requesting a little tech support please I got a new lenovo laptop

>>275594

You cannot change the patition of the system that is active except enlarging it iirc. The manager does not support that. You will have to boot some live system and start a disk manager there.

>>275607
like some linux distro?
i think the only one i have on a stick (the laptop doesnt have a cd drive) is a tails distro i tried out of curiosity. would that work or do i need a new one?

any suggestions on a good live system or a small one used basically just for this?

>>275613

Any live system goes.
They all have a disk manager on board, often GParted which is extremely powerful. It can shrink partitions while relocating all files affected by this.
The windows manager works well if started from another system. It just denies shrinking the partition that its own system is currently running from.
Classics like Knoppix are always a good choice. The one I used is https://spins.fedoraproject.org/xfce/
(useD because it's so good I installed it and am right now using it from disk...)
It too works as a live system if you don't want to install it and definitely has GParted on board.

>>275613

You can also directly use the small GParted live system which was made just for working with disks.

http://gparted.org/liveusb.php

>>275613

Oh, one more word, you CAN technically shrink even the active partition, the problem is that you nearly always run into UNMOVABLE DATA and you then cannot shrink further than to the sectors this data is located at. If you are lucky it might work but more than often it doesn't.
Using another system definitely works.

>>275594
The thing you're trying to do is retarded.

NTFS scales to petabytes; there is literally no upside to what you plan to do, only downsides.

So don't worry about it being difficult and complicated to make your PC worse; just leave it alone.

>>275594
S is the boot partition. Your computer has bitlocker (or at least is partitioned for bitlocker support). S: contains enough of Windows for it to boot, load Bitlocker, and decrypt the real system disk.

If you do have Bitlocker, partitioning your disk with third-party tools is a very bad idea, and deleting or fucking with S: will make your PC unbootable, and possibly erase all your data forever.

>>275630
"NTFS scales to petabytes"

what does that even mean?

partitioning a disk to seperate system from the rest is a thing i've seen regularly suggested all over the internet

>>275632

If he's using Bilocker that's true.
Also looking at the partitions again I am now not really sure if this shrinking restriction actually applies to C... It says Startpartition, but S is the active one. What is the start partition and can it be shrunk without running into unmovable data?

It's correct though, OP, be careful with GParted until you are shure you are not using disk encryption algorithms.

>>275637
It's suggested by complete idiots.

NTFS performs exactly the same whether the partition is 100GB or 100,000GB.

There is literally no upside to what you're attempting to do; if you think I'm wrong, state something that will actually be better, don't just say "I read on the Internet I should do that".

>>275642
Windows names partitions exactly backwards from common sense.

The "boot" partition is the one your OS is on, that isn't actually involved in booting.
The "system" partition is the one NTLDR/WinBoot is on, that has nothing to do with the operating system other than booting it.

Yes, it's ridiculous. I didn't decide this, I'm just telling you how it is.

>>275654

That's retarded as hell.
So that means C: can more than likely NOT be freely shrunken without problems as it contains the locked system data etc. even though it not shown as the active one...
Whata retarded naming concept.

>>275653

If you partition your disk in the way he said you can

>change your OS cleanly anytime without having to move your stuff
>segregate different types of content in different partitions with different mechanisms of safety (e.g. a non executable partition)
>segregate different types of content in different partitions for practical reasons (e.g. you can keep the sensible stuff on one small partition that's fast to wipe, this would provide safe erasure even in an environment with heavy journaling or any kind of setting that makes the data writing not happen in place)
>place your boot partition in the outer rim of the plates, thus improving access time marginally

and many other things. Why is it always that the ones willing to talk like if they knew shit are huge imbeciles? Every single line of your Reddit-formatted post is wrong, please commit suicide tonight idiot.

>>275683
Are you actually planning on doing any of that, or do you just want your OS to run out of space because memes?

Windows doesn't even have a concept of non-executability, let alone mounting a partition non-executable.

Do you regularly wipe your disks? Why?

These are all nebulous stupid "benefits", with no application to the real world.

>>275686

>do you just want your OS to run out of space because memes?

I still have 4 TiB in my OS partition. Not everyone is a poorfag like you.

>Do you regularly wipe your disks? Why? These are all nebulous stupid "benefits", with no application to the real world.

No, you're clearly an imbecile that lives in a basement. Just in the last six months I have changed my OS four times and wiped 16 partitions a combined total of roughly 200 times and I have very good reasons to do so.

>Windows doesn't even have a concept of non-executability, let alone mounting a partition non-executable.

Oh, thanks for confirming that you don't know shit about the stuff you say.

>all the vitriol itt
just use gparted live cd to boot and shrink the c partition. it will take a while but then you can create a new partition on the free space
gl

>>275707
>I have 4TB in one partition and a giant willy
OP has 0.5TB total, which you'd know if you'd have bothered to read OP.

>I have very good reasons to do so, and these reasons are ________
Face it, you're talking out your ass. You were asked a simple question, and instead of answering it you pretended to answer it.

i guess i'll just leave it as is now and in a year or two when i reset to factory settings, I'll remember to do all that right at the start.