• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Do you Partition or do you not Partition poll...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Yes, I partition my drives. I used:
The Windows 2000 installer.
The Ubuntu 5.04 installer.
5.6GB misc. starting partition, max size pre-SP3 Windows 2000 partition (130GB?), 1GB swap, and 20+GB shared FAT32.

I'm currently thinking about making a boot partition (and making it home to a miniscule linux distro for managing it after another one takes over the MBR), and removing the swap partition.

As little as I need to reformat in Windows, I don't see the point of separate partitions. If reloading is an issue, install over the top of the old install. In a server environment, partitioning with a single OS makes sense, but not for general use.
 
I just separate data and OS into separate partitions. If I had two drives I wouldn't even bother with multiple partitions. There would be no advantages at all.
 
Originally posted by: asadasif
Partitioning in windows helps keep the files in an alternative location should the boot partition ever get corrupted or damaged. The Windows setup can always be stored on an alternative partition so that you can install it directly from there alongside the drivers, etc.

 
1. It makes it easier to use Acronis True Image

2. Partition Commander is way more reliable for important jobs. Partition Tragic is a good way to get fired.
 
Why anyone would not partition drives larger than 80 gigs is beyond me.

Disk cleanups, Scandisks, and Defrags take way too long on drive partitions of that size.

Because all of those are pretty much pointless. I delete files manually whenever I want to clean up a disk, fsck is only necessary in extremly rare circumstances and most of the speed improvements from defragging are a placebo.
 
Thru experience I have noticed it's much less hazardous creating all my ext3 partitions beforehand. If I remember correctly I
use xfdisk last time I did this. Most distros are comfortable with this. I just had to shitcan Suse10. For one thing it didnt allow
me to choose where to load grub. So it installed on the mbr and wiped out my previous one. Also, could not get X graphical
interface to work. Well, it's a Beta. ****** happens. Use VMWare what for? It would take the fun out. I like living on the edge.
 
Use VMWare what for? It would take the fun out. I like living on the edge.

It's not about living on the edge, it's about usability and manageability. Just removing the need to reboot to use one of the other OSes is well worth it.
 
Originally posted by: Thor86
Why anyone would not partition drives larger than 80 gigs is beyond me.
Because I have files almost that big? (I have single partitions spanning drives)

1 vote for Diskpart.
 
"What do you use for partitioning software?"

Why do I need third party partitioning software? I set up my partitions when I installed Windows. Yeh, I know third party partitioning software has more features, such as re-sizing of partitions without formatting the hard drive and doing a new OS installation, but many users never need to change partitions after rthe initial setup.
 
Back
Top