Installing Two Operating Systems 4 Speed

[db.·.. >]

doesn't matter what you
few believe it to be.

the corruption of hal does
occur and has occurred on
when win2k is installed on
a partition next to winxp.

you guys should stop encoraging
people to take unnecessary risks.

because when the o.p. posts a
new issue regarding a crash
because of hal, you guys are
as silent as empty space when
it comes to helping.

--

db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

doesn't matter what you
few believe it to be.

the corruption of hal does
occur and has occurred on
when win2k is installed on
a partition next to winxp.

you guys should stop encoraging
people to take unnecessary risks.

because when the o.p. posts a
new issue regarding a crash
because of hal, you guys are
as silent as empty space when
it comes to helping.

There are two claims in your posts:
a) That installing two OSs on different partitions of the same disk may
cause a corruption of the HAL, and that this risk is eliminated by
installing them on separate disks.
b) That MVPs (presumably John John and/or myself) leave posters in the lurch
when our advice proves to be incorrect.

Since this is a discussion forum, there is always room for different
opinions. However, if you wish to be taken seriously you need to
substantiate your claims. With respect to a), some reference to a
Microsoft-issued article would be an excellent starting point. With b) you
should quote some threads managed by John John and/or myself where we
mislead posters and subsequently left them to fend for themselves.
Alternatively, if you chose to let the matter rest here then what you
expressed so far is your own personal opinion, nothing more and nothing
less.

 

[db.·.. >]

the same applies to
you guys.

perhaps, you guys need
to figure out under what
circumstances hal gets
corrupted.

in regards to legitimizing
my criticism of some mvp's,
there is substantial amount
of information for your research
as well.


--

db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces

 

[Terry R.]

doesn't matter what you
few believe it to be.

the corruption of hal does
occur and has occurred on
when win2k is installed on
a partition next to winxp.

you guys should stop encoraging
people to take unnecessary risks.

because when the o.p. posts a
new issue regarding a crash
because of hal, you guys are
as silent as empty space when
it comes to helping.

I have 5 OS's on this workstation, and W2k & XP ARE next to each other
(not that it makes any difference, they're on partitions 2 & 3 of disk
0) and I've NEVER experienced any issues, and it's been that way since 2002.

Can you provide documented instances of what you're stating?

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

 

[Bob I]

I have 5 OS's on this workstation, and W2k & XP ARE next to each other
(not that it makes any difference, they're on partitions 2 & 3 of disk
0) and I've NEVER experienced any issues, and it's been that way since
2002.

Can you provide documented instances of what you're stating?

I think what he is trying to say is if you put two Windows OS's on the
same disk then some of the magnetic field from one HAL distrupts the
magnetic field from the other HAL and causes the corruption.

 

[John John (MVP)]

These are just more of your uniformed "opinions", db. Having the
operating systems on different partitions on the same disk causes no
more inherent HAL corruption risks or problems by than having them on
different hard disks. As I said earlier, if you setup a multiboot
system using the standard Microsoft method the operating systems will
all share the same system partition and they will all use the same
boot.ini, NTDETECT.COM & ntldr system files, it doesn't matter where the
operating systems reside, they will still all use the same shared system
files mentioned above.

What you might think of a possible HAL problem is not a HAL problem at
all. If the boot.ini file is damaged or removed you may get a
misleading HAL is missing or corrupt message. It doesn't matter where
the operating systems are located, if the boot.ini file is missing or
damaged the same error message will be given when you try to boot
Windows. This is a very well known problem which, amongst other places,
is documented here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/330184

As for the corrupt HAL problem that might occur if you install Windows
2000 after Windows XP is installed that is yet another thing that you do
not understand about multibooting these operating systems and it is
something that would happen regardless of where the operating systems
are installed. This is caused by the same shared system files issue as
mentioned above. When you install Windows NT/2000/XP the setup program
installs its versions of the ntldr and NTDETECT.COM files, if those
files are already present they will be replaced by the version belonging
to the operating system being installed. If you install Windows 2000
after Windows XP is installed the Windows 2000 setup program will
replace the XP versions of the ntldr and NTDETECT.COM files, it doesn't
matter if you install Windows 2000 on a different disk or on a different
partition on the same disk as Windows XP, the files will be replaced.
The so called "corrupt HAL" problem here is that the older Windows 2000
versions of these files are not fully aware of Windows XP and they
cannot properly boot the newer Windows XP, once again this is a
misleading error message, when this happens there is absolutely nothing
wrong with the HAL in question. The fix to this also very well known
problem is to simply replace the Windows 2000 ntldr and NTDETECT.COM
files with the XP ones, it is so simple to fix that even an 8 year old
child could fix it. The Windows XP versions of those files are fully
aware of the earlier Windows NT/2000 and they can properly boot the
older operating systems.

As to your comments that "... when the o.p. posts a new issue regarding
a crash because of hal, you guys are as silent as empty space when it
comes to helping." then have a look here and see for yourself how silent
we are:
http://groups.google.com/groups/sea...q=audetweld+shared+ntldr&safe=off&qt_s=Search

The only empty space around here is between your ears so please spare us
from more of your ill informed opinions and advice!

John

 

[db.·.. >]

posts like yours are expected
and there will likely to be
another about having 7 and
even 10 o.s.'s on a disk.

i have experience with
multiple o.s.'s on a single
disk and have experience
with o.s.' on multiple disks.

the benefits of having one
o.s. per disk far outweighs
the benefit and risks of
having multiple o.s.'s on
one disk.

if there are any risks with
having one o.s. per disk,
then your welcome to provide
them to the o.p., instead of
argueing with me.

--

db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

the same applies to
you guys.

perhaps, you guys need
to figure out under what
circumstances hal gets
corrupted.

I have several machines with multiple OSs on the same disk, one of them
being a notebook (which obviously does not have more than one disk). If you
get HAL corruption then this has probably more to do with the way you've set
up your system than with the underlying principle. And since YOU claim that
the HAL gets corrupted, it's up to YOU to substantiate your claim, not up to
us.

in regards to legitimizing
my criticism of some mvp's,
there is substantial amount
of information for your research
as well.

If you publish derogatory notes about other people without substantiating
them then you lose credibility (at best) or can get accused of slander (at
worst). Let's have a look at this "substantial amount of information" you
quote. YOU made this wild claim, it is up to YOU to provide evidence.

 

[Terry R.]

The date and time was 11/4/2008 10:45 AM, and on a whim, db.·.. ><)))
·>` .. . pounded out on the keyboard:

posts like yours are expected
and there will likely to be
another about having 7 and
even 10 o.s.'s on a disk.

i have experience with
multiple o.s.'s on a single
disk and have experience
with o.s.' on multiple disks.

the benefits of having one
o.s. per disk far outweighs
the benefit and risks of
having multiple o.s.'s on
one disk.

if there are any risks with
having one o.s. per disk,
then your welcome to provide
them to the o.p., instead of
argueing with me.

But you're the one claiming there are problems. Please prove your
claims. I haven't experienced issues with multi booting on a single
disc or on multiple discs.

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

 

[Unknown]

Difficult to argue intelligently with someone using adding machine tapes for
posts.

 

[db.·.. >]

no, you are wrong again.

the problem i'm addressing
is that of the o.p.'s.

the problem you have is
argument and distraction.
--

db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces

 

[db.·.. >]

funny how you are tryint to
legitimize your defensiveness.

i too have experience with
multiple o.s.'s on single disks.

so don't think that i don't know
where you are coming from or
what you are trying to say.

if you can prove that having
one o.s. on one disk is bad then
explain it to the o.p.

further, "you" and others "like you"
are welcome to take risks and
install multitudes of o.s.'s on
multitudes of disks.

i'm sure that if your systems
became corrupted, you are
able to fix your problems.

regardless of what you say
or believe, hal is corruptable
and a great problem if and
when it causes a crash.

[sigh]

just because you may not
have experienced a corruption
of hal doesn't mean that the
risk is non existent.

[end of my discussion unless
the o.p. has anymore questions]


--

db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces

 

[Terry R.]

no, you are wrong again.

the problem i'm addressing
is that of the o.p.'s.

the problem you have is
argument and distraction.

How can I be wrong? I haven't made any statements like you have. You
said there are risks involved using multiple OS's on one disc. I asked
you to prove it.

If you can't, then your statements alone aren't valid. I'm asking you
to back up your statements.


--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

 

[db.·.. >]

there is a kb on it.

do your own research.

[end of my discussion]
--

db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces

 

[John John (MVP)]

there is a kb on it.

Then why not provide a link to it and be done with people doubting your
claims on the problem?

do your own research.

Typical reply from you, you post FUD then you go hide in a corner.

[end of my discussion]

We can only hope... but we know you will be back soon in another
discussion with more of your outrageous claims and comments.

John

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

there is a kb on it.

do your own research.

--

db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces

Unless you can quote this article, we can safely assume that it exists only
in your imagination, similar to the other things that you claimed in this
thread. So far you have not provided any substantiation whatsoever, always
asking other people to do their own research on your wild claims. The burden
is on you, my friend, not on them.

 

[db.·.. >]

i could have easily
contradicted your
suggestion by trolling
upon it.

so just shut up
and stop trolling,
winged mule, mvp.


--

db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

i could have easily
contradicted your
suggestion by trolling
upon it.

so just shut up
and stop trolling,
winged mule, mvp.
--

Sorry, my command of the English language is insufficient to match the lofty
intellectual heights that you have reached with your eloquent reply.

 

[Bill in Co.]

" db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com>
wrote
in message news:[email protected]...

Sorry, my command of the English language is insufficient to match the
lofty
intellectual heights that you have reached with your eloquent reply.

ROFL!! (Once again, it's the good ole "empty glasses make the most noise").

 

[FARAZ QURESHI]

Dear Pegasus,

Your advice had worked out good first I thought, but now when I used my
prfoile after sometime I find none of the disabled service being loaded. I
had created the startup.bat file as:

@echo off
Net start "Adobe LM Service"
Net start "Apple Mobile Device"
Net start "Bonjour Service"
Net start "iPod Service"
Net start "McAfee SiteAdvisor Service"
Net start "McAfee Services"
Net start "McAfee Network Agent"
Net start "McAfee Scanner"
Net start "McAfee Proxy Service"
Net start "McAfee Real-time Scanner"
Net start "McAfee SystemGuards"
Net start "Machine Debug Manager"
Net start "Microsoft Office Groove Audit Service"
Net start "McAfee Personal Firewall Service"
Net start "Microsoft Office Diagnostics Service"
Net start "Office Source Engine"
C:\WINDOWS\system32\usrmlnka.exe RunServices \Device\3cpipe-USRpdA
C:\WINDOWS\system32\igfxtray.exe
C:\WINDOWS\system32\hkcmd.exe
"C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office12\GrooveMonitor.exe"
"C:\Program Files\QuickTime\QTTask.exe" -atboottime
"C:\Program Files\iTunes\iTunesHelper.exe"
"C:\Program Files\McAfee.com\Agent\mcagent.exe" /runkey
"C:\Program Files\CyberLink\PowerDVD\PDVDServ.exe"
C:\WINDOWS\system32\NeroCheck.exe
C:\WINDOWS\system32\ctfmon.exe
C:\PROGRA~1\Adobe\ACROBA~1.0\Distillr\acrotray.exe
C:\PROGRA~1\COMMON~1\Adobe\CALIBR~1\ADOBEG~1.EXE

my wife's account works good without any of the service but upon logging
onto my account I find the ms-dos cmd window opening and then listing 9 times:
"System error 1058 has occurred. The service cannot be started, either
because it is disabled or because it has no enabled devices associated with
it."
Then once:
"The requested service has already been started. More help is available by
typing NET HELPMSG 2182.
Then 6 times:
"System error 1058 has occurred. The service cannot be started, either
because it is disabled or because it has no enabled devices associated with
it."
And finally the cmd.exe is left opened, looks like the services too are not
being not loaded.

Once again looking forward for your help!