DMR
Wombat At Large
7,229 posts since Dec 2003
Reputation Points: 221
Solved Threads: 370
Hello,
You might wish to re-think having a partition that large. Imagine all the things you could loose if something goes wrong on it. Plus, try to back that size of media onto something else.
Unless you are digitizing video, or have a large set of projects that consume huge amounts of data, I would suggest you partition it down into more managable sizes, to help protect your data. Remember that partitioning will *not* protect you from a hardware crash of the drive, but it will allow you to format a troublesome partition without disturbing the other volumes.
Christian
kc0arf
Posting Virtuoso
1,937 posts since Mar 2004
Reputation Points: 121
Solved Threads: 57
if something goes wrong you're likely to loose the hardware so having multiple partitions will do you no good :)
I agree it's more prudent to have several smaller disks, but 100GB or so isn't excessive for today's overly large applications (which seem to have often been designed to use as much diskspace and CPU as possible in order to further hardware sales).
jwenting
duckman
8,392 posts since Nov 2004
Reputation Points: 1,662
Solved Threads: 337
Glad you finally got it to work. :)
The difference in GBs that you're seeing is mostly due to the fact that Windows and drive manufacturers use two different number/counting systems; binary and decimal. This results in the real, usable size of the drive being some percentage less than the size of the drive as advertized by the manufacturers. Because the difference is percentage-based, the actual difference in the amount of reported disk space can get quite sizable when you start working with multi-GB drives (over 17G for a 250G drive).
It's a bit confusing if you're only used to using our normal (decimal) counting system. but a bit more of an explanation can be found here:
http://personal-computer-tutor.com/abc3/v30/vic30.htm
DMR
Wombat At Large
7,229 posts since Dec 2003
Reputation Points: 221
Solved Threads: 370