SATA Vista beta install problems RRS feed

  • Question

  • I am new to this area and have for the last month been having problems with the installation of th e Vista beta. No matter what type of install I have tried the OS fails at one of 2 spots, expanding the files with numerous errors, unable to fix files, files corrupt, unable to read cab files and a few I did not write down.
    Installations I have tried, upgrade from windows XP SP2, clean install with no programs or drivers intstalled, this one got the furthest, first reboot recieved Critical system error and install aborted and reverted back to XP.
    Boot up on DVD and do clean partion install, never has gotten past the expanding files.
    Now, about the system, P4 2.9 w/HT, gigabyte 8s661fxmp-rz Mobo, 1 Gig Muskin DDR400 ram, Antec V2 350Watt PS, Antec Mid tower, Sony A800 DVD-RW Dual, connected to IDE 1, 120 Gig Seagate ATA100 Drive, connected to IDE 0/Master. 100 Gig, WD SATA 1.5 setup in bios as an IDE drive, connected to IDE 2. Toshiba 1.44 floppy, Using onboard AC97 audio, and 100mgbit Nic.
    I tried this morning installing on the EIDE drive on patition 2 and the install had completed to finishing install when I had to leave for work. Will not know results of this install till later this after noon. Also, the DVD is from Microsoft, which also has the X64 DVD in the case as well.
    Anyone have any ideas


    Update:  EIDE installation went through with no problems, question now is, why didn't the software that is supposed to tell you that you have non-conforming software/hardware not say that my drive or chipset was not supported?
    I also was under the impression that this forum was moderated by Devs, if this is wrong please correct me.

    Glenn A Nicholson

    Friday, June 30, 2006 6:20 PM

All replies

  • When I installed windows vista, te same thing happened to me. I figured out how to solve the problem after I Formatted and erased all the information I had on my hard drive (Thing I didn´t wanted to do) Using the manufacturer disk manager. But the funny thing is that I found that besides I Have to dvd burners (From different manufacturer) Windows vista didn't show any error using the same unit where I burnt the installation DVD. So I think it would be one that can work for you. Other : Re-Burn the DVD using an alternate program.
    Saturday, July 1, 2006 7:31 PM
  • if you're having errors with the disk you're using, make sure its finalized...
    Sunday, July 2, 2006 3:18 AM
  • Like I posted above, the DVD is the beta 2 that was shipped from microsoft.  I have to believe that the disk is finalized, as well when I installed onto a EIDE drive there were NO problems with install, and I do mean NO problems, the other funny thing was the install to the EIDE drive took 1 hour, while the installs to the SATA drives would go for 2 hours or more before giving an error message.

    Monday, July 3, 2006 4:18 PM
  • installing to SATA has been a big headache for many, your best bet if you can get ahold of drivers for your Sata controller on your motherboard, or also the RAID drivers (i am assuming it has RAID as most boards these days do) install the raid drivers before you try to install to the HD
    Friday, July 7, 2006 7:11 PM
  • Getting drivers for ther motherboard is the biggest problem. Nobody is making them yet.

    I have a Asus board and on there site you can't find a Vista driver.

    That is the biggest problem.

    Monday, August 14, 2006 8:54 PM
  • Look for Nvidia´s page ... you can find the vista beta drivers there............
    Monday, August 14, 2006 9:05 PM
  • For reasons I do not understand, installing any version of Windows to SATA can be a nightmare.  All the chipsets seem to have their own quirks, and SATA drives often seem to have twitchy firmware.  My 320GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 on an Asus A8R-MVP simply "didn't like" XP SP2 and endlessly rebooted after installation (the mup.sys curse).  My 300GB Barracuda 7200.9 refused to boot windows on an Nforce4 board, but works great as a boot drive on my ATI Crossfire board.

    I can imagine the problems Vista would have...

    I agree with Kevin's advice, but I would add that you should try disabling IDE emulation (use native AHCI) and disable the RAID boot rom (you shouldn't need it if you aren't using RAID, and it adds another layer of things that could go wrong.  Then try installing Vista with a driver floppy loaded with the latest SATA drivers from the Nvidia website.

     Of course, if you have the IDE drive working you might just want to leave it that way!

    Tuesday, August 15, 2006 5:28 AM
  • Thanks for the reply, as for my SATA drivers, SiS is the chipset and they only supply the Raid driver for it.  My SATA drive is a Maxtor and the installation cd has the SATA drivers for NT 4, Server 2003, Server 2000 and XP.  Have tried using that disk, but vista says no drivers found.  Since I cannot get the Dual boot to work either, I have an EIDE and SATA drive on the system, was installing Vista on the EIDE drive and XP on the SATA drive.  I may just take the EIDE drive and split it one partition for XP one for Vista.   Let me know if you think this will work, I may try installing into the SATA drive via your instrucions to use the AHCI.

    Friday, August 18, 2006 8:41 PM
  • Hi Glenn,

    Can you get updated Vista drivers for the Sis chipset?  If they only have a RAID driver, use that, since it will include the SATA drivers.

    If you can't get Vista drivers for the Sis chipset, then I'd advise against trying to install now.  The drivers will show up eventually, and RC1 is almost out anyway.

    In general, I STRONGLY advise against putting two OS's on the same hard drive.  It introduces too many things that can go wrong.  If the second install goes bad somehow, you lose both OS's.  Unless you have a real love for the Recovery Console, spare yourself this pain.

    I've been doing this for years, and the best way I've found to have multiple OS's is to physically disconnect all hard drives except the one you plan to install to.  This prevents the OS from putting the bootloader someplace unexpected.  Once the new OS is working, I reconnect everything and use the BIOS pop-up boot manager to select the drive I want.  If one OS drive self-destructs, it can't affect any other OS install.

    I'd also add that Vista isn't yet reliable enough to trust with unusual disk layouts.  Vista's disk management service corrupted one of my dynamic disks so that XP couldn't read it (fortunately Vista could, so I didn't have to dig into my backups).  You definitely need to give Vista it's own drive separate from your primary OS.

    If I were you, I'd just get ahold of an extra IDE drive to use with Vista.  If you ask around, I'm sure you could find an old computer you could salvage or a friend with one in his sockdrawer. :)

    Friday, August 18, 2006 9:47 PM
  • Thanks for your reply, but it looks like you either misunderstood what I was saying or did not read the full post .
    I am using 2 different Harddrives. An SATA and an EIDE drive. The problem I have been experiancing is the lack of a Boot Menu on any install, done on Either drive. The install does not reconize the Second OS, which is XP MCE. As far as how long I have been doing this is concerned I started working on PC's in 1986, At that time to run IBM programs you had to modify the motherboard tracings to allow 16 and 8 bit programs to run on anything but a compaq or Ibm pc.
    This is an issue with the installer, not the drivers that Identify the harddrive, I have yet run into any issue with Vista not reconizing or being able to install on either of my drives, since the chipset is 4 years old, I had figured Microsoft would have put the drivers needed for it already, since XP does not use any drivers to work with the SATA drive. If I am wrong on that point please let me know

    Monday, August 21, 2006 3:39 PM
  • You would need to configure the boot manager manually.  There are plenty of resources around on how to do that.  I think Vista can configured to start XP.  I don't know if XP's boot manager can start Vista.

    As I said, I always use the BIOS to boot directly from the MBR I want, but there are many threads on configuring sofware dual boot.

    About SATA,

    Earlier SATA-1 chipsets emulated IDE for compatibility purposes.  That's why installing XP to them was generally easy.  Unfortunately, this emulation sometimes was flakey and had poor data-recovery.  This may be why Vista originally choked on your SATA install.

    Newer chipsets tend to use AHCI interfaces that are optimized for SATA but usually require drivers to install (when installed, the SATA driver shows up as a SCSI-type interface in Windows).  AHCI mode should be used for SATA if it is an option.

    More info here:


    Tuesday, August 22, 2006 4:17 PM
  • Thanks much for the infomation, your link was very informitive.  What I did notice is that the link you supplied is 3 years old.  Allbeit, the basics will not change, but I think the spec has.  I found this site while searching for more information on the SATA system with current specs and information.  For some reason I am unable to insert this address as a link, here it is: http://www.sata-io.org/satatechnology.asp

    Again thanks, I still have a few days before I will be able to test this information on my system.


    Wednesday, August 23, 2006 3:31 PM
  • Thanks for all your answers but the one that worked was installing  preRC1.  during install it allowed me to use the XP SATA drivers that Maxtor had provided on thier utility disk that came with the drive,to do the install.  Once those drivers were used by Vista, the install went without a hitch and it only took 15 mins to get from starting install to my desktop.

    It seems MS listened when we asked to be able to use legacy drivers during install, works smooth as silk.  Now on the other hand, Nvidia needs to find out why there 88.61 beta drivers fail during the monitor/video card sync test



    Sunday, September 3, 2006 10:46 PM