Second drive

[Super-b]

I don't think it makes much of a difference how full a
hdd is nowadays. Besides the fact if you exceed the
amount of space set as storage room for scandisks and
defragmentation, which i think is 10% or whatever, that's
what mine is set at. I have a couple of my hdds filled
to capacity with just over 1gb left on each and i'm still
running pretty good considering all the useless stuff i
have on (need to reformat ;0).

The only time you really need multiple drives to be the
same is if you planned on RAIDing them, but even then
they don't have to be the same size (just highly
recommended). Slaving any drive will work just fine with
WinXP. Both drives will be detected as seperate. I
don't see an advantage trying to get windows to think
that the two drives together form one drive, unless
RAIDing in a 0 array. Hope that was what u were looking
for, if not - reply - i will eventually return and could
elaborate more or some other genius will reply and tell
me i'm a moron. ;-)


>-----Original Message-----
>A million years ago when I was in the business with
different machines, find
>and seek times were relatively slow on disks and the
thinking was that once
>you'd filled a disk such that it was 30% full it was
about time to get
>another. What is the thinking on this now? Current
hard drive is 55.9 Gig.
>Is there a seamless way to add another similar sized
hard disk so the two
>would work in tandem? That is, if I had another, could
the system look at
>the two as if there were one 120 Gig hard disk?
>
>What other options are available?
>
>Mike
>
>
>.
>