🚀 go-pugleaf

Tom MacIntyre <tmacinty@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:37bc3d43.222231087@news1.ns.sympatico.ca...

> Just someone who won't accept that others'
> computer requirements may be quite different,

I've already said that some may well be,
most obviously when running multiple OSs.

It wasnt what was being discussed, how to partition
the boot drive when running FAT32 Win9x.

> and that there can be right, wrong,

And I provided plenty of rational reasons on the advantages
and disadvantages are of multiple partitions on the boot drive
when running FAT32 Win9x.

> and different, with different being the biggest chunk of the pie.

And when different has some real downsides, like with
multiple partitions on the boot drive with FAT32 Win9x, which
is pretty crude in how it allocates drive letters, it may well make
sense to stop using what made sense in the past with the limitations
of FAT16 and do it differently now with FAT32. With plenty of rational
reasons for changing the approach to partitioning the boot drive.

> My opinion is that FAT32 has removed probably
> the biggest motivation for multiple partitions,

It has indeed, and we are still stuck with the relatively crude approach
Win9x takes to the allocation of drive letters to hard drive partitions.
Which is quite easy to bypass by using a single partition on the boot drive.

> but there are others - they can be personal, and they can be preferential,

And the two alternatives can be rationally analysed on the
advantages and disadvantages of the two approach, one or
multiple partitions on the boot drive when running FAT32 Win9x.

> and they can supercede what some expert has put in a
> book or on a web-site, and they are up to the individual.

And many dont actually give a FRF what 'some
expert has put in a book or on a web-site'

What actually matters is what rational advantages
and disadvantages the two approach have.