Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 24 Mar 1999 14:25:20 -0500 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Right Dan. Whether windows files are located near the FAT or not is not
that critical. True, the read/write head will have to travel an extra
inch or so, but these movements are measured in millionths of a second.
Unless you are constantly starting and stopping and starting and stopping
and starting and stopping various windows processes, the extra time is
negligible.
Jim Meagher
=====
Micro Solutions Consulting Member of The HTML Writers Guild
http://www.ezy.net/~microsol International Webmasters Association
410-543-8996 MS Site Builder Network - Level 2 member
=====
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Leung <[log in to unmask]>
>>The reason is simple : when you delete
>>c:\windows, you have a lot of fragmented space; if
>>you defrag, free space will be unfragmented but
>>not in the disk's most effective place -the closest
>>to the FAT, etc. When you do format c:, you have
>>all of the HD free and can do reinstall in the best
>>way, filling the effective place with os and moving
>>your data in last.
>
>Yeah, I heard this theory before, but is this
>significant, is the performance improvement
>measurable? I think deltree c:\windows is an
>acceptable alternative.
>
>Dan
Do you want to signoff PCBUILD or just change to
Digest mode - visit our web site:
http://nospin.com/pc/pcbuild.html
|
|
|