Request more attentive resource request.

Question

Hi. Recently I downloaded the InDesign CS3 international and CS4 english trial versions. I wanted to see the application what everybody mentioned me to try for my new job. I began to install the CS3, and the installation recoiled with the message about the insufficient hard disk capacity to continue installation. I have plenty of gigabytes on the disk, but the installation clamoured for 2.2 GB more on the C: volume. Well, I know that the lamers use their hard disk in one giant, therefore vulnerable and slow volume. But I use and still want to use only 8 GB for the system volume and for anything other. This configuration has already helped me out from some system crash.
Almost all of the applications offer the choice of the drive and folder where I want to install the program files. So does your product, but it wants to install 300 MB into the chosen folder and gigabytes into the Adobe folder on drive C:. This must be a joke, I think. Almost all of the applications can manage to store the needed components in the program folder or in a separated folder by the users choice. Everybody is able to find the soluton for it. The Adobe softwares, what I have seen, usually feed up the common system folders, unlimitedly. This is very bad manner, I mean it. I use a huge number of programs and that 8 GB has always been enough for the smooth working. If one giant application - also containing unnecessary but unskippable components, I saw it at one of my colleagues - wants the whole place for itself then I am pressed to forsake that. And I am dejected. Hopefully the next version will bring a new approach and the system requirements will show more regards for the users' requirements.
Farewell.

Answer 1

My friend, let me know what I can save with properly divided hard drive. But I let you know it, too. You probably are a user who doesn't care of the accumulated garbage on your machine. If the system is too slow, you reinstall the whole one, don't you. And all of the applications, of course, because the registry and the component folders has been erased. Maybe it spends an hour. Well, if I would have to reinstall my system, it would spend a week, approximately. All the applications, all the associatings, and last but not least the settings of the applications. This is not the same weight I guess. So, you probably don't make system backups because you have nothing to lose. I have, that's why I already create system backups with particularly set and adjusted states to archive. Earlier with Norton Ghost, now with a more stable utility, with Easy Image. From sector-to sector, I save the whole system drive in a secured image, stored in a DVD, and when my system becomes suspicious, dirty or instable, I can restore a well working configuration, erasing even the last bytes of the state to be annihilated. I am able to try any programs, make careless experiments, because when my playground is too crowded, I destroy the present and recall the past. This is what I mean comfort.
If I followed your way and stored everything in one volume then I could not make a backup of the system. I could try to backup folders but as everyone knows, not all the important contents are stored in files and folders. So you have to abandon the safety, I don't. You think you are in safety because you have downloaded the updates and patches. Well, I am in safety because I haven't ever download any system updates or patches. I had created my system configuration almost 5 years ago. When have you reinstalled your system last time? 
I tell you a more interesting thing about my system. A few months ago a fully reliable software has ruined my logical drive chain, started from the partition table, if you know what I mean. The C drive has gone, okay, but some other volumes became also invisible. Maybe hurt. Somebody would decide to reinstall the whole thing, and to lose the data which are not archive right then. I took up a floppy disk of mine with an MS-DOS 7.1 system and some really handy tools. Booted on, and rechained the complete drive map by hand. Well, spent a day and a half, because I'm really out of practice, but I did not lose anything, not a file, not a byte. DOS can span 8 GB long partition in the system area to be able to use the whole disk repairing capacity of those ancient but definitely reliable and helpful tools. I took care of this limit, so at this time my care was repaid. I am curious of your methods to save your disk when a "reliable" program becomes your enemy. 
I always clear off the garbage from my machine, this is a fee for using my PC. I've been use it for five years without system loss. I use tons of programs, including some giant games, and all of them can manage their tasks without using up my 8 gigabytes size system drive. Just because this is how a well designed program is made. Just because this is the right thing. All of them. The Adobe InDesign can not. And not a few kilobytes were missing to make the things done. Two gigabytes were required, not less. Now what can I think about it? Are the other programs made by excessive care of storage requirement of the common files or is the Adobe InDesign constructed without the minimal care of the users' problems? Well, not each program was very careful, but I can use my system at five years after the big bang. So, the final conclusion has to be that Adobe doesn't worry about that ******* who has bought the great product, and the great product, the most and only solution InDesign is a crap. Any objection?