At 09:49 AM 6/21/1998  Michael A. Wosnick wrote:
>
>All of this recent talk about FAT-16 vs FAT-32 and the cluster sizes etc
>has got me wondering about a related issue that I would like to hear
>opinions about.
>
>Aside form issues of cluster size and reclaimed hard drive space etc, I
>cannot understand why someone would want a huge single C: partition. . .



Michael:

It's a matter of choice. There is no correct partitioning
solution for all situations.

The larger the clusters the faster the reads/writes and
the fewer and the quicker the defragmentations.

The smaller the clusters, the less wasted space (the
slack) but the slower the performance. Some people
claim to notice this during regular use.

Depending on your programs, your software may desire or
require installation on a particular drive. Having one large
C: simplifies many issues.

Depending on what users you are supporting, it may be
best to have everything on one large C: drive. All the eggs
in one basket is easier to protect.

If you're going to wipe out Windows regularly, to restore
a pristine state, you should put the OS and software on
C:, whatever size it takes, and the data, templates, macros,
etc., on the D: drive.

Some people like their partitions the size of their backup
device's capacity.

Some people forever tweak with Partition Magic or the like.

There are other reasons why people want a huge
single C: partition.

Regards,

John Chin