Independent assessment of problems with Vista dual boot installer

> Hi, bmoag.
>
> A kernel of truth, followed by a lot of misinformation designed to sell
> V-com's product.
>

> > • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary partition
> > on
> > the first drive (this is what starts Windows Vista). The balance of
> > Windows
> > Vista can be installed on any drive, in a primary or logical partition.

>
> This much is true. Following longstanding - although counterintuitive -
> industry terminology, Microsoft refers to the startup partition as the
> System Partition and the volume where the bulk of Vista is installed as the
> "boot volume". (See KB article: Definition of System Partition and Boot
> Partition; http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314470/EN-US/)
>

> > • Vista will default to installing it boot files into an existing Windows
> > XP/2000 partition if found. In the process it will install its text-based
> > dual boot manager into XP/2000 and replaces the original XP boot files
> > (NTLDR/NTDETECT.COM) with Vista versions. It is difficult to get out of
> > this
> > mess, once created. We are working on a tool to help restore XP/2000 to
> > normal after Vista (Q1-2007). Note that Vista will NOT warn you or give
> > you a
> > choice about how it installs if it sees XP/2000.

>
> Mostly wrong. Remember that "boot files" are those in the \Windows folder,
> NOT the startup files in the System Partition. Vista Setup will install the
> boot files into any primary partition or logical drive you choose on any HD
> in your computer, so long as there is enough unused disk space there. It
> also will format an existing partition before installing, if you choose.
> I'm not sure what "its text-based dual boot manager" means, unless it is
> BCDedit.exe, which is a command-line tool for editing the BCD. BCDedit does
> remind me of Linedit.exe of 20 years ago, but most users will never need to
> deal with it; those who do can learn to use it in less than an hour.
>
> Vista Setup does NOT replace NTLDR, etc. It does replace the WinXP boot
> sector, but it saves a copy of it first in the Root of the System Partition,
> then it creates a new \Boot folder and writes its Boot Configuration Data
> (BCD) files there. It also writes its bootmgr.exe into the Root of that
> partition.
>
> After installation, each time you reboot, the BCD offers a menu from which
> you can choose to run Vista or an "earlier" version of Windows. If you
> choose "earlier", the BCD steps back out of the way and loads the saved
> WinXP boot sector, which loads the untouched NTLDR, NTDETECT.COM and
> Boot.ini, which present the familiar menu of Windows choices. By this time,
> the computer has forgotten that Vista was ever installed on that computer,
> except for all those files taking up disk space.
>
> You can choose a third-party dual-boot system such as System Commander, of
> course, and that is the best solution for many users. But I've been
> dual-booting (multi-booting up to 8 operating systems during the Vista beta
> period) for nearly 10 years using only the method built into every NT-type
> Windows since at least WinNT4.0. I've never had to use hidden partitions or
> other such mumbo-jumbo.
>

> > This is not me bashing Microsoft, this is an independent software maker
> > that
> > recognizes that Microsoft has screwed the pooch on the Vista installer.

>
> This is a company with a product to sell. I've not used their product in
> several years, but I assume it is still a good solution to some problems,
> but it is not needed for most simple dual-booting situations.
>

> > The
> > computer press and certainly Microsoft have not mentioned this but the web
> > and this group are full of posts by users trying to create a dual boot
> > system
> > following Microsoft's instructions.

>
> There are also many posts reporting success with Microsoft's method. As
> with any newsgroups, users who have problems often post here; those who are
> successful seldom do.
>
> RC
> --
> R. C. White, CPA
> San Marcos, TX
> rc@grandecom.net
> Microsoft Windows MVP
> (Currently running Vista x64)
>
> "bmoag" <bmoag@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2565982D-411D-4ED4-9EA8-13B01972B87C@microsoft.com...

> > If you got Vista to install in dual boot configuration you are lucky. Here
> > is
> > an assessment from V-com, publishers of System commander:
> >
> >
> > • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary partition
> > on
> > the first drive (this is what starts Windows Vista). The balance of
> > Windows
> > Vista can be installed on any drive, in a primary or logical partition.
> >
> > • System Commander 8.21 or later is recommended. SC8 can also be installed
> > into a NTFS partition. Older System Commander products are not
> > recommended.
> >
> > • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary partition.
> >
> > Special Warnings
> >
> > • Vista will default to installing it boot files into an existing Windows
> > XP/2000 partition if found. In the process it will install its text-based
> > dual boot manager into XP/2000 and replaces the original XP boot files
> > (NTLDR/NTDETECT.COM) with Vista versions. It is difficult to get out of
> > this
> > mess, once created. We are working on a tool to help restore XP/2000 to
> > normal after Vista (Q1-2007). Note that Vista will NOT warn you or give
> > you a
> > choice about how it installs if it sees XP/2000.
> >
> > We STRONGLY recommend you hide all primary partitions from Vista before
> > it's
> > install using System Commander's unique "Super hiding" technology.
> > Standard
> > hiding (changing the partition id) will NOT hide partitions from the VIsta
> > installer. To do this:
> >
> > Use the OS Wizard in SC 8.21 or later to prepare for the Vista
> > installation
> > (older versions will not handle it). When the OS Wizard completes, insert
> > the
> > Windows Vista DVD and reboot directly from the DVD. Install VIsta. Note
> > that
> > when it boots from the Vista CD, you have about 5 seconds to press any key
> > when it asks if you want to boot from the DVD. Once Vista is installed and
> > working, boot from the System Commander CD (or diskette). At the menu
> > select
> > enable System Commander to restore our MBR that was erased by the Vista
> > installation.
> >
> > Note the phrase, "It is difficult to get out of this mess once created."
> > The
> > "mess" is created by following Microsoft's instructions for a dual boot
> > installation.
> >
> > This is not me bashing Microsoft, this is an independent software maker
> > that
> > recognizes that Microsoft has screwed the pooch on the Vista installer.
> > The
> > computer press and certainly Microsoft have not mentioned this but the web
> > and this group are full of posts by users trying to create a dual boot
> > system
> > following Microsoft's instructions.

>

> Hi, bmoag.
>
> A kernel of truth, followed by a lot of misinformation designed to sell
> V-com's product.
>

>> • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary partition
>> on
>> the first drive (this is what starts Windows Vista). The balance of
>> Windows
>> Vista can be installed on any drive, in a primary or logical partition.

>
> This much is true. Following longstanding - although counterintuitive -
> industry terminology, Microsoft refers to the startup partition as the
> System Partition and the volume where the bulk of Vista is installed as
> the "boot volume". (See KB article: Definition of System Partition and
> Boot Partition; http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314470/EN-US/)
>

>> • Vista will default to installing it boot files into an existing Windows
>> XP/2000 partition if found. In the process it will install its text-based
>> dual boot manager into XP/2000 and replaces the original XP boot files
>> (NTLDR/NTDETECT.COM) with Vista versions. It is difficult to get out of
>> this
>> mess, once created. We are working on a tool to help restore XP/2000 to
>> normal after Vista (Q1-2007). Note that Vista will NOT warn you or give
>> you a
>> choice about how it installs if it sees XP/2000.

>
> Mostly wrong. Remember that "boot files" are those in the \Windows
> folder, NOT the startup files in the System Partition. Vista Setup will
> install the boot files into any primary partition or logical drive you
> choose on any HD in your computer, so long as there is enough unused disk
> space there. It also will format an existing partition before installing,
> if you choose. I'm not sure what "its text-based dual boot manager" means,
> unless it is BCDedit.exe, which is a command-line tool for editing the
> BCD. BCDedit does remind me of Linedit.exe of 20 years ago, but most
> users will never need to deal with it; those who do can learn to use it in
> less than an hour.
>
> Vista Setup does NOT replace NTLDR, etc. It does replace the WinXP boot
> sector, but it saves a copy of it first in the Root of the System
> Partition, then it creates a new \Boot folder and writes its Boot
> Configuration Data (BCD) files there. It also writes its bootmgr.exe into
> the Root of that partition.
>
> After installation, each time you reboot, the BCD offers a menu from which
> you can choose to run Vista or an "earlier" version of Windows. If you
> choose "earlier", the BCD steps back out of the way and loads the saved
> WinXP boot sector, which loads the untouched NTLDR, NTDETECT.COM and
> Boot.ini, which present the familiar menu of Windows choices. By this
> time, the computer has forgotten that Vista was ever installed on that
> computer, except for all those files taking up disk space.
>
> You can choose a third-party dual-boot system such as System Commander, of
> course, and that is the best solution for many users. But I've been
> dual-booting (multi-booting up to 8 operating systems during the Vista
> beta period) for nearly 10 years using only the method built into every
> NT-type Windows since at least WinNT4.0. I've never had to use hidden
> partitions or other such mumbo-jumbo.
>

>> This is not me bashing Microsoft, this is an independent software maker
>> that
>> recognizes that Microsoft has screwed the pooch on the Vista installer.

>
> This is a company with a product to sell. I've not used their product in
> several years, but I assume it is still a good solution to some problems,
> but it is not needed for most simple dual-booting situations.
>

>> The
>> computer press and certainly Microsoft have not mentioned this but the
>> web
>> and this group are full of posts by users trying to create a dual boot
>> system
>> following Microsoft's instructions.

>
> There are also many posts reporting success with Microsoft's method. As
> with any newsgroups, users who have problems often post here; those who
> are successful seldom do.
>
> RC
> --
> R. C. White, CPA
> San Marcos, TX
> rc@grandecom.net
> Microsoft Windows MVP
> (Currently running Vista x64)
>
> "bmoag" <bmoag@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2565982D-411D-4ED4-9EA8-13B01972B87C@microsoft.com...

>> If you got Vista to install in dual boot configuration you are lucky.
>> Here is
>> an assessment from V-com, publishers of System commander:
>>
>>
>> • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary partition
>> on
>> the first drive (this is what starts Windows Vista). The balance of
>> Windows
>> Vista can be installed on any drive, in a primary or logical partition.
>>
>> • System Commander 8.21 or later is recommended. SC8 can also be
>> installed
>> into a NTFS partition. Older System Commander products are not
>> recommended.
>>
>> • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary partition.
>>
>> Special Warnings
>>
>> • Vista will default to installing it boot files into an existing Windows
>> XP/2000 partition if found. In the process it will install its text-based
>> dual boot manager into XP/2000 and replaces the original XP boot files
>> (NTLDR/NTDETECT.COM) with Vista versions. It is difficult to get out of
>> this
>> mess, once created. We are working on a tool to help restore XP/2000 to
>> normal after Vista (Q1-2007). Note that Vista will NOT warn you or give
>> you a
>> choice about how it installs if it sees XP/2000.
>>
>> We STRONGLY recommend you hide all primary partitions from Vista before
>> it's
>> install using System Commander's unique "Super hiding" technology.
>> Standard
>> hiding (changing the partition id) will NOT hide partitions from the
>> VIsta
>> installer. To do this:
>>
>> Use the OS Wizard in SC 8.21 or later to prepare for the Vista
>> installation
>> (older versions will not handle it). When the OS Wizard completes, insert
>> the
>> Windows Vista DVD and reboot directly from the DVD. Install VIsta. Note
>> that
>> when it boots from the Vista CD, you have about 5 seconds to press any
>> key
>> when it asks if you want to boot from the DVD. Once Vista is installed
>> and
>> working, boot from the System Commander CD (or diskette). At the menu
>> select
>> enable System Commander to restore our MBR that was erased by the Vista
>> installation.
>>
>> Note the phrase, "It is difficult to get out of this mess once created."
>> The
>> "mess" is created by following Microsoft's instructions for a dual boot
>> installation.
>>
>> This is not me bashing Microsoft, this is an independent software maker
>> that
>> recognizes that Microsoft has screwed the pooch on the Vista installer.
>> The
>> computer press and certainly Microsoft have not mentioned this but the
>> web
>> and this group are full of posts by users trying to create a dual boot
>> system
>> following Microsoft's instructions.

>

> the core of the issue is indeed contained above.

> Vista can only be successfully installed as a dual boot in a particular
> type
> of partition-it is now clear to me what that is,

> if RC1 is the final code many upgraders will suffer needlessly.

> It would also be quite easy to point users to
> partitions acceptable to the Vista boot loader when they are choosing
> where
> to install Vista.

> Even worse is that Vista does not uninstall its boot loader, period.

> Actually because I was burned by the dual boot option for installing Vista
> RC1 I have researched the issue extensively, experimented with dual boot
> installations, and the core of the issue is indeed contained above.
> In fact System Commander cannot consistently successfully install Vista
> with
> a dual boot option even following their instructions. I am only presuming
> that other multiboot programs are similarly hit or miss.
> Vista can only be successfully installed as a dual boot in a particular
> type
> of partition-it is now clear to me what that is, Microsoft knows what is,
> but
> if RC1 is the final code many upgraders will suffer needlessly. Only
> Microsoft can understand why the dual boot installer was not programmed
> simply not to allow an attempt to install Vista on anything other than an
> acceptable partition. It would also be quite easy to point users to
> partitions acceptable to the Vista boot loader when they are choosing
> where
> to install Vista.
> Even worse is that Vista does not uninstall its boot loader, period. This
> is a major, major bug in the program.
> One has to manually do this by running the appropriate commands in the XP
> recovery console. However doing this the user receives dire warnings of
> irreparably harming partition tables and other horrors.
> Vista intallation and, especially, deletion are so problematic that
> Microsoft should push the release date back until they get it right.
>
>
>
> "R. C. White, MVP" wrote:
>

>> Hi, bmoag.
>>
>> A kernel of truth, followed by a lot of misinformation designed to sell
>> V-com's product.
>>

>> > • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary
>> > partition
>> > on
>> > the first drive (this is what starts Windows Vista). The balance of
>> > Windows
>> > Vista can be installed on any drive, in a primary or logical partition.

>>
>> This much is true. Following longstanding - although counterintuitive -
>> industry terminology, Microsoft refers to the startup partition as the
>> System Partition and the volume where the bulk of Vista is installed as
>> the
>> "boot volume". (See KB article: Definition of System Partition and Boot
>> Partition; http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314470/EN-US/)
>>

>> > • Vista will default to installing it boot files into an existing
>> > Windows
>> > XP/2000 partition if found. In the process it will install its
>> > text-based
>> > dual boot manager into XP/2000 and replaces the original XP boot files
>> > (NTLDR/NTDETECT.COM) with Vista versions. It is difficult to get out of
>> > this
>> > mess, once created. We are working on a tool to help restore XP/2000 to
>> > normal after Vista (Q1-2007). Note that Vista will NOT warn you or give
>> > you a
>> > choice about how it installs if it sees XP/2000.

>>
>> Mostly wrong. Remember that "boot files" are those in the \Windows
>> folder,
>> NOT the startup files in the System Partition. Vista Setup will install
>> the
>> boot files into any primary partition or logical drive you choose on any
>> HD
>> in your computer, so long as there is enough unused disk space there. It
>> also will format an existing partition before installing, if you choose.
>> I'm not sure what "its text-based dual boot manager" means, unless it is
>> BCDedit.exe, which is a command-line tool for editing the BCD. BCDedit
>> does
>> remind me of Linedit.exe of 20 years ago, but most users will never need
>> to
>> deal with it; those who do can learn to use it in less than an hour.
>>
>> Vista Setup does NOT replace NTLDR, etc. It does replace the WinXP boot
>> sector, but it saves a copy of it first in the Root of the System
>> Partition,
>> then it creates a new \Boot folder and writes its Boot Configuration Data
>> (BCD) files there. It also writes its bootmgr.exe into the Root of that
>> partition.
>>
>> After installation, each time you reboot, the BCD offers a menu from
>> which
>> you can choose to run Vista or an "earlier" version of Windows. If you
>> choose "earlier", the BCD steps back out of the way and loads the saved
>> WinXP boot sector, which loads the untouched NTLDR, NTDETECT.COM and
>> Boot.ini, which present the familiar menu of Windows choices. By this
>> time,
>> the computer has forgotten that Vista was ever installed on that
>> computer,
>> except for all those files taking up disk space.
>>
>> You can choose a third-party dual-boot system such as System Commander,
>> of
>> course, and that is the best solution for many users. But I've been
>> dual-booting (multi-booting up to 8 operating systems during the Vista
>> beta
>> period) for nearly 10 years using only the method built into every
>> NT-type
>> Windows since at least WinNT4.0. I've never had to use hidden partitions
>> or
>> other such mumbo-jumbo.
>>

>> > This is not me bashing Microsoft, this is an independent software maker
>> > that
>> > recognizes that Microsoft has screwed the pooch on the Vista installer.

>>
>> This is a company with a product to sell. I've not used their product in
>> several years, but I assume it is still a good solution to some problems,
>> but it is not needed for most simple dual-booting situations.
>>

>> > The
>> > computer press and certainly Microsoft have not mentioned this but the
>> > web
>> > and this group are full of posts by users trying to create a dual boot
>> > system
>> > following Microsoft's instructions.

>>
>> There are also many posts reporting success with Microsoft's method. As
>> with any newsgroups, users who have problems often post here; those who
>> are
>> successful seldom do.
>>
>> RC
>>
>> "bmoag" <bmoag@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:2565982D-411D-4ED4-9EA8-13B01972B87C@microsoft.com...

>> > If you got Vista to install in dual boot configuration you are lucky.
>> > Here
>> > is
>> > an assessment from V-com, publishers of System commander:
>> >
>> >
>> > • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary
>> > partition
>> > on
>> > the first drive (this is what starts Windows Vista). The balance of
>> > Windows
>> > Vista can be installed on any drive, in a primary or logical partition.
>> >
>> > • System Commander 8.21 or later is recommended. SC8 can also be
>> > installed
>> > into a NTFS partition. Older System Commander products are not
>> > recommended.
>> >
>> > • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary
>> > partition.
>> >
>> > Special Warnings
>> >
>> > • Vista will default to installing it boot files into an existing
>> > Windows
>> > XP/2000 partition if found. In the process it will install its
>> > text-based
>> > dual boot manager into XP/2000 and replaces the original XP boot files
>> > (NTLDR/NTDETECT.COM) with Vista versions. It is difficult to get out of
>> > this
>> > mess, once created. We are working on a tool to help restore XP/2000 to
>> > normal after Vista (Q1-2007). Note that Vista will NOT warn you or give
>> > you a
>> > choice about how it installs if it sees XP/2000.
>> >
>> > We STRONGLY recommend you hide all primary partitions from Vista before
>> > it's
>> > install using System Commander's unique "Super hiding" technology.
>> > Standard
>> > hiding (changing the partition id) will NOT hide partitions from the
>> > VIsta
>> > installer. To do this:
>> >
>> > Use the OS Wizard in SC 8.21 or later to prepare for the Vista
>> > installation
>> > (older versions will not handle it). When the OS Wizard completes,
>> > insert
>> > the
>> > Windows Vista DVD and reboot directly from the DVD. Install VIsta. Note
>> > that
>> > when it boots from the Vista CD, you have about 5 seconds to press any
>> > key
>> > when it asks if you want to boot from the DVD. Once Vista is installed
>> > and
>> > working, boot from the System Commander CD (or diskette). At the menu
>> > select
>> > enable System Commander to restore our MBR that was erased by the Vista
>> > installation.
>> >
>> > Note the phrase, "It is difficult to get out of this mess once
>> > created."
>> > The
>> > "mess" is created by following Microsoft's instructions for a dual boot
>> > installation.
>> >
>> > This is not me bashing Microsoft, this is an independent software maker
>> > that
>> > recognizes that Microsoft has screwed the pooch on the Vista installer.
>> > The
>> > computer press and certainly Microsoft have not mentioned this but the
>> > web
>> > and this group are full of posts by users trying to create a dual boot
>> > system
>> > following Microsoft's instructions.

> Actually because I was burned by the dual boot option for installing Vista
> RC1 I have researched the issue extensively, experimented with dual boot
> installations, and the core of the issue is indeed contained above.
> In fact System Commander cannot consistently successfully install Vista with
> a dual boot option even following their instructions. I am only presuming
> that other multiboot programs are similarly hit or miss.
> Vista can only be successfully installed as a dual boot in a particular type
> of partition-it is now clear to me what that is, Microsoft knows what is, but
> if RC1 is the final code many upgraders will suffer needlessly. Only
> Microsoft can understand why the dual boot installer was not programmed
> simply not to allow an attempt to install Vista on anything other than an
> acceptable partition. It would also be quite easy to point users to
> partitions acceptable to the Vista boot loader when they are choosing where
> to install Vista.
> Even worse is that Vista does not uninstall its boot loader, period. This
> is a major, major bug in the program.
> One has to manually do this by running the appropriate commands in the XP
> recovery console. However doing this the user receives dire warnings of
> irreparably harming partition tables and other horrors.
> Vista intallation and, especially, deletion are so problematic that
> Microsoft should push the release date back until they get it right.

> Hi, bmoag.
>
> A kernel of truth, followed by a lot of misinformation designed to sell
> V-com's product.
>

>> • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary
>> partition on
>> the first drive (this is what starts Windows Vista). The balance of
>> Windows
>> Vista can be installed on any drive, in a primary or logical partition.

>
> This much is true. Following longstanding - although counterintuitive -
> industry terminology, Microsoft refers to the startup partition as the
> System Partition and the volume where the bulk of Vista is installed as
> the "boot volume". (See KB article: Definition of System Partition and
> Boot Partition; http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314470/EN-US/)
>

>> • Vista will default to installing it boot files into an existing Windows
>> XP/2000 partition if found. In the process it will install its text-based
>> dual boot manager into XP/2000 and replaces the original XP boot files
>> (NTLDR/NTDETECT.COM) with Vista versions. It is difficult to get out
>> of this
>> mess, once created. We are working on a tool to help restore XP/2000 to
>> normal after Vista (Q1-2007). Note that Vista will NOT warn you or
>> give you a
>> choice about how it installs if it sees XP/2000.

>
> Mostly wrong. Remember that "boot files" are those in the \Windows
> folder, NOT the startup files in the System Partition. Vista Setup will
> install the boot files into any primary partition or logical drive you
> choose on any HD in your computer, so long as there is enough unused
> disk space there. It also will format an existing partition before
> installing, if you choose. I'm not sure what "its text-based dual boot
> manager" means, unless it is BCDedit.exe, which is a command-line tool
> for editing the BCD. BCDedit does remind me of Linedit.exe of 20 years
> ago, but most users will never need to deal with it; those who do can
> learn to use it in less than an hour.
>
> Vista Setup does NOT replace NTLDR, etc. It does replace the WinXP boot
> sector, but it saves a copy of it first in the Root of the System
> Partition, then it creates a new \Boot folder and writes its Boot
> Configuration Data (BCD) files there. It also writes its bootmgr.exe
> into the Root of that partition.
>
> After installation, each time you reboot, the BCD offers a menu from
> which you can choose to run Vista or an "earlier" version of Windows.
> If you choose "earlier", the BCD steps back out of the way and loads the
> saved WinXP boot sector, which loads the untouched NTLDR, NTDETECT.COM
> and Boot.ini, which present the familiar menu of Windows choices. By
> this time, the computer has forgotten that Vista was ever installed on
> that computer, except for all those files taking up disk space.
>
> You can choose a third-party dual-boot system such as System Commander,
> of course, and that is the best solution for many users. But I've been
> dual-booting (multi-booting up to 8 operating systems during the Vista
> beta period) for nearly 10 years using only the method built into every
> NT-type Windows since at least WinNT4.0. I've never had to use hidden
> partitions or other such mumbo-jumbo.
>

>> This is not me bashing Microsoft, this is an independent software
>> maker that
>> recognizes that Microsoft has screwed the pooch on the Vista installer.

>
> This is a company with a product to sell. I've not used their product
> in several years, but I assume it is still a good solution to some
> problems, but it is not needed for most simple dual-booting situations.
>

>> The
>> computer press and certainly Microsoft have not mentioned this but the
>> web
>> and this group are full of posts by users trying to create a dual boot
>> system
>> following Microsoft's instructions.

>
> There are also many posts reporting success with Microsoft's method. As
> with any newsgroups, users who have problems often post here; those who
> are successful seldom do.
>
> RC

> Count me in on the list of multi-booters who don't use any 3rd party apps
> and have had absolutely no problems with the Microsoft way ;-) Currently
> triple-booting 2 instances of Vista, x64 and x86, alongside XP Pro x64.
> Countless reinstalls/rebuilds for beta-testing purposes, no problems
> whatsoever.
>
> --
> Jane, not plain 64 bit enabled :-)
> Batteries not included. Braincell on vacation ;-)

> Hi,
>
> The real issue (as I see it) is that Vista replaces the boot sector
> without any warning and (as far as I know) there's no official way to put
> it back to how it was.
>
> R. C. White, MVP wrote:

>> Hi, bmoag.
>>
>> A kernel of truth, followed by a lot of misinformation designed to sell
>> V-com's product.
>>

>>> • Windows Vista installs its OS Loader into the active primary partition
>>> on
>>> the first drive (this is what starts Windows Vista). The balance of
>>> Windows
>>> Vista can be installed on any drive, in a primary or logical partition.

>>
>> This much is true. Following longstanding - although counterintuitive -
>> industry terminology, Microsoft refers to the startup partition as the
>> System Partition and the volume where the bulk of Vista is installed as
>> the "boot volume". (See KB article: Definition of System Partition and
>> Boot Partition; http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314470/EN-US/)
>>

>>> • Vista will default to installing it boot files into an existing
>>> Windows
>>> XP/2000 partition if found. In the process it will install its
>>> text-based
>>> dual boot manager into XP/2000 and replaces the original XP boot files
>>> (NTLDR/NTDETECT.COM) with Vista versions. It is difficult to get out of
>>> this
>>> mess, once created. We are working on a tool to help restore XP/2000 to
>>> normal after Vista (Q1-2007). Note that Vista will NOT warn you or give
>>> you a
>>> choice about how it installs if it sees XP/2000.

>>
>> Mostly wrong. Remember that "boot files" are those in the \Windows
>> folder, NOT the startup files in the System Partition. Vista Setup will
>> install the boot files into any primary partition or logical drive you
>> choose on any HD in your computer, so long as there is enough unused disk
>> space there. It also will format an existing partition before
>> installing, if you choose. I'm not sure what "its text-based dual boot
>> manager" means, unless it is BCDedit.exe, which is a command-line tool
>> for editing the BCD. BCDedit does remind me of Linedit.exe of 20 years
>> ago, but most users will never need to deal with it; those who do can
>> learn to use it in less than an hour.
>>
>> Vista Setup does NOT replace NTLDR, etc. It does replace the WinXP boot
>> sector, but it saves a copy of it first in the Root of the System
>> Partition, then it creates a new \Boot folder and writes its Boot
>> Configuration Data (BCD) files there. It also writes its bootmgr.exe
>> into the Root of that partition.
>>
>> After installation, each time you reboot, the BCD offers a menu from
>> which you can choose to run Vista or an "earlier" version of Windows. If
>> you choose "earlier", the BCD steps back out of the way and loads the
>> saved WinXP boot sector, which loads the untouched NTLDR, NTDETECT.COM
>> and Boot.ini, which present the familiar menu of Windows choices. By
>> this time, the computer has forgotten that Vista was ever installed on
>> that computer, except for all those files taking up disk space.
>>
>> You can choose a third-party dual-boot system such as System Commander,
>> of course, and that is the best solution for many users. But I've been
>> dual-booting (multi-booting up to 8 operating systems during the Vista
>> beta period) for nearly 10 years using only the method built into every
>> NT-type Windows since at least WinNT4.0. I've never had to use hidden
>> partitions or other such mumbo-jumbo.
>>

>>> This is not me bashing Microsoft, this is an independent software maker
>>> that
>>> recognizes that Microsoft has screwed the pooch on the Vista installer.

>>
>> This is a company with a product to sell. I've not used their product in
>> several years, but I assume it is still a good solution to some problems,
>> but it is not needed for most simple dual-booting situations.
>>

>>> The
>>> computer press and certainly Microsoft have not mentioned this but the
>>> web
>>> and this group are full of posts by users trying to create a dual boot
>>> system
>>> following Microsoft's instructions.

>>
>> There are also many posts reporting success with Microsoft's method. As
>> with any newsgroups, users who have problems often post here; those who
>> are successful seldom do.
>>
>> RC

>
>
> --
> Gerry Hickman (London UK)