So, later on I removed the drive in question, installed it in another
computer, and was able to read from and write to it with no problems at all.
I reformatted it on the other PC, and it works fine.

At that point, I started wondering if part of the mobile rack was screwy,
so I completely replaced it (both the part that goes with the drive, and the
part you install in the PC) with a backup one I had on the shelf.

I have double checked to make sure the terminus drive is set to master,
and no jumper settings have been changed since the initial setup.

Even with the mobile rack removed, if I take a known working IDE drive and
hook it up as secondary master, the computer will do the same thing - it
takes a long while "detecting IDE drives" - something I don't normally even
notice, but it does this for about a minute. It does detect them properly,
though. Then it says "Verifying DMI Pool Data". It shows this message for
2 to 3 minutes, then tries to boot from CD. After this, it gives the "Disk
Boot Failure" message.

I can then disconnect the drive, and the system boots up just fine.
However, now I have some other issues arising:

1) system now occasionally reboots while running some of the more intensive
applications (especially games)

2) about a week ago, the system could no longer even see the onboard LAN.
It's like it no longer exists, and so I can't back up files or watch videos
over my network

3) Yesterday, the system no longer sees the USB ports. I can't use a flash
drive to back anything up. Thankfully, I did a full backup of files last
month, and not a whole lot has changed since then

Obviously, I'd like to figure out whether this has something to do with:

A) corrupted files on the hard drive

B) controller or hardware going bad on the hard drive

or

C) motherboard problem

I can easily remove the hard drive in question, format it, and then run
some sort of stability test on it. If it comes up stable, then I'll assume
it is a motherboard issue.

Can anyone recommend a utility I can download and use to test a hard drive
thoroughly for issues?

"OhioGuy" wrote in message ...
Over the past few months, my system has become unstable. I'm running
Windows XP on a VIA V21G board based system.

The first clue was that once in a while, when I would boot up I'd get the
message "The system has recovered from a serious error" It wanted to send
a report or something, and I usually had to click "don't send" 2 or 3
times, because it would pop back up.

On the primary IDE/PATA controller, I have a ~ 8 month old Seagate 300 GB
HDD as master, and a BenQ DVD drive as slave. On the secondary IDE
controller, I have a mobile rack with ~ 2 year old Seagate HDD as primary
master, and an old Lite-On CD-ROM drive as slave.

Everything was working fine, but maybe a month after I saw the first
"serious error" message, the system simply wouldn't boot.
snipped a fair bit.
..
You can d/load hard drive testing stuff from the drive manufacturers
site.
Seagate =...
http://www.seagate.com/www/en-us/sup...loads/seatools

That should be able to test your other (manu) drive as well.
I think as long as you have 1 Seagate it will work.

bw..

On Dec 17, 10:53 am, "OhioGuy" wrote:
Over the past few months, my system has become unstable. I'm running
Windows XP on a VIA V21G board based system.

The first clue was that once in a while, when I would boot up I'd get the
message "The system has recovered from a serious error" It wanted to send a
report or something, and I usually had to click "don't send" 2 or 3 times,
because it would pop back up.
...
So, later on I removed the drive in question, installed it in another
computer, and was able to read from and write to it with no problems at all.
I reformatted it on the other PC, and it works fine.

IOW a perfectly good part was fixed because the defect was not first
identified. It is called shotgunning. We learn from our mistakes.
Appreciate why you still have a failure. Shotgunning.

Solution means moving things from an 'unknown' state to either
'definitively good' or 'definitively bad'. That means numbers and
other facts. The drive was swapped because speculation was assumed to
be fact.

RobV has posted some useful tools. But the one function that can
make everything look defective is a power supply 'system'. More than
just a power supply. Other parts form a 'system'. Two minutes with a
meter and this procedure means the entire 'system' is moved from
'unknown' to 'definitively something'. "When your computer dies
without warning....." starting 6 Feb 2007 in the newsgroup
alt.windows-xp at:
http://tinyurl.com/yvf9vh

In your case, important numbers are from any one orange, red, yellow,
and purple wire when all peripherals are accessed (multitasked)
simultaneously. All numbers must exceed 3.23, 4.87, or 11.7 VDC under
these maximum loads. These numbers are different from (and base in)
RobV's numbers (for engineering reasons).

Only after the supply 'system' is 'definitively good', then move on
to other suspects. Disc diagnostics from the computer or disk
manufacturer can also move that system from 'unknown' to
'definitively ...'.

Memtst86 may identify defective memory. But sometimes only when the
test is executed during normally higher temperatures - such as when
heated by a hairdryer on highest heat setting. Temperatures
uncomfortable to touch but does not burn skin. If memory passes
Memtst86 diagnostics at elevated (normal) temperatures, then memory
moves to the 'definitively good' category.

Once a defect is identified, only then is the suspect replaced.
Those procedures also provide numbers so that others with better
knowledge can also provide useful information.

Connector corrosion is not a reason for failure. If corrosion
causes failures, then electronics are designed defectively. Properly
designed connectors are also self cleaning - break and make a
connection cleans them. Electronics also include noise margins that
make corrosion irrelevant. If connector corrosion causes problems,
then electronics may be defective.

Don't replace anything on speculation - shotgunning. RobV provided
some tools to first find the problem. Meanwhile, also collect other
facts from system 'event' logs and from Device Manager? If necessary,
use Windows' Help to find them.

I don't really consider this "shotgunning". That would be just randomly
removing a part and testing it.

I was having a hard drive related message come up on bootup, and I
happened to have a couple of spare hard drives laying around in known
working condition.

Therefore, it was a simple thing to replace the hard drive to see if
replacing it might fix the issue.

It really does appear to be some sort of issue caused by having the old
CD-ROM drive on the same data cable. Reseating the data cables didn't catch
that, but running the system without the data cable hooked to the CD-ROM
drive did.

The really strange thing is that the mobile rack drive works fine now, and
it works fine when taken out and hooked up to my PC in the basement.
However, it could not be accessed on my friend's computer. He has another
mobile rack like mine, and hasn't had any problems with it. His system
would boot up ok with this drive in it, but could not see it. Strange.

The vast majority of users should not open the case of a computer
while it is turned on and definitely should not probe around inside
of a live PC. If you need voltage readings, look at the BIOS setup
screens of any modern mainboard.






w_tom w_tom1 usa.net wrote:

Path: newssvr11.news.prodigy.net!newsdbm04.news.prodigy. net!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon 04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!p ostnews.google.com!i3g2000hsf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: w_tom w_tom1 usa.net
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: PC Behaving badly
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:52:52 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 64
Message-ID: 8a7b6377-c83f-4bd7-92dc-378171284ad6 i3g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
References: fk664k$6e1$1 aioe.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4.239.75.210
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1197949972 2463 127.0.0.1 (18 Dec 2007 03:52:52 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 03:52:52 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
Injection-Info: i3g2000hsf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=4.239.75.210; posting-account=s0TWQwkAAABF0w4hiDH6XGaa8DHFtAwv
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:499928

On Dec 17, 10:53 am, "OhioGuy" n... none.net wrote:
Over the past few months, my system has become unstable. I'm running
Windows XP on a VIA V21G board based system.

The first clue was that once in a while, when I would boot up I'd get the
message "The system has recovered from a serious error" It wanted to send a
report or something, and I usually had to click "don't send" 2 or 3 times,
because it would pop back up.
...
So, later on I removed the drive in question, installed it in another
computer, and was able to read from and write to it with no problems at all.
I reformatted it on the other PC, and it works fine.

IOW a perfectly good part was fixed because the defect was not first
identified. It is called shotgunning. We learn from our mistakes.
Appreciate why you still have a failure. Shotgunning.

Solution means moving things from an 'unknown' state to either
'definitively good' or 'definitively bad'. That means numbers and
other facts. The drive was swapped because speculation was assumed to
be fact.

RobV has posted some useful tools. But the one function that can
make everything look defective is a power supply 'system'. More than
just a power supply. Other parts form a 'system'. Two minutes with a
meter and this procedure means the entire 'system' is moved from
'unknown' to 'definitively something'. "When your computer dies
without warning....." starting 6 Feb 2007 in the newsgroup
alt.windows-xp at:
http://tinyurl.com/yvf9vh

In your case, important numbers are from any one orange, red, yellow,
and purple wire when all peripherals are accessed (multitasked)
simultaneously. All numbers must exceed 3.23, 4.87, or 11.7 VDC under
these maximum loads. These numbers are different from (and base in)
RobV's numbers (for engineering reasons).

Only after the supply 'system' is 'definitively good', then move on
to other suspects. Disc diagnostics from the computer or disk
manufacturer can also move that system from 'unknown' to
'definitively ...'.

Memtst86 may identify defective memory. But sometimes only when the
test is executed during normally higher temperatures - such as when
heated by a hairdryer on highest heat setting. Temperatures
uncomfortable to touch but does not burn skin. If memory passes
Memtst86 diagnostics at elevated (normal) temperatures, then memory
moves to the 'definitively good' category.

Once a defect is identified, only then is the suspect replaced.
Those procedures also provide numbers so that others with better
knowledge can also provide useful information.

Connector corrosion is not a reason for failure. If corrosion
causes failures, then electronics are designed defectively. Properly
designed connectors are also self cleaning - break and make a
connection cleans them. Electronics also include noise margins that
make corrosion irrelevant. If connector corrosion causes problems,
then electronics may be defective.

Don't replace anything on speculation - shotgunning. RobV provided
some tools to first find the problem. Meanwhile, also collect other
facts from system 'event' logs and from Device Manager? If necessary,
use Windows' Help to find them.

'Strange' suggests nothing learned by swapping parts. For example,
if reseating a data cabled cured anything, then was the problem due to
connector corrosion? Speculation using shotgunning often makes that
conclusion. But if 'breaking and making' that connection solved
anything, then a defect still exists. Defect still exists even when
problem 'appears' to be solved. We learned this because nothing was
fixed until the 'cure' was explained by 'whys'.

Strange is why responsible manufacturers supply comprehensive
diagnostics. Why does a system/component work here and not there?
Nobody has a clue, in part, because facts provided from diagnostics,
et al were not provided. A conclusion without supporting facts is
nothing more than wild speculation perverted into a proclaimed
'declaration of truth'.

For example, does that 'strangeness' come from a power supply system
defect? We know 'little to nothing' until a conclusion is based in a
'defintively something'. Facts and numbers are essential to fixing
things; solving it the first time; understanding the problem now and
to avoid future problems, AND to even make your posts here useful to
others.

An example of one who often violates these basic principles and who
posts without even basic electrical knowleldge are posts from John
Doe. He even foolishly believes danger exists when probing inside a
computer; which is why his ultimate conclusion is to never remove a
computer's cover.

Generally, repair things to learn. Not only to learn how that
component works. But to also appreciate how reality works. Military
academies graduate everyone with engineering training. Those
graduates are therefore provided training on how to solve all
problems. For example, so many Americans believed Saddam had WMDs
because 'speculation resulting in assumed conclusions' used the same
techniques found in shotgunning. Know something by denying or
ignoring the underlying facts? In that WMD speculation, Zippe, the
company that makes same for America, showed the White House why those
aluminum tubes could never be used for manufacturing WMDs. Those were
facts with numbers. Why did they go right back and proclaim that
Saddam had WMDs? Shotgunning. Conversion of wild speculation (even
ignore the numbers) into 'known facts'.

Curious (not strange) are symptoms of your hardware in a friend's
system. Strange is only because we have no useful facts. Again, why
we learn using facts such as manufacturer diagnostics and other
'numbers and facts'. Notice how many just know how to fix computers
and yet never even learned the power of diagnostics or how things
work? To make a decision without 'numbers and facts' is to declare
wild speculation as fact. To solve problems using Windows as a
diagnostic tool may also complicate a problem. It may appear to fix
something - which is different from actually fixing something.

Again, even a defective power supply can still boot and run a
computer. Does that mean the power supply really is not defective? A
useful conclusion requires facts based in 'definitively'. Shotgunning
does not teach; may only result in failures later (ie inside that
power supply). Not only does it work; but also why? Why is essential
to a solution - the 'definitive something' answer.

Removing a CD-Rom fixed it? Well, which computer was controlling
the bus? Computer inside the CD-Rom or computer inside a disk drive?
If using facts to draw conclusions, then answers to this question
would be part of your symptoms. What was tested by swapping?
Swapping (testing), performed based upon fundamental knowledge (the
hypothesis), is different from swapping based only on wild speculation
(shotgunning).

Meanwhile, your symptoms were classic of what would be discovered or
eliminated by using the two minute procedure in "When your computer
dies without warning....." starting 6 Feb 2007 in the newsgroup
alt.windows-xp at:
http://tinyurl.com/yvf9vh
A defective power supply system (that can still boot a computer) can
also create 'strange' problems. Do you know your or your friend's
power supply system is completely functional? To answer that question
requires numbers.

I assume you are satisfied by having the disk system working without
knowing why. I assume you will not further investigage to actually
learn what had failed or why failure happens. That is what most
people do. Same reason why, for example, only a minority could
suspect that 'Saddam has WMDs' was also based in myths and wild
speculation.

Did you know each disk drive and CD-Rom contains a computer system?
Did you know incompatibilities may exist between their computers?
Those using shotgunning would never learn. Those asking damning
questions - not just trying to shotgun or fix something - would learn
about some disk drives and CD-Roms that can cause the other peripheral
to fail.

This post simply demonstrates why people such as John Doe will often
know without first learning facts. BTW, John Doe is posting here only
because he was previously exposed as an expert who only knows from
shotgunning; does not even have basic electrical knowledge. Does he
post using technical facts, or for emotional revenge? Well, only the
naive would claim motherboard BIOS is sufficient to measure
voltages. BIOS measurement hardware is often unreliable until
calibrated such as by using a 3.5 digit multimeter.

Some ideas to better understood what you experienced. What were the
manufacturers for each disk drive or CD-Rom? How do symptoms change
when changing how the system accesses various combinations of IDE
devices? And, of course, how do those changes affect conclusions from
the hardware diagnostic? Some questions to ask and answer in the
future.

Also curious would be whether you move on to understand the problem
OR are satisfied by just having the disk system working. Many self
proclaimed computer experts never bother to ask damning questions
which is why their solutions are routinely found in shotgunning.

At minimum, I would still execute comprehensive hardware diagnostics
to learn what they report; useful knowledge gained from the
experience. Good to hear you also have a working solution.

On Dec 18, 10:50 am, "OhioGuy" wrote:
I don't really consider this "shotgunning". That would be just randomly
removing a part and testing it.

I was having a hard drive related message come up on bootup, and I
happened to have a couple of spare hard drives laying around in known
working condition.

Therefore, it was a simple thing to replace the hard drive to see if
replacing it might fix the issue.

It really does appear to be some sort of issue caused by having the old
CD-ROM drive on the same data cable. Reseating the data cables didn't catch
that, but running the system without the data cable hooked to the CD-ROM
drive did.

The really strange thing is that the mobile rack drive works fine now, and
it works fine when taken out and hooked up to my PC in the basement.
However, it could not be accessed on my friend's computer. He has another
mobile rack like mine, and hasn't had any problems with it. His system
would boot up ok with this drive in it, but could not see it. Strange.

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:04:37 -0800 (PST), w_tom
wrote:

'Strange' suggests nothing learned by swapping parts. For example,
if reseating a data cabled cured anything, then was the problem due to
connector corrosion? Speculation using shotgunning often makes that
conclusion. But if 'breaking and making' that connection solved
anything, then a defect still exists. Defect still exists even when
problem 'appears' to be solved. We learned this because nothing was


Who gives a crap. If the obnject is to make the thing work again,
then the object has been achieved.