Phred wrote in message
...

I'm looking for a simple recipe to ensure success when trying to
install a second HDD on a Dell Dimension 4100 under Windows ME

Pay me to do it |-)

(or even just mention of "gotchas" to avoid would be helpful .

Current 20GB drive is partitioned C, D, E, F using PM 6.0

Urk. Thats mad.

I want to install a 2nd HDD (WD 120GB) either as slave on the
same cable, or on the second cable as master or slave (see below).

I also have a CDRW drive (as G), and will be looking to
install a combo DVD/CDRW *or* a DVD writer "soon". So
provision needs to be made for both these optical drives too.

You sure the effect on the cheap plonk supply is warranted ? |-(

For compatibility with another ("managed") system,
I need to keep the same HDD partitions,

Why ? Thats a madly complicated config.

but would see C and D as being on the present master
HDD with E and F on the new one, if this is possible.

Thats pretty mad too. You'd normally want to have the
boot drive on the new drive, just because it would normally
be much faster than the original old dinosaur 20GB drive.

An alternative that would be nearly as convenient would be to
have C and F on the present drive with D and E on the new one.

I'd bin that complicated scheme myself.

In fact, any combination that left C on the present
master (no doubt the only possibility anyway!)

Nope, you can have it on the 120GB drive and should.

and E plus another partition on the other drive, would be
acceptable (though that may mean some playing around with
existing batch files if the CDRW drive designation is changed,
and I would prefer not to have to do that -- but it could be done.)

You really should cut to the chase and have a much simpler
partitioning scheme, and the boot drive on the new 120GB drive.

There is also the issue of the best allocation of the HDDs and the
optical drive(s) to the cables. I've seen this recommended and
argued both ways: (1) keep the HDDs separate from the CDs so
that HDD activity is not so likely to interfere during CD writing; and
(2) put the CDs on separate cables so direct copy will work better.

The short story is that you are unlikely to be able to pick
the difference between those two configs with a proper
double blind trial and so its normally best to do whats
mechanically more convenient, and thats usually with
both hard drives on the same ribbon cable, and both
optical drives on the same ribbon cable. Just because
both hard drives are normally in the 3.5" bay stack and
both optical drives are normally in the 5" bay stack and
most ribbon cables dont have enough space between
the drive connectors to mix drives in different bay stacks.

The main uses would be:
1. Existing drive stays as the system/applications drive (C),

Not a good idea, see above.

and may contain a second partition (D or F)
that would serve as a data backup area.

Its generally best to have the data backup on a different
physical drive to the drive that its backing up, obviously
so you dont lose everything on a single drive failure.

And the stuff thats absolutely irreplaceable
should be on multiple CDs as well.

2. New drive would be the main working drive (E)

Its normally best as the boot drive too, because it will be much faster.

but would also contain a partition to hold maybe 2 or 3 "Ghosts"
of the system drive (probably at least a vanilla system installation

No reason why that cant be on the physical drive since its
mostly protecting you against a service pack install ****ing
the boot drive up or an app install etc doing the same.

and a second one with the main application software freshly
installed too). [Or maybe I don't really need a partition for
that as the "Ghosts" are basically just files aren't they?]

Correct. Image files are, anyway. You can also clone partitions and
drives but there isnt normally any real point in doing that for backup.

3. The CDRW would mostly be used for backups and
other copies of data from E, and also for backup copies
of program CDs (and that may involve direct CD to CD
copies in future when I get the second optical drive).

I dont normally do it that way even when I do have the drives
that allow that. Its generally best to have the copy program
just copy it to the hard drive auto and use the same drive for
both the original and the copy. Modern burners are so much
faster that that approach has little effect on the total copy time
now. And you dont actually do that that much so there isnt
any point in getting all anal about the time it takes anyway.

It would usually only need to interact
with C during program installations.

And you cant normally even measure any difference in the total install
time with the two drives on different ribbon cables for variour reasons.

4. A temporary consideration is the best (i.e. most convenient)
way of getting nearly 8GB of data off the present E partition
onto the new drive and into the new "E".

Most convenient to use ghost or drive image. You appear to
want to use that for boot partition backup anyway so you might
as well use it for the reconfig at new hard drive install time too.

I can think of possibilities with PM, but it may
come down to CD shuffling in the end. :-(

Nope, it never does.

Just get ghost and use it for the reconfig.

Hints, guidance, recommendations, links most welcome.