dual boot XP and Vista?

[Colin Barnhorst]

The registry change to hide Vista from XP does not impair XP. It simply
sets the Vista volumes as offline while XP is running. There is no change
at all to XP itself.

 

[Bill in Co.]

You're the expert on the drive letter issue, but as you know,
it's only an esthetics issue. That is, if one is willing to let Vista
continue to refer to its own partition as "D:", nothing has to be
done. But if Vista is installed independently of XP, i.e. while
the HD containing the XP installation is disconnected (or hidden),
the Vista installer will tell Vista to call its own partition "C:",
with the result that each OS, WHEN IT IS RUNNING, will
call its own partition "C:" and the other OS's partition by some
other name which depends on how many other partitions there
are in the system. If there are only 2 partitions - XP's and Vista's -
each OS will call the other OS's partition "D:". But no problems,
be hoppy!

That sounds like the best idea.

 

[Michael Jennings]

Mr. Barnhorst - I credited your post, but you claimed I was ignorant.
Then when I point this out, you criticize rather than apologize. Is XP's
function reduced? It can't see the Vista partition. This is not impaired?
Editing the registry doesn't change XP itself at all? That's nonsense.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

Is XP impaired if you disconnect a data drive or remove a cd or dvd? Of
course not. The user simply can't access some data that he could before.
The Vista volume is no more to XP than another data drive.

Registry changes do not change an OS. Registry changes only change a
system's behavior. Installing or Removing a third party program like an
antivirus program requires changes to the registry (normally done by the
installer). Are you suggesting that adding or removing such a program would
be a change to your XP?

 

[Michael Jennings]

Access denied to XP but there for Vista. The acceptability of that depends
upon one's point of view I guess. You're running Vista. I'm running XP.

Expanding on your second statement, could adding or removing malware
be seen as making a substantial change in the operating system? If you
want to stick by your guns, you must say that it can not. Is that correct?

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

I run both XP and Vista.

There is a difference between changing an operating system and configuring
it. Registry edits are configuration changes.

The user has many ways to configure his operating system. The commonest are
presented in the GUI via checkboxes, radio buttons, text boxes, etc. It is
completely transparent to the user when registry changes are made this way
but they often are. But the devs do not provide checkboxes, etc. for all
the kazillions of possible ways to configure Windows (a virtually impossible
job) and so you have regedit.

A common registry change to XP that illustrates that the user is changing
the behavior (user experience) of Windows and not Windows is changing the
owner's name that appears on the system properties page. It requires a
registry edit but no one would argue that such a change is changing the
operating system.

Malware can change the operating system, of course, by inserting code into
system files. But that is not a good example because registry edits do not
insert code into system files. Registry edits change the parameters with
which the system files (and other files) work.

Having said that, adding or removing malware is an unrelated subject, IMO.
I don't care about the changes malware makes to the system in the context of
this discussion because, like file corruptions and other bad events that
require a repair to Windows, they maintenence issues. Such things concern
the restoration, not operation, of Windows.

 

[Michael Jennings]

This has been fun and I thank you for attempting to teach me. My long
ago experiments with careless registry editing cause me to be skeptical:
BSODs and figure out how to fix them. Windows got trashed.

The proposed edit only harms XP's view. The situation is that one
can do without shadow copy services in Vista or do without XP's access
to the Vista partition - can't have both - either XP or Vista gets dinged.

The OS should be able to see, copy and move files. Arguing that it hurts
things not a whit if it is prevented from doing that is similar to arguing
that doing without restore points in Vista is a matter of slight interest.

 

[Shenan Stanley]

I want to keep XP on my computer, but would still like to run Vista.
I have run the compatibility check and only my scanner won't work in
Vista (supposedly).

How do I install Vista so I can dual boot. And how can I eventually
remove XP once I am sure I want to stick with Vista?

Virtual Machine...?

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

There is no harm to XP's ability to manipulate XP files. XP was never
designed or intended to manipulate Vista files, of course. Anyway, the
resolution for that is to use a common data drive that both systems can
access.

 

[Nonny]

Virtual Machine...?

Thanks Shenan, but I don't want to mess with setting up and running a
Virtual Machine.

I think I'm going to install it on a second internal drive and use the
BIOS to choose which to boot.

 

[Shenan Stanley]

Thanks Shenan, but I don't want to mess with setting up and
running a Virtual Machine.

I think I'm going to install it on a second internal drive and use
the BIOS to choose which to boot.

Between dual booting and virtual machines - virtual machines is the easier
and less knowledge intensive of the two.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

Besides which you can run both OSs at the same time and exchange files
between them with the mouse.

 

[Nonny]

You could also install each OS independently on separate HDs,
i.e. with only the HD connected that will receive the installed OS,
and by using the BIOS just after startup, you could set which HD
would have boot control. That would control which OS gets booted,
but since the running OS would be able so see the files of the other
OS, you would still have to contend with the restore point conflict.
But the eventual removal of the unwanted OS would be trivially easy
for all these methods - just remove the HD containing the unwanted
OS.

That looks like the direction I will take, although the drive caddy
method looks intriguing (I have 3 spare external bays).

And I will use Colin's referenced fix for the Vista restore point
problem.

 

[Anna]

That looks like the direction I will take, although the drive caddy
method looks intriguing (I have 3 spare external bays).

And I will use Colin's referenced fix for the Vista restore point
problem.

Nonny:
As long as you have the vacant 5 1/4" bays available on your desktop PC that
you indicate, I would certainly give serious consideration to Tim Daniel's
recommendation to install removable HDDs in your machine.

I can tell you at the outset that you will never regret it. Indeed, your
*only* regret is that you didn't do it sooner. That hardware configuration
is that good.

I don't know how much you know about removable HDDs in their mobile racks.
Suffice to say that they're relatively inexpensive these days, simple to
install (no more difficult than installing an optical drive), quite
reliable, but more importantly the flexibility & peace of mind this
arrangement yields the user cannot be overemphasized - especially in cases
like yours where one's specific interest lies in installing different OSs on
a single machine.

If you want further information about these removable HDDs, so indicate and
I'll post some more detailed information about them.
Anna

 

[Nonny]

Nonny:
As long as you have the vacant 5 1/4" bays available on your desktop PC that
you indicate, I would certainly give serious consideration to Tim Daniel's
recommendation to install removable HDDs in your machine.

I already am. The cost isn't prohibitive.

Thanks.

 

[Nonny]

Nonny:
As long as you have the vacant 5 1/4" bays available on your desktop PC that
you indicate, I would certainly give serious consideration to Tim Daniel's
recommendation to install removable HDDs in your machine.

I just purchased Vista Home Basic Full Retail version and this is what
I am going to do.

I can tell you at the outset that you will never regret it. Indeed, your
*only* regret is that you didn't do it sooner. That hardware configuration
is that good.

I don't know how much you know about removable HDDs in their mobile racks.
Suffice to say that they're relatively inexpensive these days, simple to
install (no more difficult than installing an optical drive), quite
reliable, but more importantly the flexibility & peace of mind this
arrangement yields the user cannot be overemphasized - especially in cases
like yours where one's specific interest lies in installing different OSs on
a single machine.

If you want further information about these removable HDDs, so indicate and
I'll post some more detailed information about them.
Anna

Thanks, Anna.

I want to have two drives that are swappable using one bay. I am
unfamiliar with the terminology, but very familiar with the mechanics
of doing the physical installations. And my case makes things quite
easy since it doesn't use screws in any of the bays.

Is the "rack" the device installed in the bay and connected to the IDE
slot and the power supply?

Whatever that's called... I will only need one.

I will need two of whatever it is that the drives are mounted in.

 

[Nonny]

If your PC is a desktop that has a spare 5 1/4" expansion bay,
the least complex way (although it may involve the most physical
work and expense) is to use a "mobile rack" or "drive caddy".

Thanks Tim.

Looks like this will be my choice.

 

[Anna]

I just purchased Vista Home Basic Full Retail version and this is what
I am going to do.

Thanks, Anna.

I want to have two drives that are swappable using one bay. I am
unfamiliar with the terminology, but very familiar with the mechanics
of doing the physical installations. And my case makes things quite
easy since it doesn't use screws in any of the bays.

Is the "rack" the device installed in the bay and connected to the IDE
slot and the power supply?

Whatever that's called... I will only need one.

I will need two of whatever it is that the drives are mounted in.

Nonny:
These removable hard drive devices are two-piece affairs - the mobile rack
itself and the inner tray or caddy (in which the hard drive resides) that
slides into the rack. These mobile rack devices come in all-aluminum models
or a combination of aluminum-plastic or even all-plastic and range in price
from about $15 to $50. Mobile racks come in various versions, depending
upon whether the hard drive to be housed is an IDE/ATA, SATA, or SCSI
device. A Google search for "removable hard drive mobile racks" will result
in a wealth of information on these products and their vendors.

The installation of these devices is simplicity itself - no more difficult
than installing an optical drive. After the rack is installed and the
data/power cables are connected, you just plop the hard drive into the
removable tray (caddy), and slide the tray into the mobile rack. Note that
the removable hard drive mobile racks we are discussing are designed to be
installed in desktop computers and not laptop or notebook computers. The
size, weight, and design considerations of laptops/notebooks do not allow
for this hardware configuration.

Most of these mobile racks are nearly always equipped with a ON-OFF keylock,
so a simple turn of the key, in effect, activates the HDD. For added
security you can push or pull the removable tray in or out of the mobile
rack using the tray's handle and thus electrically/physically connect or
disconnect the HDD from the system. No more difficult than opening or
closing a small desk drawer.

I'm assuming from your reference to an "IDE slot" that you're working with
PATA and not SATA HDDs, right? Since you indicate your plan is to equip your
desktop PC with only one mobile rack that will be used to house two
removable trays I'm not entirely clear whether you will still be utilizing
an fixed internal HDD as well. Is that your plan? Or are you just
contemplating using only two removable HDDs in your system?

In any event you will, of course, need an additional removable tray (or
caddy as they're sometimes called). Many times these trays are not
separately available; you simply have to purchase two mobile racks, or if
the trays are separately available the cost is such that it hardly pays not
to purchase the mobile rack which includes, of course, a removable tray. I
believe the Kingwin models that Tim mentioned (at least some of them) have
additional trays that can be separately purchased. In any event the mobile
rack doesn't involve a huge expenditure by any means. Check out the various
models offered at newegg as well as other online vendors.
Anna

 

[Timothy Daniels]

As long as you have the vacant 5 1/4" bays available on your
desktop PC that you indicate, I would certainly give serious
consideration to Tim Daniel's recommendation to install
removable HDDs in your machine.

I just purchased Vista Home Basic Full Retail version and this
is what I am going to do.
[...................]
I want to have two drives that are swappable using one bay.
I am unfamiliar with the terminology, but very familiar with the
mechanics of doing the physical installations. And my case
makes things quite easy since it doesn't use screws in any of
the bays.

Is the "rack" the device installed in the bay and connected to
the IDE slot and the power supply?
Usually.

Whatever that's called... I will only need one.

I will need two of whatever it is that the drives are mounted in.

Those are usually called "trays" or "drawers".

Newegg has some house-brand removable HD racks, and
they may have single trays available, but Kingwin is the brand
for which I've seen the single trays most frequently available.

If your PC's innards are like my PC's, you may need some
help with Rat's Nest reduction. I've found "round" cables to
be a big help in that regard. You can buy them in various
lengths from 8" to 36", and in both 2- and 3-connector configs.
(The 8" ones are hard to find, and when you do find them, they're
only in the 2-connector configuration.). Nowadays, virtually all
the "round" cables have 80 conductors, just like the standard IDE
ribbon cables, 40 of them ground wires, and each of the 40 signal
wires is twisted together with a ground wire for shielding, similar
in effect to the ribbon cables. I like the ones with a braided
aluminum shield. I've seen no evidence that the braided wire
shielding protects any more from EMI than no braid, but it at least
looks cool. Silicon Valley Compucycle has a combination of good
selection and decent price, IMHO:
http://www.svc.com/ide-floppy-cable.html

For SATA drives, SVC also has a selection of cables:
http://www.svc.com/sata-cable.html

*TimDaniels*


*TimDaniels*

 

[Nonny]

I'm assuming from your reference to an "IDE slot" that you're working with
PATA and not SATA HDDs, right? Since you indicate your plan is to equip your
desktop PC with only one mobile rack that will be used to house two
removable trays I'm not entirely clear whether you will still be utilizing
an fixed internal HDD as well. Is that your plan? Or are you just
contemplating using only two removable HDDs in your system?

I have one SATA drive installed, but will be using IDE for the system
drive.

Am planning on pulling my two IDE drives and putting them into caddys
that are connected to the first IDE channel.

In any event you will, of course, need an additional removable tray (or
caddy as they're sometimes called). Many times these trays are not
separately available; you simply have to purchase two mobile racks, or if
the trays are separately available the cost is such that it hardly pays not
to purchase the mobile rack which includes, of course, a removable tray. I
believe the Kingwin models that Tim mentioned (at least some of them) have
additional trays that can be separately purchased. In any event the mobile
rack doesn't involve a huge expenditure by any means. Check out the various
models offered at newegg as well as other online vendors.

Thanks, Anna.

You confirmed what I already thought was what I needed to do.