Re: Can I have two drives installed on EIDE with both having Boot


"lcnm" wrote:

I want to install a new larger Hard Drive. My old drive is too small
for my
current needs but I'd like to keep it on line. I don't want to
reformat
the
old drive as it has many files that I want to keep. The new drive will
be
formatted for NTFS file system, but the old drive is FAT32.
I am concerned about having two bootable drives installed at the
same
time. One (the new drive) will be on the 1st Primary EIDE port, set
for
Master and the small old drive will be on 1st Secondary set as Slave.
But
the
old drive does have a boot sector. Is this in any way a problem? Can
the
bootability of the old drive mess up any of the system?

--
Retired and Happy!


"Callmark1" <Callmark1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8D669DAF-747D-46A6-946F-CBF8BB1FADD2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
11:15 PM 6/2/2006

Congratulation Icnm on your retirement and happiness!!

Good for you for thinking this through before plugging stuff in and
pushing
buttons.

It is quite possible and sometimes desireable to have two OS on two
seperate
drives or partitions of the same system. However, unless you would
have
some
specific advantage in doing so, why bother with the tedious steps
necesary?
Why take the added risk that complexity inevitably confers to any
system?
In
addition, 2 OS on one system will be prevented from "seeing" each
other,
so
you would not be able to view or work on files on the hdd which was not
currently active.

Based on your post, I advise against that particular arrangement but if
you
feel you need a "multi-boot" set up for some reason, post back here or
in
a
new post anytime you like.

Callmark1 (T F H)


lcnm:
Although you didn't say, I'm assuming that your FAT32 formatted HD
contains
the Win9x/Me operating system and not the XP OS, yes? If, on the other
hand,
that old drive contains the XP OS and you're satisfied with the
programs/data on that drive, you might want to consider "cloning" the
contents of that old HD to your new one and then converting the new HD's
file system to NTFS. If that's of some interest to you we can cover that
process later.

In substance you can do what you propose and shouldn't suffer any
conflicts
in so doing. I'm assuming in all this that you have *no* interest in
booting
to the old HD and desire it *only* as a repository for backup/storage
purposes. As you've indicated, you will connect/configure the new
bootable
HD as a Master on the Primary IDE channel. The system should boot to that
drive regardless of where you've connected/configured your secondary HD.

Contrary to Callmark1's comment, your primary booting NTFS-formatted HD
will
have no problem accessing files/folders on your secondary FAT32-formatted
HD. (The reverse will not be true).
Anna


"Callmark1" <Callmark1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2BD8A02E-CBFA-4C04-983A-CE2FE02888CE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Anna:

Based on your assumptions, I stand righteously corrected : ) XP has much
greater flexibility than past Win OS's in co-existing with other Win OS.
I
am still not in favor of maintaining two bootable drives or partitions on
one
system unless there is some conctrete advantage in doing so. where is the
advantage here?

I am also in favor of a fresh, clean install using factory CD's for OS and
all apps. Then, as you say, there is no problem in accessing files from
the
old drive installed as slave. With a clean install, driver issues are
less
likely. Also, existing registry/config patches and potholes are not
transferred during a clean install while cloning replicates every pimple
and
wart.

Either way, kudos to the OP and good luck. Let us know how it goes.

Mark


Mark:
Except in the case where the user requires a multi-boot configuration
involving different operating systems on separate internal hard drives, I
too, am not particularly enamored of establishing the same OS, e.g., Windows
XP, on two or more HDs in the system. Indeed, even where a multi-boot
capability is needed we nearly always encourage the user (where possible) to
equip his or her computer with removable hard drives so as to effectively
isolate each OS both electrically & physically.

But in the OP's case since he or she (apparently) was not planning to use
the "old" soon-to-be secondary HD as a bootable device, I felt it was
reasonable to connect/configure the two drives in the manner he/she
proposed.

As to whether the user should use a disk imaging program to clone the
contents of the old HD to the new one - as in so many cases, that depends...

To my mind, as long as the OS, programs, and created data are functioning
without problems on the "old" HD and the user expresses no dissatisfaction
with such, I see no reason why the user shouldn't clone the contents of that
drive to his or her new HD. Why go through the tedious & time-consuming
process of installing a fresh OS on the new HD and then have to install what
is probably a multitude of programs/applications and assorted data on the
new drive if it's unnecessary?

You mention "driver issues" as a potential problem. But there are no driver
issues involved in this situation. All that's involved is the addition of a
hard drive.

Of course should the user for one reason or another want to start "fresh", I
have no problem with that. I raised the disk cloning process as an
alternative since many users (as I'm sure you know) are unfamiliar with that
process and it comes as a revelation to them that this technique may be
indeed a practical & useful alternative to what they previously
contemplated.
Anna


.

Loading