Hi, I wish to format a new hard drive. I will probably format and partition it through Setup during the Win XP installation. I have four questions that I hope someone could help me with: 1) Is partitioning and formatting a blank HDD through Win XP setup as effective as partitioning and formatting a drive using FDisk.exe and FORMAT.exe DOS commands? 2) I want to separate my system partition (C:\) from my boot partition (D:\ - where I will install Win XP). Will I need to setup the C: drive as the Primary and Active partition before installing Win XP on the D: drive? Will Win XP setup automatically place the system files on the C: drive when I install the OS to D: drive? 3) I would imagine that the primary (system) partition wouldn't have to be very large, given that it's only holding the files the bios needs to point the system to the D: drive to load Win XP. What size partition should I create for the system (C:)drive? 4) If I format the C: as FAT and the D: drive as NTFS, will the system files on the C: drive point to the D: drive to load Win XP?

Hi FredosBack, 1)Do not use the Win98 floppy boot to partition except in certain circumstances; you want to format in NTFS, not FAT32 and the XP sytem disk is best for that. 2)Far as I know, XP is going to always target the C drive to install everything, boot and system files. What folks usually do for added protection is to create two partitions, one about 15 gigs to install XP on, and the rest for installing programs on and data storage. However, bear in mind this is not a silver bullet; some programs insist on installing many files on C anyway, so if C gets trashed you still end up reinstalling your proggies. For data storage only this is fine. 3)see (2) above. 4)Not a good idea, and what advantage is there in that anyway?? Remember that NTFS can read FAT32, NOT the other way. Plus FAT is a far less efficient storage system and more unstable than NTFS. That's why NTFS was created by Microsoft. If you want data security,why not do this: Create a dual-boot system by creating two partitions on your HD one large and one small. Format both in NTFS. Install XP on both. Make your large partition your default boot by altering the Boot.ini file (for convenience), with programs and data on it. Okay, now if it corrupts, gets a virus and can't boot, etc., then just boot into the 2nd XP setup, open your large partition in Explore, and drag & drop your data files off it into your smaller XP. Okay, now you can repair your large partition, but your data is safe. One last suggestion: make a slipstreamed CD of XP and SP2. Then when you install XP the whole ball of wax gets installed at once. You will have far less problems (if any) loading your programs. Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime; Then industry pollutes the water and kills all the fish.

Hi ranchhand, Thanks for responding. You have some good ideas. 1) Point well taken. 2)and 3) I understand that you said, " some programs insist on installing many files on C anyway, so if C gets trashed you still end up reinstalling your proggies". But don't most OSes and applications give you the option of where to install their entire software contents? 4) I thought a small system partition in FAT could be useful because it would allow me to use MS-DOS to boot the system if ever the boot sector didnt work. But as you pointed out, the system files in FAT would not be able to see the OS in NTFS format. Your idea of having two bootable partitions with Win XP installed on both is interesting. In that case, will the Boot.ini file contain 2 pointers, one for each OS on the different partitions? Likewise, will the Bootloader file show two Win XP installs?

A few more observations/ideas... M$ OS offer by default to install to c: , but you have the option (during setup) to change that to wherever you wish (dos being the only exception). As you already understand, the XP boot/start-up files will reside in the active Primary (c: on this occasion). You can install XP (and its apps/utils) to a reasonably sized Primary (10-15Gig???) and use balance of drive (an Extended partition) for data; and this can be subdivided further into logical-drives (for ease of data organisation, and faster/easier defrags). There was time when folks advocated a separate partition/logical-drive for the apps/utils, and it did/does have some advantages (especially if drive space is limited overall). However with large drives now readily available there is no real advantage in this approach these days? As you have already mooted, you can have very small c: (system/active)Primary) partition - say 100-200Meg or so - for the boot/start-up files only; balance of drive is Extended partition and this is subdivided into at least two logical-drives. The first logical-drive would again be 10-15Gig and used for XP system files (the OS itself) and apps/utils, balance of drive again for data... If wishing to have two versions of XP installed then a separate logical-drive for each for each would be wiser - but not esential... The small c: Primary would be formatted as fat16 (most efficient format under 504Meg). It could be also have CDROM drivers installed too - thus allowing a CDROM access from a dos level, which can have advantages. You could also have XP in c: (active Primary) - again say 10-15Gig or so (fat32/ntfs); a second version in a logical-drive (fat32/ntfs) in the Extended partition (also 10-15Gig?); balance of drive for data etc. - as already suggested in essence by ranchhand. However you could also have two separate Primary partitions, one for each XP installation 10-15Gig or so, and holding completely separate XP/apps/utils installations. They would share the common Extended partition for data. The first Primary would be the "normal/standard" active Primary; the second could be enabled (set active/bootable) as need-be via a '98 boot-disk should the first version fail to boot OK. Also the second XP installation could be added to boot.ini on the first Primary - thus giving you a boot option via the boot-loader on the first XP installation, and yet still allow you to set its Primary active and thus bootable (independant of the first XP installation) if need-be..? Both Primary partitions (XP installations) would/should normally be visible from whichever OS is booted up. There are advantages to having each version in its own separate Primary partition, over having at least one version in an Extended-partition/logical-drive... Each Primary version is self-contained and insulated from the privations/problems of the other in terms of booting etc. Even if you run the XP boot-partition (where the system files reside) as ntfs there are advantages to having data areas as fat32... In event of a crash (especially with a single OS installation) you can at least access data via '98 boot-disk? Also if the smallish primary is around the 200-250Meg size you could even install '98 there in an emergency if need-be - again for data access; making it upto 500Meg (as fat16) allows for "a few" apps/utils too... Having data as fat16 is a mixed event. If it's over 2Gig (partition size) then only XP/W2K/NT can access it; if its 2Gig or less then all M$ OS can access it... Also if data etc. is ntfs there is the usual ntfsdos util that allows acess from a dos level. And a working Linux CD (i.e. the whole Linux OS/apps etc. on a bootable CD) allows some similar access. You would boot with the Linux CD and away you go. It would not be as fast as a hard drive installation, but at least it would allow you access - and some useful tweaks too... The boot.ini/boot-menu (in c: ) will (should) list all installed OS - be it one, two, or more XP, or a mixed OS environment. There are "very few" apps that "insist" on going into c: these days (dos apps excepted). Likewise if the actual OS itself is in d: (or wherever, but not c: ) and an app/util is one that insists on c: - the app/util will "usually" go into whichever partition holds the OS involved. Those apps that usually "want/insist" c: are (usually) looking for the partition that holds the OS...; d: (or wherever) will (usually) do just as well. Invariably one has the option to change a proffered default location for most apps/utils (and the OS) these days; dos items being the only likely exception.

2)3: Yes, many do, but "not entire". The reality is that there are certain critical files which still will be created on root C of your system. All it takes is for those to be unavailable in the event of a corruption crash/virus, etc. and you are back to square one anyway. Dual-Boot: I have been setting my systems up for years this way. I have never had it fail yet, and I hear from my clients every so often and they are SO glad to have that "back door" to get in and save their data. The reason that you want a slightly bigger partition than you need for the backdoor, is that when you start transferring your data files off the failed partition you are going to need extra space, especially if you have a lot of video or music files (which are large). Afterwards in whole or in piecemeal you can burn them to CD, flash drive, etc. Sometimes, if it is just a corrupted DLL file or something fairly simple, you can even repair the main partition from your back door. Your question: Yes, in a dual-boot setup each installation has a separate entry in boot.ini and loader, and separate pointers. They are completely separate from each other, yet can read/edit each other's files. That is what makes the setup so powerful. Even in the event of a virus attack on one, the other is insulated. Some will disagree with me, but I have never had a virus/spyware jump a partition yet and infect the other XP installation. Of course, when retrieving data run a virus scan on each file to make sure you don't import the virus!! Trust me, it works. And it is far more efficient and simple than bumping around in DOS trying to gain entry to a damaged partition, which most of the time doesn't work anyway. Actually, this method is a more efficient variation of using Knoppix or a rescue disk in a CDROM to try to access a damaged partition. Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime; Then industry pollutes the water and kills all the fish.

"ranchhand" - as a philosophical point of discussion...? If the dual-boot (main + backup versions of XP) has each version in its own partition/logical-drive, and both access/use a common Extended partition area (data etc.), then there is no real need for a very large XP boot-partition to include data as well as the OS etc.? Whichever version goes down, the other would be available to continue working - and allow for a rebuild of the failed version? Ideally I would have both versions in their own Primary partitions - a little more secure than one or both versions in logical-drives? I agree the Knoppix (or similar) approach is a little slow and that a backup installation is a good idea; and I can see why non-technical "clients" would appreciate your offering it. Otherwise I think we're on more or less a similar tack on this one overall...?

Hi Trvlr and Ranchhand, Thanks for all the insight. Your thoughts are truly appreciated. Do you have any thoughts on which file system - FAT or NTFS - should be used for the various partitions you suggest? Being that I will partition and format a 40GB hdd for my laptop, this is the configuration I envision: C: drive - 1GB (Sytem files)NTFS D: drive - 14GB (OS)NTFS E: drive - 12.5 (Apps/Utilities)NTFS F: drive - 12.5 (Data)NTFS All my system files will be on the C: drive in my configuration. 1- Can I also add MS-DOS system files to the C: drive as well? Will MS-DOS operate in NTFS? I won't have enough space for a double OS installation, and would like to be able to boot back to a C:\> prompt should the OS become corrupt. I've heard that over time the OS will tend to grow and consume more space on the hard drive. 2- Is this due to Microsoft updates and service packs? Or is it due to applications depositing their files in the OS? 3-If, applications do rely on the OS that heavily(both using OS dll's and adding their own shared files to the OS), then shouldn't applications coexist in the same partition as the OS? Thanks again for all your help.