R
Rick Altman
I am one of those stubborn hangers-on still using the SUBST command. I find
nothing that comes close to the efficiency and navigational ease of being
able to assign drive letters to my critical folders, and I also find nothing
that approaches the ease of accomplishing that than the ancient SUBST.
My issue is with XP's inability to acknowledge/identify/honor those drive
letters. It looks right past them, so whenever I insert a jump drive that
the system hasn't seen before, it assigns the next drive letter to
it...which is invariably one of my SUBST drives. I need to spend 45 seconds
with Disk Manager to reassign the device to another letter further down the
alphabet.
I guess my first question is to invite anyone with an alternative to SUBST
to chime in. My second, and more engaging question is this:
Is there a way to "reserve" a series of drive letters, so the OS
knows to begin assignment of new volumes to a letter of my choosing?
Many thanks...
Rick Altman
Pleasanton, CA
nothing that comes close to the efficiency and navigational ease of being
able to assign drive letters to my critical folders, and I also find nothing
that approaches the ease of accomplishing that than the ancient SUBST.
My issue is with XP's inability to acknowledge/identify/honor those drive
letters. It looks right past them, so whenever I insert a jump drive that
the system hasn't seen before, it assigns the next drive letter to
it...which is invariably one of my SUBST drives. I need to spend 45 seconds
with Disk Manager to reassign the device to another letter further down the
alphabet.
I guess my first question is to invite anyone with an alternative to SUBST
to chime in. My second, and more engaging question is this:
Is there a way to "reserve" a series of drive letters, so the OS
knows to begin assignment of new volumes to a letter of my choosing?
Many thanks...
Rick Altman
Pleasanton, CA