>I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
>prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been
>the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead
>and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it
>was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
>
> --
> Domey
> ------------------
>
>
> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff isYou're talking about creating "logical partitions" inside extended
> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>
> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
> behind.
>
> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
> option to boot into the first system.
>
> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
> whatever.
> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff is
> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>
> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
> behind.
>
> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
> option to boot into the first system.
>
> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
> whatever.
>
>
> Hope this helps!
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
> "Domey" <gdfetergfg@ewrsfdbnfudfi.nbv> wrote in message
> news:e1U0ah4iGHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to>
> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been
> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead
> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it
> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
> >
> > --
> > Domey
> > ------------------
> >
> >
>
>
>I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on bothI'm not sure what a "logical partition" is. I'm aware of Primary and
>an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.
>
>I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon as I
>did that, things went smoothly.
>
>R.
>
>"Tony Sperling" wrote:
>>> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff is
>> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
>> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
>> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
>> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
>> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
>> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>>
>> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
>> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
>> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
>> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
>> behind.
>>
>> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
>> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
>> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
>> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
>> option to boot into the first system.
>>
>> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
>> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
>> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
>> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
>> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
>> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
>> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
>> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
>> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
>> whatever.
>>
>>
>> Hope this helps!
>>
>>
>> Tony. . .
>>
>> "Domey" <gdfetergfg@ewrsfdbnfudfi.nbv> wrote in message
>> news:e1U0ah4iGHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...>> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to>>
>> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been
>> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead
>> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it
>> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
>> >
>> > --
>> > Domey
>> > ------------------
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:30:01 -0700, Rob
> <Rob@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>> >I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on both>
> >an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.
> >
> >I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon as I
> >did that, things went smoothly.
> >
> >R.
> I'm not sure what a "logical partition" is. I'm aware of Primary and
> Extended partitions; primary partitions may be active or inactive. On
> either type of partition, you can place logical drives (the number of
> logical drives per partition is different on each). An operating
> system can be placed only on a primary partition, but I don't know
> what a "logical partition" is.
> Please explain. Thanks.
>
>> >>
> >"Tony Sperling" wrote:
> >> >> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff is
> >> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
> >> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
> >> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
> >> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
> >> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
> >> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
> >>
> >> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
> >> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
> >> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
> >> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
> >> behind.
> >>
> >> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
> >> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
> >> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
> >> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
> >> option to boot into the first system.
> >>
> >> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
> >> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
> >> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
> >> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
> >> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
> >> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
> >> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
> >> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
> >> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
> >> whatever.
> >>
> >>
> >> Hope this helps!
> >>
> >>
> >> Tony. . .
> >>
> >> "Domey" <gdfetergfg@ewrsfdbnfudfi.nbv> wrote in message
> >> news:e1U0ah4iGHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
> >> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been
> >> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead
> >> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it
> >> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Domey
> >> > ------------------
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
>A logical partition is a partition within an extended partition.
>
>So I know there's a limit to the # of primary partiions you can have on a
>disk (but don't remember exactly how many - 2 or 4 maybe), but I believe you
>can create a much larger # of logical partitions within an extended partition
>(but only 1 extended partition per disk.
>
>I'm pretty sure that's how it goes. I've never had any trouble installing
>XP, Server2003, Linux, etc on an logical partition until Vista. That said,
>installing Vista on a Primary partition solved the problem I was having.
>That's the key point I'm trying to offer.
>
>R.
>
>"milleron" wrote:
>>> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:30:01 -0700, Rob
>> <Rob@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>> >I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on both>>
>> >an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.
>> >
>> >I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon as I
>> >did that, things went smoothly.
>> >
>> >R.
>> I'm not sure what a "logical partition" is. I'm aware of Primary and
>> Extended partitions; primary partitions may be active or inactive. On
>> either type of partition, you can place logical drives (the number of
>> logical drives per partition is different on each). An operating
>> system can be placed only on a primary partition, but I don't know
>> what a "logical partition" is.
>> Please explain. Thanks.
>>
>>>> >>>
>> >"Tony Sperling" wrote:
>> >
>> >> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff is
>> >> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
>> >> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
>> >> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
>> >> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
>> >> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
>> >> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>> >>
>> >> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
>> >> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
>> >> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
>> >> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
>> >> behind.
>> >>
>> >> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
>> >> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
>> >> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
>> >> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
>> >> option to boot into the first system.
>> >>
>> >> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
>> >> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
>> >> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
>> >> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
>> >> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
>> >> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
>> >> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
>> >> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
>> >> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
>> >> whatever.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hope this helps!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Tony. . .
>> >>
>> >> "Domey" <gdfetergfg@ewrsfdbnfudfi.nbv> wrote in message
>> >> news:e1U0ah4iGHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> >> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
>> >> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been
>> >> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead
>> >> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it
>> >> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Domey
>> >> > ------------------
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
> What you create in Extended partitions are logical drives. You can't
> actually create a partition within a partition, can you? Perhaps
> "logical partion" is a synonym for "logical drive" that I just haven't
> heard of before.
>
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 11:41:02 -0700, Rob
> <Rob@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>A logical partition is a partition within an extended partition.
>>
>>So I know there's a limit to the # of primary partiions you can have on a
>>disk (but don't remember exactly how many - 2 or 4 maybe), but I believe
>>you
>>can create a much larger # of logical partitions within an extended
>>partition
>>(but only 1 extended partition per disk.
>>
>>I'm pretty sure that's how it goes. I've never had any trouble installing
>>XP, Server2003, Linux, etc on an logical partition until Vista. That
>>said,
>>installing Vista on a Primary partition solved the problem I was having.
>>That's the key point I'm trying to offer.
>>
>>R.
>>
>>"milleron" wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:30:01 -0700, Rob
>>> <Rob@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on
>>> >both
>>> >an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.
>>> >
>>> >I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon
>>> >as I
>>> >did that, things went smoothly.
>>> >
>>> >R.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what a "logical partition" is. I'm aware of Primary and
>>> Extended partitions; primary partitions may be active or inactive. On
>>> either type of partition, you can place logical drives (the number of
>>> logical drives per partition is different on each). An operating
>>> system can be placed only on a primary partition, but I don't know
>>> what a "logical partition" is.
>>> Please explain. Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> >"Tony Sperling" wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista
>>> >> stuff is
>>> >> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer
>>> >> will
>>> >> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
>>> >> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't
>>> >> throw a
>>> >> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure
>>> >> to
>>> >> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it
>>> >> will
>>> >> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>>> >>
>>> >> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a
>>> >> name or
>>> >> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and
>>> >> the
>>> >> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions
>>> >> by
>>> >> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to
>>> >> leave
>>> >> behind.
>>> >>
>>> >> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't
>>> >> matter
>>> >> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go
>>> >> ahead and
>>> >> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain
>>> >> at the
>>> >> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose
>>> >> the
>>> >> option to boot into the first system.
>>> >>
>>> >> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the
>>> >> Vista
>>> >> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
>>> >> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a
>>> >> drive
>>> >> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
>>> >> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space
>>> >> you
>>> >> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way
>>> >> of
>>> >> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this
>>> >> space
>>> >> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition,
>>> >> the
>>> >> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to
>>> >> boot into
>>> >> whatever.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Hope this helps!
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Tony. . .
>>> >>
>>> >> "Domey" <gdfetergfg@ewrsfdbnfudfi.nbv> wrote in message
>>> >> news:e1U0ah4iGHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> >> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
>>> >> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have
>>> >> >been
>>> >> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go
>>> >> >ahead
>>> >> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition
>>> >> >as it
>>> >> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > Domey
>>> >> > ------------------
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:30:01 -0700, Rob
> <Rob@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on>
>>both
>>an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.
>>
>>I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon as I
>>did that, things went smoothly.
>>
>>R.
> I'm not sure what a "logical partition" is. I'm aware of Primary and
> Extended partitions; primary partitions may be active or inactive. On
> either type of partition, you can place logical drives (the number of
> logical drives per partition is different on each). An operating
> system can be placed only on a primary partition, but I don't know
> what a "logical partition" is.
> Please explain. Thanks.
>
>>>
>>"Tony Sperling" wrote:
>>>>> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff
>>> is
>>> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
>>> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
>>> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't
>>> throw a
>>> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
>>> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it
>>> will
>>> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>>>
>>> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name
>>> or
>>> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
>>> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
>>> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
>>> behind.
>>>
>>> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't
>>> matter
>>> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead
>>> and
>>> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at
>>> the
>>> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
>>> option to boot into the first system.
>>>
>>> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
>>> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
>>> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a
>>> drive
>>> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
>>> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
>>> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
>>> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this
>>> space
>>> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition,
>>> the
>>> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot
>>> into
>>> whatever.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hope this helps!
>>>
>>>
>>> Tony. . .
>>>
>>> "Domey" <gdfetergfg@ewrsfdbnfudfi.nbv> wrote in message
>>> news:e1U0ah4iGHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
>>> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have
>>> >been
>>> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go
>>> >ahead
>>> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as
>>> >it
>>> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Domey
>>> > ------------------
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| dual boot but lost vista boot loader | Chinnasamy Arumugam | Windows Vista Install & Setup | 3 | 07-23-2006 10:24 AM |
| linux dual boot: removing the lilo boot manager | chris | Windows XP Help & Support | 1 | 11-03-2003 03:01 PM |
| Dual boot drive. Windows won't boot after a failed format | Margaret Simpson | Windows XP Help & Support | 1 | 10-28-2003 03:28 PM |
| During XP Dual Boot Installation Setup Wants to Write to Boot Sector of C: | Shep | Windows XP Help & Support | 1 | 10-22-2003 02:45 AM |
| Safe boot in dual boot system | Mark Salloway | Customize Windows XP | 0 | 07-17-2003 10:19 PM |
Linear Mode
Posts: n/a