| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 25146 | 2002-09-27 03:46:00 | Dual Boot 2K XP Pro | Archibald (180) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 83689 | 2002-09-27 05:40:00 | Hey Chill, I can think of any number of folders that (apart from anything else) will cause 'confusion' e.g. "Documents and Settings", "Program Files", "System Volume Information", "Recycler" ... So the MS way (although we may not like it) is sensible and also as I support large system/networks (mainly MS) I can assure you you really don't want to go the dual OS on the same partition. Gets flame-retardent suit back on and hides under fire-proof mat. Babe. |
Babe Ruth (416) | ||
| 83690 | 2002-09-27 05:50:00 | *Runs next to Babe Ruth to hide from all the guru's who know a whole lot more* | Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 83691 | 2002-09-27 06:24:00 | Possible - yes, sensible - no way in hell! Possible or not, I wouldn't go within a mile of a PC set up like that unless it was to format and reinstall. You are asking for trouble. It is possible (though not always wise) to install your apps to a single folder (do it twice, but one folder as suggested above), but I would be wary of possible problems. If you are so short on space that you cannot fit two full installations on the disk, then I query the reasoning behind the dual-boot. Especially when the two OS's are fairly similar. I don't really see the need for both. My $0.02 G P |
Graham Petrie (449) | ||
| 83692 | 2002-09-27 06:38:00 | Mmmm. How reliable is a Windows OS installed according to MS standard procedures? How reliable is a machine with two Windows OSs installed in a way explicitly not according to MS standard procedures likely to be? There should be an infinite number of crash modes. |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 83693 | 2002-09-27 10:56:00 | Guys, Thanks for your help! Appreciated I'm off to play with my new OS :) A |
Archibald (180) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||