DVDs, Win98 & 4Gb file size limit

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by moriman, Jul 6, 2005.

  1. moriman

    moriman Guest

    Hi,

    Is it possbile to work with DVDs using Win98?

    In particular I am thinking of the 4Gb file size limit of Win98's FAT32 file
    system. If I want to create an iso image of a DVD on my 40Gb hard drive,
    CloneDVD is complaining that my drive doesn't support files larger that 4Gb.
    I can repartition the drive to have a 10GB (for example) NTFS partition
    (that does support files > 4Gb) but this partition will not be recognised by
    Win98 :(

    I really do prefer Win98 to XP but cannot see a way around this problem.

    Any help that can be offered would be greatly appreciated ;-)

    TIA

    mori
    moriman, Jul 6, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. moriman

    Java Jive Guest

    I do all my video work on W2K with pretty good results. You may be able to
    do it on W98, but I suspect there would be a number of problems.

    1) IIRC the file size limit is 2Gb? The partition limit under FAT16 is
    4Gb.
    2) Although the end DVD video *.VOB files to be burned onto DVD+-R(W)
    will be 1Gb or less, source video files for the DVD Authoring may well be
    the full 4.7Gb, it depends on your source. Eg: Panasonic HD/DVD Recorder;
    use FR mode to squeeze long film onto DVD-RAM; put this in PC; result is one
    huge file ~4.7Gb in length.

    You should grasp the nettle and upgrade your OS - W2K is so much more
    stable and reliable than W98 that when my last place of work upgraded,
    support staff who had been chronically over-worked were suddenly reduced to
    competing for work. You do need a suitably spec'ed PC tho'

    "moriman" <> wrote in message
    news:dah70b$e1$-infra.bt.com...

    > Is it possbile to work with DVDs using Win98?
    Java Jive, Jul 6, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. moriman

    John Howells Guest

    "Java Jive" <> wrote

    > 1) IIRC the file size limit is 2Gb? The partition limit under FAT16 is
    > 4Gb.


    Only on NT based systems (NT, 2K, XP) is FAT16 allowed to go to 4G, and such
    partitions are not accessible to MS-DOS, or any Win9x variant, where the
    partition limit is 2G.

    John Howells
    John Howells, Jul 6, 2005
    #3
  4. moriman

    billh Guest

    "moriman" <> wrote in message
    news:dah70b$e1$-infra.bt.com...
    > Hi,
    >
    > Is it possbile to work with DVDs using Win98?
    >
    > In particular I am thinking of the 4Gb file size limit of Win98's FAT32
    > file
    > system. If I want to create an iso image of a DVD on my 40Gb hard drive,
    > CloneDVD is complaining that my drive doesn't support files larger that
    > 4Gb.
    > I can repartition the drive to have a 10GB (for example) NTFS partition
    > (that does support files > 4Gb) but this partition will not be recognised
    > by
    > Win98 :(
    >
    > I really do prefer Win98 to XP but cannot see a way around this problem.
    >
    > Any help that can be offered would be greatly appreciated ;-)
    >
    > TIA
    >
    > mori
    >
    >

    I liked W98 and W98SE was one of the best Windows OS. I like XP and have
    found it to be very stable although it is hard to abandon the devil you know
    for a new devil. Your problems caused by staying with W98 are going to get
    worse, not better as time goes on so I recommend you just move onto the OS
    that natively supports what you are trying to do if your budget permits.
    billh
    billh, Jul 6, 2005
    #4
  5. moriman

    Guest

    On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 19:59:57 +0100, "Java Jive" <> wrote:

    >I do all my video work on W2K with pretty good results. You may be able to
    >do it on W98, but I suspect there would be a number of problems.
    >
    >1) IIRC the file size limit is 2Gb? The partition limit under FAT16 is
    >4Gb.
    >2) Although the end DVD video *.VOB files to be burned onto DVD+-R(W)
    >will be 1Gb or less, source video files for the DVD Authoring may well be
    >the full 4.7Gb, it depends on your source. Eg: Panasonic HD/DVD Recorder;
    >use FR mode to squeeze long film onto DVD-RAM; put this in PC; result is one
    >huge file ~4.7Gb in length.
    >
    >You should grasp the nettle and upgrade your OS - W2K is so much more
    >stable and reliable than W98 that when my last place of work upgraded,
    >support staff who had been chronically over-worked were suddenly reduced to
    >competing for work. You do need a suitably spec'ed PC tho'
    >
    >"moriman" <> wrote in message
    >news:dah70b$e1$-infra.bt.com...
    >
    >> Is it possbile to work with DVDs using Win98?

    >

    Agree. Win2K is very stable, supports FAT16, FAT32, and NTFS, doesn't have
    the B.S. WinXP does, looks/feels just like Win98, and works well even with
    'modest' processors (very usable with Pentium-3 processors, even better with
    one-gigahertz or faster CPUs).

    Yes, I believe the max file size is 2 gb under FAT32. FAT16 supports partitions
    up to four gigabytes, but DOS/9x can only 'see' two gigabytes. Incidentally,
    the cluster size for a four-gig FAT16 partition is ridiculous and will result
    in massive drive slack.

    Is it possible to work with DVDs under Win98? Yes, but I think you'll find it
    easier under Win2000 - and as has already been pointed out, you're restricted
    in file size to two gigabytes, which will be a problem with your source files.
    There are utilities that allow Win9x/ME-based machines to read NTFS volumes,
    but this is a kludge approach. Installing Win2K or newer is the most elegant
    solution.
    , Jul 6, 2005
    #5
  6. moriman

    GraB Guest

    On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 16:31:52 -0400, wrote:

    >On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 19:59:57 +0100, "Java Jive" <> wrote:
    >
    >>I do all my video work on W2K with pretty good results. You may be able to
    >>do it on W98, but I suspect there would be a number of problems.
    >>
    >>1) IIRC the file size limit is 2Gb? The partition limit under FAT16 is
    >>4Gb.
    >>2) Although the end DVD video *.VOB files to be burned onto DVD+-R(W)
    >>will be 1Gb or less, source video files for the DVD Authoring may well be
    >>the full 4.7Gb, it depends on your source. Eg: Panasonic HD/DVD Recorder;
    >>use FR mode to squeeze long film onto DVD-RAM; put this in PC; result is one
    >>huge file ~4.7Gb in length.
    >>
    >>You should grasp the nettle and upgrade your OS - W2K is so much more
    >>stable and reliable than W98 that when my last place of work upgraded,
    >>support staff who had been chronically over-worked were suddenly reduced to
    >>competing for work. You do need a suitably spec'ed PC tho'
    >>
    >>"moriman" <> wrote in message
    >>news:dah70b$e1$-infra.bt.com...
    >>
    >>> Is it possbile to work with DVDs using Win98?

    >>

    >Agree. Win2K is very stable, supports FAT16, FAT32, and NTFS, doesn't have
    >the B.S. WinXP does, looks/feels just like Win98, and works well even with
    >'modest' processors (very usable with Pentium-3 processors, even better with
    >one-gigahertz or faster CPUs).
    >
    >Yes, I believe the max file size is 2 gb under FAT32. FAT16 supports partitions
    >up to four gigabytes, but DOS/9x can only 'see' two gigabytes. Incidentally,
    >the cluster size for a four-gig FAT16 partition is ridiculous and will result
    >in massive drive slack.
    >
    >Is it possible to work with DVDs under Win98? Yes, but I think you'll find it
    >easier under Win2000 - and as has already been pointed out, you're restricted
    >in file size to two gigabytes, which will be a problem with your source files.
    >There are utilities that allow Win9x/ME-based machines to read NTFS volumes,
    >but this is a kludge approach. Installing Win2K or newer is the most elegant
    >solution.


    Or Linux.

    What is all this talk about FAT16? Win95b and later supports FAT32.

    Maximum file size: 4 GB minus 1 byte (2 ³² bytes minus 1 byte).
    http://tinyurl.com/2ozuo

    Using 98SE I ripped a DVD once to a single file as an experiment and
    it stopped at 4Gig (-1 byte). It played back fine.
    GraB, Jul 7, 2005
    #6
  7. moriman

    erik Guest

    "moriman" <> wrote in message
    news:dah70b$e1$-infra.bt.com...
    > Hi,
    >
    > Is it possbile to work with DVDs using Win98?
    >
    > In particular I am thinking of the 4Gb file size limit of Win98's
    > FAT32 file
    > system. If I want to create an iso image of a DVD on my 40Gb hard
    > drive,
    > CloneDVD is complaining that my drive doesn't support files larger
    > that 4Gb.
    > I can repartition the drive to have a 10GB (for example) NTFS
    > partition
    > (that does support files > 4Gb) but this partition will not be
    > recognised by
    > Win98 :(
    >
    > I really do prefer Win98 to XP but cannot see a way around this
    > problem.
    >
    > Any help that can be offered would be greatly appreciated ;-)
    >
    > TIA
    >
    > mori
    >


    If you really must keep Win98 for whatever reason, use dual boot and
    install XP as well. But I would get rid of Win98. My brother used to
    have it, too, but his children were installing various games and they
    succeeded to damage it pretty quickly (just by
    installing/deinstalling) - I used to have 2-3 phonecalls from him per
    week that something is damaged again, please help. After installing XP
    problems stopped (or he does not want to speak with me again? :)
    Anyway, XP is more robust and if you have good enough hardware, you
    should use it. You'll get used to it pretty quickly. BTW 10GB
    partition won't be probably enough.
    erik, Jul 7, 2005
    #7
  8. moriman

    Guest

    you should have no problem whatsoever in creating iso images using
    these older OS. Most programs worthy of the name allow ISO images to
    be split into sections that the os file system can handle ( spanning)
    eg dvddecrypter. I use Win98se and have no problems. The only
    difficulty is that most editing software these days works on XP and


    On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 18:13:31 +0000 (UTC), "moriman"
    <> wrote:

    >Hi,
    >
    >Is it possbile to work with DVDs using Win98?
    >
    >In particular I am thinking of the 4Gb file size limit of Win98's FAT32 file
    >system. If I want to create an iso image of a DVD on my 40Gb hard drive,
    >CloneDVD is complaining that my drive doesn't support files larger that 4Gb.
    >I can repartition the drive to have a 10GB (for example) NTFS partition
    >(that does support files > 4Gb) but this partition will not be recognised by
    >Win98 :(
    >
    >I really do prefer Win98 to XP but cannot see a way around this problem.
    >
    >Any help that can be offered would be greatly appreciated ;-)
    >
    >TIA
    >
    >mori
    >
    >
    , Jul 7, 2005
    #8
  9. moriman

    Guest

    you should have no problem whatsoever in creating iso images using
    these older OS. Most programs worthy of the name allow ISO images to
    be split into sections that the os file system can handle ( spanning)
    eg dvddecrypter. I use Win98se and have no problems. The only
    difficulty is that most editing software these days works on XP and


    On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 18:13:31 +0000 (UTC), "moriman"
    <> wrote:

    >Hi,
    >
    >Is it possbile to work with DVDs using Win98?
    >
    >In particular I am thinking of the 4Gb file size limit of Win98's FAT32 file
    >system. If I want to create an iso image of a DVD on my 40Gb hard drive,
    >CloneDVD is complaining that my drive doesn't support files larger that 4Gb.
    >I can repartition the drive to have a 10GB (for example) NTFS partition
    >(that does support files > 4Gb) but this partition will not be recognised by
    >Win98 :(
    >
    >I really do prefer Win98 to XP but cannot see a way around this problem.
    >
    >Any help that can be offered would be greatly appreciated ;-)
    >
    >TIA
    >
    >mori
    >
    >
    , Jul 7, 2005
    #9
  10. moriman

    David Z Guest

    "billh" <> wrote in message
    news:9xWye.7076$...
    >
    > "moriman" <> wrote in message
    > news:dah70b$e1$-infra.bt.com...
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> Is it possbile to work with DVDs using Win98?
    >>
    >> In particular I am thinking of the 4Gb file size limit of Win98's FAT32
    >> file
    >> system. If I want to create an iso image of a DVD on my 40Gb hard drive,
    >> CloneDVD is complaining that my drive doesn't support files larger that
    >> 4Gb.
    >> I can repartition the drive to have a 10GB (for example) NTFS partition
    >> (that does support files > 4Gb) but this partition will not be recognised
    >> by
    >> Win98 :(
    >>
    >> I really do prefer Win98 to XP but cannot see a way around this problem.
    >>
    >> Any help that can be offered would be greatly appreciated ;-)
    >>
    >> TIA
    >>
    >> mori
    >>
    >>

    > I liked W98 and W98SE was one of the best Windows OS. I like


    Er, no, one of the best Windows OS's was Win95 OSR2. Win98 was simply Win95
    with integrated IE4 and a few other updates. Most of which could be
    downloaded and installed separately.
    David Z, Jul 7, 2005
    #10
  11. moriman

    Guest


    >What is all this talk about FAT16? Win95b and later supports FAT32.


    Someone had mentioned FAT16 and said that it supported 4 gb partitions.
    I was only pointing out that 4 gigs was not possible under the DOS/Win9x
    kernel, and even under NTFS the cluster size was astronomical and would
    generate huge drive slack. Not sure how the topic came up originally.

    >Maximum file size: 4 GB minus 1 byte (2 ³² bytes minus 1 byte).
    >http://tinyurl.com/2ozuo


    Yes, I realized my error this morning. It is indeed a four-gig max
    file size under FAT32. I stand corrected.

    >Using 98SE I ripped a DVD once to a single file as an experiment and
    >it stopped at 4Gig (-1 byte). It played back fine.
    , Jul 7, 2005
    #11
  12. erik wrote:
    > "moriman" <> wrote in message
    > news:dah70b$e1$-infra.bt.com...
    >
    >>Hi,
    >>
    >>Is it possbile to work with DVDs using Win98?
    >>
    >>In particular I am thinking of the 4Gb file size limit of Win98's
    >>FAT32 file
    >>system. If I want to create an iso image of a DVD on my 40Gb hard
    >>drive,
    >>CloneDVD is complaining that my drive doesn't support files larger
    >>that 4Gb.
    >>I can repartition the drive to have a 10GB (for example) NTFS
    >>partition
    >>(that does support files > 4Gb) but this partition will not be
    >>recognised by
    >>Win98 :(
    >>
    >>I really do prefer Win98 to XP but cannot see a way around this
    >>problem.
    >>
    >>Any help that can be offered would be greatly appreciated ;-)
    >>
    >>TIA
    >>
    >>mori
    >>

    >
    >
    > If you really must keep Win98 for whatever reason, use dual boot and
    > install XP as well. But I would get rid of Win98. My brother used to
    > have it, too, but his children were installing various games and they
    > succeeded to damage it pretty quickly (just by
    > installing/deinstalling) - I used to have 2-3 phonecalls from him per
    > week that something is damaged again, please help. After installing XP
    > problems stopped (or he does not want to speak with me again? :)
    > Anyway, XP is more robust and if you have good enough hardware, you
    > should use it. You'll get used to it pretty quickly. BTW 10GB
    > partition won't be probably enough.
    >


    Stupid question probably but would NT4.0 work as a substitute to XP as
    I'd assume from the NT in NTFS that they use the same file system format ?


    Richard.
    Richard Brooks, Jul 7, 2005
    #12
  13. moriman

    Guest

    On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 17:56:55 +0100, Richard Brooks <>
    wrote:

    >Stupid question probably but would NT4.0 work as a substitute to XP as
    >I'd assume from the NT in NTFS that they use the same file system format ?


    No such thing as a stupid question. Yes, NT 4.0 uses NTFS, but I can't
    think of any particular advantage to NT 4.0 over Win2K or WinXP. Why
    would you want to do this?
    , Jul 7, 2005
    #13
  14. wrote:
    > On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 17:56:55 +0100, Richard Brooks <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Stupid question probably but would NT4.0 work as a substitute to XP as
    >>I'd assume from the NT in NTFS that they use the same file system format ?

    >
    >
    > No such thing as a stupid question. Yes, NT 4.0 uses NTFS, but I can't
    > think of any particular advantage to NT 4.0 over Win2K or WinXP. Why
    > would you want to do this?


    In my travels around my attic (past the Netware boxes, Concurrent PC-DOS
    and QuickBASIC) I found my copy I thought I'd thrown away! Reading in
    some of the notes, it looks like your idea in buying WinXP is the best
    bet as there are some NT4 installation issues with drives larger than 4gig!


    Richard.
    Richard Brooks, Jul 7, 2005
    #14
  15. moriman

    erik Guest

    "Richard Brooks" <> wrote in message
    news:dak3qm$ujt$...
    > wrote:
    >> On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 17:56:55 +0100, Richard Brooks
    >> <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Stupid question probably but would NT4.0 work as a substitute to XP
    >>>as I'd assume from the NT in NTFS that they use the same file
    >>>system format ?

    >>
    >>
    >> No such thing as a stupid question. Yes, NT 4.0 uses NTFS, but I
    >> can't
    >> think of any particular advantage to NT 4.0 over Win2K or WinXP.
    >> Why would you want to do this?

    >
    > In my travels around my attic (past the Netware boxes, Concurrent
    > PC-DOS and QuickBASIC) I found my copy I thought I'd thrown away!
    > Reading in some of the notes, it looks like your idea in buying
    > WinXP is the best bet as there are some NT4 installation issues with
    > drives larger than 4gig!
    >
    >
    > Richard.


    I think Micro$oft is terminating their support for NT4, so I'd say
    it's best to skip even Win2k and go to WinXP. I may be wrong, but NT4
    does not support USB2 (or does it?), which can be a problem. Also it
    does not have windows file protection, which is rather a nice feature.
    erik, Jul 8, 2005
    #15
  16. On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 10:43:41 +0200, "erik" <> wrote:

    >"Richard Brooks" <> wrote in message
    >news:dak3qm$ujt$...
    >> wrote:
    >>> On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 17:56:55 +0100, Richard Brooks
    >>> <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Stupid question probably but would NT4.0 work as a substitute to XP
    >>>>as I'd assume from the NT in NTFS that they use the same file
    >>>>system format ?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> No such thing as a stupid question. Yes, NT 4.0 uses NTFS, but I
    >>> can't
    >>> think of any particular advantage to NT 4.0 over Win2K or WinXP.
    >>> Why would you want to do this?

    >>
    >> In my travels around my attic (past the Netware boxes, Concurrent
    >> PC-DOS and QuickBASIC) I found my copy I thought I'd thrown away!
    >> Reading in some of the notes, it looks like your idea in buying
    >> WinXP is the best bet as there are some NT4 installation issues with
    >> drives larger than 4gig!
    >>
    >>
    >> Richard.

    >
    >I think Micro$oft is terminating their support for NT4, so I'd say
    >it's best to skip even Win2k and go to WinXP. I may be wrong, but NT4
    >does not support USB2 (or does it?), which can be a problem. Also it
    >does not have windows file protection, which is rather a nice feature.
    >


    NT4's file system is not compatible with XP's, and NT4 does not
    support USB.

    ... Steve ..
    Steve(JazzHunter), Jul 8, 2005
    #16
  17. erik wrote:
    > "Richard Brooks" <> wrote in message
    > news:dak3qm$ujt$...
    >
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 17:56:55 +0100, Richard Brooks
    >>><>
    >>>wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Stupid question probably but would NT4.0 work as a substitute to XP
    >>>>as I'd assume from the NT in NTFS that they use the same file
    >>>>system format ?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>No such thing as a stupid question. Yes, NT 4.0 uses NTFS, but I
    >>>can't
    >>>think of any particular advantage to NT 4.0 over Win2K or WinXP.
    >>>Why would you want to do this?

    >>
    >>In my travels around my attic (past the Netware boxes, Concurrent
    >>PC-DOS and QuickBASIC) I found my copy I thought I'd thrown away!
    >>Reading in some of the notes, it looks like your idea in buying
    >>WinXP is the best bet as there are some NT4 installation issues with
    >>drives larger than 4gig!
    >>
    >>
    >>Richard.

    >
    >
    > I think Micro$oft is terminating their support for NT4, so I'd say
    > it's best to skip even Win2k and go to WinXP. I may be wrong, but NT4
    > does not support USB2 (or does it?), which can be a problem. Also it
    > does not have windows file protection, which is rather a nice feature.
    >


    I think you're right but then it's for us guys so you have to "do it by
    hand" as it were, the system not being plug n' play.

    Asking in a shop down the road I'd found that WinXP is only about 60
    quid/UKP so that's worth avoiding the "effing and blinding" that goes
    with fdisk, install, long wait for installation then error - WinNT
    cannot install.

    I'm only going for a graphics rendering/DVD machine with no connection
    to the outside world so I just need a simple setup with little software.


    Richard.
    Richard Brooks, Jul 8, 2005
    #17
  18. moriman

    John C. Guest


    >I think Micro$oft is terminating their support for NT4, so I'd say
    >it's best to skip even Win2k and go to WinXP. I may be wrong, but NT4
    >does not support USB2 (or does it?), which can be a problem. Also it
    >does not have windows file protection, which is rather a nice feature.
    >

    W2K is NT5.


    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
    John C., Jul 9, 2005
    #18
  19. moriman

    Biz Guest

    "John C." <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > >I think Micro$oft is terminating their support for NT4, so I'd say
    > >it's best to skip even Win2k and go to WinXP. I may be wrong, but NT4
    > >does not support USB2 (or does it?), which can be a problem. Also it
    > >does not have windows file protection, which is rather a nice feature.
    > >

    > W2K is NT5.


    It WAS NT5, it was re-worked enough to not be called NT5 anymore. They even
    did a completely new BETA testing after the re-work.
    Biz, Jul 9, 2005
    #19
  20. moriman

    Jeff Rife Guest

    Biz () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
    > It WAS NT5, it was re-worked enough to not be called NT5 anymore. They even
    > did a completely new BETA testing after the re-work.


    Nope, it's *still* NT5. If you request the Windows version from the OS,
    Win2K returns (essentially) "NT 5.0". The exact version on my install with
    SP4 is "5.00.2195".

    Windows XP returns "5.1" as the short version number.

    --
    Jeff Rife |
    | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/MotherGooseAndGrimm/GatewaySource.gif
    Jeff Rife, Jul 9, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. moriman

    DVDs, Win98 & 4Gb file size limit

    moriman, Jul 6, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    557
    Large Farva
    Jul 6, 2005
  2. moriman

    DVDs, Win98 & 4Gb file size limit

    moriman, Jul 6, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    863
  3. David J Taylor

    If you have 4GB, are you getting 4GB?

    David J Taylor, Jan 26, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    66
    Views:
    1,263
    Roger
    Feb 2, 2006
  4. peter
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    825
    Jürgen Eidt
    May 25, 2006
  5. One4All

    Disconnect Between HD File Size & PS's File Size

    One4All, Sep 9, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    345
    One4All
    Sep 12, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page