I can't find a post that suggested partitioning to 6 partitions. I did find a post suggesting that backups and defrags take too long on large partitions... I have this to offer particularly on the question of defrag...
A single large partition will not fragment files as quickly. Divide that partition into 4 smaller partitions and now every partition has less free space to work with. Result: files fragment more easily and defrag can't defragment them as easily. Result: defragging 4 small partitions takes longer than defragging the one large partition of same total size and total usage. As for backup, that's a valid concern if you need to backup some data daily and other data weekly or monthly, and you want to use an image backup program. But few home users have the kind of data on a data drive that benefits from an image backup. Hence, you partition the OS so it can be image backed-up reasonly quickly and not using too many removeable media, and everything else is data which you backup however you want with a file-based backup. Carl -----Original Message----- From: Windows Home/SOHO [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Dykes Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 9:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Outpost.com | Seagate 3.5 PATA Intern al Hard Dri ve When I opened the message, I found that Carl Houseman had written: > What function is served by using separate partitions for weddings vs. > vacations? None at all! > What function that cannot be as well served by separate folders within one > partition? None at all! I was just listing the possibilities, replying to someone who suggested partitioning it into maybe six partitions. I'm not one for partitions. I've never went to the trouble to partitioned a drive. Regards, Jim -- ---------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is your picture included in the Official Win-Home List Members Profiles Page? http://www.besteffort.com/winhome/Profiles.html If not, write to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
