What about this?
Add a second drive to the PC. Format it and write down the drive letter.
Then setup a Junction Link to the new drive so the PC think’s it’s C:\program Files
Instructions found at How To Use Hardlinks And Junctions In Windows - Daniel Einspanjer's journal — LiveJournal
It sounds tantalizing…
That article refers to “hardlinks” in all cases, and though I know nothing about what the author is talking about from a Windows perspective, in Unix land, hard links are direct pointers to a file/directory, with exactly the same status as the original entry. In other words, the directory/file appears in two places in the file hierarchy, and neither place is the “true” location, they both are fully valid links to the target.
Hard links do not go across device boundaries however. The kind that can go across device boundaries is a symbolic link—this type of link is simply a reference to a filesystem path, sort of like shortcuts. If you move the target, the symbolic link no longer works. In Unix, these are handled transparently by the underlying OS, so when you reference a file with a symbolic link in its path, everything just works right.
I don’t know if Windows supports symbolic links and, if so, does Windows provide the same level of transparent support for them.
Even if you can do symlinks in Windows, across device boundaries, there is the strong risk that lots of the Windows framework and software just wouldn’t handle it well.
Software that walks directory trees will see both devices as one; software that uses old APIs for file access may or may not function properly. And tools such as Explorer aren’t designed to handle symlinks or hard links very well.
I imagine it would be an interesting, if risky, experiment to see if you could successfully put “Program Files” elsewhere. You might just smoke out some weirdness, like when I found out that some installer programs had hard-coded “C:\Progra~1” in them.
This is the best program for copying the OS partition I’ve ever used. if you have a different spare drive you can copy to the other drive.
As for enlarging your current partition it’s not hard, but there is the slightest chance of a problem. Use a partition resizing program to shrink the data partition first. Enlarge the OS partition next. Your done. They are simple to use and if your just resizing it’s very hard to screw anything up.
Before attempting resizing operations:
Check Disk
Defrag
It’ll make things both safer and faster.
I’ve always found GPartEd (the Gnome Partition Editor) to be excellent for repartitioning, reformatting partitions, etc.
I used it when i repartitioned my hard drive before installing Ubuntu, and i’ve used it since to reformat partitions to new file systems. It resized my C: drive without a hassle (though, like Mr Slant suggests, running Check Disk and then a defrag first is highly recommended).
You can download and burn it as a bootable CD.
I’ve repartitioned with Easeus and had no problems. I would recommend running a scandisk prior to doing anything. http://www.partition-tool.com/download/epm.exe
Linky no worky.
I’ve actually already tried to defrag C:, and got an error that I don’t have enough space to properly do so. Sigh. Haven’t been willing to risk doing it anyway without backing up first.
Stiiiillll hoping for an answer to my backup questions…
Please restate your backup questions, if they’re in this thread.
I didn’t realize you had a pending request.
I don’t know what you want either at this point. You can’t defrag a drive that’s full. Don’t worry about defrag.
In essence I want a full-image backup (registry, software, data, everything) of my entire internal hard drive, copied onto the external hard drive. Is this going to be a plug-and-play and follow-the-prompts kind of deal? It occurs to me that I don’t even know if I have to format or otherwise mess with the external drive before making the image.
How does the ISO/recovery disk/whatever-it-is come into play?
How do I verify that the backup image on the external hard drive is good, and is 100% something I could restore from?
Any other personal experiences with Shadow Protect. I’m assuming that it’s fairly user-friendly, and won’t be difficult to figure out how to back-up, restore, or schedule incremental back-ups, but I don’t know.
Your recycle bin sets aside 10% of the drive space by default, so it’s chewing up a gig just sitting there. Unless you delete huge files on a regular basis feel free to set it smaller.
Also, you can safely unhide and delete all the backup folders Windows makes for Windows Updates. These will be hidden in C:\Windows with names like $NTUninstall… You can delete them all and save yourself a bit of space. To find them you’ll have to go into Windows Explorer and under Folder Options/View uncheck “hide protected operating system files” at which point they should show up in Explorer.
Last but not least, hard drives are cheap and easy to install. Why not just buy a +500GB drive and never have this problem again?
Off-topic, but given the subject of C:\WINDOWS\Temp, I figured this would be a good thread to ask this question here.
I run Vista Home Premium, but I had this issue with XP as well.
Using IE7, when downloading large files off the internet (video and music, but mostly video), there is the percentage downloaded message box. When that download hits 99%, whatever was downloading apparently has to be copied from the Temp file to the location I selected as “Save As.” When downloading large files, or multiple files concurrently, the time required to copy the download from the Temp File to the destination I selected can take 30 seconds to several minutes for each download.
I’ve always wondered-- is there a way to skip the “Temp file” middleman here? I don’t want to copy a file I’m downloading-- I just want to download it to my destination so when it hits 100% downloaded, it’s already there. All this extra time is annoying and methinks ultimately pointless.
(FYI-- if the solution is “use a different browser,” I routinely use Firefox and Chrome as well, but I’d like to know if there is a workaround here for IE because for some purposes I still prefer IE at times).
Thanks for any help. . .
It is annoying and pointless, but another example of the “latest” concepts from Microsoft that are worse than 20 year old software from smarter people.
The idea of making a temporary file name in the destination directory, then renaming it after the download completes is a concept I used, wrote and enjoyed in the 1980’s for many programs. It’s no big deal.
Now, if there’s a way around this or a registry setting I can change, I’d sure like to know about it, but that doesn’t change my attitude towards MS for making the stupid 2-step operation the default.
There is a reason for the 2-step thing : should you or a software/hardware issue interrupt the download midway through, the partial download stays in the TEMP directory, which is flushed regularly. Thus, it reduces the risk of unwittingly cluttering the disk with garbage files the average user is afraid to delete because he doesn’t know wherefrom they came.
EDIT : That… was a completely pointless remark, wasn’t it ? palmface
No time for a lengthy post now, but start researching here if you like:
Do you know how common it is for programs to create junk & work files that they never delete even if not interrupted? Very. They get scattered all over the drive. This kind of clean computing doesn’t seem to be important to most programs.
The easiest solution (for file downloading) is to name the temp file something distinctive, like an extension of “$$$”. Then a periodic sweep of all files of this type will turn up any orphans and all can be deleted.
In fact, you don’t even have to rename it at all. Just download to the final file name and be sure to lock the file until the download is complete. The only drawback to this scheme is that a directory listing in the middle of a download will show that file as existing, but with the wrong size and not openable. BFD.
There are other more sophisticated ways, like keeping a database of temporary file names which is periodically consulted and used to purge junk. I’ve programmed this into complex systems and if carefully crafted, works like a charm.
And I don’t know of any basic system routine that “flushes the TEMP directory regularly,” although I’m sure there are some aftermarket routines that include that in their bag of tricks. Either way, it’s an extra step that isn’t needed and a decision the user shouldn’t have to bother with.
Be that as it may (and indeed, it’s very frequent), that’s just bad form. Just because the norm for coders these days is to not optimize their code for mem and disk usage anymore doesn’t make their half-assed efforts good and proper.
And frankly, for once I do believe Microsoft got things right. That’s rare enough a phenomenon 
But such sweep will take longer than the 10s needed to copy a file from TEMP to E:\dad\work\archives\porn, wouldn’t it ? Especially for larger drives. I admit I’m not filesystem guru though.
Some peer-to-peer softs I used went that route, in fact they created a file that used the final name and actually used the total, completed space as soon as the download started (I assume they generate a field of zeroes that are progressively written over by the downloaded data, or something to that effect).
I always thought it was a crappy way of doing things, because short of opening the peer-to-peer program itself, I have no idea whether the file is useable or not.
It was my understanding that Windows “Not enough space, do you want me to clean the disk ?” routines did that, but I may be mistaken - I never trusted those not to clean unorphaned files and bork my stuff, so I’ve always done things by hand.
Great for regaining disk space. I’ve never known it to cause any problems. And it’s free.
Because my internal hard drive is 300 gig of mostly unused space. My external hard drive is 500 gig of entirely unused space. I don’t need a new hard drive and don’t have the money for one anyway… I’ll be squeezing blood from a stone when I buy the cloning software. I haven’t attempted to resize the partitions yet for reasons already discussed ad nauseum in this thread.
Mr. Slant, thanks, but it doesn’t really look like that page answers my specific questions.
No, no it doesn’t.
Some software tools will make imaging a “plug and play” ordeal.
You don’t need to format the drive to use the tools.
The whole recovery disk/ISO thing… well, recovery disks are a Windows feature you can read up on.
The ISO thing… that varies from tool to tool.
Basically you boot from one media [or a special Windows mode], then create an image on a hard drive.
Once you’ve got the image, if you need to go back, you boot from one media besides your HDD, then restore the image.
It’s slow with such big drives, but works fairly simply.
During the backup there’s zero risk.
During the restore, if you’ve got a good image, there’s also zero risk.
If you have a spare space to use, you can try restoring the image to a non-essential partition to test its functionality.
Some years back, I routinely did all of this with Partition Magic and Drive Image.
Now the software in question is different, but I suspect it all works the same.