>> Is the limitation for the disk controller itself, or per partition?
>> ie: get a 160gb drive, partition it to 137GB and 23GB ?
>Is this because of the FAT32 format? Or is it the USB1.0 configuration.
3.5" disk (don't know much about this).
Another suggestion which has already been given, is to have two partitions.
Next message: [IDC]Dragon: "Re: >137Gbyte?"
Previous message: George Michaelson: "this battery regression thing: is bootbox/rombox in the loop?"
In reply to: Linus Nielsen Feltzing: "Re: >137Gbyte?"
Next in thread: Claus Helbing: "Re: >137Gbyte?"