Oh, and there was no ATA port at all that I know of.
“Stupid Windows XP”? Isn’t that redundant? 
Seeing as I’m fully awake now. I understand what you’re saying now. I had an ATA/100 card installed because I didn’t have one before. That’s the new card. LCP didn’t put anything in, and your explanation of the RAID anomaly seems to fit things.
It probably is something to do with the settings on the “D, now F” drive. It used to be a slave drive to the C drive that crashed. I’ll cal them when they open (10am Pacific Time).
One of the best SDMB posts ever! And only the third ever to win the coveted Lib’s 5 Laughie award.
Another use for raid is speeding up the reading and writing to disks in RAID 0 the disks are used much like Dual Channel DDR. Data is “striped” between multiple disks, while waiting for the rest of a read/write on one disk to finish, read/writes can take place on others. This is for the very impatient or folks who move around huge amounts of data frequently.
Incidentally the “I” in RAID was initially inexpensive even though at that time hard disks were in the thousands of dollar price range. It is the opposite of SLED : Single Large Expensive Disks
See the developers Patterson, Gibson and Katz and here and here, the first and last ones give easy to understand descriptions of the various raid configurations.
Checking master/slave jumpers is definately a good idea.
ATA and won’t connect to IDE? Could the new HDD from LCP) be SATA?
All four of my HDD’s are ATA 100’s or ATA 133’s and all are IDE.
P.S. Good advice can be found at these forums, feel free to post questions, they don’t bite.
This is a good forum as is this and this, this and this.
ATA drives are IDE. See here
They don’t mention ATA 133 or SATA because they’re newer than the article.
In the case of ATA and IDE incompatibility it’s usually that the motherboard supports IDE channels running at ATA/66 but the drive is ATA/100 or ATA/133.
In those instances, I’ve had to use separate controller cards to get the new devices to work.
This must be an old Motherboard then. ATA has been around a while, ATA 66 is read/writes 66Mbps
ATA 100 is 100Mbps
ATA 133 is 133Mbps the fastest IDE now.
SATA is 150 MBPS it is not parallel,S is for Serial. It’s 150 Mbps
ancient as far as introduction.
ATA 133’s can run run at ATA 100, the drive can run as slow as the system requires. Two of my drives are 133’s on ATA 100’s
My mistake, it just didn’t have an ATA 100 controller.
Yes, but I have had serious problems getting ATA 100 drives to work properly with ATA 66 on the motherboard.
Theoretically they should be able to run slower, but in reality they totally fucked the system, Windows couldn’t recognize they were there, and I had to get a controller card to make them work.
My current ATA 100 and ATA 133 have no problem working together happily, it was just the other two that didn’t get along.
I also had the same problem of improperly named drives when my primary drive went tits up and I installed XP on a new(er, bigger, faster!!) drive. Easily remedied through the disk management tool where you can manually assign the drive whatever designation you’d like.
As for XP not seeing it as formatted, I’d definitely take catsix’s advice and try converting to NTFS first, but it should be able to see it regardless of format.
XP now writes (by default) the drive letter to the drive itself. If they installed the new disks with the old disks in place, XP will see the the other drive letter in use & assign “F:” in place of “D:” or similar.
You can rewrite the drive letter with the drive management utility or via the command line with the “diskpart” utility. This Microsoft KB article will explain it.
Note, the method described does not work on CD or DVD drives, just hard drives. It also doesn’t work to change your boot-drive address. That’s officially not possible.