🚀 go-pugleaf

"sittingduck" <you.love.sitting-duck@spamgourmet.com> wrote in message 
news:Xns97E07D8B7A964duckrulestheuniverse@news.easynews.com...
> SP Goodman wrote:
>
>> "sittingduck" <you.love.sitting-duck@spamgourmet.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns97E05F99DB056duckrulestheuniverse@news.easynews.com...
>>> SP Goodman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Double not.  What if your non-OS partition fails, huh?
>>>
>>> I've never seen a partition fail. I've seen plenty of drives goe tits
>>> up though. Regardless, I DO have a drive image of my programs
>>> partition.
>>>
>>>> Anyone with any sense - first and foremost - keeps a backup, so that
>>>> IF you have to reformat/reinstall, there's much less to restore.  As
>>>> such Quake III Arena goes under (gasp!) C:\Program Files, with neither
>>>> fear nor loathing.
>>>
>>> Hey, no one if forcing you to learn anything here, you can do things
>>> the old-
>>> fashioned noob way if you want. Some of us have learned that windows
>>> runs a
>>> lot better if it's isolated on it's own partition.
>>
>> Is this some kind of attempt to justify not having a backup then?
>
> You either have no clue what a drive image is, or didn't even read my
> previous post. Keeping programs and other documents and data off of the OS
> partition makes it EASIER to do backups, IMO.

Drive images are only efficient as a backup method if [a] you've got the 
duplicate disk space, and [b] you run the backup nightly while out of the 
office.  In addition restoration is fine at achieving a full bring-back, but 
what about the work one has done since 3am?

>> As someone who's been building PCs since 1981 I shouldn't care less
>> about this, but it's nothing but an invitation to an argument to claim
>> that using a default location for installation is the mark of a "noob".
>> Installation of a package on another drive doesn't require much
>> technical experience though, does it?
>
> Some people like thier PCs to run as efficently and logically as possible.
> Not everyone has the experience, expertise, desire, or patience to take 
> the
> steps that are neccesary.

Some folks just use their PCs as tools and don't have a need to fiddle with 
them.  Running test platforms, or a server bank?

>> I suppose such is valid, if one needs to tweak the machine that much to
>> get a reasonable boost in performance.  I remember when one had to pay
>> attention to cluster size on the HDD to get good performance, but after
>> IDE drives had been out for a few years this was a fairly meaningless
>> tweak, eventually just quoted to me by people who wanted to impress me
>> with their alleged technical prowess.  Me?  Perfectly happy at 2.5G
>> right now and I haven't started overclocking beyond the pedestrian as
>> yet. :)
>
> I generally overclock only slightly, if at all. Most of my computers are 
> set
> up for specific tasks, and speed is not really a concern.

'most of them'?  This is, of course, not the norm for a vast majority of 
people.  How many do you have, just for interest's sake?