ah...this is interesting...everyone here already knows that I made the term up virtual partitions...it's a very good, and acurate term...I'm very proud of the term, and fully expect it to be used more often to describe good file management, as I point out, though it's lost on a couple of you, the practical use of my vitual partitions is ABSOLUTELY IDENTICLE to the vast majority of the practical use of actual partitions...and anyone who performs normal computing realizes.
It's very interesting; we all agree that there is a performance issue, and we all agree that it is probably a small issue...for some resason, there are people here that don't want me to point out that microsoft believes the issue is important enough to urge manufacturers to not partition...Sorry, to those of you that don't want me to do so, if microsoft says there is an issue, I will point it out.
As I originally said, I and most of the peoplle I know, including experts hardly see any pervasive reason to partition at all.
Everyone who's read my posts has seen that from my very first post, I have urged those of you who want to partition, to do so...I then went on to give you the information most of you would prefer to have...I'm very surprised this is such an issue.
So, once again, and I hope for the last time, and as I said from the very beginning of this thread, I agree with allan...if you want to partition for your personal preferance, you certainly should... many people find some kind of advantage to it as has been pointed out...I find no advantage to it, as has been pointed out.
If you are doing it for the purpose of performance, no, it's counter productive, so much so, microsoft urges manufactureres to not partition.
So what new has been said here?...nothing by me, so now I feel bad for trying to get the last word...ok, if someone else has an additional post, if again, it's just a rehash of all of this, which is all the last few posts have been, I will definately not try to get the last word in...