Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Dream Machine ( Build your own PC ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Howard R. Hansen who wrote (11485)	11/14/2000 10:20:28 PM
From: Stuart T	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14778

This is why multiple partitions are nice Message 11685665 If I screw something up on my computer, I can be up and running in a matter of minutes.

To: Howard R. Hansen who wrote (11485)	11/14/2000 10:58:08 PM
From: Rick Faurot	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14778

<<The maximum size a partition could be when you use a FAT16 file system is 2 gigabytes. Hence who ever originally partitioned your hard disk had to split it up into a minimum of 3 partitions. However, a 2 gigabyte FAT16 partition is very inefficient at storing small files. I don't know if you looked but you should have a lot more free space on your C partition after your converted it to a FAT32 file system. >> I'm curious why the maximum size was 2 gig. Probably some arcane technical limitation. I don't know whether I gained a lot of hard drive space as I didn't take note of how much space I had before I went to FAT32, but I did watch the graphic display of the defrag after the FAT32 change and there were huge empty blocks visible that were getting consolidated. More important, the performance of my hard drive is vastly improved. Most notably, I don't have to keep dumping caches all day to prevent the GDI from running dry and crashing me. The difference in GDI performance after FAT32 is amazing. Regarding using alternate drives for imaging the OS etc, I don't see the advantage over a fresh install from the CD. Would using a so-called image (I presume this just means copy) be preferable? best, Rick