Dual Boot Questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jisha
  • Start date Start date
J

Jisha

* When adding a parallel installation of w2k, are any files from the
original system modified in the process?

* Which system holds the info regarding the Dual Boot? ...original? ...new?
....both? ...neither?

* I have a current backup image of the existing system installation.... but
after adding the dual boot, will I need to re-image a backup for the dual
boot set-up....

* The parallel install is going to a separate HDD... if one system-drive
fails, how will that affect boot process?

* Can I short-cut the procedure by installing the parallel w2k system, then
overwriting the partition from an image made of fully updated w2k system but
no programs or users set-up yet... then go from there?

TIA
Chris
 
Bad choice, relying on the MS site for info on what you want to do here.
Multiboot methods fall into two general categories: the Microsoft way and
everyone else's way. The two methods use incompatible concepts and cannot
simply be substituted for one another. In your case you want to use the
third-party method, but unfortunately, all the info you'll find on MS's site
will lead you to believe the MS way is the only way that exists.

The MS way intertwines the OS's and uses boot.ini to define the available
OS's in the boot menu. The third-party way does not intertwine OS's and
uses a separate boot manager, not the boot.ini file. You can't mix the
methods by installing your OS's without intertwining and then trying to
control the multiboot through boot.ini, or vice-versa, installing the OS's
the Microsoft way and trying to use a third-party boot manager.

In a nutshell, the Microsoft way intertwines the OS's by always booting
through the same partition and then forking to one or another operating
system on different drive letters (for example, Win2K #1 on C: or Win2K #2
on D:). Third-party boot managers keep OS's totally independent and truly
boot separate partitions as alternate "C:" partitions.

Since you want to dualboot two independent installations (yours happen to be
duplicates, but the key point is both partitions will contain OS's that want
to believe they are the C: partition), then you must use a third-party boot
manager. Third-party boot managers can keep OS's hidden from each other, so
when you boot #1 it will be designated C: and the #2 partition can
(optionally) be hidden, and when you boot #2 it will be C: and the #1
partition can be hidden. Since the OS's can be hidden from each other, the
chance of one messing up the other is minimized. Since the OS's are
independent, it is much easier to upgrade or eliminate either one later.

(You'll find more details about the differences in the multiboot methods at
my webpage at www.goodells.net/multiboot -- see my sections on the boot
process and the Microsoft boot loader).
 
Hi Dan,
WOW... thanks a whole bunch for the pointer to your webpage .... VERY
helpful!
In a nutshell, the Microsoft way intertwines the OS's by always booting
through the same partition and then forking to one or another operating
system on different drive letters (for example, Win2K #1 on C: or Win2K #2
on D:). Third-party boot managers keep OS's totally independent and truly
boot separate partitions as alternate "C:" partitions.
Click to expand...

Yes... I realize now that my primary concern with the dual boot is that I DO
wish to keep the separate OS installations from becoming intertwined...
reading through your multiboot scenario really helped to clarify that for
me.

Regards,
Chris
 
Back
Top