🚀 go-pugleaf

Rod Speed wrote in message ...
>
>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.

That was already discussed. We've moved on already.

>
>> 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.

Where was that?

>
>> 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.

And throw out any non FAT32 compatible software too. If knew which ones will
bite you.

>
>> 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.

That option is the individuals choice to do so.

>
>> 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.

Did you always repeat yourself? Please go on.

>
>> 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'

Nor what some loser posts in a newsgroup.

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

That's already been discussed, move on already.

>
>
>