Windows Experience Index of 5.9?

Sven Groot said:

CreamFilling512 said:

*snip*

Wow, you've got a big system partition. I always put the OS + apps on a relatively small partition (80GB) and everything else on different drives/partitions, so I can reformat the system drive without worrying about preserving anything. It's a habit I picked up during the Windows 2000 and XP betas, where we'd sometimes get a new build every week which meant re-installing your PC a lot.

You call that large? What are you gonna say about me?

Dodo said:

Sven Groot said:

*snip*

You call that large? What are you gonna say about me?

So what do you do in the event your system is borked and you need to reinstall? You'd have to copy nearly 2TB of data to some other location before you can format the disk.

Sven Groot said:

Dodo said:

*snip*

So what do you do in the event your system is borked and you need to reinstall? You'd have to copy nearly 2TB of data to some other location before you can format the disk.

Buy three new hard drives and create a new RAID array. Then install on there, starting from scratch. I don't 'bork' my installs, I don't even delete stuff. If I'm running out of space, I usully buy new drives to fill. Though, maybe I should get a few SANs and use RAIDed SSDs with 24h backups... might be a better plan.

Ion Todirel said:

Dodo said:

*snip*

so what happens if your machine suddenly doesn't boot because of a bad sector or whatever? RAID won't help you in any way

I just use new drives. This way I am always presented with the opportunity of hiring a recovery firm like Kroll Ontrack, if necessary.

Usually drives fail much sooner, I set S.M.A.R.T warn levels to allow only one reallocated sector before a drive gets marked as failed).

Dodo said:

Ion Todirel said:

*snip*

I just use new drives. This way I am always presented with the opportunity of hiring a recovery firm like Kroll Ontrack, if necessary.

Usually drives fail much sooner, I set S.M.A.R.T warn levels to allow only one reallocated sector before a drive gets marked as failed).

Just goes to show just how differently we all see and fix the same problem. The Sven/Ion solution is the most pragmatic, hassle free and time saving - and time honoured - solution.

If you prefer hiring krollontrack, then you must have more money than sense (and I mean that in the nicesst possible way), because you are really making mountains out of molehills.

It also may well be that you are a complete whizz, and can attain 99% reliability, but I have used some top knotch gear that has been borked beyond repair, and my time is expensive, I'd rather not waste it doing menial things like data recovery, when you can sandbox your data from the OS.

vesuvius said:

Dodo said:

*snip*

Just goes to show just how differently we all see and fix the same problem. The Sven/Ion solution is the most pragmatic, hassle free and time saving - and time honoured - solution.

 

If you prefer hiring krollontrack, then you must have more money than sense (and I mean that in the nicesst possible way), because you are really making mountains out of molehills.

 

It also may well be that you are a complete whizz, and can attain 99% reliability, but I have used some top knotch gear that has been borked beyond repair, and my time is expensive, I'd rather not waste it doing menial things like data recovery, when you can sandbox your data from the OS.

Actually, in percentage towards a whole year, my data reliability rating is about 99.74% right now. Uptime reliability of my workstation is at 90.14% and that's just because backordering a motherboard took a while (almost a month).

I can never have enough storage on the Desktop area (I like having things right at my finger tips). I've been replacing a drive about... every three weeks for the last months. If a drive fails and a RAID array fails with it to the point where software methods won't do anything anymore, well there's only the choice of hiring the Ontrack guys. I don't have that kinda equipment to read data from a platter of disassembled drives.

I might add, I also don't like loosing my personalized settings.

A single partition is most storage efficient and 1TB drives currently have the best capacity to price ratio.

If I need to reinstall, I just use new drives and copy my stuff from the old ones and then put them in a drawer... as simple as that.

I've never had a hard drive fail (knock on wood) but I do keep my user files on a separate drive from my system drive, and back them up to my server every once in a while. Aside from some documents and photos, nothing on there couldn't be recreated.

CreamFilling512 said:

Ion Todirel said:

*snip*

Got a new laptop and it also gets 5.9 for the hard drive (non-SSD).

 

Curious, what laptop is that? HP Envy? What else has the i7 and ATI 4xxx series?

intelman said:

CreamFilling512 said:

*snip*

Curious, what laptop is that? HP Envy? What else has the i7 and ATI 4xxx series?

Dell Studio XPS 16

I don't think the thing about splitting the OS is nearly as needed these days, for the last few years I havent formatted, just usually got a bigger drive.

stevo_ said:

I don't think the thing about splitting the OS is nearly as needed these days, for the last few years I havent formatted, just usually got a bigger drive.

Old habits die hard I guess. And I did reformat for the Win7 beta, RC and RTM.

Since people above posted their scores:

Processor - 7.1
RAM- 7.1
Graphics - 7.0
Gaming Graphics - 7.0
Primary Hard Drive - 7.7