 Icons on your desktop, best not to have many |
Welcome Guest ( Log In | Click here to Register a free account now! )
Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to Bleeping Computer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.| Important Announcement: We have two terrific contests running on the site that I wanted all our members and guests to know about. The first contest is the HP Magic Giveaway, which is underway as of November 28th. More information can be found at this topic, which will be updated very soon with further information. The second contests, is for the chance to win two Seagate FreeAgent external hard drives. More information about this contest can be found here. These are both amazing contests and I suggest everyone submit an entry for them. - BleepingComputer Management |
  |
 Jan 20 2005, 07:26 PM
Post
#16
|
|
 Learning Daily  Group: Members Posts: 4,543 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Washington State, USA Member No.: 1,322  |
In practicality, two on a single cable that provides connection to the motherboard, is the typical limit. Yes, you can have a pair of 200+ HD's. Because of this fact, partitioning is a useful reality. You wouldn't want to scan (in any way) 500GB's of files on a routine basis. (That explains why NTFS in windows XP and forward from that point in the development of OS versions is also a reality) It is why you can choose in anti-virus scans, anti-trojan scans, anti-spyware scans, and system-wide monitoring in general... Many people store many GB's of files in such a way that those files are simply "storage". Not particularly appropriately nestled into the boot drive. Speed is largely dependent on what you allow to startup & run constantly. Really. SATA drives offer more options than ATA drives, also. Technology marches ever forward (with some backward compatibility) A gulf exists between 32 bit technology & the relatively new 64 bit technology, however. That will be considered "apples" & "oranges" more so as time goes on. IMO -------------------- patiently patrolling, plenty of persisant pests n' problems ...
|
 |
 
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 07:41 PM
Post
#17
|
|
 Forum Addict Group: Members Posts: 1,167 Joined: 11-January 05 From: Australia Member No.: 9,289 |
I know windows XP has to file systems what's the difference between NFTS and FAT32
and which is better? |
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 07:42 PM
Post
#18
|
|
 Voted most likely Group: Members Posts: 3,675 Joined: 19-September 04 From: Collingwood, Ontario, Canada Member No.: 2,883 |
QUOTE So becuase i don't have an actual WIndpws CD could i just purchase a professional XP disc in upgrade XP Home, that way i would have an actual windows CD? You won't be able to use an upgrade CD because at the beginning of the installation you will be required to insert the CD for your original OS to prove ownership of a prior OS. -------------------- **** We use our powers for good, not evil **** When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail. Abraham Maslo |
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 07:46 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Forum Addict Group: Members Posts: 1,167 Joined: 11-January 05 From: Australia Member No.: 9,289 |
if i can't use an upgrade CD what about if i buy a full WINDOWS XP CD and install it with that, instead of installing a fresh copy of it could i keep my original settings or something.
EDIT: XP PROFESSIONAL (AS I USE HOME AT THE MOMENT) This post has been edited by Izzy: Jan 20 2005, 07:47 PM |
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 07:47 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Learning Daily Group: Members Posts: 4,543 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Washington State, USA Member No.: 1,322 |
If you have data you want to use on a new OS,
and that data was stored on FAT32 (the system used in pre-winXP) you'd likely want to stay with FAT32. NTFS, among other security related matters, allows you to use more characters in filenames. Also the way the drive is "sectioned off" differs. Allows for what some find is a better utilization of hard drive space. I find both features of NTFS useful. 
This post has been edited by phawgg: Jan 20 2005, 07:48 PM -------------------- patiently patrolling, plenty of persisant pests n' problems ...
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 07:51 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Forum Addict Group: Members Posts: 1,167 Joined: 11-January 05 From: Australia Member No.: 9,289 |
i had a cousin who had XP PRO with NFTS file system but changed it to FAT32, some of his programs wouldn't work anymore. he couldn't uninstall or re-install or even repair them. had to formatt hardrive and start over (well he backed up hi stuff first though).
what the trouble? |
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 07:55 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Learning Daily Group: Members Posts: 4,543 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Washington State, USA Member No.: 1,322 |
QUOTE a cousin who had XP PRO with NFTS file system but changed it to FAT32, some of his programs wouldn't work anymore. When changing from one to the other, very specific warnings are published in the dialog that is read when doing so.The fact is as I mentioned, the two are not twins. One or the other, please. If you have old FAT32 data on CD as backup or on a hard drive(s) you need to convert it when you make the change, and not look back, thats the way it is.  There may indeed be ways to accomplish the conversion using software available, but I am unaware of the details. sorry. I have experienced difficulties in using my backup CD's that were resolved by "taking ownership" of the files. That provision is available in winXP, but I think those files initially rejected by the OS after a fresh reload were NTFS in nature, I mention it only to provide an insight into winXP that might not otherwise be an issue. I thought "this is weird" when I first encountered it. This post has been edited by phawgg: Jan 20 2005, 08:02 PM -------------------- patiently patrolling, plenty of persisant pests n' problems ...
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 07:57 PM
Post
#23
|
|
|
Voted most likely Group: Members Posts: 3,675 Joined: 19-September 04 From: Collingwood, Ontario, Canada Member No.: 2,883 |
His programs would have stayed as NTFS as the conversion would only apply to XP itself. Since XP was now FAT32 it would not be able to read any NTFS files so would not be able to run, uninstall or delete.
-------------------- **** We use our powers for good, not evil **** When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail. Abraham Maslo |
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 07:59 PM
Post
#24
|
|
|
Forum Addict Group: Members Posts: 1,167 Joined: 11-January 05 From: Australia Member No.: 9,289 |
Is the FAT32 system the old way
The NFTS system the new way? |
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 08:03 PM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Learning Daily Group: Members Posts: 4,543 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Washington State, USA Member No.: 1,322 |
YES
-------------------- patiently patrolling, plenty of persisant pests n' problems ...
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 08:07 PM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Forum Addict Group: Members Posts: 1,167 Joined: 11-January 05 From: Australia Member No.: 9,289 |
thank you for your help i understand better than before.
i'll stay with NFTS file system. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 08:11 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Learning Daily Group: Members Posts: 4,543 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Washington State, USA Member No.: 1,322 |
I struggled with definitions & read quite a bit about the matter.
It, like many relating to winXP, must be understood to some degree before a user (like me) can be comfortable using it. -------------------- patiently patrolling, plenty of persisant pests n' problems ...
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 08:12 PM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Forum Addict Group: Members Posts: 1,167 Joined: 11-January 05 From: Australia Member No.: 9,289 |
very true, i'm not a windows Xp lover, i still rather 98SE but we must move on.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 20 2005, 08:33 PM
Post
#29
|
|
|
Learning Daily Group: Members Posts: 4,543 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Washington State, USA Member No.: 1,322 |
I agree.
Longhorn looms on the horizon. 64-bit has been in the stores for months now. -------------------- patiently patrolling, plenty of persisant pests n' problems ...
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 21 2005, 04:17 AM
Post
#30
|
|
|
Forum Addict Group: Members Posts: 1,167 Joined: 11-January 05 From: Australia Member No.: 9,289 |
64-Bit not available in Australia yet.
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 3rd December 2008 - 03:09 PM |
© 2003-2008 All Rights Reserved Bleeping Computer LLC.