Partition or not to partition?

[gba]

I have always set up separate partitions for for my data and programs files on previous versions of Windows so that if I need to restore my OS with Ghost (program I have been using for restores), my work and settings would be preserved. I have noticed that some people who used to do the same are no longer partitioning with Vista. Can anyone advise me which way I should go? Is partitioning still as important as it used to be?

Thanks in advance for the input.

 

[lxskllr]

I never partition(except for dual booting). I use 1 partition for everything. I keep Windows stock user directories as a slush file eg temporary storage for music, pictures...whatever. The stuff I end up keeping goes on a secondary hd as my primary data storage.

 

[gba]

Originally posted by: lxskllr
I never partition(except for dual booting). I use 1 partition for everything. I keep Windows stock user directories as a slush file eg temporary storage for music, pictures...whatever. The stuff I end up keeping goes on a secondary hd as my primary data storage.

thanks.. I am considering just moving "Documents" over to my secondary drive. I have always set up partitions on a second drive for music, etc. that I wanted to keep, too, and will continue to do that, regardless.

I guess what I am wondering about is if people run into situations where Vista install becomes totally hosed and in need of a restore or a fresh install which would wipe out the current state of user profile and information that programs may have registered either in Windows Registry or in a .ini in their own folder, etc.. things like that... Have people found that restoring from within Windows has improved to the point w/ Vista of making restoring your OS partition with Ghost or Clonzezilla or similar not really necessary.

 

[lxskllr]

I've only reinstalled once that didn't have to do with changing computers, or O/Ss. A fresh squeaky clean install is nice every so often. I used to be really bad about collecting software(several apps that do the same thing), and it would build up too much. A clean install would get rid of the stuff I never used.

To answer your question... When I reinstall, I back up my complete user directory, then burn the rest to the ground, and start new. I don't have that much software that I /have/ to have immediately, so I replace it as the mood strikes me. It takes me about 3 hours initially to reinstall. That's including all my specialized settings. The rest gets done bit by bit as the need arises.

 

[gba]

Thanks for your input.. I am still not sure.. hmm?

 

[VinDSL]

Originally posted by: gba

Originally posted by: VinDSL

...When Clonezilla was done, all I had to do is 'tell' Vista Disk Manager to use the entire disk for the primary partition...

So, may I ask what is your thinking in terms of why you prefer not set up a seperate partition for your data on your Vista lappy?

EDIT: I will start a new thread for this question.. did not mean to hijack.

I guess I fall into the same boat as lxskllr...

I never partition... well, I haven't in years!

Matter of fact, the last time I partitioned my drives was when I was running a multi-line dialup BBS.

I had 11 CD-ROMS (3 changers and 2 proprietary) on that machine (freeware/shareware distros for download) and like 13 partitions. I think I used up the entire English alphabet... 2 floppies plus an internal tape backup. Gawd, those were the days!

LoL!

I can't remember exactly why I had so many partitions, but I think it was so I could keep everything straight - using partitions as folders, or whatever.

I don't have any reason for doing that now - although I recently ran across a very compelling article that talked about the many benefits of partitioning a drive. It seemed perfectly logical when I read it, but I forgot the reasons by the next day...

Anyway, I can't think of any reason for not doing so either...

 

[VinDSL]

Whoops, that's what I get for keyboarding when laying down...

Might as well turn this into a real post. LoL!

As far as my important docs/pics, et cetera, are concerned - I back them up to different machines on my LAN - and I mirror them to my web server in Atlanta (offsite - I'm in Arizona). And, I mirror my sites in Atlanta to my local machines.

That way, I really don't have much to lose, if I puke a drive or two!

I'm not really a dual-boot fan either. On the lappy, I decided to just buy another drive and install Linux on that - and, of course, Linux installers take care of all the partitioning semi-automatically, so you don't even have to think about it... unless you want to.

Having said that, it's kind of curious that MS doesn't give you the option of partitioning the drive(s) when you install it - only before or after you install it.

Hrm...

Well, anyway, this sort of looks like a post now...

 

[gba]

Thanks VinDSL... I have been backing up my data on my LAN as well nowadays, which is the main reason I am thinking I really do not need to bother partitioning Vista. Especially on my laptop, since there is only one hard drive on it anyway... I figure if Vista is rendered unbootable, I can grab the HD out of the lappy, drop it into a docking station connected to my main machine and copy off of it whatever data I may not have backed up to my LAN yet.

Even though it may not matter as much as it used to whether one partitions or not, the reason I am leaning toward not bothering is that I just cannot be sure how large Vista is planning to get on me and do not want to have a load of wasted space after creating a huge partition for my boot drive on my laptop. With good old WIN2000 I know a 5GB partition is just the right size for the OS partition, with Vista HP x64, which I have on my main desktop machine, it seems like 30GB may be just right, with x32, well I am not really sure.