getting ready for windows 7

[TequilaChaser]

Actually I didnt think about partitioning the drive  

Its will be a fresh install, got all files I want to keep burned to cd,including IE8 (yeah I know some of you guys hate IE,but it works for me)

minke, I am almost certian that windows 7 comes default with IE8

I suggest/recommend you use Skuzzy's  IE settings ( think they are located in the stickys at top of the Tech forum, I maybe wrong though ) then allow authorization for your most needed addon's/plug-ins afterwards......to fit your needs

as MrRipley has posted most all todays HD's are faster than older ones, but doing maintenance on a 1Tb HD partitioned in whole is a "TIMELY" project...... in my view, it would be much better if you installed your main OS & main apps to a smaller partitioned area.......( thinking long term here down the road )


YMMV

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Its not always about AHII Ripley and thats the point.

No, FSX is the exception to the rule most likely. When HDD gets accessed for whatever reason, the game is lost. HDD is inherently slow.

[Mighty01]

If I had to do all this I would seriously consider getting a new faster harddrive _now_.

Reasoning behind it? You get more performance, more hd space and same amount of trouble as if you'd do it again later on. Another benefit is that you can then use the old hd for swap file giving you an added boost again.

If your existing hdd is 3-4 years old I would definately get a new 1Tb or 1.5Tb 7200rpm drive on the side. You'll notice a marked improvement in i/o performance. Just remember to partition the Tb drive to at least 2 partitions, 200 or so Gb for OS and programs and other partition for AH etc. games that will not require installation to program files. This makes a reformat of c: a breeze later on - especially if you back up the cleanly installed image of c: on the leftover hd or partition.

I agree with the above quote from a not to old thread, for your needs minke

[MrRiplEy[H]]

I agree with the above quote from a not to old thread, for your needs minke

Just notice that I didn't mention anything about gaming in context of a faster harddrive. The benefit is mainly lower load times. On other things as large file copy etc. the difference is noticeable.

[Chalenge]

No, FSX is the exception to the rule most likely. When HDD gets accessed for whatever reason, the game is lost. HDD is inherently slow.

FSX is the exception when it comes to games but it is not the only exception when it comes to applications and you and I do not know what minke is planning to use his system for until he tells us.

Just to be clear here I would very much prefer to have three to six hard drives (using four with two in RAID configuration) over one hard drive with six partitions or two hard drives with three partitions or any other combination. Why? Its much easier to get the system to haul butt in every aspect of use thats why.

Another aspect I failed to mention is simultaneous access to two drives which todays systems can certainly do but which is impossible or self-defeating with a single drive and multiple partitions. For instance. I have my OS on one drive and FSX on multiple drives (main program on one... scenery on another... traffic on yet another) and when I record film with FRAPS it goes to yet another hard drive (even when using AHII).

Your approach cannot compare period especially if a user is not willing to shutdown background processes (and recomending users do that can destroy their systems if they are not able to properly cope with it). I would love to hear from Skuzzy about some details about AH myself because it seems like stutters would be mainly caused by disk access and not because of video memory use or anything like that.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

FSX is the exception when it comes to games but it is not the only exception when it comes to applications and you and I do not know what minke is planning to use his system for until he tells us.

Just to be clear here I would very much prefer to have three to six hard drives (using four with two in RAID configuration) over one hard drive with six partitions or two hard drives with three partitions or any other combination. Why? Its much easier to get the system to haul butt in every aspect of use thats why.

Another aspect I failed to mention is simultaneous access to two drives which todays systems can certainly do but which is impossible or self-defeating with a single drive and multiple partitions. For instance. I have my OS on one drive and FSX on multiple drives (main program on one... scenery on another... traffic on yet another) and when I record film with FRAPS it goes to yet another hard drive (even when using AHII).

Your approach cannot compare period especially if a user is not willing to shutdown background processes (and recomending users do that can destroy their systems if they are not able to properly cope with it). I would love to hear from Skuzzy about some details about AH myself because it seems like stutters would be mainly caused by disk access and not because of video memory use or anything like that.

I think you're a bit out of touch with reality here. Most users have only one hdd on their computer. Leaving it unpartitioned means they will have all their junk on C:

Now that's just appauling to even think about. The first problem they get with the OS they're in big big trouble if the problem requires a format. It means the user should have planned ahead and do regular full backups of his system (yeah with 1 hdd, 200 dvd's per month?). I can tell you this ain't gonna happen.

It's astronomically better to separate the OS in a separate partition from other files. The performance impact from doing that is no different from using an empty hdd compared to 80% full hdd. Do you stop using your drives when they start to get full because they become too slow? And I'm not referring to the SSD fiasco of yours now

Now, if this user said he was looking for an ultra-performance state of the art system he should not worry the least about partitioning the drive. He should be getting megaexpensive 10-15k rpm drives and do multiple raid configuration that ends up costing more alone than most people's computers. I saw no indication of wishing to do that though. Disk partitioning is NOT a performance issue in day to day life In My Humble Opinnion.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Food for thought: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/expert/tulloch_partition.mspx

[Chalenge]

Now you are being ridiculous and not seeing the forest for the trees. What you are suggesting is that a user take one large drive and place the OS on the primary and software on the secondary partitions and there isnt any way to save the secondary if the primary requires a format (you went there not me).

RAID configurations are only worth it to people that need speed in video editing and for programs like FSX that use large images for terrain or something like that and super fast drives about the same thing. In those cases a standard 7200rpm drive will work in a properly setup RAID just as well as a faster 15000 rpm drive and I challenge you to tell the difference (its like comparing 60fps to 70fps you cant see it). Its much easier to get a small drive for the OS and a larger drive for programs and games. Yes what I use isnt for everyone but its a great example of how to speed things up. With your system a FAT problem or other issue requiring a format and all data is gone (OS and games and apps).

I use a hard drive dock to back up to using Acronis True Image (more hard drives). I think hard drives are cheap compared to the time it takes in reformatting and reinstalling software. A weeks worth of installing and registering can be restored in 30 minutes time my way. DVDs? What are you thinking? If cash is so tight you can only afford one drive you WILL be stuck when your drive dies (not if).

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Now you are being ridiculous and not seeing the forest for the trees. What you are suggesting is that a user take one large drive and place the OS on the primary and software on the secondary partitions and there isnt any way to save the secondary if the primary requires a format (you went there not me).

I think you have a major problem with reading comprehension. Read again and see I stated exactly the OPPOSITE.

One drive is bad if the drive dies totally, yes. But one drive and two partitions are 100% better if only the OS goes corrupt or you get a nasty virus.

[Skuzzy]

Just to be clear about a point in the linked article to MS and what others may think.

Multiple drives cannot simultaneously read/write data.  It is a physical impossibility as only one bus master device (CPU, drive, ethernet, video...) can read/write RAM at a time.  The commands can be sent to multiple drives, but when the data for any given command is ready (read or write), only one device can the CPU memory or I/O bus, at a time.

For hard drive access, the command phase is an insignificant part of the overall time it takes to actually complete a command.

[Chalenge]

I think you have a major problem with reading comprehension. Read again and see I stated exactly the OPPOSITE.

One drive is bad if the drive dies totally, yes. But one drive and two partitions are 100% better if only the OS goes corrupt or you get a nasty virus.

I would think you would want to reformat a drive in the case a nasty virus hits. Its like going into orbit and niking the planet its the only real way to be sure. 

Skuzzy points out that reading and writing data at the exact same time is impossible but compare accessing two seperate folders on a single drive versus two folders on seperate drives for a moment. Particularly in the case of a dual partition the head of the drive has to move a great distance when compared to two seperate drives accessing folders that 'by design of zone filing' will be at the fastest read area of the drive. I will say that this too is very difficult for humans to see and realize the difference but with programs so slaved to I/O as we have today this can become a severe data flow problem that results in video stuttering and I have myself seen where using more than a single drive can really clear things up and smooth things out.

[Skuzzy]

Multiple drives can help improve overall performance, if they are configured correctly to spread accesses evenly across them.  The reduction in seek times would be the improvement made.

[minke]

minke, I am almost certian that windows 7 comes default with IE8

So are they including web browsers with 7 or not? I was told they were,but I was getting conflicting info. Will all released retail versions have it?

[Skuzzy]

The browser will be available with all versions of Windows 7 regardless which country you are buying it for or from.

Unless the EU changes its mind again.

[hyster]

i got win7 pro and it came with IE8. im in the uk