Computer tech question - Hard drive partitions

[XA Coupsta]

Anyone know much about partitioning hard drives?

Basically, I want to get into 'Limewire' (hope I dont cop copyright flames for that).

But i've heard good an bad.......so to offer some sort of safeguard incase it is all bad - I have partitioned a new section of my HD, bout 15 gig worth, and this is where I will base the Limewire app and any downloads I get from it.

So i've got 3 partitions now. One for my operating system (10gig - been told keeping this small should help the system run well?). One with about 50gig on it (has some program files, music, other junk) and now one with 15gig on it totally dedicated to Limewire.

1. Is this worthwhile doing? Will it protect my operating system (which is on a separate partition/drive) if the proverbial does hit the fan with it?

2. How does this affect system performance? Should it? Might just be me - but I reckon its running slower now with this new partition.

3. Is there a better way for all this that others could suggest?

Ive downloaded the limewire software, upgraded Java (at its request). Im pretty close to kicking it all off. Going to do some full system clean ups and virus scans and defrags and things before I do though.

Cheers for your help. Im certainly no expert on it - but I know on this forum there are some far more skilled people in this area than I and would appreciate any help offered!

Coupsta

[b0son]

Your paranoia is unnecessary. Have run Limewire for ages without issue. I dont bother partitioning. With HDDs being so cheap, its less effort to simply buy another drive.

[max^power]

Yep dont waste your time. Virus scan what you download and you wont have to waste time or DISK SPACE doing this. keep a backup of any data you want, and you'll be sweet. if you need help with anything that does fail, someone can help your for free without formatting your hard drive.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by XA Coupsta

1. Is this worthwhile doing? Will it protect my operating system (which is on a separate partition/drive) if the proverbial does hit the fan with it?

Nope. Won't do a thing. Partitioning is only really logically dividing a physical device into logical sections (partitions). Is it worthwhile doing? Personal preference really.

Originally Posted by XA Coupsta

2. How does this affect system performance? Should it? Might just be me - but I reckon its running slower now with this new partition.

In this case performance will be about the same. If you're really tricky you can partition a disk in a way that has the OS partition and the swap file in the middle of the disk as, over time, it has the tendency of reducing seek time by the hard drive.

Originally Posted by XA Coupsta

3. Is there a better way for all this that others could suggest?

It's all personal preference really. I partition my disk for OS and swap (small partition so when I inevitably re-install the OS I can format it again and not worry about files in other partitions), another partition for games, another for music and video (for my ipod) and another for general downloads.

It's just easier organisation to know that my music is on M: drive and my games are on G: drive and quicker to defrag a parition when it gets fragmented.

Once upon a time partitioning helped with reducing chunk size but with NTFS, I believe chunk size is uniform anyway.

[Abacus]

You will get some performance gain if your NT/2000/XP swap file is on a different physical hard drive to your NT/2000/XP system folder. Just putting the swap file on a different partition of the same physical drive won't increase system performance.

I run 4 partitions, largely for ease of scheduling backups, ie:

Partition 1: C Drive - OS and program files. This doesn't get backed up too often, apart from everything under c:\Documents and Settings, which is backed up regularly with my database backups.

Partition 2: Drive D - General client data, correspondence, admin folders, personal documents, music, etc. This stuff is generally supported by a hard copy and can be fairly easily reconstructed. I back up this folder about once a month.

Partition 3: Drive E - Databases, accounting data, and stuff that is critical to my business, or difficult to reconstruct. This stuff should be backed up everyday, but more likely gets backed up a few times a week, together with everything under C:\Documents and settings (which includes my Outlook files and everything on the desktop).

Partition 4: Drive F - Archived files, application installation files, old software, etc - non volatile stuff, backed up once in a blue moon.

Of course, you can set up a backup regime that will just back up the individual folders that you want to secure, but bitter experience has taught me that it is too to easy to overlook stuff that should have been backed up. It's much easier to just tell your backup software (in my case NovaBackup) to back up an entire partition, burn the backup file to DVD, and then you know you've covered everything.

Apart from that, the only reason I would bother partitioning is to keep the OS and programs on a separate partition from everything else. You can defrag more efficiently, and I have always found that the system just "feels" like it runs happier this way.

Hi Coupsta,
i read the replies you've received already and i wouldn't say i necessarily agree.
I install security softwares on pc's and i can tell you that depending on your config there is opportunity for problems.
You probably wont be in this position but if you run W98/se and use ZoneAlarm and Limewire be prepared for possible conflicts, i have come across it on many occassions.

I don't recommend Limewire as i find Bittorrents the cleanest and safest method, but if you do just run a couple of different anti-spywares each week.(Many people who use Limewire do so for single songs as opposed to full albums on Torrents.Also Torrents aren't really feasible for dialup as they would take a long time, so Limewire is popular with dialup.)
Limewire used to have lots of spyware/bloatware in it and then it brought out the 'clean' version.But if you run some anti-spywares over your pc you will find, depending on the software, that it can find upto 20 files that will be regartded as spyware.
You can make your own conclusions there.

If you want to make your pc secure by utilising a partition use one of your partitions and put another operating system on it and whenever your downloading or doing anything of concern boot the pc into that partition, it will be isolated from the other partitions and any problems will remain only in that partition.If need be you can reformat that partition alone.
You can transfer data from one partition to another.

[XA Coupsta]

Hmmmmmm - thanks to everyone for replying!!!!

Certainly given me plenty to think about.

Bittorrents. Never heard of it - can you tell me anymore? Im on ADSL too. I like the idea of album downloads Vs singular songs.

[svo347]

http://fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=32759
Try that mate...
on another note, i share my comp and for some reason my pics, docs programs are on her desktop also how do i stop this.???

[T2TL50]

Originally Posted by Rodp

Nope. Won't do a thing. Partitioning is only really logically dividing a physical device into logical sections (partitions). Is it worthwhile doing? Personal preference really.



In this case performance will be about the same. If you're really tricky you can partition a disk in a way that has the OS partition and the swap file in the middle of the disk as, over time, it has the tendency of reducing seek time by the hard drive.



It's all personal preference really. I partition my disk for OS and swap (small partition so when I inevitably re-install the OS I can format it again and not worry about files in other partitions), another partition for games, another for music and video (for my ipod) and another for general downloads.

It's just easier organisation to know that my music is on M: drive and my games are on G: drive and quicker to defrag a parition when it gets fragmented.

Once upon a time partitioning helped with reducing chunk size but with NTFS, I believe chunk size is uniform anyway.

HERE HERE!!!! i agree with you.. much better to have your data on other partitions so as to not have to worry about formating the drive.. unless the actuall drive fails!!

Hi SVO347,
without knowing or seeing all the specifics not sure why she sees your details.

It could be because you created her user account after you'd already created these settings on your desktop(original one) and you selected to use existing settings on creation of her account.

I don't normally have this problem when setting up multiple user accounts on pc's, so i don't have much experience with it but you do have a choice whether to copy existing items or create new ones.(this could vary depending on operating system).

You could try creating a new account and taking careful notice of the options that are available during creation.
If you succeed in creating a clean user account you can transfer any required data via 'shared' folders that alreading exist and then when ready delete yours or her account.
This step could be repeated to give both of you fresh starts, although minor complications can occur, but not always.

Goodluck.

[svo347]

cheers mate welcome aboard also...

Thanks SVO,
joined a week or two ago but for some reason it's not accumulating the posts i do.
Oh well matters little.

[brenx]

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

Thanks SVO,
joined a week or two ago but for some reason it's not accumulating the posts i do.
Oh well matters little.

Posts in the bar dont contribute to your post count

Ok, thank Brenx, that explains that

[svo347]

Is that silent bob???
How damn cool!!!!

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

If you want to make your pc secure by utilising a partition use one of your partitions and put another operating system on it and whenever your downloading or doing anything of concern boot the pc into that partition, it will be isolated from the other partitions and any problems will remain only in that partition.If need be you can reformat that partition alone.
You can transfer data from one partition to another.

I don't think that's what the OP was planning on doing, but regardless, if you have multiple partitions with multiple OS's (assuming Windows variety) and they're all mounted and visible, grabbing a virused file and having it exposed to your system, your partitioning scheme will make no difference.

If you're talking about having a partition only visible to the operating system using that partition, then you've basically dedicated your machine to limewire unless you're going to waste a hell of a lot of space by installing everything twice on your PC.

Hi Rod,
as i mentioned i am talking about partitioning a hard drive into more than one partition.
On one partition, we'll call it p1, you have your normal everyday operating system and your favorites and My Documents email etc.
On p2 you have an operating system and free security softwares and enough space for downloading.
If you want to download safely do it on p2, if you want to do anything else do it on p1.
Not difficult and doesn't take up much space.
Depending on what you download before you burn it and remove it from the hard drive it could be 10 or 15 gb upto what ever you want.

You don't install everything twice, you install what you need for downloading and burning and keeping your pc safe.
It's pretty much the same as having two seperate pc's in isolation, to most part, accept you can't run them at the same time.

As you would know setting up an OS and a bit of software will only take an hour - an hour and a half.
All of my pc's have more than one partition and many of them have multiple operating systems, some Windows and some Linux.
The Coupsta can do what he wants, i'm just offering an opinion based on what i do myself.
Regards

Yes it is SVO, i let the puter do the talkin

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

Hi Rod,
as i mentioned i am talking about partitioning a hard drive into more than one partition.
On one partition, we'll call it p1, you have your normal everyday operating system and your favorites and My Documents email etc.
On p2 you have an operating system and free security softwares and enough space for downloading.
If you want to download safely do it on p2, if you want to do anything else do it on p1.
Not difficult and doesn't take up much space.
Depending on what you download before you burn it and remove it from the hard drive it could be 10 or 15 gb upto what ever you want.

You don't install everything twice, you install what you need for downloading and burning and keeping your pc safe.
It's pretty much the same as having two seperate pc's in isolation, to most part, accept you can't run them at the same time.

As you would know setting up an OS and a bit of software will only take an hour - an hour and a half.
All of my pc's have more than one partition and many of them have multiple operating systems, some Windows and some Linux.
The Coupsta can do what he wants, i'm just offering an opinion based on what i do myself.
Regards

Like I said, if you're going to do it that way and you're downloading something off limewire that will take a few days the use of your PC is going to be diminished if you run applications stored on your other partition, won't be able to get to your documents in your 'My Documents' folder, etc.

If you're going to do it that way, you best get a hold of a program called VMWare, uses more resources but at least you can use all of your PC while your PC is still protected (if you set it up that way) and you don't have to worry about a partitioning scheme at all.

I'm currently running a Windows 2003 box that has 3 Linux servers, a Netware servers and 2 XP clients on the one machine simultaneously. Much more efficient than dual boot (and all in 1 partition).

[jonk]

Partitioning is old hat & not at all necessary nowadays, causes more prob's than it's worth. Just purchase a new HDD for $80.

And don't bother too much about windows swap file. It's best to delete it all and let it work out of RAM only, less defragging and you HDD lasts longer. Good for those only with 512MB of RAM or more.

And limewire is lame compared to bittorrents. There are plenty dedicated music site's to dl music without even resorting to limewire/bt's.

[max^power]

Originally Posted by jonk

And don't bother too much about windows swap file. It's best to delete it all and let it work out of RAM only, less defragging and you HDD lasts longer. Good for those only with 512MB of RAM or more.

More like 2gb or more, some programs actually rely on a swap file. Of course, it depends what you're doing. There's no need for heaps of partitions, hard drives are cheap, just buy a 200gb drive and store the downloads on there, takes 2 minutes to install - if you're lucky, the shop you get the drive from will install it for nothing. :MrT_anim:

Hi Rod,
i'm not sure you're familiar with partitioning as the way i have suggested wont allow you to download on one partition and access the other partition to run programs of any sort.
They are two seperate partitions, you can only run one at a time.
What many downloaders do is download overnight, as the pc generally isn't being used and some ISP's have overnight bonus download allocations, such as Optus.

Virtual drives are good, i use them in the right situations, if the Coupsta thinks it's right for him i'm sure he'll go with it.
By the way what sort of testing have you done with virus and malware across the border of virtual and real?

Jonk, if Coupsta wants to spend $80.00 (i would pay the extra 20 or so dollars and get 120gb or more if taking this course)i'm sure he will.

My initial comment was that i dont recommend Limewire to people i cater to, so i offered my opinion of an alternative.
Coupsta was familiar with partitions and he didn't mention wantinting to spend more money.
I put forward a partitioning method that will incur no cost, i thought that might meet his criteria.

Horses for courses.

Goodluck Coupsta.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

Hi Rod,
i'm not sure you're familiar with partitioning as the way i have suggested wont allow you to download on one partition and access the other partition to run programs of any sort.
They are two seperate partitions, you can only run one at a time.
What many downloaders do is download overnight, as the pc generally isn't being used and some ISP's have overnight bonus download allocations, such as Optus.

Yes, exactly my point. You're diminishing the use of your PC by booting into another copy of an OS in order to download using limewire. For instance, I'm currently downloading 41GB of files from a bittorrent which is going to take approximately 3 weeks. Had I booted into a 'protected' partition with a copy of its own OS that was paritioned in a way that it was only mounting that partition, then the applications and files on my original partition will be inaccessible for approximately 3 weeks unless I stop my download and boot into the primary OS.

Seems like a complete waste of time and resources to have to boot into another OS and have your machine basically tied up running 1 application as well as having to interrupt your download everytime you want to actually use your PC for something other than downloading from limewire.

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

Virtual drives are good, i use them in the right situations, if the Coupsta thinks it's right for him i'm sure he'll go with it.
By the way what sort of testing have you done with virus and malware across the border of virtual and real?

These aren't virtual drives, they're virtual *machines*. They running their own protected virtual memory space and their own virtual drives with a copy of their own OS. As far as the primary OS filesystem knows, there's a big honking file. That is what my virtual machine is mounting as a filesystem. This is a complete aside from the original question posed. I could happily virus the hell out of one of my virtual machines and the host OS and any of my other virtual machines will remain completely unaffected.

I use these virtual machines for testing and training for what I have to do at work. Dual boot is so 90's. :P

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

Coupsta was familiar with partitions and he didn't mention wantinting to spend..

His question was whether creating an extra partition on his current machine with his current OS will protect him from malicious files he may download off limewire. The answer is No.

Rod, Rod, Rod.
I provided some information to Coupsta on the basis that it may suit him, if it doesn't thats ok.
I download between 24 and 36 gb everymonth and it's all done overnight.
I explained the overnight part or do you have selective memory.
If downloading overnight doesn't suit Coupsta i'm sure he wont do it, simple.
There are multitudes of alternatives he could take to achieve his goal.
The RodP way is not the only way.

You seem unfamiliar again, I use MS Virtual PC 2004 for virtual drives.
What did you think i was using?

As i commented to you Coupsta showed he was familiar with partitioning and didn't mention wanting to spend.
I believe this is a valid statement.
And still holds true regardless of how much that dissapoints you.

The way you talk about partitioning would leave you vulnerable, too true.
In case you missed the intent that's why i offered an alternative method that would be secure.
Read above, 'offered', if he doesn't want to utilise that info that's fine, i was only one of many offering an opinion.I hope we're allowed to offer our opinions.

And, you completely failed to supply a reasonable answer to an enquiry i made to you regarding the security between virtual to real.I was actually interested what testing(specifics) if any you had done and what the results were.
This is one of the few areas where i haven't run first person tests, and i thought you could provide data here if you have actually done the testing.
I have an opinion on the actions and results,but lack empiracal results so if you're in the same boat you should have just told me rather than avoiding the question.

[XA Coupsta]

ummm........uhhhh........I got lost about 6 posts ago.

but thanks?

lol. nah serious - healthy debate is good debate, and you two are obviously highly informed on this topic.

Basically I know partitions isnt going to save me diddly squat if the system goes down.

Cool Coupsta,
i'm sure you'll sort something out.
All the best.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

Rod, Rod, Rod.
I provided some information to Coupsta on the basis that it may suit him, if it doesn't thats ok.
I download between 24 and 36 gb everymonth and it's all done overnight.
I explained the overnight part or do you have selective memory.
If downloading overnight doesn't suit Coupsta i'm sure he wont do it, simple.
There are multitudes of alternatives he could take to achieve his goal.
The RodP way is not the only way.

I'm about to go to site, but I'll take a quick crack.

I never really offered an alternative other than to suggest that creating an additional partition on an existing OS installation wasn't going to protect the system from malicious files. That's what the OP asked. I prefer bittorrent and I'm not at all concerned about malicious files.

It's 1am. I'm using my machine. Some may consider this overnight. I had to log on to my machine to get some files I need to do for a job I'm heading to right now, had I been using your method of downloading my bittorrents I would have to stop all downloads and boot into my primary OS. I think that's a very poor method of doing things, but that's just my opinion.

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

You seem unfamiliar again, I use MS Virtual PC 2004 for virtual drives.
What did you think i was using?

I didn't know and I didn't much care what you were using, it wasn't relevant to anything.

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

As i commented to you Coupsta showed he was familiar with partitioning and didn't mention wanting to spend.
I believe this is a valid statement.
And still holds true regardless of how much that dissapoints you.

I have no idea what you mean by that, I'm not dissapointed by the fact that parititioning a drive and having it mounted does not protect it from malicious software, I understand that as a limitation of partitioning using that method, I'm not dissapointed by the way you choose to download and I'm not dissapointed that the OP didn't want to spend any money.

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

The way you talk about partitioning would leave you vulnerable, too true.

I answered the question that was posed. That was the question. I gave the correct answer.

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

In case you missed the intent that's why i offered an alternative method that would be secure.
Read above, 'offered', if he doesn't want to utilise that info that's fine, i was only one of many offering an opinion.I hope we're allowed to offer our opinions.

...and in my opinion it's a very poor way of doing it, I hope I'm allowed to offer my opinion?

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

And, you completely failed to supply a reasonable answer to an enquiry i made to you regarding the security between virtual to real.I was actually interested what testing(specifics) if any you had done and what the results were.
This is one of the few areas where i haven't run first person tests, and i thought you could provide data here if you have actually done the testing.
I have an opinion on the actions and results,but lack empiracal results so if you're in the same boat you should have just told me rather than avoiding the question.

I failed to supply a reasonable answer? The fact that I said that running a virtual machine in its own protected virtual memory space and mounting a filesystem that is simply a file in the host OS doesn't adequately answer the question? I also went on to say that I could virus the hell out of that virtual machine and all the other virtual machines and the host OS would remain unaffected doesn't provide you with the answer as to the testing that I've done?

I don't know what else to tell you then.

Rod,
to have differing opinions is fine by me, but if you want to debate you have to be aware that you have to be knowledgeable, honest and objective.
You have displayed restricted knowledge, little honesty- particularly self honesty, and have displayed only subjectiveness.

You appear to be a sophist, and not a very good one at that,lol.

All of your replies are an example of what i mean but to highlight it i can see the last paragraph you wrote whilst i type this.
I asked you for information on your tests of virus etc. between virtual and real areas and you don't give any.
I reiterated for clarities sake what i was asking, as in specifics (e.g. what virus or other malwares you tested in the boundaries of the two environments and what could pass and what couldn't) and you still couldn't supply information as requested or inform me that you haven't actually done any tests , you were just offering an unqualified opinion based on subjective emotion.

By the way Rod did you look up and see what MS Virtual PC 2004 is ,lol.

People like you Rod forget that you leave a permanent record of your inadequate dialogue for anyone with knowledge to assess.

Alas, people without the experience might actually take what you say as being gospel, which is a sad way to impress people.

It's never too late for self improvement strategies Rod.

Ciao

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

Rod,
to have differing opinions is fine by me, but if you want to debate you have to be aware that you have to be knowledgeable, honest and objective.
You have displayed restricted knowledge, little honesty- particularly self honesty, and have displayed only subjectiveness.

Wow. I just get back from my call and I see this. LOL.

Please, explain to me where I have displayed restricted knowledge and show me where I've not been honest?

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

All of your replies are an example of what i mean but to highlight it i can see the last paragraph you wrote whilst i type this.
I asked you for information on your tests of virus etc. between virtual and real areas and you don't give any.
I reiterated for clarities sake what i was asking, as in specifics (e.g. what virus or other malwares you tested in the boundaries of the two environments and what could pass and what couldn't) and you still couldn't supply information as requested or inform me that you haven't actually done any tests , you were just offering an unqualified opinion based on subjective emotion.

Do I have to repeat myself again? Seriously. You obviously aren't getting the gist and I've attempted to explain it without being condescending. But perhaps that's my mistake as you're oozing condescending from every keystroke. If you understood the concept at all, I shouldn't have to explain it to you.

Picture.

A PC running an OS (which I will call the host OS) which in my case is Windows 2003 Server. VMWare installed on that host OS.

You create a virtual machine within VMWare and boot that virtual PC. As far as that session is aware it is booting an actual PC, it has its own BIOS, it goes through a POST routine, you can assign it virtual hardware, it can even PXE boot. The host OS gives VMWare a contiguous flat memory space that's protected from the host OS which you have assigned within VMWare, it's just a chunk of memory set aside for *that* virtual machine to use. That virtual machine uses that contiguous space as if it were real memory and loads its processes using that memory space and *only* that memory space.

You create a virtual disk which comprises of one flat file, the host OS sees it as a file (in my case) 4GB big for each of my virtual machines. This is your virtual machines disk. As far as the host OS is aware, it's just one honking big binary file.

I've explained this twice now and hopefully you'll begin to understand that the host OS cannot be infected by a virus on a virtual machine or malicious damage done to the host OS via malware, spyware or anything else you're willing to throw at it because it is in both a *protected memory space* and a *protected file space* which are separate and independant of the memory used by the host OS and the filesystem used by the host OS. The host OS has just assigned a chunk of memory and a chunk of disk space to a virtual machine, the host OS does not know what are in those memory addresses or filespace and is unable to do anything but present those addresses to the virtual machine.

You're hung up on a cross over from real to virtual which means you have absolutely no idea about how VMWare works, you wouldn't be asking me these questions if you did! The only cross over that exists between my Windows 2003 machine and any of my virtual machines is through the network if I set it up in that manner. I have 2 machines on my network, my games machine and my VMWare box. If you were on the outside looking in right now you'd see my Host Windows 2003 server, a Netware server and 2 Linux servers. 1 machine, 4 servers each with their own IP address (you would never be able to tell they were running on 1 machine)... and my XP games machine.

I'd already explained that you can throw every virus you wanted at one of the virtual machines and it would not affect other virtual machines or the host OS. Do I have to make a list of what I've tried? It's pointless if you understand the concept behind protected memory space and the way VMWare mounts a filesystem. : You can put every virus ever created, every piece of spyware ever written and as many trojans as you wanted on one of my virtual machines and it's not going to do a single thing to the host OS!

I can crash or hang a virtual machine and it does not affect the host OS or other virtual machines because it is in a *protected memory space*. I turn off that virtual machine, the memory set aside is recovered by the host OS and I can reboot that virtual machine.

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

By the way Rod did you look up and see what MS Virtual PC 2004 is ,lol.

Oh wow.

I know exactly what it is. It's the poor (poor is too nice a word, homeless is closer to the mark) Microsoft cousin to VMWare. Look up what VMWare is. Virtual PC 2004 is a *toy*. I've used it, it's terrible, the fact that you're waving that in my face is farcical.

I was amazed at a site I attended not so long ago running VMWare ESX. SAN storage with blade servers SAN booting off it running ESX farms and hosting SQL, Exchange, SAP, Oracle, you name it, all fault tolerant and load balanced, all virtual servers. A blade crashes, those virtual machines move over dynamically to another blade. Increased up time. If a blade server's load gets too much, it moves a virtual machine to another physical blade server *on the fly*. Does your precious Virtual PC 2004 do that? LOL!

http://www.vmware.com/products/esx/

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

People like you Rod forget that you leave a permanent record of your inadequate dialogue for anyone with knowledge to assess.

Alas, people without the experience might actually take what you say as being gospel, which is a sad way to impress people.

I'm happy for anyone to assess it, I'm not here to impress anyone. I offered my opinion based on the OP's question and I honestly believe the way you conduct your downloading overnight is exceptionally unneccessary. I'm happy to debate you, but I'd love you to point out exactly where my knowledge is lacking. I've worked in the industry a long time and I'll be the first to claim that I know a tiny fraction of what there is to know and you're not the first one to be condescending to me and end up : and you certainly won't be the last.

Originally Posted by modeltlaser

It's never too late for self improvement strategies Rod.

...and it's never too late to stop eating humble pie :P

Sidestepping waffle Rod, i thought you may have looked up what a sophist is.

It's nice to know that if your host ever succumbs to a hack or malware of some sort that you client is miraculously invulnerable to effect.
LOL.

Ciao