This post was originally a response to a thread I read in General Hardware. 90 minutes and two pages later, I figured that this deserved its own thread.
----------------
Who's the guy who wrote the diatribe called "Dissertation on Partitioning?" Oh, wait. That was me.
I never posted the update to my dissertation. Hell, I didn't even pen the update yet. But, I still have the original, if anyone is interested.
First, partitioning in required if you ever want to use a hard drive. When was the last time you connected a brand new, out-of-the-static-bag drive to your system and you copied files to it immediately. Does never sound about right? Well, that is because you need to create at least one partition on the hard drive to make it usable.
Having multiple partitions on one hard drive is VERY DIFFERENT than "partitioning."
I am very much a fan of using multiple partitions. However, it is essential to establish multiple partition for the proper reasons ... if you want to see any benefits, that is.
If you ever want to natively use more than one non-Windows operating system, using multiple partitions is a must. The key thought there is native. Yes, you can have many OSes on one partition (ala Lin4Win and the like), but that's probably not the usual native nature of the underlying OS.
If you are only using MS operating systems (but, more than one), you are likely to find yourself better off if you employ multiple partitions. The last Microsft OS you install will declare itself the "king" of your system ... and it will probably do so without informing you. It has the potential to ruin any other MS install you've already got running. Having access to beta MS code and an elitist demeanor (when it comes to PCs, at least), I prefer to separate my Windows installs via multiple partitions.
Since every MS OS loves to use drive C: for booting, I purposely have set aside a small partition for C: ... even though I never install Windows directly to C: (regardless of version). There is no rule in Windows stating that you must install to C: (as in C:\Windows, C:\WINNT, or C:\Program Files). Yes, C: is usually set aside as a default ... and each install of Windows will put some important files on C:, but you are by no means obligated to use it in that fashion. I use my C: drive strictly for DOS utilities (Ghost, BIOS flashing, etc.), temp files, and virtual memory. All of my Windows installs use that space in the same manner. Why have a swap/page file for each Windows install when you can use the same file for all of them? How often do you use more than one install of Windows simultaneously on the same PC?
If your system doesn't fall in any of the above scenario, then you are running only one version of Windows on your system. At this point, I can only think of one real good reason to have multiple partitions: You want to physically limit the amount of disk space for a particular set of files. Again, being elitist (or anal, take your pick), I limit my personal files to 2GB. After all, how many zillions Word files will I ever need? I think I've been using multiple partitions on my system ... even for Windows ... for many years now. Taking a look at my personal files, I'm only using 1.27GB. I mean, I've got years of archived e-mail, photos, and defunct web pages ... and it still only takes up a little more than 1GB of space.
Better organization is often claimed as another benefit using multiple partitions. I have been very guilty of this line of thinking in the past. BUT, THIS THINKING CAN BACKFIRE! I used to have separate partitions for games, MP3s, and software downloads. It was probably along the lines of 10GB/40GB/30GB. Guess what happened. One day I actually filled up my MP3 partition and nearly had a panic attack (OK, so it wasn't that bad). But, at that point, my seemingly perfect partition/organization scheme was nearly rendered useless. I wanted more MP3s ... and I wanted more space on my dedicated MP3 partition. I could have played the PartitionMagic game, but who's to say that the same thing wouldn't happen to me a few days/weeks/months from now? I learned that lesson quickly, and now have one huge partition were I lump things like game installs, MP3s, downloads, Ghost images, etc.
Using multiple partitions can also protect data to a certain extent. If you keep personal files on your OS partition, you will have to back them up elsewhere before you have to reformat and reinstall the OS. If you have a separate partition for personal files, you can muck around with the OS partition as much as you want knowing that your data is safely intact somewhere else. Just realize that this is not a perfect "backup" methodology. As has been mentioned, if your hard drive dies, your personal files die with it ... even if you've used a separate partition. At least implement a seconday backup routine that involves a completely separate medium ... be it CD, DVD, Zip, or another hard drive.
As for the defrag argument, I would not let that be my basis for using multiple partitions.
-SUO, a guy who likes multiple partitions
P. S.: Small diversion here. I really dislike the notion of installing the OS to one partition and programs to another. I'm not saying that it doesn't work. It just doesn't make much sense to me. If you have to format the OS partition, chances are that your registry will go with it. You may very well have to reinstall the apps anyway just to get them working again. Yes, some apps will work without a reinstall. I just doubt that every programmer out there is savvy enough to "registry-proof" their code.
P. P. S: For those who have multiple Windows installs and a common "programs" partition ... why even bother with multi-booting if you are going to run the same apps regardless of the OS?
----------------
Who's the guy who wrote the diatribe called "Dissertation on Partitioning?" Oh, wait. That was me.
I never posted the update to my dissertation. Hell, I didn't even pen the update yet. But, I still have the original, if anyone is interested.
First, partitioning in required if you ever want to use a hard drive. When was the last time you connected a brand new, out-of-the-static-bag drive to your system and you copied files to it immediately. Does never sound about right? Well, that is because you need to create at least one partition on the hard drive to make it usable.
Having multiple partitions on one hard drive is VERY DIFFERENT than "partitioning."
I am very much a fan of using multiple partitions. However, it is essential to establish multiple partition for the proper reasons ... if you want to see any benefits, that is.
If you ever want to natively use more than one non-Windows operating system, using multiple partitions is a must. The key thought there is native. Yes, you can have many OSes on one partition (ala Lin4Win and the like), but that's probably not the usual native nature of the underlying OS.
If you are only using MS operating systems (but, more than one), you are likely to find yourself better off if you employ multiple partitions. The last Microsft OS you install will declare itself the "king" of your system ... and it will probably do so without informing you. It has the potential to ruin any other MS install you've already got running. Having access to beta MS code and an elitist demeanor (when it comes to PCs, at least), I prefer to separate my Windows installs via multiple partitions.
Since every MS OS loves to use drive C: for booting, I purposely have set aside a small partition for C: ... even though I never install Windows directly to C: (regardless of version). There is no rule in Windows stating that you must install to C: (as in C:\Windows, C:\WINNT, or C:\Program Files). Yes, C: is usually set aside as a default ... and each install of Windows will put some important files on C:, but you are by no means obligated to use it in that fashion. I use my C: drive strictly for DOS utilities (Ghost, BIOS flashing, etc.), temp files, and virtual memory. All of my Windows installs use that space in the same manner. Why have a swap/page file for each Windows install when you can use the same file for all of them? How often do you use more than one install of Windows simultaneously on the same PC?
If your system doesn't fall in any of the above scenario, then you are running only one version of Windows on your system. At this point, I can only think of one real good reason to have multiple partitions: You want to physically limit the amount of disk space for a particular set of files. Again, being elitist (or anal, take your pick), I limit my personal files to 2GB. After all, how many zillions Word files will I ever need? I think I've been using multiple partitions on my system ... even for Windows ... for many years now. Taking a look at my personal files, I'm only using 1.27GB. I mean, I've got years of archived e-mail, photos, and defunct web pages ... and it still only takes up a little more than 1GB of space.
Better organization is often claimed as another benefit using multiple partitions. I have been very guilty of this line of thinking in the past. BUT, THIS THINKING CAN BACKFIRE! I used to have separate partitions for games, MP3s, and software downloads. It was probably along the lines of 10GB/40GB/30GB. Guess what happened. One day I actually filled up my MP3 partition and nearly had a panic attack (OK, so it wasn't that bad). But, at that point, my seemingly perfect partition/organization scheme was nearly rendered useless. I wanted more MP3s ... and I wanted more space on my dedicated MP3 partition. I could have played the PartitionMagic game, but who's to say that the same thing wouldn't happen to me a few days/weeks/months from now? I learned that lesson quickly, and now have one huge partition were I lump things like game installs, MP3s, downloads, Ghost images, etc.
Using multiple partitions can also protect data to a certain extent. If you keep personal files on your OS partition, you will have to back them up elsewhere before you have to reformat and reinstall the OS. If you have a separate partition for personal files, you can muck around with the OS partition as much as you want knowing that your data is safely intact somewhere else. Just realize that this is not a perfect "backup" methodology. As has been mentioned, if your hard drive dies, your personal files die with it ... even if you've used a separate partition. At least implement a seconday backup routine that involves a completely separate medium ... be it CD, DVD, Zip, or another hard drive.
As for the defrag argument, I would not let that be my basis for using multiple partitions.
-SUO, a guy who likes multiple partitions
P. S.: Small diversion here. I really dislike the notion of installing the OS to one partition and programs to another. I'm not saying that it doesn't work. It just doesn't make much sense to me. If you have to format the OS partition, chances are that your registry will go with it. You may very well have to reinstall the apps anyway just to get them working again. Yes, some apps will work without a reinstall. I just doubt that every programmer out there is savvy enough to "registry-proof" their code.
P. P. S: For those who have multiple Windows installs and a common "programs" partition ... why even bother with multi-booting if you are going to run the same apps regardless of the OS?