Phillips said:
Guys,
I was talking about the (multitude of) average users and their PCs: Dell,
Gateway machines with preinstalled OEMs plus custom built machines in the
low high-end class (guess up to $2000); most laptops come with an OEM OS
also. Most cheaper machines come with XP Home while the more expensive use
XP Pro. Glimpsing through the subjects of the messages, I gather that
these type of dudes ask for help on this "windowsxp.newuser" newsgroup.
Nope. Again, some rather gross generalizations that simply are flat out
false. Dell for one, supplies standard OEM media. They have discovered that
it reduces support costs. The other OEMs, including e-Machine nee Gateway
will provide standard type OEM media on request at no charge to the client.
I know since I have clients that have e-Machines...
Toshiba laptops are *NOT* low end and and not cheap. But they ship with HE
when purchased at reail outlets. Again, an extremely broad generalization
that does not hold up to the light of day.
You, on the other hand, are talking about what I would call 'everything
computing' (customized OEM distros, critical data management/backups etc).
I wouldn't go so far as calling it a 'categorical mistake' since Dells etc
are (arguably
a subset of, well, 'everything computing that uses a
flavor of XP'; however, my take is that we are comparing apples and
oranges.
Nope. I categorize nothing. I take each an every platform as unique as soon
as the user fires it up and starts using the machine. Which is why
generalized 'tweaking' is a crap shoot.
However, yes, I do deal with generalized platforms. Problem is the number of
people that are running a generalized platform that think otherwise.
Again, I will summarize my arguments - for the benefit of the 'newuser.'
1. Partitioning is a cost efficient method of storing data and is not
available on common XP OEMs:
Again, an overly broad statement that is categorically false. In fact both
parts of the statement are false. Partitioning consumes space that could be
otherwise used for user storage (carefully think about the HD structure
required to track files and free space as well as the amount of free space
that must be reservd to allow for growth and that can not be aggregated).
Partitioning is extremely ineffienct of space usage. And agin, common OEM
distros are happy with multiple partitions.
a. location is right in the machine - easy to remember where you put it
Nope. It's a nightmare in terms of actual use and support. However that does
depend on granularity and the applications. If you have OS, app, data that's
one thing. Personally I have 10 monted partitions across two stand alone
drives and one RAID array and I get confused where I stuff things. Even with
550G online I'm running out of space since I can't stop long enough to
concatenate the free space. Not that I have much to begin with.
b. readily available - either after reinstall or via another OS (be it
Knoppix) that can be installed on an available partition or run from some
drive.
Again, nope. Data is accessible, but data without applications is like a car
with gas. You're going nowhere fast. And yes I do multi-boot although I'm
switching towards VMs for some of what I do. However your're addressing an
extremely small subset of the user population. Space management is PITA when
dealing with a partitioned drive.
c. low start up cost (just the Retail XP Pro that can be transferred on
another machine, installed on another partition etc). Of course, in long
run one needs better backup management.
Nope. There is additional cost that is on the oder of one-third to one-half
of the cost of the machine. That's not low start cost. In fact the CBA sort
of has large holes in it.
d. enhanced - but not perfect - data security
Enhanced how? The stuff you're talking about is the stuff that get's people
in trouble. EFS is the only thing that's availble on Pro that isn't
available on HE and there are a number of people that are now finding out
they should have stayed far, far away from EFS. The 'enhanced' security is
meaningless and dangerous outside of the context of a managed environment.
e. enhanced efficiency - shorter times for defrags, virus scans,
backups since only the most active partitions need to be addressed often.
Just an example: you want to make an imagine of your boot drive and you
need to restore it! It is far more convenient to have XP installed on a
15-20GB partition than a on a whole 120-200GB (most machines come with
HDDs in this range) partition.
Again, you're assuming a lot that does not touch on reality. As well you're
forgetting that most people, even though running with upwards of 200G of
attached acreage, only only use maybe 20-30G at most. That's not a SWAG, but
a hands on observation while babysitting crapware exorcisms.
If your backup software is incapable of compressing and is backing up free
space, may I suggest you find some that works better. Even xcopy would be a
better choice since it doesn't copy free space.
Defrag and av scans times are irrelvant. Schedule when you're safely
slumbering at night and they happen in 0 percieved time.
f. better data organization. I have 150GB "Music" partition (I let you
guess what's types of files you could find there), other "Downloads,"
"Documents," (emails, saved settings, favorites etc), "Shop" (mostly apps,
work in progress and temp files) etc.
See above. I have 10 partitions spread across an aggregate of 550G. I have 5
different download (ignoring some specialized things) directories since I'm
running out of space on individual partitions. And the last I looked about
6-7 different directories where I've go different VMs stuffed (2-16G each).
You'd do better, as would I, with fewer partitions so the free space could
be aggregated. I have two partitions only that have more than 10G free and
both of those are less than 20G free and most of the other partitions,
including the system partition, have less than 3G free. Aggregating that
free space would be nice, but I'm looking at having to bump up to 1TB by
adding a 4x250 RAID0+1 array real soon now.
g. faster search/indexing times - since you most likely I would search
on the appropriate partition.
Indexing is disabled. And should be unless your business is doing file
searches. However, indexing reduces search time on large drives and when the
data is aggregated operates better.
But you just contradicted yourself. If your partitioning schemed is well
organized, why are doing searchs for files. ;-)
2. Tweaking, when done right, presents benefits derived from increased
speed (say, multiple downloads, personalized GUI, blah blah), and
security - disabling services etc.
Again, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul. That is what 'tweaking' is. You
steal resources from one area and give them to another. Personalization is
not in the same category as 'tweaking'. As long as Peter doesn't complain
and start getting sulky then you're home free. Otherwise you're going to
have give Peter some of his stuff back.
Now, your main counter-arguments seem to be "slower system for NTFS," poor
security, unreliable system due to tweaking, poor backup strategy. I
simply agree with you.
Hmm. What is 'slower system for NTFS'?
As for poor security, again, you missed the boat. The superset functionality
of Pro is appropriate for the enterpise/managed environment. Care to state
the specifics of what you tink HE is incapable of that is appropriate for a
peer network and/or single machine/non-server use?
'Tweaking' into instability: Yep. I fix those systems rather often. ;-)
'Poor backup strategy". What does that have to do with Pro vs. HE? What does
Pro offer that HE doesn't in that regard?
Run OEM as it comes, buy a $200 external HDD, burn CD's you lose track of
after a few months or cannot be read unless you dedicate time to verify
and maintain, pay a storage provider (in Alaska
and upload your
precious pics and tax returns... sorry, sense of humor goes astray at
times
Of course, one needs to find better backup solution - pending of
the data type and costs of maintenance v cost of loss bla blah.
OK. But again, what does this have to with Pro vs. HE much less partitoning?
There's actually sense in storing data on different coasts if the expense is
worth it to you. Actually, you may have thought you were being humorous but
I have had to tell people their unreplacable pictures of deceased family
members were flattened by hardware or malware/crapware activity.
All in all, the new OEM XP Home user can simply weight the arguments and
counterarguments and proceed according to her/his judgment pending their
means and needs.
That's absolutely true. What's funny is the number of people that feel that
Pro is vastly superior to HE and can't back up the claim. ;-)
