All that follows may be well known, but consider it just FYI for those
as new as I am to Vista. If it's already old stuff, just ignore it. ;^)

I am beginning to get "help" requests from folks who have bought
machines with Vista, typically older couples whose computers (XP) had
failed and they went out and bought a replacement that had Vista already
installed.

I had not planned to get Vista for a while, being happy with Win2K and
XP, but decided to go ahead just to learn Vista's quirks...

I can bear out that Vista (RC2, at least) doesn't like a partition that
was created in Linux, even if deleted and reformatted to NTFS. Since
Win2K was on that hd, I bought a new hd and it installed just fine.

The Vista wireless nic driver installed, but wouldn't work (D-link
DWL-G510). A driver update seems to have fixed that, as I am using that
card right now.

Nero 7 that came with the DVD/CD-RW drive isn't Vista compatible, won't
even install.

The onboard video is not Vista compatible (K8M800/S3 Unichrome) but it
works well enough for most functions. No hardware acceleration, so even
card games are maddening. I have an XFX 6200 AGP video card on the way
(A8V-MX has no PCIe x16 slot), and will try out Premium when it gets here.

All in all, I like it so far. But I don't think I would have made the
transition just because of the new features. Personally I still like my
W2K just fine.

-Larry

Larry wrote:
[...]
> I can bear out that Vista (RC2, at least) doesn't like a partition that
> was created in Linux, even if deleted and reformatted to NTFS...

I can't comment on the rest of your post, but I am curious what you
mean by 'doesn't like'. Can you be more 'verbose'?

"Don" <don195702@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef$TIc2XHHA.3824@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Larry wrote:
> [...]
> > I can bear out that Vista (RC2, at least) doesn't like a partition that
> > was created in Linux, even if deleted and reformatted to NTFS...
>
> I can't comment on the rest of your post, but I am curious what you
> mean by 'doesn't like'. Can you be more 'verbose'?


Yes...my thoughts exactly. If a partition is deleted then recreated as NTFS
what difference could that possibly make to the OS?
Makes no sense to me.

philo wrote:
> "Don" <don195702@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ef$TIc2XHHA.3824@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Larry wrote:
>> [...]
>>> I can bear out that Vista (RC2, at least) doesn't like a partition that
>>> was created in Linux, even if deleted and reformatted to NTFS...
>> I can't comment on the rest of your post, but I am curious what you
>> mean by 'doesn't like'. Can you be more 'verbose'?
>
>
> Yes...my thoughts exactly. If a partition is deleted then recreated as NTFS
> what difference could that possibly make to the OS?
> Makes no sense to me.
>
>
<verbose mode>

I was dual booting W2K and Fedora Core 4. Linux partitioner was used to
create two Linux partitions, after W2K had been up and running a while.
To install Vista, I wiped out Linux using the W2K partitioner (from W2K
install CD). Deleted two Linux, re-created as one, formatted NTFS. Vista
would install right up to the last time "setting up Vista". Windows boot
manager came up with the choice of 2K or Vista. W2K would load ok, but
selecting Vista (or timing out) was where it got lost. The screen would
stay black, no cursor, absolutely no hard drive activity. Trying to
repair from the Vista install DVD resulted in log indication that Vista
installed successfully. Opening a command window and looking at my D:
drive (Vista partition) revealed that the files had been copied over.
But it never, ever would boot up into Vista.

So I got a brand new drive, formatted NTFS, and Vista installed without
a problem. IIRC, I had read somewhere that Vista was not very happy with
non-M'soft partitioners.

</verbose mode off>

Cheers,
Larry