delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: opendos/2001/02/16/02:32:53

Message-ID: <01FD6EC775C6D4119CDF0090273F74A4021F69@emwatent02.meters.com.au>
From: "da Silva, Joe" <Joe DOT daSilva AT emailmetering DOT com>
To: "'opendos AT delorie DOT com'" <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: RE: Max. drive letter, etc. (was Hard Disk 20gb and dos)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 18:32:29 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com

Oh, yeah - that reminds me ... does anyone know for
certain that this 24 drive limit is real, or are people
simply assuming this because there are about 24
letters (26 actually) in the English alphabet?

I remember reading an old Micro$oft manual that
said you could have *more* drive letters than there
were letters in the alphabet, so that the drives above
"Z:" would be "[:" and so on, as per the ASCII
character set ...

Joe.

Speaking of other (possible) myths, I also vaguely
recall reading somewhere that the often quoted
statement, that "if you have two drives on an IDE
cable, then the slowest drive will determine the
speed (transfer rate) of both drives", is a myth ...

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Bernie [SMTP:bernie AT mbox302 DOT swipnet DOT se]
> Sent:	Friday, 16 February 2001 17:46
> To:	opendos AT delorie DOT com
> Subject:	Re: Hard Disk 20gb and dos
> 
> Pat wrote:
> >Yes the is very true. DOS only has the cpability of 24 total drives,
> >whether they be physical or logical or a conbination of both. So why use
> >an 8GB drive for FAT 16? Really seems rediculous to me.
> 
> I know that, still I have more than 10GB for DOS (MS-DOS 6.2, two drives)
> here. I have no idea what it is. My hope is that sometime this week (ie.
> tommorow) or the next I'll get my new parts. With a new 46.1GB HD I'll
> start over with a fresh set of GBs - not even copying the c:\dos directory
> :)
> //Bernie

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019