---- Perry's guide to installing & maintaining a fast windows environment ---

[drebo]

Originally posted by: nerp
I think the impact of fragmentation on performance is terribly overstated in this thread. It simply is not worth the time spent coming up with fancy and overcomplicated installations/partition arragements.

This post pretty much sums up this thread.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: drebo

Originally posted by: nerp
I think the impact of fragmentation on performance is terribly overstated in this thread. It simply is not worth the time spent coming up with fancy and overcomplicated installations/partition arragements.

This post pretty much sums up this thread.

Exactly what the forums are for. To educate the ignorant.
You are in the right place.:thumbsup:

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: drebo

Originally posted by: nerp
I think the impact of fragmentation on performance is terribly overstated in this thread. It simply is not worth the time spent coming up with fancy and overcomplicated installations/partition arragements.

This post pretty much sums up this thread.

Exactly what the forums are for. To educate the ignorant.
You are in the right place.:thumbsup:

So you are agreeing that your whole partitioning scheme is rather useless then?

 

[drebo]

Oh, snaps.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: drebo

Originally posted by: nerp
I think the impact of fragmentation on performance is terribly overstated in this thread. It simply is not worth the time spent coming up with fancy and overcomplicated installations/partition arragements.

This post pretty much sums up this thread.

Exactly what the forums are for. To educate the ignorant.
You are in the right place.:thumbsup:

So you are agreeing that your whole partitioning scheme is rather useless then?

Nowadays if I get computers back to work on that I have built for people they rarely have the choking issues that other machines do.

Yes this method really is superior for the average user.
It's ok though you couldn't have known.

 

[loup garou]

paging nothinman....

 

[Smilin]

Sorry Perry, This topic in particular hits on an area where I have some depth and the theory just isn't aligning with my knowledge.

Lacking any actual benchmarks or evidence I'm going to just go ahead and declare shenanigans.

Kudos again on your coolheadedness in the thread though. It's a tough and knowledgeable crowd.

 

[Rubycon]

Haven't partitioned since the days before FAT32 when you had no choice to with drives >2GB. :laugh:

Sep physical drives > partitioning.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: Smilin
Sorry Perry, This topic in particular hits on an area where I have some depth and the theory just isn't aligning with my knowledge.

Lacking any actual benchmarks or evidence I'm going to just go ahead and declare shenanigans.

Kudos again on your coolheadedness in the thread though. It's a tough and knowledgeable crowd.

Tis alright. It's a method that's taken me years to perfect. I don't expect everyone to immediately accept or grasp the ideas. I don't mean this in a mocking manner. As for me however I have tried all methods and found this to be superior.
I'll leave the benchmarks to others. The crowd is "somewhat" knowledgeable. The trouble with most computer techs is that they usually only know what they're talking about half the time. This includes the anandtech crowd.

And Rubycon yes multiple drives are obviously always superior. Partitioning(which is only a part of this combined method) can however be done on a raid0 array as well with outstanding results.

 

[nerp]

Thing is, perry, as well-intentioned as you feel, and as real as your anecdotal experience tells you, there are people in these forums that work or have worked for MS and are deeply involved in the very file systems you're talking about. It's hard to argue against the engineers and architects who really know the underpinnings. We can devise schemes and swear by them because we feel the differences, but I've realized that the mind has a powerful way of convincing ourselves of things that run contrary to the actual ones and zeros bouncing under our fingers.

I think you should do something that could not only confirm your suspicions but would also end up in an oft-referred reference about the pros/cons of partitioning, etc:

Take a machine that you've experienced your percieved benefit. Develop an irrefutable way to benchmark it, subtracting as many variables as possible: let vista have time to index, build it's superfetch, balance, etc, for a few hours after each install.

Then install a test suite of apps, your way and then the standard way. Conduct a series of scientifict or as close to scientific tests on each setup and carefully record the results. Post them here and then this discussion could really move foward.

 

[her209]

Hey, turn off the pagefile and watch it really fly.




(he he he)

 

[Jeff7181]

What a pretentious ass.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: nerp
Thing is, perry, as well-intentioned as you feel, and as real as your anecdotal experience tells you, there are people in these forums that work or have worked for MS and are deeply involved in the very file systems you're talking about. It's hard to argue against the engineers and architects who really know the underpinnings. We can devise schemes and swear by them because we feel the differences, but I've realized that the mind has a powerful way of convincing ourselves of things that run contrary to the actual ones and zeros bouncing under our fingers.

I think you should do something that could not only confirm your suspicions but would also end up in an oft-referred reference about the pros/cons of partitioning, etc:

Take a machine that you've experienced your percieved benefit. Develop an irrefutable way to benchmark it, subtracting as many variables as possible: let vista have time to index, build it's superfetch, balance, etc, for a few hours after each install.

Then install a test suite of apps, your way and then the standard way. Conduct a series of scientifict or as close to scientific tests on each setup and carefully record the results. Post them here and then this discussion could really move foward.

I have done literally thousands of installs. Again yes benchmarks are fantastic but I don't really care enough about it to log the work myself at this point in time. Many will scoff and pretend they know what they're talking about and this is nothing new. That is not to say there are not valid points being made but the majority of naysayers in this thread are talking out the side of their head and have not presented anything short of useless comments.
What I do enjoy is sharing my experience and I really don't need others confirmations to to trust my own knowledge which is extensive. Some will read this and take my experience into consideration and that's great however I'm really not concerned about pleasing the entire world. Just sharing my experience will suffice. If that makes me pretentious then so be it.
Thanks to those here who have offered up thoughtful comments though. :thumbsup:

 

[Jeff7181]

Sharing your experience isn't what makes you a pretentious ass. It's your assumption that you know better and that everyone who disagrees with you is ignorant.

Additionally, if your knowledge is in fact extensive, you won't need to keep telling us, it will be apparent.

You won't gain any credibility by insulting this community as a whole and praising yourself.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Sharing your experience isn't what makes you a pretentious ass. It's your assumption that you know better and that everyone who disagrees with you is ignorant.

Additionally, if your knowledge is in fact extensive, you won't need to keep telling us, it will be apparent.

You won't gain any credibility by insulting this community as a whole and praising yourself.

I'll tell you what. You show me where I threw any insults or where I praise myself and I'll take what you have to say into consideration. That is, if you actually decide to add thoughtful comment. You're the one slinging insults not I. Stating that I have extensive experience is hardly praising myself.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Sharing your experience isn't what makes you a pretentious ass. It's your assumption that you know better and that everyone who disagrees with you is ignorant.

Additionally, if your knowledge is in fact extensive, you won't need to keep telling us, it will be apparent.

You won't gain any credibility by insulting this community as a whole and praising yourself.

I'll tell you what. You show me where I threw any insults or where I praise myself and I'll take what you have to say into consideration. That is, if you actually decide to add thoughtful comment. You're the one slinging insults not I. Stating that I have extensive experience is hardly praising myself.

If you insist...

Examples of you citing your experience:

I've been doing this for years now and i can tell you from experience

My experience after a decade plus of doing computer repair will have to suffice.

This is something I have perfected over the years and I am merely sharing my work. By the way I have done this on a raid 0 and it is incredibly fast even after a years worth of software installations.

It's a method that's taken me years to perfect. I don't expect everyone to immediately accept or grasp the ideas.

I have done literally thousands of installs.

And where you've insulted people:

Aside from that you people are showing your ignorance.

Exactly what the forums are for. To educate the ignorant. You are in the right place.

The crowd is "somewhat" knowledgeable. The trouble with most computer techs is that they usually only know what they're talking about half the time. This includes the anandtech crowd.

It's ok though you couldn't have known.

You can feign good intentions and humor, but I see through it.


To get back on topic though... I used to use similar methods of partitioning to "improve performance." I've since abandoned those methods as there is no tangible performance difference as fragmentation is no where near the problem it is today as it was 10 years ago and the effort required to put those methods into practice isn't worth any organizational benefit you get from it either.

The only reason I partition a hard drive anymore is for compatibility with an old OS, dual booting, or possibly to short stroke a set of drives in RAID to extract better performance where capacity isn't much of a concern.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

If you insist...

Examples of you citing your experience:



And where you've insulted people:

Exactly what the forums are for. To educate the ignorant. You are in the right place.

To get back on topic though... I used to use similar methods of partitioning to "improve performance." I've since abandoned those methods as there is no tangible performance difference as fragmentation is no where near the problem it is today as it was 10 years ago and the effort required to put those methods into practice isn't worth any organizational benefit you get from it either.

The only reason I partition a hard drive anymore is for compatibility with an old OS, dual booting, or possibly to short stroke a set of drives in RAID to extract better performance where capacity isn't much of a concern.

Alright I will concede on that one small insult. The rest were legitimate responses. Not sure why some of you continue to jump on the partitioning bandwagon. Partitions are merely a fraction of what I have presented here. The OP is a complete process and none of these steps within itself is a whole. Yes I too stopped partitioning years ago etc etc etc...
Three years ago I too was talking people out of partitioning.
Yet now I use another method that does once again include partitioning because for some of us another 10-20 seconds taken off the boot time or 3-4 off a application launch is a big deal in much the same way a few extra mhz are to an overclocker. Removing programs from the shell unquestionably increases windows performance and boot time. Removing fragmentation from the windows OS unquestionably increases performance and boot time. Removing the need to even defragment unquestionably Saves time and energy. All these things together unquestionably increase windows performance and in many circumstances in a huge way.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

If you insist...

Examples of you citing your experience:



And where you've insulted people:

Exactly what the forums are for. To educate the ignorant. You are in the right place.

To get back on topic though... I used to use similar methods of partitioning to "improve performance." I've since abandoned those methods as there is no tangible performance difference as fragmentation is no where near the problem it is today as it was 10 years ago and the effort required to put those methods into practice isn't worth any organizational benefit you get from it either.

The only reason I partition a hard drive anymore is for compatibility with an old OS, dual booting, or possibly to short stroke a set of drives in RAID to extract better performance where capacity isn't much of a concern.

Alright I will concede on that one small insult. The rest were legitimate responses. Not sure why some of you continue to jump on the partitioning bandwagon. Partitions are merely a fraction of what I have presented here. The OP is a complete process and none of these steps within itself is a whole. Yes I too stopped partitioning years ago etc etc etc...
Three years ago I too was talking people out of partitioning.
Yet now I use another method that does once again include partitioning because for some of us another 10-20 seconds taken off the boot time or 3-4 off a application launch is a big deal in much the same way a few extra mhz are to an overclocker. Removing programs from the shell unquestionably increases windows performance and boot time. Removing fragmentation from the windows OS unquestionably increases performance and boot time. Removing the need to even defragment unquestionably Saves time and energy. All these things together unquestionably increase windows performance and in many circumstances in a huge way.

I suspect if your method really does reduce boot times, and is repeatable and measurable, it would have less to do with fragmentation and more to do with the decreased physical area that the partition spans. That's the reason for short stroking drives, and has nothing to do with controlling fragmentation. I don't know why you're so focused on that. Fragmentation is really not the big problem today that it was 10 years ago when a heavily fragmented drive could cause not only performance issues, but file system errors and data loss.

Everyone is focusing on the partitioning section of your guide because that's what it's about. Every other step or suggestion is based on the fact that you've created additional partitions and need to change the default way that Windows behaves to make use of them. You say don't let programs integrate themselves into the shell... but you haven't mentioned how to remove ones that already have, or how to integrate programs or shortcuts into the shell that one would WANT there for ease of use.

 

[bsobel]

Im about ready to lock this thread, there are lots of claims which most users find false and no evidence provided.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

If you insist...

Examples of you citing your experience:



And where you've insulted people:

Exactly what the forums are for. To educate the ignorant. You are in the right place.

To get back on topic though... I used to use similar methods of partitioning to "improve performance." I've since abandoned those methods as there is no tangible performance difference as fragmentation is no where near the problem it is today as it was 10 years ago and the effort required to put those methods into practice isn't worth any organizational benefit you get from it either.

The only reason I partition a hard drive anymore is for compatibility with an old OS, dual booting, or possibly to short stroke a set of drives in RAID to extract better performance where capacity isn't much of a concern.

Alright I will concede on that one small insult. The rest were legitimate responses. Not sure why some of you continue to jump on the partitioning bandwagon. Partitions are merely a fraction of what I have presented here. The OP is a complete process and none of these steps within itself is a whole. Yes I too stopped partitioning years ago etc etc etc...
Three years ago I too was talking people out of partitioning.
Yet now I use another method that does once again include partitioning because for some of us another 10-20 seconds taken off the boot time or 3-4 off a application launch is a big deal in much the same way a few extra mhz are to an overclocker. Removing programs from the shell unquestionably increases windows performance and boot time. Removing fragmentation from the windows OS unquestionably increases performance and boot time. Removing the need to even defragment unquestionably Saves time and energy. All these things together unquestionably increase windows performance and in many circumstances in a huge way.

I suspect if your method really does reduce boot times, and is repeatable and measurable, it would have less to do with fragmentation and more to do with the decreased physical area that the partition spans. That's the reason for short stroking drives, and has nothing to do with controlling fragmentation. I don't know why you're so focused on that. Fragmentation is really not the big problem today that it was 10 years ago when a heavily fragmented drive could cause not only performance issues, but file system errors and data loss.

Everyone is focusing on the partitioning section of your guide because that's what it's about. Every other step or suggestion is based on the fact that you've created additional partitions and need to change the default way that Windows behaves to make use of them. You say don't let programs integrate themselves into the shell... but you haven't mentioned how to remove ones that already have, or how to integrate programs or shortcuts into the shell that one would WANT there for ease of use.

That's not what it's about. That is merely a portion of it. Not integrating applications into the shell is just as important.
That's my point. There is more than just one step here. If it was just about fragmentation then what would be the point of the thread?

Originally posted by: bsobel
Im about ready to lock this thread, there are lots of claims which most users find false and no evidence provided.

bsobel I would appreciate it if you would keep your personal feelings towards me out of this.
Because a few of you don't agree with my methods does not mean this thread deserves being locked. I took the time to write this and it deserves to stay open.
I have not violated any rules and by anandtech standards I have been very cordial. Leave it open to scrutiny and if it serves no purpose it will naturally go away on its own.

 

[bsobel]

bsobel I would appreciate it if you would keep your personal feelings towards me out of this.

I have no personal feelings towards you.

Because a few of you don't agree with my methods does not mean this thread deserves being locked. I took the time to write this and it deserves to stay open.

Just because you took the time to write infactual things doesnt mean it deserves to stay open, especially when you've turned into a troll thread.

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: bsobel
Im about ready to lock this thread, there are lots of claims which most users find false and no evidence provided.

bsobel I would appreciate it if you would keep your personal feelings towards me out of this.
Because a few of you don't agree with my methods does not mean this thread deserves being locked. I took the time to write this and it deserves to stay open.

If you want this thread to stay open I highly suggest you post valid benchmarks of your claims, otherwise this is just yet another thread with bad information for people who have less of a clue then you.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: bsobel

bsobel I would appreciate it if you would keep your personal feelings towards me out of this.

I have no personal feelings towards you.

Because a few of you don't agree with my methods does not mean this thread deserves being locked. I took the time to write this and it deserves to stay open.

Just because you took the time to write infactual things doesnt mean it deserves to stay open, especially when you've turned into a troll thread.

That's bull. Just leave it alone and stop baiting me. Others are the ones thread crapping not me.
Are you actually going to tell me that i have provided false information?

 

[bsobel]

That's bull. Just leave it alone and stop baiting me. Others are the ones thread crapping not me.

Jeff7181 hit the nail on the head...

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: bsobel

That's bull. Just leave it alone and stop baiting me. Others are the ones thread crapping not me.

Jeff7181 hit the nail on the head...

How about stop spamming in my thread now? All I have done is shared my experience.