Partitioned hard drive with both FAT32 & NTFS???

[bullion416]

I was looking at my firned's new Sony desktop computer and it is set up with a partition, one of which is formatted to FAT32 and the other is formatted to NTFS. Is this better than having just having your hard drive in one big section? The Sony is partitioned with all the Windows files on the FAT32 partition and I think it had around 5 gigs of storage. On the other partition, it was using NTFS and was about 35 gigs of storage. Is this a stable way to set up a computer as opposed to just having one big section for your hard drive? I ask because I am reformatting my copy of Windows XP Pro and I want to know what setup will give me the best performance and reliablility/compatibility.

 

[GreenGecko]

I wouldn't partition the drive unless you were planning to Dual Boot or wanted to keep your OS separate from you Apps, Games, Data, etc. It should be reliable either way.

As for NTFS vs. FAT32, there are many threads on this board about using either File System. The only thing I will mention here is that NTFS is more secure than FAT32, however, if you have other machines running Windows 95, 98, 98SE, or ME, they won't be able to see the NTFS drive.

On a 40GB Hard Drive, I would format as one partition, personally.

Good Luck!

 

[Derango]

Not quite...If you have win 95/98/ME installed on the same computer, they will be unable to view the NTFS partition. If you have 95/98/ME on another computer, you CAN access the NFTS partition using a network share from the 95/98/ME computer.

 

[Giscardo]

I find it usefull to partition my drives into a smaller section (about 2 or 3 gigs for the first partition), and the rest of the space is goes to the other partition. I install my OS on the first, smaller partition, and my mp3s, video files, games and downloads and stuff all go on the big partition. This way, whenever i want to reinstall or change the OS, i just reformat the first partition without losing any of my games or mp3s etc from the big partition.

 

[AndyHui]

FAQ: FAT32 vs NTFS

FAQ: Using FAT32 and NTFS on the same system

 

[c0rv1d43]

The Sony was probably set up that way using the sort of lowest common denominator approach that marketing people almost always employ. The fact is that you can always convert the FAT32 partition to NTFS, but not vice versa. So, if they make the system / boot partition FAT32, then a customer can have it either way without needing to reformat / reinstall the OS and software. My guess is that this is a machine designed for doing video work. In that case the undboutedly went with NTFS on the second partition because NTFS isn't hampered by the file size limits that plague FAT32. And this is lowest common denominator reasoning, too. That data partition can be removed and replaced by a FAT32 partition at the new user's whim without any trouble.

Wndows XP and Windows 2000 like breathing room. I don't understand why anyone would try to stick one of these operating systems on a small partition. Oh, I've read the rationale, I just don't buy it. The OS, software and at least certain types of data have a tendency to intermingle. A large single partition is just as easy to maintain and protect as a collection of smaller ones. We have nice, big hard drives available to us now so that we don't go around bumping our heads on storage limits. So what do we do? We make small partitions for our OS and software. Huh?

But to each her/his own!

- Collin

 

[Lord Evermore]

I use 8 gig partitions for my OSes and apps, and format the rest as the rest of the drive space. 8 gigs is good for storing the OS and applications, and the 15 to 20 gigs that leaves me (depending on the drives) for the other partition is where I store movies and MP3's.

My main reason is just that it's easier to sort out the things I'm doing. I don't see any sense in separating apps and the OS, since they do intermingle so much and install files to the main drive anyway, and if I have to wipe and reinstall the OS, most applications get screwed up anyway without the Registry entries they create so I have to reinstall or at least reconfigure the apps. The second reason is scandisk and defrag are faster on smaller partitions. Fewer clusters (which I make 16k instead of the default 4k since the lost space isn't an issue now).

As for why Sony used both, I think it was probably some decision by a know-nothing that thought it was a good idea, but didn't really have any reasoning behind it. There is no reason to use multiple partitions. However one reason might be that the makers use a standard image to put the software on the hard drive. That image comes as a certain size, so if they give you a larger drive, they have to format that as a second partition.