Boot sector problem with Vista? Howto load Linux onto a clean,formated HD?

[Linonut]

* raylopez99 fired off this tart reply:

So, you love to tinker with OSes rather than use them to do real
work.

Who said that? I love to tinker with OSes /in/ /addition/ /to/ using
them to do real work.

This is known as having a hobby. I would not quit my day job.

Computing is my hobby. Computing is my day job.

What can I say? Computers are my life, much to my wife's chagrin.

Linux is hobbyware--the thrill is just getting it to work, nothing
else.

Bullshit, pure and simple. The thrill of Linux comes from many sources,
depending on who is using it.

Your thrill with it comes from using it to make fun of its users,
certainly a callow and ignoble motive.

Perhaps you imbibe too much of the product of your friend and namesake,
Pepe Lopez?

 

[raylopez99]

Bullshit, pure and simple. The thrill of Linux comes from many sources,
depending on who is using it.

1% of the computing population is using it.

Your thrill with it comes from using it to make fun of its users,
certainly a callow and ignoble motive.

Trying to deprogram you. Not working.

Perhaps you imbibe too much of the product of your friend and namesake,
Pepe Lopez?

The tequila? Or the disqusting sex act (says the Urban Dictionary)?

Enjoy your hobbyware Linonut.

RL

 

[Jim]

So, you love to tinker with OSes rather than use them to do real
work. This is known as having a hobby. I would not quit my day job.


Linux is hobbyware--the thrill is just getting it to work, nothing
else.

RL

Too bad that your computer skills are lacking. Had you actually
installed and evaluated a modern Linux distribution your reaction would
be quite different.

Keep in mind a very important factor. Most of us currently using Linux
started with machines that arrived with Windows pre-installed. We
wanted something better. We found Linux. We had the CHOICE of which OS
to use.

Of the friends and family that I have introduced to Linux over the past
four years, not one has desired to return to Windows.

 

[Linonut]

* raylopez99 fired off this tart reply:

1% of the computing population is using it.

Wrong. Even if you count your average email/web user as part of the
"computing population". I certainly don't.

I wouldn't be surprised if 3% of even the "lamers" actually use it once
and while.

And in the tech world? I'd bet it might be 20% or more.

Trying to deprogram you. Not working.

The Linonut is impervious to auto-suggestion about Microsoft software,
products, and services.

The tequila? Or the disqusting sex act (says the Urban Dictionary)?

Tequila. The other is "the dirty Sanchez", I believe.

Enjoy your hobbyware Linonut.

What hobbyware? The last hobbyware I had was the Atari ST. I'd dumped
Win 3.1 in favor of NT.

Linux ain't hobbyware. It's lifeware.

 

[raylopez99]

raylopez99 wrote:


Too bad that your computer skills are lacking. Had you actually
installed and evaluated a modern Linux distribution your reaction would
be quite different.

Had I spent the time to do that, I wouldn't have time to eat, sleep or
hold a steady job.

Keep in mind a very important factor. Most of us currently using Linux
started with machines that arrived with Windows pre-installed. We
wanted something better. We found Linux. We had the CHOICE of which OS
to use.

So? Jonestown cultists joined Jones in Guana and drank the kool-aid.

Of the friends and family that I have introduced to Linux over the past
four years, not one has desired to return to Windows.

Maybe they couldn't disinstall the damn OS?

RL

 

[class_a]

1% of the computing population is using it.

Source?

 

[class_a]

Had I spent the time to do that, I wouldn't have time to eat, sleep or
hold a steady job.

Now you're just proving that you really don't know what you're talking
about. Linux installs FASTER and with much LESS hassle than Windoze.
Try it, you might even like it

 

[Peter Köhlmann]

Source?

His ass

 

[Hadron]

Source?

Yeah. DELL reckon its about 0.6%. It's certainly more common in the
server room but the very low desktop usage combined with the more common
server usage surely brings it up to about 2%?

 

[Conor]

Source?

Pick any stats site you want.

 

[Kier]

His ass

You beat me to it, Peter.

We know it's not a huge percentage, but it's no way as low as that.

 

[class_a]

Pick any stats site you want.

Easily done, but show me one that says 1% and I'll show you 10 more that
say differently.

 

[Johan N]

Jack,
Tx. I'm downloading Ubuntu now, but it's gonna take 2 hours.

Opensuse is fine at handling an install after windows has been
installed too ... hint

THis problem is, as I researched your suggestion more, a problem with
SATA drives. See a suggestion here:http://weblogs.asp.net/jkey/archive/2005/08/28/423901.aspx

But it 's gonna cost me at least a day...I'll report back any progress
made.

My latest thinking: try installing Windows2000 again but load the
driver for SATA Hitachi HD (if I can find it--it wasn't on the CD the
seller gave me).

It's not a driver for the HD ... but a driver for the controller on
your motherboard you're looking for !!

See below.

Actually my latest thinking is that I have a spare IDE drive, and

Actually that would be quick to do ... and you'd have a quick
indication if it's an issue with SATA-drivers for the chipset at your
motherboard.

since this is just a gift, I'll unload the SATA drives, which causes
real pain, and install an IDE drive. Maybe I'll use the Hitachi SATA
drive for another system.

RL

WikiAnswers:
First answer by 70.241.88.69. Last edit by 70.241.88.69. Question
popularity: 1 [recommend question]

INSTALLING WIN XP ON SATA DRIVE

YOU NEED TO LOAD 3RD PARTY DRIVERS WHEN INSTALLING XP FROM CD WATCH
CLOSE WHEN INSTALL START FOR "PRESS F6 FOR 3RD PARY DRIVERS" IT WILL
THEN KEEP LOADING WINDOWS AWHILE THEN STOP AND ASK FOR A FLOPPY WITH
YOU SATA/SCSI DRIVERS ON IT. YOU MAY HAVE TO SLAVE A FLOPPY IN JUST
FOR THIS OPERATION. YOU CAN USUALLY GET THESE DRIVERS OFF YOU
MOTHERBOARD DRIVERS CD OR THE MOTHERBOARD MANUFACTURES WEBSITE. I RUN
INTO THIS PROBLEM ON ABOUT 20-40% OF SATA DRIVES WHEN I NEED TO
INSTALL XP. GOOD LUCK

 

[Johan N]

USB available but nothing in fact attached.




Yes. set in BIOS.




Too much bother. Jack in this thread is onto the real problem: SATA
drives cannot be used to load Windows unless you load external drivers
during the installation--you have six seconds to do so, and WIndows
before Vista does not recognize non-floppy drives! And this system
doesn't have a floppy (only a CD)! Screwed (unless you use a third
party 'slipstream' utility, see below).


Too much bother. But thanks.




I will, but this will not fix anything (perhaps). I'm almost sure of
it. You will get DOS to install, but unless you want to use DOS,
you're soon back to square one (perhaps). Recall: I do get Vista to
install, though the system hangs on reboot (I'm using Bart's PE CD to
spy on the Sata HD once the installation of Vista "hangs", and I can
see that stuff exists on the HD from Vista, including game folders
like Chess and Minesweeper, so Vista is seeing the HD and doing stuff
to it).



Yes, good point, I will install IDE not SATA. This is my latest
workaround. Otherwise I'd have to do all kinds of tricks including
using a third party utility to 'slipstream' the installation using a
CD with SATA drivers (which for Hitachi I'm having a hard time
finding) burned in: see:http://weblogs.asp.net/jkey/archive/2005/08/28/423901.aspx

Verdict: installation of OSes suck, and I doubt Linux is any
better.

Well then I can only recommend you make a standard install with a
Linux distro - you'll be surprised

This bios is from this year. Not the problem.

Did you actually check, if the fixed an issue in regard to your
problem ... do check the changelog !!

 

[Johan N]

Well, actually, in that you would be quite wrong. Linux is, for the most
part, amazingly easy to install. I should know, since I've installed a
great many distros on various machines, both laptop and desktop, over the
past few years. At first it was a modest challenge, but nowadays it's a
breeze.

For one thing, the modern distros all have built in partioning tools
(Mandriva is one of the best in this regard, their GUI partitioner is
absolutely excellent and very straight-forward and simple to use and
understand). Also, most a the required drivers for hardware and present
upion installation. YOu can also choose what software you want to install,
or just go for the defaults.

Most distros will also pick up any Windows installation and add it to the
sequence so it can be chosen at boot time.

So basically, unless you are very unlucky with your hardware - which tends
to happen less and less these days - installing Linux doesn't suck at all.

Agree fully with Kier .... just try any of the big distros ...
fedora / centos / opensuse / Ubuntu ... your choice

 

[Kier]

Agree fully with Kier .... just try any of the big distros ...
fedora / centos / opensuse / Ubuntu ... your choice

Though Fedora is very good, I wouldn't always recommend it to a
first-timer, as it tends to showcase the bleeding edge, and that can
occasionally bring problems. I'd go with Ubuntu, Mandriva or SUse, (either
open or SLED, they're both excellent), or perhaps PCLinuxOS or Mint.

 

[chrisv]

Pick any stats site you want.

WTF? I thought you were already binned. Must have been a different
group.

*plonk*

 

[PeterC]

Though Fedora is very good, I wouldn't always recommend it to a
first-timer, as it tends to showcase the bleeding edge, and that can
occasionally bring problems. I'd go with Ubuntu, Mandriva or SUse, (either
open or SLED, they're both excellent), or perhaps PCLinuxOS or Mint.

Just set up PCLOS here - tried several, including those above - and found
that PCLOS seemed to be the most useable. Freespire seemed weird (or I).