Force format to extended partition

B

Bob

When partitioning/formatting a single large partition on a drive, Win7

apparently defaults to 'Primary' with no options for 'Extended' (as

was the case with XP). Is there any way to force Win7 to create an

extended partition rather than primary?
 
G

Gordon

"Bob" wrote in message

news:geles59gbbvhkddhmqcpbr3b4f1ihkpmn8@4ax.com...

> When partitioning/formatting a single large partition on a drive, Win7

> apparently defaults to 'Primary' with no options for 'Extended' (as

> was the case with XP). Is there any way to force Win7 to create an

> extended partition rather than primary?



If that is the sole partition on the drive then it CAN'T be "extended".

Never was in XP either....
 
S

Scott

Gordon wrote:

>

> "Bob" wrote in message

> news:geles59gbbvhkddhmqcpbr3b4f1ihkpmn8@4ax.com...

>> When partitioning/formatting a single large partition on a drive, Win7

>> apparently defaults to 'Primary' with no options for 'Extended' (as

>> was the case with XP). Is there any way to force Win7 to create an

>> extended partition rather than primary?

>

> If that is the sole partition on the drive then it CAN'T be "extended".

> Never was in XP either....



Doesn't Win7 create a 100MB system reserved partition?
 
B

Bob

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:18:38 +0100, "Gordon"

wrote:



>

>"Bob" wrote in message

>news:geles59gbbvhkddhmqcpbr3b4f1ihkpmn8@4ax.com...

>> When partitioning/formatting a single large partition on a drive, Win7

>> apparently defaults to 'Primary' with no options for 'Extended' (as

>> was the case with XP). Is there any way to force Win7 to create an

>> extended partition rather than primary?

>

>If that is the sole partition on the drive then it CAN'T be "extended".

>Never was in XP either....



XP can indeed create an extended partition as the sole partition on a

drive. Bring up XP's disk mgmt and it provides a choice between

creating primary or extended. Then one large logical partition can be

created within the extended partiton.



It's also possible to create the extended/logical partition under XP,

then format it under Win7. The obvious omission is the ability to

create the extended partition under Win7.
 
N

nooneyouknow

"Bob" wrote in message

news:0pbhs5t8h4ufv2nm0tf8131h480sastu38@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:18:38 +0100, "Gordon"

> wrote:

>

>>

>>"Bob" wrote in message

>>news:geles59gbbvhkddhmqcpbr3b4f1ihkpmn8@4ax.com...

>>> When partitioning/formatting a single large partition on a drive, Win7

>>> apparently defaults to 'Primary' with no options for 'Extended' (as

>>> was the case with XP). Is there any way to force Win7 to create an

>>> extended partition rather than primary?

>>

>>If that is the sole partition on the drive then it CAN'T be "extended".

>>Never was in XP either....

>

> XP can indeed create an extended partition as the sole partition on a

> drive. Bring up XP's disk mgmt and it provides a choice between

> creating primary or extended. Then one large logical partition can be

> created within the extended partiton.

>

> It's also possible to create the extended/logical partition under XP,

> then format it under Win7. The obvious omission is the ability to

> create the extended partition under Win7.



XP supported FAT32, but who would want it.
 
B

Bob

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:07:35 -0700, "nooneyouknow"

wrote:



>

>"Bob" wrote in message

>news:0pbhs5t8h4ufv2nm0tf8131h480sastu38@4ax.com...

>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:18:38 +0100, "Gordon"

>> wrote:

>>

>>>

>>>"Bob" wrote in message

>>>news:geles59gbbvhkddhmqcpbr3b4f1ihkpmn8@4ax.com...

>>>> When partitioning/formatting a single large partition on a drive, Win7

>>>> apparently defaults to 'Primary' with no options for 'Extended' (as

>>>> was the case with XP). Is there any way to force Win7 to create an

>>>> extended partition rather than primary?

>>>

>>>If that is the sole partition on the drive then it CAN'T be "extended".

>>>Never was in XP either....

>>

>> XP can indeed create an extended partition as the sole partition on a

>> drive. Bring up XP's disk mgmt and it provides a choice between

>> creating primary or extended. Then one large logical partition can be

>> created within the extended partiton.

>>

>> It's also possible to create the extended/logical partition under XP,

>> then format it under Win7. The obvious omission is the ability to

>> create the extended partition under Win7.

>

>XP supported FAT32, but who would want it.



Anyone who wants transportability between systems that use FAT32 would

want it (that includes various hardware video players, for example).

And XP was only introduced because a previous poster said that XP

could not create a sole partition as 'extended', which is not correct.



Still that's not the point. Or are you aware of some inherent defect

in extended partitions that merited the comparison with FAT32? I'd be

curious to hear about that, as I've been using extended partitions for

storage drives for many years.



If not, then the question remains: Can Win7 create a sole partition on

a drive as 'extended'? It does not seem to be provided as a direct

option under the drive mgt snap-in, but that doesn't always mean that

it can't be done.
 
R

relic

"Bob" wrote in message

news:6qnhs5d03b5kv3g8jh8f88mbvietojh59i@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:07:35 -0700, "nooneyouknow"

> wrote:

>

>>

>>"Bob" wrote in message

>>news:0pbhs5t8h4ufv2nm0tf8131h480sastu38@4ax.com...

>>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:18:38 +0100, "Gordon"

>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>>

>>>>"Bob" wrote in message

>>>>news:geles59gbbvhkddhmqcpbr3b4f1ihkpmn8@4ax.com...

>>>>> When partitioning/formatting a single large partition on a drive, Win7

>>>>> apparently defaults to 'Primary' with no options for 'Extended' (as

>>>>> was the case with XP). Is there any way to force Win7 to create an

>>>>> extended partition rather than primary?

>>>>

>>>>If that is the sole partition on the drive then it CAN'T be "extended".

>>>>Never was in XP either....

>>>

>>> XP can indeed create an extended partition as the sole partition on a

>>> drive. Bring up XP's disk mgmt and it provides a choice between

>>> creating primary or extended. Then one large logical partition can be

>>> created within the extended partiton.

>>>

>>> It's also possible to create the extended/logical partition under XP,

>>> then format it under Win7. The obvious omission is the ability to

>>> create the extended partition under Win7.

>>

>>XP supported FAT32, but who would want it.

>

> Anyone who wants transportability between systems that use FAT32 would

> want it (that includes various hardware video players, for example).

> And XP was only introduced because a previous poster said that XP

> could not create a sole partition as 'extended', which is not correct.

>

> Still that's not the point. Or are you aware of some inherent defect

> in extended partitions that merited the comparison with FAT32? I'd be

> curious to hear about that, as I've been using extended partitions for

> storage drives for many years.

>

> If not, then the question remains: Can Win7 create a sole partition on

> a drive as 'extended'? It does not seem to be provided as a direct

> option under the drive mgt snap-in, but that doesn't always mean that

> it can't be done.



Extended partitions were 'popular' with FAT32 not so much with NTFS. You

can do it with the diskpart command if you need more than 4 partitions.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/300415
 
B

Bob

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:59:49 -0700, "relic" wrote:



>

>"Bob" wrote in message

>news:6qnhs5d03b5kv3g8jh8f88mbvietojh59i@4ax.com...

>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:07:35 -0700, "nooneyouknow"

>> wrote:

>>

>>>

>>>"Bob" wrote in message

>>>news:0pbhs5t8h4ufv2nm0tf8131h480sastu38@4ax.com...

>>>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:18:38 +0100, "Gordon"

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>"Bob" wrote in message

>>>>>news:geles59gbbvhkddhmqcpbr3b4f1ihkpmn8@4ax.com...

>>>>>> When partitioning/formatting a single large partition on a drive, Win7

>>>>>> apparently defaults to 'Primary' with no options for 'Extended' (as

>>>>>> was the case with XP). Is there any way to force Win7 to create an

>>>>>> extended partition rather than primary?

>>>>>

>>>>>If that is the sole partition on the drive then it CAN'T be "extended".

>>>>>Never was in XP either....

>>>>

>>>> XP can indeed create an extended partition as the sole partition on a

>>>> drive. Bring up XP's disk mgmt and it provides a choice between

>>>> creating primary or extended. Then one large logical partition can be

>>>> created within the extended partiton.

>>>>

>>>> It's also possible to create the extended/logical partition under XP,

>>>> then format it under Win7. The obvious omission is the ability to

>>>> create the extended partition under Win7.

>>>

>>>XP supported FAT32, but who would want it.

>>

>> Anyone who wants transportability between systems that use FAT32 would

>> want it (that includes various hardware video players, for example).

>> And XP was only introduced because a previous poster said that XP

>> could not create a sole partition as 'extended', which is not correct.

>>

>> Still that's not the point. Or are you aware of some inherent defect

>> in extended partitions that merited the comparison with FAT32? I'd be

>> curious to hear about that, as I've been using extended partitions for

>> storage drives for many years.

>>

>> If not, then the question remains: Can Win7 create a sole partition on

>> a drive as 'extended'? It does not seem to be provided as a direct

>> option under the drive mgt snap-in, but that doesn't always mean that

>> it can't be done.

>

>Extended partitions were 'popular' with FAT32 not so much with NTFS. You

>can do it with the diskpart command if you need more than 4 partitions.

>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/300415



That's the answer then, thanks. I got in the habit of using extended

partitions from the days when you couldn't control drive letter

displacement. Never saw any reason to change that, but I suppose it's

much less a factor now.



Do you happen to know of any actual drawbacks in using extended

partitions? Obviously I won't be installing bootable systems to them,

but aside from that, I'm not aware of any adverse performance effects.
 
R

relic

"Bob" wrote in message

news:eek:jths59b2slanjnsa7auqkh1847iu954q9@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:59:49 -0700, "relic" wrote:

>

>>

>>"Bob" wrote in message

>>news:6qnhs5d03b5kv3g8jh8f88mbvietojh59i@4ax.com...

>>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:07:35 -0700, "nooneyouknow"

>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>>

>>>>"Bob" wrote in message

>>>>news:0pbhs5t8h4ufv2nm0tf8131h480sastu38@4ax.com...

>>>>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:18:38 +0100, "Gordon"

>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>"Bob" wrote in message

>>>>>>news:geles59gbbvhkddhmqcpbr3b4f1ihkpmn8@4ax.com...

>>>>>>> When partitioning/formatting a single large partition on a drive,

>>>>>>> Win7

>>>>>>> apparently defaults to 'Primary' with no options for 'Extended' (as

>>>>>>> was the case with XP). Is there any way to force Win7 to create an

>>>>>>> extended partition rather than primary?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>If that is the sole partition on the drive then it CAN'T be

>>>>>>"extended".

>>>>>>Never was in XP either....

>>>>>

>>>>> XP can indeed create an extended partition as the sole partition on a

>>>>> drive. Bring up XP's disk mgmt and it provides a choice between

>>>>> creating primary or extended. Then one large logical partition can be

>>>>> created within the extended partiton.

>>>>>

>>>>> It's also possible to create the extended/logical partition under XP,

>>>>> then format it under Win7. The obvious omission is the ability to

>>>>> create the extended partition under Win7.

>>>>

>>>>XP supported FAT32, but who would want it.

>>>

>>> Anyone who wants transportability between systems that use FAT32 would

>>> want it (that includes various hardware video players, for example).

>>> And XP was only introduced because a previous poster said that XP

>>> could not create a sole partition as 'extended', which is not correct.

>>>

>>> Still that's not the point. Or are you aware of some inherent defect

>>> in extended partitions that merited the comparison with FAT32? I'd be

>>> curious to hear about that, as I've been using extended partitions for

>>> storage drives for many years.

>>>

>>> If not, then the question remains: Can Win7 create a sole partition on

>>> a drive as 'extended'? It does not seem to be provided as a direct

>>> option under the drive mgt snap-in, but that doesn't always mean that

>>> it can't be done.

>>

>>Extended partitions were 'popular' with FAT32 not so much with NTFS. You

>>can do it with the diskpart command if you need more than 4 partitions.

>>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/300415

>

> That's the answer then, thanks. I got in the habit of using extended

> partitions from the days when you couldn't control drive letter

> displacement. Never saw any reason to change that, but I suppose it's

> much less a factor now.

>

> Do you happen to know of any actual drawbacks in using extended

> partitions? Obviously I won't be installing bootable systems to them,

> but aside from that, I'm not aware of any adverse performance effects.

>



No performance problems that I've ever heard of, just maintenance

annoyances: e.g., removing an NTFS logical partition in an extended

partition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Why did diskpart specify partition type 05h to an extended partition which is more than 1,800 GiB?
Replies
0
Views
89
newbie1canobie
N
A
How to create system reserved partition during windows installation ?
Replies
0
Views
115
Aram Al-mandawi
A
N
New F: drive named System Reserved?
Replies
0
Views
70
nume dudu
N
A
Is there a way to force the same COM port to all devices that connect on a precise USB port? (production line tests)
Replies
0
Views
93
AleB_883
A
H
Laptop only boots to OneKey Recovery Mode.
Replies
0
Views
61
Hrishikesh Remesh
H
Back
Top Bottom