Why do proprietary machines use one partition?

[ByTor]

What I am basically looking for is the pros, cons, facts, of the giants
like, Dell, HP, Gateways, etc., etc., shipping their machines with the
OS and data saving isolated to one partition? (I understand that
technically some of them use two, one for the recovery partition)

I understand that on a mass produced level imaging drives through the
line is much faster, but I also know that a primary and a logical can
also be imaged & restored(unless I'm mistaken)......so.........anyway.

It just amazes me how countless amounts of people will increase the
probability of losing ALL their data by isolating it to the OS
drive.....Yes drives can fail and having more than one partition would
be irrelavant, but the probably of losing the OS functionality is higher
than physically losing the drive itself......so hence the many problems
I read about in the groups with people wanting to recover their
data......

Do recovery experts & software companies actually make that much money
in recovering data? Or does proprietary tech support say, OH, just back
it up to a DVD."

Would it really be a disadvantage in teaching people how to seperate
their data from the OS drive by partitioning & creating logical
drives??? Would somebody somewhere decrease the likelyhood of making
more money?? I don't think the average user is not teachable or stupid
for that matter.......Will the proprietary companies void their warranty
service if you take it upon yourself to partition your drive thereby it
not being in it's original state? This part is just a tad concern of
mine as when I work on machines I try to give the individual a little
education on how to store their data more efficiently & offer to split
their drives but I don't want to void their support if they still have
it..........

Anyway, I'm not looking for a fueled debate or criticising any one
company's methods just looking for some good clean feedback and
logic..........

Thanks...........

 

[Jim Macklin]

People smart enough to manage two or three partitions will
do it for themselves. It certainly is a good idea.


|
| What I am basically looking for is the pros, cons, facts,
of the giants
| like, Dell, HP, Gateways, etc., etc., shipping their
machines with the
| OS and data saving isolated to one partition? (I
understand that
| technically some of them use two, one for the recovery
partition)
|
| I understand that on a mass produced level imaging drives
through the
| line is much faster, but I also know that a primary and a
logical can
| also be imaged & restored(unless I'm
mistaken)......so.........anyway.
|
| It just amazes me how countless amounts of people will
increase the
| probability of losing ALL their data by isolating it to
the OS
| drive.....Yes drives can fail and having more than one
partition would
| be irrelavant, but the probably of losing the OS
functionality is higher
| than physically losing the drive itself......so hence the
many problems
| I read about in the groups with people wanting to recover
their
| data......
|
| Do recovery experts & software companies actually make
that much money
| in recovering data? Or does proprietary tech support say,
OH, just back
| it up to a DVD."
|
| Would it really be a disadvantage in teaching people how
to seperate
| their data from the OS drive by partitioning & creating
logical
| drives??? Would somebody somewhere decrease the likelyhood
of making
| more money?? I don't think the average user is not
teachable or stupid
| for that matter.......Will the proprietary companies void
their warranty
| service if you take it upon yourself to partition your
drive thereby it
| not being in it's original state? This part is just a tad
concern of
| mine as when I work on machines I try to give the
individual a little
| education on how to store their data more efficiently &
offer to split
| their drives but I don't want to void their support if
they still have
| it..........
|
| Anyway, I'm not looking for a fueled debate or criticising
any one
| company's methods just looking for some good clean
feedback and
| logic..........
|
| Thanks...........
|

 

[R. McCarty]

A big consideration for the large OEM's is minimizing Service Calls.
If fact allot of what the Dell/HP & other's do is probably known by
them to not be the best solutions. Just like installing all the 3rd party
trials, etc isn't in the customer's best interest - but they receive money
for putting them on there. (Symantec, McAfee, Office)

They (OEM's) are after stability - not performance. The profit margins
on PCs are very tight. Anything they can do to keep costs down they
will go for. By keeping setups "Simple", it makes it easier to support
which increases their profits.

 

[ByTor]

Microsoft is recommending to manufacturers that the os ship with one
partition...for the vast majority of users, computing is much faster
with one large partition then a bunch logical partitions.

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysperf/benchmark.mspx

I'm not sure I would put any confidence in a "MS" recommendation, while
it makes valid points to some extent, pushing their OS's capabilities
would be beneficial on their part...hence, biased.........

"The physical placement, or layout, of files on the disk can have a
considerable effect on performance, up to 10% for normal use. Windows
XP observes file usage patterns as the system is used. If deemed
necessary, Windows XP will adjust the file layout at three day
intervals. By placing files that are referenced together near each
other on the disk, and towards the more dense outer edge of the disk,
seek distances are reduced which results in shorter seek times and
improved performance. The performance benefit of placing files becomes
increasing important as the size of the disk increases."

this protocol doesn't cross volumes and is pretty much useless if a
user puts their apps on a separate partition then the os, which just
about every user that partitions will do.

I've actually only mentioned data storage, not program installs to
logicals, but point taken.... ;0)

also, forget that "it's more organized" to have partitions, it's
not...folders serve the same purpose for "organization" as logical
partitions, and their is no benefit for organization.

as far as data being lost more often because a user didn't partition,
no.

Interesting.....So if the OS fails it would be easier to try & retrieve
your data from a failed OS rather than a logical.....?

data should always be backed up off the disk...if a user knows enough
to use their partition to backup, they should defiantly be backing up
off the box anyway...who would argue this?

How big is some of the data??? This is the "digital" age where files can
be very large.....Sometimes backing up to a DVD or CD can be a
longwinded experience........But you are correct, saving externally is a
great option I won't dispute that.......

the partition as a backup gives a false sense of security, people
become remiss and don't backup all their data all the time...people
like myself who think partitions are a waste of time, ALWAYS has off
dislike backup.

Interesting also..........I feel(personally) much more confident that my
data is stored to logicals and or seperate drives..........

I appreciate the link and info though, there are many valid points to
your logic/articles logic.....

Thanks for taking the time........ ;0)

 

[Richard Urban]

*****And that's just your opinion.*****

I have been building/repairing and setting up computers for a very long
time. EVERY computer I deliver to, or back to, a customer/client has at
least 3 partitions.

The operating system, programs and utilities are on partition C:

Personal Files (My Documents, Favorites, Temporary Internet Files, Address
Book, E-Mail Repository etc., etc., etc.) are moved to partition D:

A hidden Primary DOS partition contains an image of drive C: as it was when
I delivered the computer back to the customer/client.

I also install, and CONFIGURE, all those free, and for cost, apps and
utilities that are needed to help keep a system safe and clean. When they
receive their computer from me it has installed ZoneAlarm Free, a full blown
version of a quality antivirus program with a 1 year subscription
(configured to run a scan of their choice on a daily/weekly basis), Ad-Aware
Free, Spybot Search and Destroy, the latest versions of CW Shredder and
Stinger, a full blown backup program, a decent de-fragmenting program, a
good CD/DVD burning program and others - all preconfigured. The
customer/client has to do nothing, unless they want to.

Many times in just the past year, I have instructed customers how to bring
their computer back to the condition it was in - the day I turned it over
to them. In every case, all of their personal information was instantly
available for their use.

Yes, it will cost the customer/client significantly more to allow me to set
up the computer in this fashion, as they pay for the programs I install. It
also increases my setup time by at least 100 to 200%. I could be like others
and just install the operating system and turn the computer over to the
customer/client - leaving them on their own from that point on.

For those who wish it I will also configure their computers for dual
booting. I install an identical 2nd copy of Windows XP (for emergency use)
on a second Primary DOS partition and install a good boot manager program.
The two operating systems are isolated from one another so what happens to
one, excluding hard drive failure, will not happen to the other. This 2nd
O/S is restricted in that the customer must initially logon to the boot
manager with a different name in order to get into this O/S. This prevents
inadvertent usage, and accidental corruption, of the emergency operating
system. This partition is also imaged to the hidden partition. The customer
also pays for "these" programs.

The end result is that if one operating system gets screwed up the customer
can boot into the alternative operating system to perform their work until
they have an opportunity to repair the primary operating system or restore
the primary operating system from the supplied image.

Just recently I have begun to also copy the operating system partitions to
one of my external USB 2.0 hard drives. I fully plan to keep this
information for three years. This covers my customers/clients if there is a
hard drive failure. Their personal files are covered through the backup
program that is configured to backup partition D: once a week, and is
"their" responsibility (you can lead a horse to water etc,) Yes, there is a
one time charge for this service!

So, continue to work with just one drive and one partition. It is your
choice!



--
Regards,

Richard Urban

aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[ByTor]

*****And that's just your opinion.*****

I have been building/repairing and setting up computers for a very long
time. EVERY computer I deliver to, or back to, a customer/client has at
least 3 partitions.

The operating system, programs and utilities are on partition C:

Personal Files (My Documents, Favorites, Temporary Internet Files, Address
Book, E-Mail Repository etc., etc., etc.) are moved to partition D:

A hidden Primary DOS partition contains an image of drive C: as it was when
I delivered the computer back to the customer/client.

I also install, and CONFIGURE, all those free, and for cost, apps and
utilities that are needed to help keep a system safe and clean. When they
receive their computer from me it has installed ZoneAlarm Free, a full blown
version of a quality antivirus program with a 1 year subscription
(configured to run a scan of their choice on a daily/weekly basis), Ad-Aware
Free, Spybot Search and Destroy, the latest versions of CW Shredder and
Stinger, a full blown backup program, a decent de-fragmenting program, a
good CD/DVD burning program and others - all preconfigured. The
customer/client has to do nothing, unless they want to.

Many times in just the past year, I have instructed customers how to bring
their computer back to the condition it was in - the day I turned it over
to them. In every case, all of their personal information was instantly
available for their use.

Yes, it will cost the customer/client significantly more to allow me to set
up the computer in this fashion, as they pay for the programs I install. It
also increases my setup time by at least 100 to 200%. I could be like others
and just install the operating system and turn the computer over to the
customer/client - leaving them on their own from that point on.

For those who wish it I will also configure their computers for dual
booting. I install an identical 2nd copy of Windows XP (for emergency use)
on a second Primary DOS partition and install a good boot manager program.
The two operating systems are isolated from one another so what happens to
one, excluding hard drive failure, will not happen to the other. This 2nd
O/S is restricted in that the customer must initially logon to the boot
manager with a different name in order to get into this O/S. This prevents
inadvertent usage, and accidental corruption, of the emergency operating
system. This partition is also imaged to the hidden partition. The customer
also pays for "these" programs.

The end result is that if one operating system gets screwed up the customer
can boot into the alternative operating system to perform their work until
they have an opportunity to repair the primary operating system or restore
the primary operating system from the supplied image.

Just recently I have begun to also copy the operating system partitions to
one of my external USB 2.0 hard drives. I fully plan to keep this
information for three years. This covers my customers/clients if there is a
hard drive failure. Their personal files are covered through the backup
program that is configured to backup partition D: once a week, and is
"their" responsibility (you can lead a horse to water etc,) Yes, there is a
one time charge for this service!

So, continue to work with just one drive and one partition. It is your
choice!

Thanks Rich, basically my sentiment exactly......Interesting though
using the Primary hidden partition with the clean image on it....never
thought to do that, I usually save their image on one of my MANY
harddrives..........or compress enough to fit on a CD....DVD(if they
have one)

Thanks for the comments..............

 

[R. McCarty]

Richard - Very well thought out process. Taking care of customers
is what small(er) IT/PC shops can do that the OEM's cannot.

Here's another reason to segment/partition data, Multimedia content.
Keeping Pictures, Songs and videos on the same drive/partition with
XP can be a real issue. Today it's not uncommon for users to have
Very large multimedia content. Including that in a System Image is a
real time/size issue. Best to segment that data away from XP and even
normal user data (Email, Favorites, My Docs). The underlying reason
for segmenting data/partitions or separate drives is to allow for users
to have data protection and varying backup strategies. You don't
need to backup your Music collection as often as your XP install.
The personal data needs to be on a "Readable" type of media like
CD-R/DVD-R and should be isolated from Windows.

It's like having a Grab-Bag of candy - You only want a Junior Mint,
but have to search through the whole bag to find one.

*****And that's just your opinion.*****

I have been building/repairing and setting up computers for a very long
time. EVERY computer I deliver to, or back to, a customer/client has at
least 3 partitions.

The operating system, programs and utilities are on partition C:

Personal Files (My Documents, Favorites, Temporary Internet Files, Address
Book, E-Mail Repository etc., etc., etc.) are moved to partition D:

A hidden Primary DOS partition contains an image of drive C: as it was
when I delivered the computer back to the customer/client.

I also install, and CONFIGURE, all those free, and for cost, apps and
utilities that are needed to help keep a system safe and clean. When they
receive their computer from me it has installed ZoneAlarm Free, a full
blown version of a quality antivirus program with a 1 year subscription
(configured to run a scan of their choice on a daily/weekly basis),
Ad-Aware Free, Spybot Search and Destroy, the latest versions of CW
Shredder and Stinger, a full blown backup program, a decent de-fragmenting
program, a good CD/DVD burning program and others - all preconfigured. The
customer/client has to do nothing, unless they want to.

Many times in just the past year, I have instructed customers how to bring
their computer back to the condition it was in - the day I turned it over
to them. In every case, all of their personal information was instantly
available for their use.

Yes, it will cost the customer/client significantly more to allow me to
set up the computer in this fashion, as they pay for the programs I
install. It also increases my setup time by at least 100 to 200%. I could
be like others and just install the operating system and turn the computer
over to the customer/client - leaving them on their own from that point
on.

For those who wish it I will also configure their computers for dual
booting. I install an identical 2nd copy of Windows XP (for emergency use)
on a second Primary DOS partition and install a good boot manager program.
The two operating systems are isolated from one another so what happens to
one, excluding hard drive failure, will not happen to the other. This 2nd
O/S is restricted in that the customer must initially logon to the boot
manager with a different name in order to get into this O/S. This prevents
inadvertent usage, and accidental corruption, of the emergency operating
system. This partition is also imaged to the hidden partition. The
customer also pays for "these" programs.

The end result is that if one operating system gets screwed up the
customer can boot into the alternative operating system to perform their
work until they have an opportunity to repair the primary operating system
or restore the primary operating system from the supplied image.

Just recently I have begun to also copy the operating system partitions to
one of my external USB 2.0 hard drives. I fully plan to keep this
information for three years. This covers my customers/clients if there is
a hard drive failure. Their personal files are covered through the backup
program that is configured to backup partition D: once a week, and is
"their" responsibility (you can lead a horse to water etc,) Yes, there is
a one time charge for this service!

So, continue to work with just one drive and one partition. It is your
choice!



--
Regards,

Richard Urban

aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Leythos]

*****And that's just your opinion.*****

I have been building/repairing and setting up computers for a very long
time. EVERY computer I deliver to, or back to, a customer/client has at
least 3 partitions.

The operating system, programs and utilities are on partition C:

Personal Files (My Documents, Favorites, Temporary Internet Files, Address
Book, E-Mail Repository etc., etc., etc.) are moved to partition D:

A hidden Primary DOS partition contains an image of drive C: as it was when
I delivered the computer back to the customer/client.

[snip]

Here's the only part I would change. Instead of a partition with the
system info on it, create a CD or DVD and provide that to them. Since most
of the systems that are pre-configured will GHOST to a single CD size
(with compression) all you have to do is setup a CD and they are in
business. This gives them the space back on their drive and also means
that if they loose the drive they can still recover.

I always do a dual partition method, 12GB~20GB for OS, remainder for
DATA/APPS on the second partition. Always redirect their documents and
other items to default to the second partition.

Other than your use of a hidden partition instead of a CD/DVD it's a great
method.

 

[Richard Urban]

I use a hidden partition because all of the extras that are installed
(sometimes including Office etc.) end up causing the image to be over 2 1/2
gig in size (even with maximum compression)!

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

*****And that's just your opinion.*****

I have been building/repairing and setting up computers for a very long
time. EVERY computer I deliver to, or back to, a customer/client has at
least 3 partitions.

The operating system, programs and utilities are on partition C:

Personal Files (My Documents, Favorites, Temporary Internet Files,
Address
Book, E-Mail Repository etc., etc., etc.) are moved to partition D:

A hidden Primary DOS partition contains an image of drive C: as it was
when
I delivered the computer back to the customer/client.

[snip]

Here's the only part I would change. Instead of a partition with the
system info on it, create a CD or DVD and provide that to them. Since most
of the systems that are pre-configured will GHOST to a single CD size
(with compression) all you have to do is setup a CD and they are in
business. This gives them the space back on their drive and also means
that if they loose the drive they can still recover.

I always do a dual partition method, 12GB~20GB for OS, remainder for
DATA/APPS on the second partition. Always redirect their documents and
other items to default to the second partition.

Other than your use of a hidden partition instead of a CD/DVD it's a great
method.

 

[ByTor]

I'll guarnatee...you backing up your "large files" using partitons will
one day loose your data when your hardrive fails.

this will be entirely due to the false sense of security you have that
your data is "backed up incase the os fails"

me on the other hand will NEVER EVER loose data more then the current
days work.

this is due to the fact that I don't have the false sense of security
that your partitions give you.

a fine conversation, I agree.

As I have mentioned, full HD failure is always eminent & possible, I
would never say that using more partitions safely keeps the data....I
use external sources myself but only for the more important stuff.....

I understand your "false" sense of security approach, which I agree with
but from my own experience with the 15 Harddrives I have in the last few
years I've had only 1 fail and that one was 5 yrs old.......But I still
see your point and definitely agree with its validity..........I guess
it all depends on what an individuals needs are also........

But as you mentioned my backing up "large" data is not really a big
issue with me if I lose it.....it's just the way I organize my data
according to its importance..........

Yes, fine conversation indeed........... ;0)

 

[ByTor]

the article tells you why manufacturer ship computers with one partiton
as oposed to a few

you asked why they do it, and this is the reason...it's not because
it's easier, it's not becuase it's cheaper to do it this way...it's
because microsoft tells them this is the best option.....

Oy vay! I find that pretty scary....... ;0)

that's the answer to your question ...the rest of the discussion is
academia, which I enjoy

Same here.............

 

[Vagabond Software]

What I am basically looking for is the pros, cons, facts, of the giants
like, Dell, HP, Gateways, etc., etc., shipping their machines with the
OS and data saving isolated to one partition? (I understand that
technically some of them use two, one for the recovery partition)

I understand that on a mass produced level imaging drives through the
line is much faster, but I also know that a primary and a logical can
also be imaged & restored(unless I'm mistaken)......so.........anyway.

It just amazes me how countless amounts of people will increase the
probability of losing ALL their data by isolating it to the OS
drive.....Yes drives can fail and having more than one partition would
be irrelavant, but the probably of losing the OS functionality is higher
than physically losing the drive itself......so hence the many problems
I read about in the groups with people wanting to recover their
data......

Do recovery experts & software companies actually make that much money
in recovering data? Or does proprietary tech support say, OH, just back
it up to a DVD."

Would it really be a disadvantage in teaching people how to seperate
their data from the OS drive by partitioning & creating logical
drives??? Would somebody somewhere decrease the likelyhood of making
more money?? I don't think the average user is not teachable or stupid
for that matter.......Will the proprietary companies void their warranty
service if you take it upon yourself to partition your drive thereby it
not being in it's original state? This part is just a tad concern of
mine as when I work on machines I try to give the individual a little
education on how to store their data more efficiently & offer to split
their drives but I don't want to void their support if they still have
it..........

Anyway, I'm not looking for a fueled debate or criticising any one
company's methods just looking for some good clean feedback and
logic..........

The kind of person that manages data and functionality on multiple
partitions also do not buy their computers from Dell, Sony, and the rest.
They usually build it themselves.

Dell and the others can assume, correctly in my opinion, that even were its
customers provided additional partitions, most of them would simply continue
"put everything on drive C:" computing habits.

carl

 

[Kerry Brown]

What I am basically looking for is the pros, cons, facts, of the giants
like, Dell, HP, Gateways, etc., etc., shipping their machines with the
OS and data saving isolated to one partition? (I understand that
technically some of them use two, one for the recovery partition)

Like many others that have replied I have built, sold and supported
thousands of PC's. I used to make at least two partitions, one for the OS
and programs, and one for data. I found it was a support nightmare. My
number one complaint from customers was how come I have two hard drives? The
next largest complaint was my hard drive is full. Upon investigation a
"friend who really knew computers" had "tweaked" their Windows for them. In
reality this friend had reinstalled Windows, had know idea what they were
doing and hadn't redirected the data paths. Or another common scenario a
teenager had installed Kazaa and all the downloaded videos were in the Kazaa
share directory in Program Files.

Over the years I found the most generic possible install made it easier to
support my customers. Most of them could muddle through with a little help.
It must work as most of my current customers have been with me for years and
are buying their 3rd or 4th systems from me. With the advent of Windows XP
as a consumer OS using NTFS I also found the performance reasons for using
more than one partition didn't exist. My latest personal computer I set up a
120 GB drive as one partition. I decided I liked it. It's very easy to use
folders to structure your data and with current hardware I don't notice any
performance decrease copying files, burning DVD's etc. I'm sure a benchmark
program could measure a difference but I find it's fast enough that the
convenience of one partition by far outweighs any very minor performance
decrease. Now if I was doing video editing, major gaming etc. I'm sure I
would have a different opinion. If a customer indicates a special need like
that I will custom design a file setup for them.

Kerry Brown
KDB Systems

 

[Ken Blake]

In

It just amazes me how countless amounts of people will increase
the
probability of losing ALL their data by isolating it to the OS
drive.....Yes drives can fail and having more than one
partition would
be irrelavant, but the probably of losing the OS functionality
is
higher than physically losing the drive itself......so hence
the many
problems I read about in the groups with people wanting to
recover
their data......

I'm not going to address the merits of one partition vs two,
three, or some other number, but I wanted to point out that the
*only* real solution to the potential problem of "losing ALL
their data" is by putting in place and using a good backup
strategy.

Having data in a separate partition still leaves it vulnerable to
hard drive crashes, user errors, severe power glitches like
nearby lightning strikes, virus attacks, even theft of the
computer.

Without a good backup, stored externally to the computer, there
is no real protection. If you think that a partitioning scheme
substantially increases your security in this regard, you're
kidding yourself. Whatever the merits of having multiple
partitions, this isn't it.

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <[email protected]> ByTor

What I am basically looking for is the pros, cons, facts, of the giants
like, Dell, HP, Gateways, etc., etc., shipping their machines with the
OS and data saving isolated to one partition? (I understand that
technically some of them use two, one for the recovery partition)

I understand that on a mass produced level imaging drives through the
line is much faster, but I also know that a primary and a logical can
also be imaged & restored(unless I'm mistaken)......so.........anyway.

The reason is simple: Users are stupid.

1) Most users would store everything on C: anyway. This would result in
users running out of usable space well before the drive is physically
out of space.

2) Changing the default profile directory location to D: would help the
above (since a lot of people use "My Documents"), but even so, you'd run
into cases where the user runs out of space to install more
applications, but has plenty of "data" space. Unless/unless there
becomes an easy way to reallocate space between the two, it would result
in a lot of support calls.

(And yes, Partition Magic and similar tools can get the job done. Who
would like to volunteer to walk my grandmother through Partition Magic
over the phone, then to go over to her house and recover after it
inevitably fails -- It might be reliably 99.999% of the time, but with
millions of PCs being sold every year, that's a HUGE failure rate)

 

[Jim Macklin]

Folders do "organize" but partitions segregate and then I
use folders on the partitions.


message |
| microsoft is recomending to manufacturers that the os ship
with one
| partition...for the vast majority of users, computing is
much faster
| with one large partition then a bunch logical partitions.
|
| and forget that "it's more organized"...folders server the
same purpose
| for "organization" as logical partitoons
|
| as far as data being lost more often because a user didn't
partition,
| no.
|
| data should alwasys be backed up off the disk...if a user
knows enough
| to use their partition to backup, they should definatley
be
| partitiooning off the box.
|
| the partition as a backup gives a false sense of security,
and people
| like myself who think partitions are a waste of time,
ALWAYS has off
| dislk backup.
|
|
| --
| perris
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------
| perris's Profile:
http://forum.osnn.net/member.php?userid=17
| View this thread:
http://forum.osnn.net/showthread.php?t=59361
|

 

[Leythos]

1) Most users would store everything on C: anyway. This would result in
users running out of usable space well before the drive is physically
out of space.

I've seen that same case, user had a 160GB drive, 8GB for C, remainder for
D and kept complaining they were out of space on their big drive - D
didn't have a single file on it

 

[Richard Urban]

You will have to defragment your main partition far less frequently if you
place your Temporary Internet Files, your My Documents (which include your
music and photos), you're e-mail store etc. on partition D:

A person who is constantly arranging and rearranging their hard drive really
does not have a handle upon what they are doing. Personally, I can remember
damn few times that I change my scheme and move files/folders across
partitions. If you save them in the first place, according to the initial
scheme, you just don't have to do that.

It sounds, from your post, that your whole days workload comprises of
nothing but moving files/folders, much like the lady of the house
rearranging furniture! Of course it's easier to move a sofa from one wall to
another as opposed to moving a dresser from the living room to the bed room,
but how many people would put the dresser initially in the living room to
begin with. Do you do anything else with your computer? (-:

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[ByTor]

The kind of person that manages data and functionality on multiple
partitions also do not buy their computers from Dell, Sony, and the rest.
They usually build it themselves.

Dell and the others can assume, correctly in my opinion, that even were its
customers provided additional partitions, most of them would simply continue
"put everything on drive C:" computing habits.

carl

Yes I agree, as this is my case also.....been building my own since my
first encounter with a comcrap 7yrs ago..... ;0)
But also I would agree most people still would put it to C and most
times would not know where it is....that's the sad part.....

Thanks for the comments.....

 

[ByTor]

Like many others that have replied I have built, sold and supported
thousands of PC's. I used to make at least two partitions, one for the OS
and programs, and one for data. I found it was a support nightmare. My
number one complaint from customers was how come I have two hard drives? The
next largest complaint was my hard drive is full. Upon investigation a
"friend who really knew computers" had "tweaked" their Windows for them. In
reality this friend had reinstalled Windows, had know idea what they were
doing and hadn't redirected the data paths. Or another common scenario a
teenager had installed Kazaa and all the downloaded videos were in the Kazaa
share directory in Program Files.

Over the years I found the most generic possible install made it easier to
support my customers. Most of them could muddle through with a little help.
It must work as most of my current customers have been with me for years and
are buying their 3rd or 4th systems from me. With the advent of Windows XP
as a consumer OS using NTFS I also found the performance reasons for using
more than one partition didn't exist. My latest personal computer I set up a
120 GB drive as one partition. I decided I liked it. It's very easy to use
folders to structure your data and with current hardware I don't notice any
performance decrease copying files, burning DVD's etc. I'm sure a benchmark
program could measure a difference but I find it's fast enough that the
convenience of one partition by far outweighs any very minor performance
decrease. Now if I was doing video editing, major gaming etc. I'm sure I
would have a different opinion. If a customer indicates a special need like
that I will custom design a file setup for them.

Kerry Brown
KDB Systems

Thanks for this input, you basically hit the nail on the head for me.
You are absolutely correct in that it would be a support nightmare, it
also would mean that the approach I would like to suggest saving data is
very different to the average individuals "one click" mentality........I
think I'd have to re-teach an individual how to use a computer. ;0)

But I will still say this, for someone like yourself even a well
maintained system can fail, with saving data to your C drive do you use
imaging software? I could not even begin to imagine the size of the
image file...... (LOL)
Anyway not criticising, it would be a disadvantage for myself as I do
image backups on a daily basis......

Anyway, you're right though I would have to toy with the idea as far as
one approach and one only. I'm sure in the end it will be 1 partition
only because your point is a major one.......

Thanks for taking the time......