PDA

View Full Version : Zip drive not working under DOS 6.2



uncleseth
November 8th, 2008, 03:05 PM
Hi,

I have a 386 computer that has been thrown together out of a bushel basket. I am trying to get either an internal or external zip drive working. I have a combination HDD/FDD/serial/parallel/game card installed right now that is running a 5.25 floppy, a 3.5 floppy, a WDAC2200 hard drive, a microsoft mouse, and a Thrustmaster joystick. I just bought and installed a Creative Labs Omni 2X CD drive that is running off of a Sound Blaster 16 card. All of that works just great under DOS 6.2. I will probably install Windows 3.1 in the future. I have several internal 100MB zip drives that I have tried one by one hooking into the IDE port on the controller card. I set the HDD to master and the zip to slave. Everything goes haywire, from dead controller issues to non-booting issues. Don't ask why, but I really want to run a zip drive on this thing. Should I try SCSI, or as a last resort, a parallel version of zip? Or should I try something else for the internal zip? The controller card is a PM520 if that helps. It is supposed to run 2 IDE devices. I have successfully installed a parallel 100mb zip on my 486. Could my computer be too old for zip drives? I am at a loss right now.

Thanks,

Terry Yager
November 8th, 2008, 03:11 PM
Hmmmn, I'd try the SCSI option if it's available, before you tear out any more of your hair.

--T

mbbrutman
November 8th, 2008, 03:41 PM
The IDE controller on the 386 might not be up to the task. Zip drives are ATAPI devices, which is a superset of IDE.

If you want those Zip drives to run, get a newer controller. Vanilla IDE probably isn't enough.

Chuck(G)
November 8th, 2008, 04:18 PM
ATAPI is mostly a matter of a driver, rather than anything weird in the hardware. I suspect that there's a timing issue with the controller. Are you running the controller in PIO mode 0? Are you using a 40-conductor IDE cable or the UDMA 80-conductor one? If the latter, try a 40-conductor cable. It can make a a difference.

SCSI or even parallel port Zip drives are generally the least trouble in my experience.

Anonymous Coward
November 8th, 2008, 04:39 PM
I have a Zip100 Plus drive with carrying case and 10 disks for sale. Supposedly it can work with either parallel port or 25-pin SCSI.

uncleseth
November 8th, 2008, 04:42 PM
Hi,

I am using a 40 pin cable. Would the BIOS tell me what mode it is running in? The BIOS is pretty basic. Do I need to have a driver installed for the PM520 controller because I don't as of now. I looked at the BIOS and it doesn't support anything except for 2 IDE HDD, no other choices. I am slowly learning about these old ancient machines.

Thanks,

MikeS
November 8th, 2008, 05:12 PM
A 386 and DOS6.2 should be fine, and I'd be surprised if the controller were the problem. You do realize that you will require a driver? Also, be aware that although the newer 40-pin ZIP100s are ATAPI (model # Z100ATAPI), the early ones are NOT (although they look very similar and use the same cable). I would also recommend putting it on its own IDE port if possible.

And of course we're assuming the drive itself is OK.

mike

Chuck(G)
November 8th, 2008, 05:19 PM
Driverguide has the DOS (I'm assuming that's what you're running) driver. I've got them also, if you're not having any luck finding them.

ISTR that the old (ATA not ATAPI) Zip behaved like a hard drive if an initialized disk was present in the drive at boot time. Otherwise, you definitely needed the driver (I think it was called GUEST). Best to use the driver all of the time.

The ATAPI version needs a driver regardless of the state of the drive at boot.

uncleseth
November 8th, 2008, 05:28 PM
Hi,

Just want to clear things up a little here. Should the controller card, the PM-520, have a driver installed for it? I have all of the drivers for the zip drives. The PM-520 is unidentified as for the manufacturer. Stason.org has all of the settings for it. Also, if I have to go SCSI, is there a certain controller card that I need? I heard that the SCSI zip is 25pin, and I've heard that the parallel version can be used as SCSI also. Is that true?

Thanks,

MikeS
November 8th, 2008, 05:45 PM
Multi-I/O cards did not usually require drivers for a standard configuration.

If you have the choice, the parallel ZIP drive would probably be the most straightforward, not use up an IDE port, and of course can be moved and used with a floppy version of Guest (as opposed to drivers in config.sys & autoexec.bat).

For the IDE/ATA/ATAPI internals there are a number of different drivers; needless to say, you need the correct one ;-)

If you still have that 486, why not try installing it there? That would remove the PM-520 from the equation; maybe it even has dual IDE ports so there's no conflict?

I recall lots of confusion and frustration with the early drives and DOS, not to mention the infamous click of death, but at the time they were a godsend (when they worked). Still have a lot of stuff archived on ZIP disks; should probably transfer it while I still have working drives...

I believe that yes, the parallel ZIP100 is a SCSI drive internally.

m

mbbrutman
November 8th, 2008, 06:09 PM
ATAPI is mostly a matter of a driver, rather than anything weird in the hardware. I suspect that there's a timing issue with the controller. Are you running the controller in PIO mode 0? Are you using a 40-conductor IDE cable or the UDMA 80-conductor one? If the latter, try a 40-conductor cable. It can make a a difference.

SCSI or even parallel port Zip drives are generally the least trouble in my experience.

I might be wrong, but I think that you have over simplified this. ATAPI is electrically similar to IDE, but the command set is a superset of IDE. ATAPI devices like CD-ROMS and this Zip drive can not be driven by an IDE chipset that doesn't have the ATAPI commands.

So I'm standing by my assertion that the IDE controller is old enough where it doesn't recognize ATAPI commands. Put a newer ATAPI capable controller in the machine and the OP will have better luck.

MikeS
November 8th, 2008, 07:19 PM
Interesting; regarding the IDE ZIP drives I was under the same impression as Chuck, i.e. pretty well any true IDE interface would work as long as you used the correct ASPI manager out of the 1/2 dozen or so supplied with the drives (usually ASPIATAP or ASPIIDE and/or GUEST). I may just have to dig out one of my old 386/486 systems that has a ZIP drive and the various versions of ZIPtools and drivers and investigate...

Of course some BIOSs on the newer integrated MoBos provided direct support and/or boot capability, but that's a different issue.

The fact that it interferes with an IDE drive on the same port suggests to me that either it's not an ATAPI model or the M/S/CS settings/cable are incorrect, but maybe the MIO card is the problem after all - what do I know...

Update:
FWIW, I did just dig out an ATAPI ZIP100 drive, stuck it into an ancient 386 with a single IDE port as slave to the HD master, ran Guest and Bob's your uncle; no problem.

If I can find one of my IDE versions I'll give that a try as well.

m

Druid6900
November 8th, 2008, 07:26 PM
And when I recovered the files off that guy's Rodime hard drive, I just used an old 386 MoBo, grabbed a 16-bit MI/O card out of the box, cabled and powered everything up, loaded the drivers and away it went (after I figured out that I had to floppy boot from 6.2 since the O/S on the HD was too old)

MikeS
November 8th, 2008, 08:20 PM
<snip>
ATAPI is electrically similar to IDE, but the command set is a superset of IDE. ATAPI devices like CD-ROMS and this Zip drive can not be driven by an IDE chipset that doesn't have the ATAPI commands.
<snip>

-----
Does an IDE "chipset" even know anything about "commands"? I thought an IDE "controller" was essentially nothing more than a bus buffer?

m

Chuck(G)
November 8th, 2008, 09:49 PM
-----
Does an IDE "chipset" even know anything about "commands"? I thought an IDE "controller" was essentially nothing more than a bus buffer?

m

Bingo. At least in PIO mode, an IDE controller is dumb as a stump. ATAPI pretty much encapsulates a close relative of the SCSI command set in a set of ATA commands. The controller doesn't know or care.

That's not to say that there could be some ATA controller out there with lots of smarts, but it would be exceptional.

I know I've run 100 MB ATA Zip drives on DOS 6.2 successfully.

Drivers are the missing part of the puzzle.

MikeS
November 9th, 2008, 07:19 AM
<snip>
I know I've run 100 MB ATA Zip drives on DOS 6.2 successfully.

Drivers are the missing part of the puzzle.
Most probably.

But even without drivers it shouldn't interfere with the HD, so I'd double-check the M/S/CS jumpers, check the cable (NOT 80-conductor!) and maybe disconnect the HD and try booting and running Guest from a floppy.

Chuck(G)
November 9th, 2008, 09:46 AM
But even without drivers it shouldn't interfere with the HD, so I'd double-check the M/S/CS jumpers, check the cable (NOT 80-conductor!) and maybe disconnect the HD and try booting and running Guest from a floppy.

I agree--and also suspect that that old 212MB WD hard drive is part of the puzzle. It hails from a time when "X hard drive as master doesn't work with Y hard drive as slave" was far more common.

I'd try a different HD to start with.

uncleseth
November 20th, 2008, 01:34 PM
Finally bought an Iomega SCSI internal zip with controller, and it fixed all my problems. Thanks for everybody's help.

barythrin
November 20th, 2008, 02:18 PM
Good choice. I was about to post and suggest against the Parallel idea although yes it's nicely compatible with vintage PCs but it's pretty damn slow for practical use. SCSI is sorta neat also since a lot of vintage systems will see it as an external hard drive (Amiga, Mac, etc).

Micom 2000
November 20th, 2008, 04:08 PM
I have a program from a German programer which allows Iomega drives to run on an Atari Portfolio and other palmtops.
http://leute.server.de/peichl/pfe.htm
One of his cautions was that newer Zip drives wouldn't work with it. Obviously Iomega had changed some of it's internal workings with it's newer models. Mind you my experience has always been with external models, SCSI on Atari STs, Macs, Amiga, all M68000 machines, or SCSI or parallel on Wintel boxes. I found little difference with the speed since to my knowledge the parallel subset uses SCSI which is of course faster than IDE.

I tend to agree with Mike S. and others that the root of the problem is likely the driver. One should be aware however that Iomega no longer supplies the older drivers and perhaps the driver used, if supplied by Iomega recently, did not accord to older ISA systems ATA needs.

Lawrence

Chuck(G)
November 20th, 2008, 04:39 PM
Good choice. I was about to post and suggest against the Parallel idea although yes it's nicely compatible with vintage PCs but it's pretty damn slow for practical use. SCSI is sorta neat also since a lot of vintage systems will see it as an external hard drive (Amiga, Mac, etc).

Parallel depends a lot on the vintage of the interface and the adapter. Using a peripheral that ECP/EPP compatible with an appropriately-parallel-port-equipped PC can turn in very respectable (>1MB/sec) datarates. A Zip drive is perfect in this situation.

OTOH, transferring data via nibble mode on an SPP-type port can be very slow.