| Guest
|
Re: Dual Boot VIsta Ultimate and XP Home
Tim, thanks a million for all the info. Since my sister-in-law told me
she had no intention of using Vista whatsoever and she is anything but a
power user (basically just light Web browsing), I decided to just
perform a clean install of XP.
However, I am keeping all your pointers becauase in the near future, I
intend to dual boot XP and Vista, so thanks once more.
--
Dave
"Timothy Daniels" <NoSpam@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e9N21x2$IHA.4064@xxxxxx Quote:
> What I would do is get rid of that recovery partition. If it were to
> be used, it would wipe out any new partitions and obliterate XP.
> Deleting it would also free up a Primary partition. If Disk
> Management
> can't delete it, try Gparted. If Gparted can't do it, change the
> partition type code to hex 07 using Cute Partition Manager (a free
> download .iso file to make a live CD). If you have an external
> hard drive handy, you may also want to clone Vista before deleting
> the recovery partition, then delete the Vista partition, then copy the
> Vista clone back into the newly available unallocated space that
> had been freed up. Either in the process of making a new partition
> for Vista, or after Vista had been copied back, you could shrink
> the Vista partition using either Disk Management or Gparted to
> juggle the relative sizes of the Vista and XP partition. You may want
> to discuss the uses intended for the large data partition. If your
> sister doesn't have a lot of video or multi-media files to edit or
> keep
> on disk, you may want to copy those current files elsewhere tempor-
> arily while you adjust the size of the data partition as well. Since
> you
> would be working with just Primary partitions, I don't think you'd
> have any problems using Vista's Disk Management. Gut if you do
> have Gparted handy, you'll save a *little* bit of space using the old
> start-of-data offset instead of the larger 2,048-sector offset of
> Vista.
>
> What hasn't been mentioned, yet, in this thread is that Vista and XP
> will step on each other's restore points. There is a registry hack to
> get around that, but if your sister just backs up her files
> religiously,
> restore points would be superfluous, anyway. Here's more info on
> that: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926185 .
>
> Here's info on dual-booting Vista and XP with XP installed 2nd
> and using Vista's bcdedit to adjust Vista's BCD:
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926185 ,
> http://windowssecrets.com/2008/02/14...t-Vista-and-XP
>
> Here's info on doing the same thing, but using VistaBootPro to
> adjust Vista's BCD:
> http://vistasupport.mvps.org/install...ning_vista.htm .
>
> Here's info on doing the same thing, but using EasyBCD to adjust
> Vista's BCD:
> http://vistasupport.mvps.org/install...ning_vista.htm
>
> Good luck!
>
> *TimDaniels*
>
>
> "Daave" wrote: Quote:
>> Thanks so much for your explanation; it's starting to make sense to
>> me. :-)
>>
>> The laptop belongs to my sister-in-law. It's an Acer 5100-3357. It
>> came preinstalled with Vista Home Premium, which she detests. I'd
>> like to create a dual-boot system for her with XP Home. This way, she
>> can use XP to her heart's content but still have the option to use
>> Vista. Using Disk Management, I see there are three primary
>> partitions. One is the hidden 8.79 GB hidden recovery partition. Then
>> there is C:, which is the boot drive with Vista (51.65 GB). Finally,
>> there's D:, a 51.36 GB data partition. Since there are no extended
>> partitions, I suppose I could use Vista's partitioning utility. Or
>> Gparted. So, what's your recommendation for her particular setup?
>>
>>
>> "Timothy Daniels" wrote: Quote:
>>> The caution I gave was:
>>> "Don't use Gparted to add or delete logical drives to/from a Vista-
>>> created Extended partition, though."
>>>
>>> As the "multibooters" site explained, Vista can deal with partitions
>>> created under the "old rules", but adding to or removing logical
>>> drives (i.e. logical partitions) from an Extended partition involves
>>> offsets within the Extended partition, and mixing the "rules" by
>>> using different partition managers to do so may lead to the apparent
>>> "disappearance" of a partition. If you look in the Google archives
>>> of this very NG, there are moans by people who say that their
>>> precious partition has simply disappeared. So the conservative
>>> and safe thing to do would be to do *all* partition management
>>> under the same set of rules. And since "restoring" an image of
>>> a partition is related in some of its processes to creating a
>>> partition, one should do that under the same set of rules that
>>> were used to create the original partition. But since Vista can
>>> access partitions created under the old rules, my guess is that
>>> restoring an image or copying back a clone is safe as long as one
>>> is not creating a new logical drive within an Extended partition.
>>> Why partitions made by VistaBootPro may not be affected, I
>>> don't know. Perhaps it was not tested for creation and deletion
>>> of logical drives within an Extended partition that contained
>>> Vista-created logical drives. To add to the confusion, there are
>>> cloning utilities with recent versions that claim compatibility with
>>> Vista new offset rules. BootItNG and Casper are a couple that
>>> make that claim. They may or may not work in all scenarios.
>>> The safest thing to do would to just use something like Gparted
>>> to create all the partitions because all partitioning utilities can
>>> deal with the old rules. In the case of my Dell laptop with Vista
>>> pre-installed, Vista was on a Primary partition with the old offset,
>>> and a proprietary app was on a logical drive in an Extended
>>> partition
>>> that had the new internal offset. I nuked the entire Extended
>>> partition
>>> and kept the Primary partition, and I've cloned and restored Vista
>>> several times using an old-rules Casper with no problems. If you
>>> can't tell whether your pre-installed Vista has the old offset or
>>> the
>>> new 2,048-sector offset, and you are willing to re-install Vista,
>>> I'd
>>> say to just re-install Vista in a partition created under the old
>>> rules.
>>>
>>> *TimDaniels*
>>>
>>> "Daave" wroote:
>>>> Now I am thoroughly confused, Timothy!
>>>>
>>>> In another post, you listed these links:
>>>>
>>>> Here's an explanation of the problem:
>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931854
>>>> Here's the reference that explaines Vista's new partitioning
>>>> format: http://www.multibooters.co.uk/partitions.html
>>>> Here's just one How-To that uses VistaBootPro:
>>>> http://vistasupport.mvps.org/install...ning_vista.htm
>>>> Here's a How-To that uses Vista's own "bcdedit" command:
>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/919529
>>>>
>>>> The multibooters link states:
>>>>
>>>> <quote>
>>>> If you only have Vista on your computer and don't mess with
>>>> imaging or cloning then you have nothing to worry about. However
>>>> if you do image or clone your drive or have a dual/multiboot
>>>> configuration with OSes other than Vista, then there are various
>>>> serious problems that can arise. For now the best solution is to
>>>> not let Vista create partitions, but do it with previous Windows
>>>> OSes or with third-party tools.
>>>> </quote>
>>>>
>>>> Okay. Since it's a very good idea to either image or clone one's
>>>> hard drive, it seems that using Vista to repartition the hard drive
>>>> is not a good idea.
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore, it states:
>>>>
>>>> <quote>
>>>> When installing Vista you should create the partition yourself
>>>> beforehand and point the Vista install to that partition. Vista is
>>>> perfectly happy to follow the standard conventions and I have
>>>> not seen any issues when everything has been done by the old
>>>> rules using XP compatible tools. Many current apps that worked
>>>> with XP can be used with Vista, however many might not install
>>>> inside Vista but they can be used from inside another OS or
>>>> boot disk. When there have not been any Vista created partitions
>>>> on the drives I have successfully used several non-Vista versions
>>>> of partitioning and imaging/cloning tools.
>>>> </quote>
>>>>
>>>> So, it appears that a tool like Gparted might fit the bill.
>>>> However, you state that doing so may result in other problems! Or
>>>> perhaps the idea is to let Gparted partition the drive from the
>>>> get-go, and *then* install the OSes (that is, not to have it do
>>>> repartitoning after the fact that Vista had already been
>>>> installed). Am I correct?
>>>>
>>>> In the John Barnett link, he advocates using VistaBootPro. But this
>>>> involves using Vista to repartition the hard drive. So, if the
>>>> multibooters link is correct, again, problems could arise when
>>>> imaging or cloning the hard drive!
>>>>
>>>> So, is there anything definitive as to the best practices
>>>> procedure?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Timothy Daniels" wrote:
>>>>> Here's my reply to another posting in this NG on using
>>>>> Gparted to create partitions for both Vista and other OSes::
>>>>>
>>>>> On my Dell laptop with pre-installed Vista, I had good luck using
>>>>> Gparted - a Linux partition manager which runs on a bare-bones
>>>>> version of Linux (which disappears when you exit Gparted).
>>>>> Gparted will shrink Vista's partition much further than will
>>>>> Vista's
>>>>> Disk Management, and it's just as intuitive to use. You can
>>>>> download a free .zip file to make a live USB stick (as I did) or
>>>>> you
>>>>> can download a free .iso file to make a live CD. These free files
>>>>> are
>>>>> are both available from http://gparted.sourceforge.net/livecd.php
>>>>> .
>>>>> Here's some user documentation:
>>>>> http://gparted.sourceforge.net/larry/livecd/livecd.htm
>>>>> (For the live USB, I take all the defaults at startup, except that
>>>>> I choose "1" - for the "Medium" level of expertise - and then I
>>>>> tell it NOT to let the startup routine select the graphic driver
>>>>> auto-
>>>>> matically, but then I accept its selection and the rest of the
>>>>> defaults.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't use Gparted to add or delete logical drives to/from a Vista-
>>>>> created Extended partition, though. Vista uses a new 2,048-sector
>>>>> offset from the beginning of its partitions, and the feature can
>>>>> cause
>>>>> problems for other partition managers in Extended partitions.
>>>>>
>>>>> *TimDaniels*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "GrahamH" wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> Could be that when you used vista to do the partitioning and
>>>>>> formatting XP didnt like it. There is i believe something
>>>>>> different in the structure of Vista`s partitioning and formating.
>>>>>> It may not be backward compatible, at least with 3rd party
>>>>>> partitoning software. Cant rememeber what the difference is but a
>>>>>> search on the web
>>>>>> will find it.
>>>>>> I guess you installed XP on an extended partition/logical drive
>>>>>> in which case the mbr would have been overwritten by the o/s and
>>>>>> also system files.
>>>>>> This is the way i did it, as it then isolates each o/s from each
>>>>>> other.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have installed XP home and Vista premium on same drive and
>>>>>> the way i did it was to create two Primary partitions and format
>>>>>> ntfs using paragon hard disk manager.
>>>>>> I installed XP on the second primary and Vista on the first.
>>>>>> Just make the partition you want to install O/S on active first.
>>>>>> I also created on the second primary an extended partition and
>>>>>> logical drive and installed XP again for testing software
>>>>>> purposes.
>>>>>> So i can boot to Vista / Xp / and Xp test.
>>>>>> You need to use a boot manager like paragon that can select and
>>>>>> make active either partition depending on o/s selection at boot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good luck
>>>>>> Graham....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "john p murphy" <jm920@xxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:t8ip94l7ub6ach921ofse3qcv3rjfnd880@xxxxxx
>>>>>>> Ok, so i am bored last weekend, i am presently running Vista
>>>>>>> Ultimate,
>>>>>>> and figured i would install XP HOme editon, i create a partition
>>>>>>> using
>>>>>>> vista disk management, format it, put some files on it, partiton
>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>> just fine, so i put in the xp disk, reboot, does the standard XP
>>>>>>> thing
>>>>>>> copying windows files, now time to reboot, after reboot, i get
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> message, missing operating system, well i tried to reinstall
>>>>>>> again and
>>>>>>> again, so i put in the vista dvd, boot, go to repair, repair
>>>>>>> fails
>>>>>>> miserably, so i just figure, new vista install, so i do, get to
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> part to partiton, etc, what i notice is now i have 3 partitions,
>>>>>>> C,D,
>>>>>>> and an unallocated space, small, so i remove all the partitions,
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> just install vista, no problems, running fine now, what i am
>>>>>>> curious
>>>>>>> about is what the hell just went on,????? years ago, i never had
>>>>>>> problems doing dual boots, xp and 98 , its killing me not
>>>>>>> knowing what
>>>>>>> the hell was going on and what happened?? thanks for any help
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> this, i am losing sleep on this one LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> >>
>> >
> |