Re: Dual Boot VIsta Ultimate and XP Home
- From: "Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 17:35:45 -0400
Thanks so much for your explanation; it's starting to make sense to me.
The laptop belongs to my sister-in-law. It's an Acer 5100-3357. It came
preinstalled with Vista Home Premium, which she detests. I'd like to
create a dual-boot system for her with XP Home. This way, she can use XP
to her heart's content but still have the option to use Vista. Using
Disk Management, I see there are three primary partitions. One is the
hidden 8.79 GB hidden recovery partition. Then there is C:, which is the
boot drive with Vista (51.65 GB). Finally, there's D:, a 51.36 GB data
partition. Since there are no extended partitions, I suppose I could use
Vista's partitioning utility. Or Gparted. So, what's your recommendation
for her particular setup?
"Timothy Daniels" <NoSpam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
The caution I gave was:
"Don't use Gparted to add or delete logical drives to/from a Vista-
created Extended partition, though."
As the "multibooters" site explained, Vista can deal with partitions
created under the "old rules", but adding to or removing logical
drives (i.e. logical partitions) from an Extended partition involves
offsets within the Extended partition, and mixing the "rules" by
using different partition managers to do so may lead to the apparent
"disappearance" of a partition. If you look in the Google archives
of this very NG, there are moans by people who say that their
precious partition has simply disappeared. So the conservative
and safe thing to do would be to do *all* partition management
under the same set of rules. And since "restoring" an image of
a partition is related in some of its processes to creating a
partition, one should do that under the same set of rules that
were used to create the original partition. But since Vista can
access partitions created under the old rules, my guess is that
restoring an image or copying back a clone is safe as long as one
is not creating a new logical drive within an Extended partition.
Why partitions made by VistaBootPro may not be affected, I
don't know. Perhaps it was not tested for creation and deletion
of logical drives within an Extended partition that contained
Vista-created logical drives. To add to the confusion, there are
cloning utilities with recent versions that claim compatibility with
Vista new offset rules. BootItNG and Casper are a couple that
make that claim. They may or may not work in all scenarios.
The safest thing to do would to just use something like Gparted
to create all the partitions because all partitioning utilities can
deal with the old rules. In the case of my Dell laptop with Vista
pre-installed, Vista was on a Primary partition with the old offset,
and a proprietary app was on a logical drive in an Extended partition
that had the new internal offset. I nuked the entire Extended
and kept the Primary partition, and I've cloned and restored Vista
several times using an old-rules Casper with no problems. If you
can't tell whether your pre-installed Vista has the old offset or the
new 2,048-sector offset, and you are willing to re-install Vista, I'd
say to just re-install Vista in a partition created under the old
Now I am thoroughly confused, Timothy!
In another post, you listed these links:
Here's an explanation of the problem:
Here's the reference that explaines Vista's new partitioning
Here's just one How-To that uses VistaBootPro:
Here's a How-To that uses Vista's own "bcdedit" command:
The multibooters link states:
If you only have Vista on your computer and don't mess with
imaging or cloning then you have nothing to worry about. However
if you do image or clone your drive or have a dual/multiboot
configuration with OSes other than Vista, then there are various
serious problems that can arise. For now the best solution is to
not let Vista create partitions, but do it with previous Windows
OSes or with third-party tools.
Okay. Since it's a very good idea to either image or clone one's hard
drive, it seems that using Vista to repartition the hard drive is not
a good idea.
Furthermore, it states:
When installing Vista you should create the partition yourself
beforehand and point the Vista install to that partition. Vista is
perfectly happy to follow the standard conventions and I have
not seen any issues when everything has been done by the old
rules using XP compatible tools. Many current apps that worked
with XP can be used with Vista, however many might not install
inside Vista but they can be used from inside another OS or
boot disk. When there have not been any Vista created partitions
on the drives I have successfully used several non-Vista versions
of partitioning and imaging/cloning tools.
So, it appears that a tool like Gparted might fit the bill. However,
you state that doing so may result in other problems! Or perhaps the
idea is to let Gparted partition the drive from the get-go, and
*then* install the OSes (that is, not to have it do repartitoning
after the fact that Vista had already been installed). Am I correct?
In the John Barnett link, he advocates using VistaBootPro. But this
involves using Vista to repartition the hard drive. So, if the
multibooters link is correct, again, problems could arise when
imaging or cloning the hard drive!
So, is there anything definitive as to the best practices procedure?
"Timothy Daniels" wrote:
Here's my reply to another posting in this NG on using
Gparted to create partitions for both Vista and other OSes::
On my Dell laptop with pre-installed Vista, I had good luck using
Gparted - a Linux partition manager which runs on a bare-bones
version of Linux (which disappears when you exit Gparted).
Gparted will shrink Vista's partition much further than will Vista's
Disk Management, and it's just as intuitive to use. You can
download a free .zip file to make a live USB stick (as I did) or you
can download a free .iso file to make a live CD. These free files
are both available from http://gparted.sourceforge.net/livecd.php .
Here's some user documentation:
(For the live USB, I take all the defaults at startup, except that
I choose "1" - for the "Medium" level of expertise - and then I
tell it NOT to let the startup routine select the graphic driver
matically, but then I accept its selection and the rest of the
Don't use Gparted to add or delete logical drives to/from a Vista-
created Extended partition, though. Vista uses a new 2,048-sector
offset from the beginning of its partitions, and the feature can
problems for other partition managers in Extended partitions.
Could be that when you used vista to do the partitioning and
formatting XP didnt like it. There is i believe something different
in the structure of Vista`s partitioning and formating. It may not
be backward compatible, at least with 3rd party partitoning
software. Cant rememeber what the difference is but a search on the
will find it.
I guess you installed XP on an extended partition/logical drive in
which case the mbr would have been overwritten by the o/s and
also system files.
This is the way i did it, as it then isolates each o/s from each
I have installed XP home and Vista premium on same drive and
the way i did it was to create two Primary partitions and format
ntfs using paragon hard disk manager.
I installed XP on the second primary and Vista on the first.
Just make the partition you want to install O/S on active first.
I also created on the second primary an extended partition and
logical drive and installed XP again for testing software purposes.
So i can boot to Vista / Xp / and Xp test.
You need to use a boot manager like paragon that can select and
make active either partition depending on o/s selection at boot.
"john p murphy" <jm920@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
Ok, so i am bored last weekend, i am presently running Vista
and figured i would install XP HOme editon, i create a partition
vista disk management, format it, put some files on it, partiton
just fine, so i put in the xp disk, reboot, does the standard XP
copying windows files, now time to reboot, after reboot, i get
message, missing operating system, well i tried to reinstall again
again, so i put in the vista dvd, boot, go to repair, repair fails
miserably, so i just figure, new vista install, so i do, get to
part to partiton, etc, what i notice is now i have 3 partitions,
and an unallocated space, small, so i remove all the partitions,
just install vista, no problems, running fine now, what i am
about is what the hell just went on,????? years ago, i never had
problems doing dual boots, xp and 98 , its killing me not knowing
the hell was going on and what happened?? thanks for any help with
this, i am losing sleep on this one LOL
- Re: Dual Boot VIsta Ultimate and XP Home
- From: Timothy Daniels
- Re: Dual Boot VIsta Ultimate and XP Home