Which HD to use for dual-boot?

[shegeek72]

I'm planning to create a Vista/Win7 dual-boot on a system that
currently runs Vista (32-bit) and need feedback on which of two HDs to
use. The 1T has Vista installed and currently has 694gb free. The
second HD has 465gb of 500gb free (both are Seagate). I've heard that
it's better to put the OS's of a dual-boot on separate drives, if
possible. True?

 

[SteveH]

I'm planning to create a Vista/Win7 dual-boot on a system that
currently runs Vista (32-bit) and need feedback on which of two HDs to
use. The 1T has Vista installed and currently has 694gb free. The
second HD has 465gb of 500gb free (both are Seagate). I've heard that
it's better to put the OS's of a dual-boot on separate drives, if
possible. True?

Why not just get rid of Vista?

 

[shegeek72]

Why not just get rid of Vista?

Good question.

I'm a freelance computer tech (repair, trouble-shoot, build) and like
to have the OS's around that my clients are using, so I can test/
trouble-shoot on my own systems, if need be (I also have an XP box).

Also, perhaps I'm old-school, but I like to wait until the first SP
has been released before committing mission critical systems to a new
OS.

 

[peter]

if I were you ,and I have done this. I would disconnect the Vista drive
and install W7 on the free partition on the other drive. This will not
overwrite the MBR of the Vista installation and will not create a dual boot
start up screen when you boot up. If your mobo bios is capable of this
you basically push F12 upon boot and a small BIOS screen will show
asking which HD to boot from.
If you wish to have the dual boot screen don't disconnect the Vista HD and
still install W7 onto the free partition on the other drive. This will overwrite
the
Vista MBR and be more work to undo.

peter

 

[SteveH]

if I were you ,and I have done this. I would disconnect the Vista
drive and install W7 on the free partition on the other drive. This will
not
overwrite the MBR of the Vista installation and will not create a
dual boot start up screen when you boot up. If your mobo bios is
capable of this you basically push F12 upon boot and a small BIOS screen
will show
asking which HD to boot from.
If you wish to have the dual boot screen don't disconnect the Vista
HD and still install W7 onto the free partition on the other drive.
This will overwrite the
Vista MBR and be more work to undo.

peter

Or..
He could get one of these, if all the drives are SATA:
http://www.antec.com/Detail.bok?no=676

And put each OS on its own drive, and swap them as needed.
I've got one for some storage drives, and it works fine.

 

[shegeek72]

Or..
He could get one of these, if all the drives are SATA:http://www.antec.com/Detail.bok?no=676

And put each OS on its own drive, and swap them as needed.
I've got one for some storage drives, and it works fine.

It's she.

Yes, all drives are SATA. Here are specs:

Gigabyte EX58-UD3R
Intel Core i7 940 quad
3GB OCZ DDR3
Seagate 1T SATA
Seagate 500g SATA (backup)
Sapphire Radeon 4850 512mb GDDR3 x2
Antec TPQ-850 850w SLI CrossFire ready
Antec 900 case
Vista HP 32-bit

 

[SteveH]

It's she.

Sorry m'dear.

Yes, all drives are SATA. Here are specs:

So you /could/ use the suggested caddy, if you chose to.

I've just got two drives in my PC, a 750 and a 500. One with XP and one with
7, plus I've got one of those caddies for storage drives and in case I want
to experiment with other OS's.

Fortunately, none of the people whose PC's I look after ocasionally would
touch Vista with a bargepole, and all still have XP. A fair few though are
looking now to go to 7 as it seems to be shaping up OK.

 

[shegeek72]

Fortunately, none of the people whose PC's I look after ocasionally would
touch Vista with a bargepole, and all still have XP. A fair few though are
looking now to go to 7 as it seems to be shaping up OK.

Hmm...I actually like Vista. If you turn off UAC and make a few tweaks
it's not a bad OS. It's more stable, has DX10 and is slicker than XP.
I think it's bad rap is mostly undeserved. From what I've seen, and
read about, Win7 (on its way from newegg) it's a lot like Vista.

 

[Bug Dout]

Good question.

I'm a freelance computer tech (repair, trouble-shoot, build) and like
to have the OS's around that my clients are using, so I can test/
trouble-shoot on my own systems, if need be (I also have an XP box).

Yeah, ok.

Also, perhaps I'm old-school, but I like to wait until the first SP
has been released before committing mission critical systems to a new
OS.

Win7 is the second SP for Vista.

 

[Flasherly]

I'm planning to create a Vista/Win7 dual-boot on a system that
currently runs Vista (32-bit) and need feedback on which of two HDs to
use. The 1T has Vista installed and currently has 694gb free. The
second HD has 465gb of 500gb free (both are Seagate). I've heard that
it's better to put the OS's of a dual-boot on separate drives, if
possible. True?

If you're comfortable with Ranish and various low level partition
manipulators, and, unless there are issues with either W7 or Vista
accessing low-level settings, that is, once past the initial
installation.

I don't run either, just XP. Basically it's about hiding partitions
Windows Operating Systems wouldn't need to or shouldn't see. Once the
OS is stable, IMO, it's mainly about being very careful about
subsequent hardware and sometimes software changes.

I just swapped cases last night (and a few minor changes - 1 new USB
port, a SATA MB port DVD hookup). Tricky, how XP can screw itself
up. But, since I'm ghosted, I was able to repeat the installation and
duplicate the errors to find what was causing XP the grief (required
stagged, consecutive hardware detection of each piece, singularly,
before advancing to next "changes". Three DVDs running simultaneously
over separate DMA channels into three 200/250G 5-year-old Seagate
HDs. 756 3000 AMD on an Asus, doing it, bumps the temp from 100 to
125F, but still sweet. Getting media off DVDs and onto 1T drives via
a USB docking station).

I prefer keeping an OS small by installing subsequent software to
other partitions (potentially shared OS resources is a further
possibility). Then I can Ghost the OS into smaller, faster-to-restore/
write binary-sector images. Once my images are backed-up, Ghost will
account adapting to most any sector sizing.

Which is circularly roundabout back to low level manipulations. If
partitions and drive letter assignments match, should be a mote point,
where the operating system is going (aside a little juggling in the OS
hardware detection phase, and a drive model ID coming up as detected
for different). I personally prefer everything related to an OS on
one drive (some partitions/logical assignments of course being hidden
by a boot arbitrator), in dealing and keeping storage issues from a
core gist of OS "maintenance" -- apart on other drives.