Is there a general rule that would apply to most pcs these days, like I know not to buy a hdd slower than 7200 rpms, but might it be smarter to install all windows files and programs on one hdd (lets say, 40 gb) and a 2nd drives for music, pictures and w/e. I thought maybe that would help in case I needed to reformat the windows drive, then I wouldn't have to even bother with my music drive. Or should I even consider RAID if I don't play modern games? I realize it's supposed to be more of backup, but anything I have that important is on a dvd already. I'm sorry if this was already disscussed (i searched to no aveil) but any help is appreciated!

I don't know about gen. rule apply
yes
while 1 drive is read, write for OS the other read write your data
thats how I can edit 2 movies and copy same time
there is a limit ,one limit is the ide bus or sata controller
using raid will increase some at cost of drive space
also great on re-installs
this is just an opinion on my part
some don't use a smaller drive they will just partition
some say it (partitions)does not work for them
todays hdd's cost about 50 cents usd a gb,but when you try and buy older stock smaller drives that will go up past 1.00 usd
its more what works for you

trend ,today too many people put egg's in 1 basket ,basket breaks lose all eggs
with the low cost of baskets this should not be the case
I guess most people see drive as static (no moving parts)

You've got to be careful about what drive you put your OS on if you have more than one drive. Say for example your current system has a 40 gig hd in it and you buy a new 400 gig because you need some extra space. The easy thing to do is slap that 400 in and forget about it. The problem is that 400 will outperform that 40 gig, so you are missing a potential speed increase.

So you'd want your OS on that 400 gig. So what you'd want to do is clone your Windows installation over to the 400 gig and use that. Then either completely dump the 40, or use it to store backups of critical files.

A comprimise would be to keep Windows on that 40, but then create a small partition at the start of that 400 for the Windows Swap/Pagefile, that way you'll keep swap and the OS on different physical drives (good) and also get the swap to a faster drive.

I don't believe I ahve "cloned" an installation before...I take it you are not refering to re-installing? lol

Not reinstalling, cloning, so its identical. Seagate/Maxtor has a utility that comes with their drives (but can also be downloaded) that should work with any other brand too that clones one drive onto another. Your other option is to go with Acronis something or Norton Ghost.

Seagate DiskWizard does 'data migration' which is cloning.

I am probably off the wall here but just a note if u can find a fast hard drive that is small and put Windows on and then put programs and folders with pics and music, or docs and the like on another then when u reformat the os drive u will not have to do anything but reinstall the programs u use. to me this is one of the best ways to backup data, although I do have a external hard drive that I back up to with anything I cannot afford to lose. the new drives that are at 1000MGHZ are the fastest for anything although I am not speaking for games as I am not a gamer.

the rule is 'divide and conquer'.

Segregating the OS from everything else is a great idea. However, with Windows
and its registry, some of the benefits get lost -- ie: the ability to replace the OS
without impacting the applications. *IF* you get religious about taking registry
backups and keeping a second copy on the alternate drive, then you have a
better chance of OS replacement.

When I have the opportunity, I split a system into at least three parts;

1. the OS itself
2. shrink wrapped applications (things I buy/download)
3. all user data

(1-2) can be recovered by reinstalling
(3) is the user files and I need due diligence on backups to recover this data