A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Disk Partitioning



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old September 16th 13, 04:00 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
R. C. White
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,058
Default Disk Partitioning

Hi, Steve.

Back in 1999 I bought a new computer and the biggest hard disk available
was 8 Gig.


Me, too. And that's about when I started multi-partitioning. I was still
running Win95 when I bought my son a student software bundle that included
WinNT4.0. With much work and experimentation, I learned how to install NT
and dual-boot it with Win95. But NT could not read FAT32, and Win95
couldn't handle NTFS. Both could use FAT(16) partitions, but those could
not be bigger than 2 GB. My new IBM HDD was 9 GB - theoretically - but
after converting sectors, tracks, cylinders, etc., and translating hex to
decimal numbers, there were 4 partitions of 2 GB each, plus about 800 MB
left over. I first created a small primary partition with that 800 MB,
formatted it FAT(16), marked it Active and made it my System Partition.
Then I made an Extended Partition holding 8 GB and created four 2 GB logical
drives in it. The System Partition was Drive C:, Win95's Boot Volume was
Drive D:, Drive E: became Data, Drive F: was for Miscellaneous and Drive G:
was Archives. WinNT's Boot Volume shared the FAT Drive C: with the startup
files, including Boot.ini.

There have been MANY changes over the 15 or so years since then, both in my
hardware and software AND in the capabilities of Windows versions. Each new
HDD was much larger than the one before, and since I had already learned
about Disk Management and partitioning, rather than discard the outgrown
HDD, I just bought a longer cable and added the new disk. (At the moment, I
have 4 internal SATA drives, 200 GB to 1 TB each), 1 external 3 TB USB 3.0,
plus a 180 GB SSD. No, I don't need all that space, but I have it so...
g) In 2002, MSFT gave me the MVP Award and invited me to participate in
the beta for Longhorn, which became Vista.

We went through more than a half-dozen successive builds of the OS beta;
each required us to install the new version from scratch, into a separate
partition, and each came in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions. By changing
Boot.ini, we could specify which Disk(#) and Partition(#) to install each
OS. Windows did not require "drive" letters, but we humans are not comfy
without them, so I had pretty soon used up almost all the 26 letters
available. That's when I learned to also assign LABELS to each partition,
so that Vista32 remained Vista32 even when it moved from Drive V: to Drive
X: and its Boot Folder became X:\Windows. At one time, I was
"octo-booting": Boot.ini offered me the choice of 8 versions of Windows
XP/Vista/32/64/NT at each reboot! Thankfully, I'm down to a couple of
choices now and seldom boot anything other than 64-bit Win8.

But THAT was a productive use of multiple partitions. SOME of my data had
to be migrated each time a new OS was installed, but most of the time, only
the current Boot Volume needed to be deleted and recreated to install the
new OS, while all my Data (photos, documents, Quicken records, etc.)
remained untouched on good ol' Drive E:. (Yes, that drive letter has stuck
with me ever since Win95/NT.)

Of course, most of this is of little or no interest to most users, who never
get involved in multiple OSes - but many of us in newsgroups like this DO
get into such adventures. To lump us all together in discussing how, why
and whether to use multiple partitions is to overlook the real world
differences between us.

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX

Microsoft Windows MVP (2002-2010)
Windows Live Mail 2012 (Build 16.4.3508.0205) in Win8 Pro


"Steve Hayes" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:43:39 -0500, Bob I wrote:



On 9/15/2013 11:17 AM,
wrote:
I'm, by some quirk (anal retentive, obsessive compulsive, other ???)
of my mentality, an organizational freak. I, by nature, want things well
structured and organized logically.
So, in XP-Pro I have the hard drive partitioned into multiple
partitions _- Office Apps, Internet Apps, Accessories, Utilities,
etc.
I've been told that this "slows" the machine down -- but I don't do
anything (except 1 or 2 CPU-intensive math things I've programmed)
where the slow-down , if it exists, is noticeable.
So, my question --- what's the downside of doing the same thing
on a new Win 7 64 bit computer?



Primarily a waste of time and effort. Makes successful restoration from
backups less likely. All the registry and user info for the
installations remains on the C: drive anyway.


I generally agree but sometimes partitioning makes sense.

Back in 1999 I bought a new computer and the biggest hard disk available was
8
Gig.

When bigger drives became available I got a 40 Gig one, and partioned it
into
D, E, F, and G drives -- back then it was Fat 32, and making it all one
partition would have wasted a bit of space because it would have required a
bigger cluster size. My plan was to use D to back up C, E for programs, F
for
games (I didn't want the kids installing them in my working disk space) and
G
for data.

I installed programs on E because there wasn't enough space on C.

And I've carried the same configuration over ever since, because I don't
like
reinstalling programs -- much too time-consuming.

When I bought a new computer, I bought it without an OS. I just backed up
each
partition on Acronis, and restored it on the new computer's 500 Gig drives.
Everything worked.




--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa

Ads
  #32  
Old September 16th 13, 04:43 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Dave[_48_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 172
Default Disk Partitioning

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 03:31:09 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:43:39 -0500, Bob I wrote:




When bigger drives became available I got a 40 Gig one, and partioned it
into D, E, F, and G drives -- back then it was Fat 32, and making it all
one partition would have wasted a bit of space because it would have
required a bigger cluster size. My plan was to use D to back up C, E for
programs, F for games (I didn't want the kids installing them in my
working disk space) and G for data.

I've never agreed with the cluster size argument. You can't fill a

partition to the very tippy top so you finish up having to try to balance
where you put stuff. Some programs like compression programs require free
space.
Anyway, cluster size argument no longer applies and even it did, hd's are
so huge and inexpensive who would care.

There is an excellent reason to confine the system and installed program
files on one drive and all data on a second drive. Extra partitions may be
needed for alternate systems or other special purposes, like huge photo,
music or video collections. The advantage to doing so is for backup
management. I don't bother.
I use macrium to image the c drive and file backup for the data partition.
I point My Documents to the D drive.

With windows 7 it may be possible to point the user directory to the D
drive but I've never tried it and some of the folder deny access. Linux
with it's home directory is so much better in this respect.
  #33  
Old September 16th 13, 04:57 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Stef
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 364
Default Disk Partitioning

John wrote:

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 00:38:18 +0100, John wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 12:56:06 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 20:34:39 +0100, choro wrote:

"Ken Blake" wrote in message

You might want to read this article I've written:
http://www.computorcompanion.com/LPMArticle.asp?ID=326

Nice sensible advice. Thx!

Everybody should tick to go to your article and read it carefully.
Personally I put backups on a 2nd internal HD. But just to be on the
safe side I also copy them to an external HD. With HDs so cheap these
days, I see no reason to try and economize on HDs.

+1 fully earned.


Thanks for the kind words.


I agree with Clorox.


Bloddy, stupid, damned, irritating *SPELLCHECKERS* and the utter
*idiots* who don't see them changing things behind our backs! (Me, I
mean.)
Sorry, choro, *I* typed your 'nym correctly, I just missed the damned
spellchecker helpfully "correcting" it for me.
No offense intended.
J.


Turn off auto-spellchecking. I never use it. Use your brain instead.
Works better . . . with practice. Well, with some it will take a lot of
practice. ;-)

And does anyone "proof" there posts and replies anymore?


Stef

  #34  
Old September 16th 13, 05:05 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
pyotr filipivich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default XXCOPY (Was Disk Partitioning)

choro on Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:21:15 +0100 typed in
alt.windows7.general the following:

But maybe I should give *Robocopy* a try. If it's got a learning curve,
so be it, if it is worth the effort. You are the second person
recommending this program.


It is worth it. It does have a learning curve, but what doesn't?
(It is a Microsoft Program, well, available from Microsoft.) Use the
/Learn option a lot when starting./testing. I keep a shortcut to the
documentation on the desktop.

And I have built some rather (if I say so my self) impressive
batch files to sync files between computers via thumb drives.

the command line for one transfer is
:
robocopy . R: *.* /xf thumbs.db desktop.ini /XO /S /NP /Tee
/Log+:%DrvBB%:\%Hack%TB-bb.rtf /xd All_cod backup temp /purge /xx /W:1
/R:2

loosely translated:

copy "from here" to R: /eXcludeFile Thumbs.db desktop.ini /XO - copy
only the new or newer files /Subdirectories /NoProcess report (don't
show the % of the file copied) /Tee - two output streams, one to
StdOut, the other to /logfile "%DrvBB%:\%TimeHack%TB-bb.rtf"
/eXcludeDirectories /Purge - remove all files on target not on
original /xx eXclude eXtra file report /Wait:1 second if fail /Repeat
two times.

There are many other options.
I also, for my own "sanity"(Bwahahahahahahaha) use Subst a lot,
making the source drive & path Q: (for Quelle - "source" in German)
and R: the path to where it is going. (from Q to R and then S ...)
Which makes, for me, reading the programs easier. Same with putting
the thumb drive's drive letter into DrvBB and a cleaned up timestamp
into TimeHack. My report files title have the form
0916_0845TB-bb.rtf, which makes sorting them "easier".

I like it, because it lets me just copy the changed files, and the
ones "not there." Ideal for backups.

tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr Filipivich
"Bother," said Pooh, "Eeyore, ready two photon torpedoes and
lock phasers on the Heffalump. Piglet, meet me in transporter
room three. Christopher Robin, you have the bridge."
  #35  
Old September 16th 13, 05:06 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
choro
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 944
Default Disk Partitioning

On 16/09/2013 16:31, John wrote:
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 00:38:18 +0100, John wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 12:56:06 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 20:34:39 +0100, choro wrote:

"Ken Blake" wrote in message

You might want to read this article I've written:
http://www.computorcompanion.com/LPMArticle.asp?ID=326

Nice sensible advice. Thx!

Everybody should tick to go to your article and read it carefully.
Personally I put backups on a 2nd internal HD. But just to be on the
safe side I also copy them to an external HD. With HDs so cheap these
days, I see no reason to try and economize on HDs.

+1 fully earned.


Thanks for the kind words.


I agree with Clorox.


Bloddy, stupid, damned, irritating *SPELLCHECKERS* and the utter
*idiots* who don't see them changing things behind our backs! (Me, I
mean.)
Sorry, choro, *I* typed your 'nym correctly, I just missed the damned
spellchecker helpfully "correcting" it for me.
No offense intended.
J.


No offense taken. Reminded me a bit of DOMESTOS which kills all known
germs! Or is it 99 % of all known germs?

Had to look up Clorox as I was not aware of the product/brand!
--
choro
*****
  #37  
Old September 16th 13, 05:31 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Dave[_48_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 172
Default Disk Partitioning



And does anyone "proof" there posts and replies anymore?


Stef


Apparently no.

  #38  
Old September 16th 13, 05:53 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
R. C. White
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,058
Default Disk Partitioning

Hi, Bob.

You can "name" any folder as a drive letter.


Yes, you can. Just be sure you don't use a Label to rename a Drive
(partition) as a drive letter. That usually is a very confusing thing to
do!

As Paladin said, "You can name your foot a hand", too, but that serves no
real purpose that he (or I) can see.

But it reminds me of the famous Abraham Lincoln story:

Abe: If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?
Answer: Five.
Abe: No, four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it one.

And calling Drive C:, "Drive F:" just invites confusion! A recent
conversation in another newsgroup concerned a user who was trying to
reorganize her partitions simply by Naming them D:, E:, etc., by using
Labels. She wound up with things like:
D:\Drive F:
or
D:\F:

But naming a FOLDER as a drive letter can sometimes be a useful tool - or so
I've heard. I haven't done it myself. I can see it coming very handy to
refer to a folder with a very long pathname. But the SUBST command might be
a better way to handle that job by creating a "virtual drive"; type "subst
/?" in a Command Prompt window to see the usage.

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX

Microsoft Windows MVP (2002-2010)
Windows Live Mail 2012 (Build 16.4.3508.0205) in Win8 Pro


"Bob I" wrote in message ...

On 9/15/2013 3:45 PM, Paladin wrote:
On 2013-09-15, Juan Wei wrote:
has written on 9/15/2013 12:17 PM:
I'm, by some quirk (anal retentive, obsessive compulsive, other ???)
of my mentality, an organizational freak. I, by nature, want things well
structured and organized logically.
So, in XP-Pro I have the hard drive partitioned into multiple
partitions _- Office Apps, Internet Apps, Accessories, Utilities,
etc.


Why not just use a directory structure? What do you gain by all those
partitions?


Alphabet soup.
Some people get off on a P:/ drive.



You can "name" any folder as a drive letter. Simply r-click it, select
Properties, Sharing, Share, Select Everyone from the pull down and set
R/W. Then in the Tools menu in Windows Explorer, select "Map network
drive" to give the letter of choice to the shared folder.

  #39  
Old September 16th 13, 06:03 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default XXcopy

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 12:35:23 +0200, Steve Hayes
wrote:


I don't seem to have it on my XP system, is it only in Win 7?


XXCopy is not a Microsoft program and doesn't come with any version of
Windows.

  #40  
Old September 16th 13, 06:08 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default Disk Partitioning

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 00:38:18 +0100, John wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 12:56:06 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 20:34:39 +0100, choro wrote:

"Ken Blake" wrote in message


You might want to read this article I've written:
http://www.computorcompanion.com/LPMArticle.asp?ID=326

Nice sensible advice. Thx!

Everybody should tick to go to your article and read it carefully.
Personally I put backups on a 2nd internal HD. But just to be on the
safe side I also copy them to an external HD. With HDs so cheap these
days, I see no reason to try and economize on HDs.

+1 fully earned.



Thanks for the kind words.


I agree with Clorox. That is a very well written article that treats
a very difficult subject gently. Excellent job, Mr. Blake.



No formality is necessary; just "Ken" is fine.

And thank you for the kind words, too.

Ken
  #41  
Old September 16th 13, 06:10 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
R. C. White
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,058
Default Disk Partitioning

Hi, Choro.

Had to look up Clorox as I was not aware of the product/brand!


Yes, in the USA, Clorox is almost as well-known as Coca-Cola. I thought it
was known worldwide - like Coke. They've expanded the brand name to other
products in recent years, but it has always meant a leading brand of laundry
bleach, also often used as a disinfectant.

Now, your turn to educate me: What is DOMESTOS? No, wait. I'll ask
Wikipedia...? ;} Aha! Nearly the same stuff, ain't it? And Chloros?
Sounds like Clorox, doesn't it?

More evidence that we are "divided by a common language"! ;)

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX

Microsoft Windows MVP (2002-2010)
Windows Live Mail 2012 (Build 16.4.3508.0205) in Win8 Pro


"choro" wrote in message ...

On 16/09/2013 16:31, John wrote:
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 00:38:18 +0100, John wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 12:56:06 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 20:34:39 +0100, choro wrote:

"Ken Blake" wrote in message

You might want to read this article I've written:
http://www.computorcompanion.com/LPMArticle.asp?ID=326

Nice sensible advice. Thx!

Everybody should tick to go to your article and read it carefully.
Personally I put backups on a 2nd internal HD. But just to be on the
safe side I also copy them to an external HD. With HDs so cheap these
days, I see no reason to try and economize on HDs.

+1 fully earned.


Thanks for the kind words.


I agree with Clorox.


Bloddy, stupid, damned, irritating *SPELLCHECKERS* and the utter
*idiots* who don't see them changing things behind our backs! (Me, I
mean.)
Sorry, choro, *I* typed your 'nym correctly, I just missed the damned
spellchecker helpfully "correcting" it for me.
No offense intended.
J.


No offense taken. Reminded me a bit of DOMESTOS which kills all known
germs! Or is it 99 % of all known germs?

Had to look up Clorox as I was not aware of the product/brand!
--
choro
*****

  #42  
Old September 16th 13, 06:13 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default Disk Partitioning

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 03:04:10 +0100, choro wrote:

Now if only they used the Chinese character set instead of the English
alphabet! I gather there are 20,000 characters in the Chinese alphabet.



The number isn't clear, but it's considerably more than 20,000.
Probably somewhere in the 40,000 - 80,000 range.

And note that this isn't an alphabet. Those characters aren't letters;
they are actually much more like words.

  #43  
Old September 16th 13, 07:24 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Juan Wei
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 553
Default Disk Partitioning

choro has written on 9/15/2013 3:34 PM:
On 15/09/2013 19:28, wrote:
"Ken Blake" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:17:38 -0500, wrote:

I'm, by some quirk (anal retentive, obsessive compulsive, other ???)
of my mentality, an organizational freak. I, by nature, want things well
structured and organized logically.


Yes, separating different kinds of files on partitions is an
organizational technique, but so is separating different kinds of
files into folders. The difference is that partitions are static and
fixed in size, while folders are dynamic, changing size automatically
as necessary to meet your changing needs. That generally makes folders
a much better way to organize, in my view.


So, in XP-Pro I have the hard drive partitioned into multiple
partitions _- Office Apps, Internet Apps, Accessories, Utilities,
etc.


In my opinion, that's *way* overpartitioned.


Please don't misinterpret here, I don't mean
to be argumentative at all, but if one is partitioning
what becomes "too much" ??

I've been told that this "slows" the machine down -- but I don't do
anything (except 1 or 2 CPU-intensive math things I've programmed)
where the slow-down , if it exists, is noticeable.


With modern computers, the slowdown is very slight if it exists at
all.



You might want to read this article I've written:
http://www.computorcompanion.com/LPMArticle.asp?ID=326

Nice sensible advice. Thx!


The only problem with imaging a single partition HD is the size of the
image. Don't you run out of space on the destination drive pretty
quickly? (I've inferred that imaging copies the entire partition rather
than just the blocks that are in use.)
  #44  
Old September 16th 13, 08:26 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ed Cryer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,621
Default Disk Partitioning

Juan Wei wrote:
choro has written on 9/15/2013 3:34 PM:
On 15/09/2013 19:28, wrote:
"Ken Blake" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:17:38 -0500, wrote:

I'm, by some quirk (anal retentive, obsessive compulsive, other ???)
of my mentality, an organizational freak. I, by nature, want things well
structured and organized logically.


Yes, separating different kinds of files on partitions is an
organizational technique, but so is separating different kinds of
files into folders. The difference is that partitions are static and
fixed in size, while folders are dynamic, changing size automatically
as necessary to meet your changing needs. That generally makes folders
a much better way to organize, in my view.


So, in XP-Pro I have the hard drive partitioned into multiple
partitions _- Office Apps, Internet Apps, Accessories, Utilities,
etc.


In my opinion, that's *way* overpartitioned.

Please don't misinterpret here, I don't mean
to be argumentative at all, but if one is partitioning
what becomes "too much" ??

I've been told that this "slows" the machine down -- but I don't do
anything (except 1 or 2 CPU-intensive math things I've programmed)
where the slow-down , if it exists, is noticeable.


With modern computers, the slowdown is very slight if it exists at
all.



You might want to read this article I've written:
http://www.computorcompanion.com/LPMArticle.asp?ID=326

Nice sensible advice. Thx!


The only problem with imaging a single partition HD is the size of the
image. Don't you run out of space on the destination drive pretty
quickly? (I've inferred that imaging copies the entire partition rather
than just the blocks that are in use.)


No; just the used parts.

Ed

  #45  
Old September 16th 13, 08:42 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Gene E. Bloch[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,485
Default Disk Partitioning

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 02:50:44 +0100, choro wrote:

On 16/09/2013 00:41, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
AllWay Sync


I will look into this AllWaySync and see if it will serve me better than
XXcopy. I've commented on XXcopy, its ease of use and speed of action,
to say nothing of its tailorability, once you have written the simple
DOS commands. But anything is worth trying once. Who knows, I might
discard XXcopy! This would be like going into a new relationship while
having a long standing steady relationship with all the dangers that it
entails.


The nice thing abut the sync programs (there are others besides the two
mentioned) is that you just call up the program, click on analyze or
whatever, and changed files get moved (or deleted, if appropriate).

You can sync one way or both ways and you can exclude folders from
syncing.

Of course, all the customizing features lead to maybe too much time
spent customizing :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.