A question for Tacit

[Gary S]

Tacit,

I was wondering if you would mind giving a discription of your current HHD setup on your Macs as far as partitioning for OSX and 9x including how your managing your disks etc.

it may yield some insight. i'm ready to partition and install another HHD and would apprieciate your insight.

[tacit]

I currently have four Macs in daily use: a B&W G3, a Revision "D" iMac, a slot-loading imac, and a new (white) iBook.

The slot-loading imac and iBook are partitioned exactly as they came from the factory: One partition, with OS 9 and OS X on the same partition.

The 333MHz "Revision D" iMac, which has the limitation of all early iMacs (it can not boot if the system partition is greater than 8GB), has an aftermarket 40GB hard disk drive in it. That drive is formatted 4GB for OS 9, 4 GB for OS X, and 32GB for data.

My B&W G3 also has an aftermarket hard drive, this one 80GB. It's formatted similarly: 4GB OS 9, 4 GB OS X, and 72GB data.

[Gary S]

Thanks Tacit.

[Gary S]

A couple of questions about your setup on the computers that have the 4 gig partitions for OSX.

1) Have you had any problems with running out of room for the Virtual Memory in OSX?

2) How do you separate your OSX and OS9x Applications and docs?

[tacit]

Nope, no problem with OS X VM. Of course, most of my computers have 640 MB of RAM (with the exception of the Rev. D iMac), so VM paging doesn't cause problems.

I keep all my apps except for the Apple iApps on the data and general purpose partition. The Apple iApps have to be in the "Applications" folder, or else Software Update tends to do nasty things when it tries to update them. But Quark, Illustrator, Photoshop, and so on get installed on the large partition.

[Gary S]

Thanks Tacit.

I've been holding off partitioning on the G4 that has OS10.2.4 on it and I'm glad I did.

I like the idea of keeping the iApps on the smaller partition and the other Applications on another partition. I didn't know how well that would work but.........I know it will work now.

I'm glad I asked.

[Paddy]

Gary, you can even keep the apps on another drive if you want to...I've still got a few shareware apps I use over on the 45GB IBM, while running from the 120GB WD, and it works just fine. One of these days I'll get around to moving them to the newer, slightly faster drive, but it's not on the top of the to do list! However, I do keep the apps and the documents on the same partition for the most part - using another partition for Photoshop scratch space and another one for document backup.

Unlike Tacit, I also keep 9 on one small partition and X on several others - again, it seems to work very well. Seems to be a personal choice more than anything. Nobody has pointed out any major or consistent pitfalls of doing it either way. Given the fact that I never use 9 anymore, it seemed silly to put it on my primary drive/partition. Again - personal choice.

This is one of those situations where there is no absolutely right answer - just lots of opinions!  

Further question for Tacit though - is there a particular reason that you keep the system and iApps on a small, separate partition with everything else on another partition? Would avoiding disk fragmentation on the OS partition be a reason to do this (?) Just wondered...

[Gary S]

Paddy,

"Would avoiding disk fragmentation on the OS partition be a reason to do this?"

That was my main thought, although it seems Tacit has left his 2 newest machines they way they came.

I just have found it so much easier in the past to run DiskWarrior or a defragmenter on my smaller System partitions and then hit the Apps partition when it really needs it or i have the time.

We'll see what Tacit says.

[tacit]

I partitioned the Rev. D's hard drive because a quirk in the firmware of a Rev. D iMac makes it incapable of booting from a system file not located in the first physical 8GB of hard drive space. Since I added a hard drive larger than 8GB, partitioning is necessary.

The B&W I partitioned a long time ago as a hedge against a corrupt system. The idea isthat if something should damage one OS, the computer will still boot; it will skip the damaged OS and load the OS from the next partition.

The other two computers, the newer iMac and the iBook, I left as-is simply because I didn't want to go through the hassle of partitioning and formatting the hard drive and reinstalling the operating systems. I had the hard drive on the iBook halfway full within hours of receiving it.

[Gary S]

The hassle of partitioning and reinstalling OSX.2.      

That's why I haven't got around to it too. I bought another HHD and have left the new one as is.

All I've installed on it is a few Carbon games like Medal of Honor and Warcraft lll........my son finally get to use the "World Editor" in Warcraft lll. It is pretty cool.

I'm kind of happy on my Beige unit.....but the G4 is a lot faster!

   

Things sure have changed....I remember when I used to reinstall System 6x about every week on the floppies.  
 
 [ 04-04-2003, 07:32 PM: Message edited by: Gary S ]

[swhitset]

Tacit,

I'm curious.. How much Ram do you have in that 333?  I have 288 MB in mine  (a low profile 256 MB so Dimm in the lower slot and the original 32 MB in the upper slot  (I have had both of these in either slot since they are both low profile chips).  The imac has no problems recognizing that 256 MB chip.  The reason I ask is that I have read that many people have had problems getting a 333 to recognize anything over a 128 MB chip (or 256 MB total ram).  I just wondered if you had any insight in this regard.

Steve

[jepinto]

quote:Originally posted by swhitset:
The reason I ask is that I have read that many people have had problems getting a 333 to recognize anything over a 128 MB chip (or 256 MB total ram).  I just wondered if you had any insight in this regard.

Steve

I also have a 333, and have the low profile 256 in the lower slot and a 128 in the upper slot.  No problems!  Now, I've been told that we can onlty max out at 512, that a 512 chip won't work, but according to OWC's
 My OWC

quote: 256MB PC100 CL2 SO-DIMM Low-Profile for PowerBook G3 Series Wallstreet(1998), Lombard(1999), iMac 233/266/333. Lifetime Warranty. Allows up to 512MB! Works in LOWER and upper slot! (OWC100SO256168L)

[swhitset]

Jennie that quote doesn't seem to contradict the 512MB limit.  It only confirms what I have always assumed... that by putting in two 256 MB chips.. you could have up to 512MB of ram in the 333.  Apple only supports up to 256 MB because that is what was tested at the time of the release of the 333. But, when I bought mine, I had read that the 333 would support 512MB when the 256's came out.

My question now is that I have read in several places that some people have not been able to get a 256 MB chip to be recognized in there 333.  One source that I read about over on the MacWorld forums had a lab full of 333's. Some of them would recognize more that 256 MB of Ram and some would not using the same ram chips.  I just wonder if anybody here has any insight into why this is?

Steve

[kelly]

Probably goes back to that Chip Density issue that tacit addressed.  

http://www.techsurvivors.net/cgi-bin/ultim...ic;f=1;t=010390

Similar from OWC Larry.

http://forums.dealmac.com/read.html?f=1&i=...06354&t=1106289

Another great RAM post from him.

http://forums.dealmac.com/read.html?f=1&i=...32297&t=1132297

[tacit]

My 333MHz iMac has 384MB of RAM: 128MB upper slot, 256MB lower slot.

Kelly is spot-on; it's a chip density issue. The Rev. D iMac can address a 256MB DIMM, but only if it uses low-density chips, not high-density chips. They make SODIMMs with both low-density and high-density chip; if you use one that has high-density chips on it, the iMac "sees" it as a 128MB DIMM, not a 256MB DIMM.

Usually, most RAM vendors will swap a non-working high-density SODIMM for a low-density one.