2 Hd's, Reformatting One

Aries8Aries8 Join Date: 2002-12-12 Member: 10719Members
edited January 2005 in Off-Topic
<div class="IPBDescription">computer HD question</div> This might seem like a stupid question but here goes...i just got another HardDrive installed and now I have two. I moved all the files i want to the new HD(C:) and want to reformat the old one(D:). After I reformat D: can I move all the files that i dont want on C:, like music and movies to D:, which will have no OS besides dos, and access them normally through C:?

Second which way do would you suggest reformatting D: just through dos and typing in the reformat command(which i think is D:\ formatD:) or do it through the windows xp cd

Thanks to anyone that can answer either one.

Comments

  • AlcapwnAlcapwn &quot;War is the science of destruction&quot; - John Abbot Join Date: 2003-06-21 Member: 17590Members
    Yeah, i think you can.

    I did it on my old win98 comp.
  • BaconTheoryBaconTheory Join Date: 2003-09-06 Member: 20615Members
    Yes you can. I have 2 HDs, a 60GB and a 80GB and my local disk is C: but I store files on my second HD which is X:. You can also install programs on he HD that is NOT the local disk, because you had to hook the second HD up as slave and the programs will just run off the Win XP on your local disk.
  • EpidemicEpidemic Dark Force Gorge Join Date: 2003-06-29 Member: 17781Members
    I could, I have a 30 days trial of windows and I have reformatted the HD where the windows installation was in 3 times now without my other hardrive which was left unformatted.


    [monse, dont hurt me]
  • BaconTheoryBaconTheory Join Date: 2003-09-06 Member: 20615Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-Epidemic+Jan 29 2005, 08:29 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Epidemic @ Jan 29 2005, 08:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> [monse, dont hurt me] <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    You, my friend, have just sealed your fate.
  • SkulkBaitSkulkBait Join Date: 2003-02-11 Member: 13423Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-Aries8+Jan 29 2005, 06:19 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Aries8 @ Jan 29 2005, 06:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Second which way do would you suggest reformatting D: just through dos and typing in the reformat command(which i think is D:\ formatD:) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    You would only do that if you wanted a Fat32 filesystem, and there really isn't any good reason to use that anymore.

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> or do it through the windows xp cd

    Thanks to anyone that can answer either one.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    And thats a waste of time. Assuming you're using XP, just rightclick on "My Computer" and select manage and then Disk Management. Right click on the drive you want to format and select "format". The filesystem you probably want in this case is NTFS.
  • TalesinTalesin Our own little well of hate Join Date: 2002-11-08 Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
    Actually, I prefer FAT32 over NTFS. Many programs can have difficulty passing through the HAL that's required for NTFS access.
    FAT32 is also <b><i>MUCH</b></i> faster at defragging, even if NTFS is slightly more fragmentation-resistant. (I'd rather spend an hour every month defragging, than five days a year)

    And then there's Linux interoperability... NTFS can be read, but not written safely.


    Oh, and there's the fact that under NTFS, at least on my machine paging files to disk CHUGS like no tomorrow.. 20-second access times are pretty standard, when under FAT32, it took about two seconds at most. I suspect a HAL problem, again.
    Then again, what do you expect from a company that tried to copyright symlinks.
  • SkulkBaitSkulkBait Join Date: 2003-02-11 Member: 13423Members
    edited January 2005
    <!--QuoteBegin-Talesin+Jan 29 2005, 09:01 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Talesin @ Jan 29 2005, 09:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Actually, I prefer FAT32 over NTFS. Many programs can have difficulty passing through the HAL that's required for NTFS access. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I have never, in my entire life, had a problem with this.

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
    FAT32 is also <b><i>MUCH</b></i> faster at defragging<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I call BS on that. Jesus, it takes like 10 minutes to defrag a nearly full 40gig HD every week on an NTFS drive. Back when I used win98 (fat32) defragging was sometinhg I did over the weekend, start it when I leave and it might be almost done when I get back 2 days later.


    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And then there's Linux interoperability... NTFS can be read, but not written safely.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    This is a genuine concern if you ever intend to dual-boot linux.

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Oh, and there's the fact that under NTFS, at least on my machine paging files to disk CHUGS like no tomorrow..<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    You'd have to be doing a lot of work or have virtually no ram. I run about the most outdated system on this entire board and I've never had an issue with paging when I didn't have a ton of **** running.

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->20-second access times are pretty standard<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    At this point I have to ask, just what kind of horrible thing are you doing to your system?

    Oh, and without NTFS you don't get any filesystem based security, if thats important to you.

    <a href='http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm' target='_blank'>here</a> is a simple comparison
    <a href='http://www.thundercloud.net/information-avenue/ntfs-vs-fat32/' target='_blank'>put annother way</a>

    The only time I would ever use FAT again is for putting the pagefile on its own fat16 partition to increase performance (as specified in Monse's tuning guide)
  • Aries8Aries8 Join Date: 2002-12-12 Member: 10719Members
    edited January 2005
    <!--QuoteBegin-Talesin+Jan 29 2005, 09:01 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Talesin @ Jan 29 2005, 09:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Actually, I prefer FAT32 over NTFS. Many programs can have difficulty passing through the HAL that's required for NTFS access.
    FAT32 is also <b><i>MUCH</b></i> faster at defragging, even if NTFS is slightly more fragmentation-resistant. (I'd rather spend an hour every month defragging, than five days a year)

    And then there's Linux interoperability... NTFS can be read, but not written safely.


    Oh, and there's the fact that under NTFS, at least on my machine paging files to disk CHUGS like no tomorrow.. 20-second access times are pretty standard, when under FAT32, it took about two seconds at most. I suspect a HAL problem, again.
    Then again, what do you expect from a company that tried to copyright symlinks. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    *Notice the comparision that skulkbait gave for NTFS and FAT32 edits post* I went to the disk management and it says that my bootdisk is NFTS and the one i want to reformat is FAT32. Just kind of wondering is i should leave them different or change them to be the same, if you can.

    Last question, will the reformat from here will completely wipe the HD cause theres a virus in windows on that that drive that I want to make sure is gone.
  • TalesinTalesin Our own little well of hate Join Date: 2002-11-08 Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
    SB, I have 512MB of PC3200. So that shouldn't be an issue, though I've been considering upgrading to a 2GB kit.

    As for the NTFS defrag, it's just a fact of life that it operates slower. The filesystem isn't set up to defrag.. it's meant to prevent it from being needed. But it fails, and the defrag takes quite a bit longer.

    You're running a 40GB drive... FAT32 would be faster. NTFS only really starts to show short-term advantages on 60GB+ partitions. And given that my total storage currently exceeds 500GB at the moment, I'd *STILL* take FAT32 over NTFS.


    Even if workload was heavy, and a full disk swap was required.. the system should not stop while paging is in process. Oop.. another downside to NTFS. The HAL is an extra drain on the CPU, and can actually end up eating more RAM. Making the swap slower.

    As for the games that have problems with NTFS, Neverwinter Nights was one title that immediately came to mind. It attempted direct disk write, which didn't fly. So the program crashed out. Perhaps you remember the early problems with Black & White, where 90% of people playing on Win2K were unable to auth? NTFS' fault.


    As for what I'm doing with my machine at the moment, let me see. 16 Firefox windows open, tabbed browsing enabled, 15 tabs each would be a decent estimate. XChat, Trillian, a few instances of Notepad, WinAMP, and Maya 6. So long as I don't switch to a Firefox window, everything's happy. The problem is, even if I only have two FF windows open, it causes the same slowdown as the cache is paged into memory.
  • SkulkBaitSkulkBait Join Date: 2003-02-11 Member: 13423Members
    edited January 2005
    I run lots of stuff all the time, I've never had the problems you describe and I'm working off of 256MB of <i>SD</i>RAM and a 1.1ghz P3.

    Anyway:

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I went to the disk management and it says that my bootdisk is NFTS and the one i want to reformat is FAT32. Just kind of wondering is i should leave them different or change them to be the same, if you can.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Thats entirely up to you. I would say you want to reformat the one as NTFS, and the links I provided agree with me (in fact, I couldn't find a link that recomended fat32 over NTFS except on dual-boot systems). However, you might want to get your self a copy of Monse's tuning guide, which will describe how to set up a small FAT16 partition on that second drive where you can place your pagefile for performance reasons.

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Last question, will the reformat from here will completely wipe the HD cause theres a virus in windows on that that drive that I want to make sure is gone.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Yes.

    Oh, so you don't have to track it down, here is monse's tuning guide:
  • Aries8Aries8 Join Date: 2002-12-12 Member: 10719Members
    edited January 2005
    Thanks for the help guys. I reformatted the drive put all my information on it, works fine, virus gone, all that good stuff. Turns out that the only option it gave me to reformat the drive as was NTFS. thanks for finding the file skulkbait. Just wanted to let everyone one in on the happy ending <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Sign In or Register to comment.