Hello Murray,

14 Nov 99 15:17, Murray Lesser wrote to Eddy Thilleman:

ML> I assume that he agrees with me that it is very poor practice to play
ML> this game.

I don't see advantages to this setup myself.

ML> According to a post to Linda from John Thompson, recent versions of
ML> Windows can also see all primary partitions.  (He doesn't know
ML> whether this is "a good thing," either.)

I don't know too, but my thought is that general rules which everyone has
always used shouldn't be abanboned because most will still these rules and
thus it leads to utterly confusion.

ML> But there goes Microsoft again, making up its own rules as it goes
ML> along :-).

Not for the first time.

ML> On more mature thought, I believe that the above statement is
ML> incorrect.  As noted in other posts (not from me), there are several
ML> other exceptions to the "see all primary partitions" assertion.

I never tried it.

ET>> DOS and any winxx version don't recognize and so can't use HPFS
  >> partitions, but not because they can't see them. :)

ML> They don't assign drive letters to them, either!  Can you tell me the
ML> practical difference between "don't recognize" and "can't see?"

well, on second thought, not really.

ML> FAT is best suited for disk partitions that are 80 MB or less in size
ML> _or_ that have a limited number of files installed. Usually, 256
ML> files is a good target, with up to 500 acceptable. [emphasis added]

I didn't know that, I thought it was per directory.

ML> To quote from another message from you to me in the same packet:

ET>> Please at least _read_ the messages you are replying to. :)

Well, we can't read each other's minds, so we don't know what others are
thinking. We can only read what was written. I will try better next time. :)

  Greetings   -=Eddy=-        email: eddy.thilleman@net.hcc.nl

... WindowError:008 Broken window.  Watch for glass fragments.
--- GoldED/2 3.0.1