Does Windows Vista "Play Nice" with Linux?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Hi,

I use Linux extensively on my home computer as it is vital to my work. For
various other reasons, I plan on purchasing & installing Vista on a separate
partition on my computer. This leads me to ask the question: will Vista's
installer "play nicely" with Linux? Previous MS OSs have had a rough time
with Linux, with some going as far as to ...

- offer to reformat my jfs/ext3 drives
- overwrite my grubby bootloader
- refuse to install on anything other than /dev/hda1

(just to name a few...)

Thus, as a potential Microsoft customer, I want Vista to co-exist "nicely"
with my Linux system and incur as little hassle for me as possible when I go
to install it. What can I expect from a Vista install on a (current)
dual-booting Windows 2000/Linux machine?

K.
 
Dual-boot Windows Vista and Linux
http://www.pro-networks.org/forum/about78184.html


--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

:

Hi,

I use Linux extensively on my home computer as it is vital to my work. For
various other reasons, I plan on purchasing & installing Vista on a separate
partition on my computer. This leads me to ask the question: will Vista's
installer "play nicely" with Linux? Previous MS OSs have had a rough time
with Linux, with some going as far as to ...

- offer to reformat my jfs/ext3 drives
- overwrite my grubby bootloader
- refuse to install on anything other than /dev/hda1

(just to name a few...)

Thus, as a potential Microsoft customer, I want Vista to co-exist "nicely"
with my Linux system and incur as little hassle for me as possible when I go
to install it. What can I expect from a Vista install on a (current)
dual-booting Windows 2000/Linux machine?

K.
 
Hello Kris,

Your question is very valid.

There is a very knowledge filled Post (dual boot) located at, Windows
General Discussion, “Subject†Dual Boot Problems, Posted by “jimmuh†that is
filled with learned experiences, well worthy of a read.

Likely, the above Post will answer most of your questions. However, the
above Post discusses XP & Vista, not specifically Linux.

Respectfully, since you have expressed previous conflicts (I think you
implied) dual booting Linux and Windows; in my experiences, should one dual
boot Linux and Vista it is near guaranteed that troubles and conflicts will
rapidly follow.

Sincerely, no offense please, Vista Ultimate is simply too technically
advanced compared to Linux. Understand your work dilemma... have you
considered loading each OS on different HDDs using the same machine? Perhaps,
that would provide the best true method for evaluating the functionalities
within each OS without each OS fighting each other.

Might consider loading Vista Ultimate with BitLocker and EFS active on an
individual HDD for a real demonstration / comparisons for what Windows Vista
demonstrates regarding inherent ultimate Security.

There is a reason major corporations are purchasing Vista as if there is no
end for tomorrow, or, possibly as if the supply will not maintain product
demand.

The true factual reason, simply, the inherent ultimate Security provided by
Windows Vista; 64-bit Vista provides greater Security compare to 32-bit Vista.


--
Life is Wonderful while using Vista solo !

Posting & Painting
"Painting, n.: The art of protecting flat surfaces from the weather, and
exposing them to the critic."

(Ambrose Bierce)
 
Hi,
Sincerely, no offense please, Vista Ultimate is simply too technically
advanced compared to Linux.
Click to expand...

Hehe, while your response made me chuckle, I don't want to discuss the
merits of Linux vs. Microsoft in this thread or forum.

Coming back to topic, I think that my question has pretty much been answered
(based on the discussion at one of the provided links) -- Vista will
co-exist, but the installer will overwrite the boot loader. This is easy for
me to fix.

(Note: it *is*, nevertheless, an annoying hassle that doesn't *really* have
to exist. This kind of design decision makes me want to talk it over with
the developers that worked on the Vista installer... :)

K.
 
Hello Kris,

Laughter is good medicine for the soul, and our attitudes.

Intuition gently informs me that possibly you currently have a line of
communication with Microsoft for obtaining what you desire for knowing.

In the meantime, if desired, at your convenience, there are many, many
online articles provided by Microsoft’s Vista developers and engineers fully
discussing every detail regarding Windows Vista. The articles range from
general knowledge to in-depth Technology IT knowledge based for clearly
satisfying the desires of every of ones level of computing knowledge.

Seriously please understand, secondary to technological security
advancements, Vista is not the typical PnP OS. One small example, when
formatting the HDD, BitLocker requires for the *first active volume to be at
least 1.5 Gig, and the remaining capacity for the OS and/or additional
volumes if needed or desired.

By the way, the statements within my original Post required near two years
for mastering, and been doing computing stuff much longer than I desire
remembering (makes me feel old).

Wishing you a marvelous adventure while mastering Vista… also, if
experimenting with Vista on an individual HDD, have faith and courage for
running Vista solo just for evaluating Vista’s inherent ultimate security.

--
Life is Wonderful while using Vista solo !

Posting & Painting
"Painting, n.: The art of protecting flat surfaces from the weather, and
exposing them to the critic."

(Ambrose Bierce)
 
Have you 'mastered' the difference between an icon and a toolbar yet?
Or will that take an additional two years of study 'the hard way'?
 
Hi Kris,

It'll overwrite GRUB, so you'll have to repair it afterwards. A Windows
install will nearly always offer to format/convert any unknown volumes, as
it likes being the only OS on the system (multibooters are the exception,
the majority would want it to be able to write to all partitions). Setup
will allow you to install the bits anywhere on the drive, but it must have
access to the active partition as well (hiding it via a boot manager or BIOS
blocking may result in a failed install). Otherwise, it's no different than
any other Win/Lin dual boot install.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
I have to ask this.. Are you for real?


Vista Ready said:
Hello Kris,

Laughter is good medicine for the soul, and our attitudes.

Intuition gently informs me that possibly you currently have a line of
communication with Microsoft for obtaining what you desire for knowing.

In the meantime, if desired, at your convenience, there are many, many
online articles provided by Microsoft’s Vista developers and engineers
fully
discussing every detail regarding Windows Vista. The articles range from
general knowledge to in-depth Technology IT knowledge based for clearly
satisfying the desires of every of ones level of computing knowledge.

Seriously please understand, secondary to technological security
advancements, Vista is not the typical PnP OS. One small example, when
formatting the HDD, BitLocker requires for the *first active volume to be
at
least 1.5 Gig, and the remaining capacity for the OS and/or additional
volumes if needed or desired.

By the way, the statements within my original Post required near two years
for mastering, and been doing computing stuff much longer than I desire
remembering (makes me feel old).

Wishing you a marvelous adventure while mastering Vista… also, if
experimenting with Vista on an individual HDD, have faith and courage for
running Vista solo just for evaluating Vista’s inherent ultimate security.

--
Life is Wonderful while using Vista solo !

Posting & Painting
"Painting, n.: The art of protecting flat surfaces from the weather, and
exposing them to the critic."

(Ambrose Bierce)
Click to expand...
 
Hello Mike,

As real as the waking morning Sun,

As real as Bill's love for playing poker, specifically, Texas Hold Em.
--
Life is Wonderful while using Vista solo !

Posting & Painting
"Painting, n.: The art of protecting flat surfaces from the weather, and
exposing them to the critic."

(Ambrose Bierce)
 
I fear this comment may not be timely enough, but I'll do my best anyway.

One option I have found useful is to burn a Super Grub Disk before
installing windows, and let windows do mean things to your mbr etc. Then boot
to sgd and have it set up a fresh grub instance on your disk. It's pretty
high tech for 3 mb, it can read different filesystems and boot chainloaded
operating systems like windows, and automagically detects most operating
systems on your computer and sets up a grub menu item for them.

I recall a time when windows ate my ext3 partition, which had grub on it, so
nothing would boot. SGD saved the day, and without dding the mbr with a hex
editor, or the dos equivalent [I don't want to know].

I think the /dev/hda1 problem has been solved, but I've never tried.
 
Kris said:
Hi,




Hehe, while your response made me chuckle, I don't want to discuss the
merits of Linux vs. Microsoft in this thread or forum.

Coming back to topic, I think that my question has pretty much been answered
(based on the discussion at one of the provided links) -- Vista will
co-exist, but the installer will overwrite the boot loader. This is easy for
me to fix.

(Note: it *is*, nevertheless, an annoying hassle that doesn't *really* have
to exist. This kind of design decision makes me want to talk it over with
the developers that worked on the Vista installer... :)

K.
Click to expand...

Yeah...right. I sure am glad the limux installer doesn't override the
Windows installer, aren't you?
Frank
 
Yeah...right. I sure am glad the limux installer doesn't override the
Windows installer, aren't you?
Frank
Click to expand...

Well Frank, it doesn't unless you tell it to. Or, are you referring to
some specialised distro that automagically installs a whole system,
including the bootloader, without any user intervention, just assuming it
is the only operating system, like Windows does? I have yet to see a
GNU/Linux system write to the mbr without asking first. But I don't know
everything, I might just not have encountered it yet. I have encountered
people who have needed help because they told the system to overwrite the
mbr, because they didn't understand the question.

I wish you would give a bit more detail with your statements, I'm not sure
where they are coming from but it doesn't appear to be any knowledge base
with which I'm familiar.

Rodney
 
Rodney said:
I wish you would give a bit more detail with your statements, I'm not sure
where they are coming from but it doesn't appear to be any knowledge base
with which I'm familiar.

Rodney
Click to expand...

Auto install of the distros I've used (6+) will all default to C drive
where MBR is generally located.
Frank
 
I have installed Mandriva 2006 along with Vista.
Vista is on C:
Mandriva on another partition with lilo on it's own boot sector (not the
MBR)
Then I copy lilo boot sector to c:\mandriva.bin and add this program either
to Vista boot array with BCDEDIT or to boot.ini.
Both methods work.
I have not been able to make this work with GRUB, this is the reason why I
reverted to Mandriva 2006 which offers lilo and Grub.
 
Rodney said:
Well Frank, it doesn't unless you tell it to. Or, are you referring to
some specialised distro that automagically installs a whole system,
including the bootloader, without any user intervention, just assuming it
is the only operating system, like Windows does? I have yet to see a
GNU/Linux system write to the mbr without asking first. But I don't know
everything, I might just not have encountered it yet. I have encountered
people who have needed help because they told the system to overwrite the
mbr, because they didn't understand the question.

I wish you would give a bit more detail with your statements, I'm not sure
where they are coming from but it doesn't appear to be any knowledge base
with which I'm familiar.
Click to expand...
Frankie Boy is just a dumb Wintard. He's never used Linux in his life, or at
least never got it installed properly if he tried. Just ignore his b.s. and
you'll be fine. He's good at one thing ... making bodily sounds. said:
Rodney
Click to expand...

Love and Kisses,
Doris
 
Frank said:
Auto install of the distros I've used (6+) will all default to C drive
where MBR is generally located.
Frank
Click to expand...

There's no such a thing as a Sea Drive in Linux. Linux is smarter than that.
Now go back to your sandbox and leave computing to those who know a bit
about it.

Love and Kisses and a Juicy Big <snort>
Doris
 
Doris said:
Frank wrote:




There's no such a thing as a Sea Drive in Linux. Linux is smarter than that.
Now go back to your sandbox and leave computing to those who know a bit
about it.

Love and Kisses and a Juicy Big <snort>
Doris
Click to expand...
Oh Doris, I'm afraid you're confused again. You're not mixing those
little blue pills with your Gin again are you? Rock will be very upset
disappointed with you if you are!
And I know you forgot (memory problems again?)that Sea Drive is along
the ocean at La Jolla, remember?
Get well soon!
Frank
 
I've run Fedora Core in a Virtual PC 2007 VM under Vista without any
problems. I was not able to get Ubuntu to install properly (video driver
issues).

J
 
Back
Top