NT newbie seeks advice on first time NT install

Hello There, I hope to install NT wrkstn 4.0 on a compaq deskpro 4000. Currently I have 95 running fat 16 on 2.5 gb drive. I would like to start from scratch, and wonder what advice do you have for me? Format, fdisk, boot with disk for cdrom support and run setup? If i was installing 95, I would prolly go along those steps, but I'm not sure where to go from here with NT. Any advice or links for newbies would be greatly appreciated! Please help my first NT experience be a pleasant one!

Thanks much!

Hi radi8tor

You could try here http://www.ntfaq.com/index.htm you will have plenty of reading to do! I think you will find answers to most questions you can think of.

Hope this helps and I am sure many other links will follow https://discussions.virtualdr.com/

------------------
Don Davidson
Network Engineer
Nutties bit o the Web

[email protected]


[This message has been edited by DDavidson (edited 05-08-2000).]

I don't know that much about your specific model of Compaq platform. I do know that typically to start fresh you would want to boot from the SmartStart CD and erase the system. This should also detect all your hardware and will eventually lead you through the maze of media raid devices and the loading of the target OS.
Required media: SmartStart CD; Management CD; Profile Floppy; OS media.
Like I said I am not that familiar with the Compaq platforms but this where I am starting with my 1600 Proliant platforms. Good luck hope this helps get you started.


------------------
Dwayne Brown

Ok, i booted up with the CDROM, and it is walking me thru installation...my first obstacle is....FAT or NTFS file system? What exactly are the pros and cons. Coming from a 95 and 98 background, Im fairly familiar with FAT, but not NTFS, can someone please clarify the differences?

Thanks all for your input, it is all appreciated!

The quick answer is pick NTFS, it is a bit more robust and has more features over that of FAT.

------------------
Dwayne Brown
Systems Software Engineer

NTFS it is, thanks DwayneB! I am also finding lots of good stuff on the link from ddavidson, that is a good link...

btw DwayneB, the new signature is looking good, you have inspired me to work on one of my own...

Thanks again!

Rad
"If we weren't supposed to eat animals, they wouldn't be made out of meat."
-Homer Simpson on Vegetarianism

My first NT install went great! Thanks for the help folks! Tomorrow I plan on loading the service packs, and welcome feedback from all =)

------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Radi8tor

Quote:

---

If we weren't supposed to eat animals, they wouldn't be made out of meat.

---

-Homer Simpson on Vegetarianism

Something to consider for future (re-)installs... and at the risk of being slightly contentious...

There are a lot of folks (many are Network/NT Pros's) who advocate having a small C: system (active primary) partition that is permanently FAT16. This can be as small as 100Meg; personally I like it to be nearer to 200-250Meg. The main NT installation goes into separate space as FAT16 or NTFS as you choose...

Why this smallish C: FAT16???

It allows the setting up of dual/multi-boot systems in the future. Also having DOS installed in this C: partition can make some recovery options and general trouble shooting a little easier...

When NT is installed this way (i.e. with a smallish C: system FAT16 partition), it places its boot.ini, NTldr and other (system) start-up files there..., whilst the main boot-files (the actual OS itself) go wherever you put them.

One can also have a bare-bone install of NTWS (or Svr) there as well, and this one will obviously be (and remain) FAT16. As already suggested, the main NT install can go into separate space and be NTFS as you wish.

It does mean that you do two installs of NT... (good practice...?)

Having the bare-bone version in this C: FAT16 system partition means you can 'always' get into the 'real NT install', in case of problems and have to do a fix or three... If you choose not to have the bare-bones NT install initially, (just having the C: around 250Meg and set to FAT16 ) you can always install it later - when, as is more than likely..., you need to do a fix...

It is useful to have DOS (ideally 6.22) with CDROM support included installed into the C: system partition. Again this can allow easier installs (including multi-boot systems) in the future. (You would naturally have a dual-boot NT/DOS system from the start in this case...)

I've also seen suggestions to limit the size of the NT partition (where the boot files reside) to 2Gig; this being more than enough for the OS and most applications... It need not be NTFS unless security is 'critical'... The rest of the drive/partitions sizes can be in excess of this, and will obviously hold data and be NTFS if you prefer. (Both the boot files partition and the 'data' partitions can be NTFS if security is 'truly' critical.)

The only drawback to having the C: partition set to FAT16 (with or without DOS installed) is that it does 'weaken' NT's security somewhat; especially if there is a bare-bones NT install there as well. But in a home environment, this isnt'/shouldn't be an issue???

Incidentally, looking at the size of your current HD: I'd suggest having the 250Meg C: system FAT16 partition, another around 1-1.5Gig for the 'real' NT install and applications, and the balance for data (both of these can be NTFS or FAT16 as you prefer???) If you set the C: system partition sized to 500Meg and FAT16, then you would have space enough in the future for a FAT16 install of 98 (in a dual-boot scenario) and still space enough for the bare-bone NT and DOS as well (triple-boot...).

It is always useful/wiser to have your data/critical files in a separate partition to the acutal OS's - just in case you 'have' to Fdisk and re-install the OS('s)... Avoids possible loss of the data when it's separate from the OS' 'space' area...

HTH in the future?

Good luck

LM-S