Before I Test Install Xp Pro For Dual Boot

[Wizzandabe]

How much RAM have you got?

[DL.]

Originally posted by Wizzandabe+12 November 2003 - 09:42--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Wizzandabe @ 12 November 2003 - 09:42)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-DL.@12 November 2003 - 07:02
Don&#39;t dual boot Xp and Xp unless you hide one of the partitions or you&#39;ll have a crosslinked mess. MS won&#39;t bust down your door and really don&#39;t care if you can update.
VMware is the best for trying things out.

I am dual booting XP PRo and 2000. I think I installed XP, then installed 2000 after, on a different partition, and now when ever I format c:&#092; (XP) 2000 still reconises, and I dont need to reinstall that.

So cool. [/b][/quote]
And..... ???

Good for you I guess

Imagine an 80 gigabyte drive partitioned into many 5 gb partitions. Now you can install about 38 different operating systems on that one hard drive. if you really had to without hiding partitions, at least with the NT systems. Windows 9x is more fussy. Then you need to hide the partitions from each other.

But&#33; with no hiding, If two are the same, like XP and XP, some crappy programs (like windows update) will try to install parts to whichever has the most room. Maybe the registration to one and the program files to another.
2000 and XP are quite happy together. It&#39;s when you mix XP, Longhorn, and maybe server 2003 or windows 95, 98 and me, that you have problems.
This is what makes VMware so usefull. No rebooting the host to change to a different system, if you have enough ram, you can have many guests open at once and use the best for each purpose or mood.

[benitosan]

512 RAM. The machine can&#39;t take any more than that.
Wish I had a gig.

[DL.]

512 is lots for VMware. Virtual PC is the one that takes too much ram.

[Wizzandabe]

Originally posted by DL.@12 November 2003 - 10:07
512 is lots for VMware. Virtual PC is the one that takes too much ram.

I was just going to say. I know VPC, never used VMware though

[DL.]

VMware is great. You can add harddrives or CDroms or any other hardware and it has a defragmenter in the drive properties as well.
With NAT, or Bridged network, it can run most server OS&#39;s well too. If you have a fast machine, you might even forget you&#39;re working in the guest system. I have only found 2 OS&#39;s that it won&#39;t run by default but with some custom settings, it will run those as well.

[benitosan]

Sounds like VMWare is pretty compact and tightly written. Is 512 enough for Virtual PC?

I was surprised my 128 Meg Old Compaq not only ran XP Pro but I could even encode an Eccleston clip on TMPGEng. I learned something from that experience though. When in XP Pro there, I can&#39;t necessarily doubleclick and run a program that was installed in the Win98 partition. WinDVD for instance.

There must be an alternative to having to reinstall every program for each OS, no?

[DL.]

VPC will lag a bit at 512 if you have the host XP and the guest XP. Both will want at least 250. It is just slower than VMware anyway.

vmware workstation (www.vmware.com) is the one you want. astalavista should have the numbers for you

[benitosan]

Thanks for the heads up on the VMWare Workstation.
Looks like I&#39;ll be looking at some MILF popups when I visit Asta. P)

Hey, maybe if I succeed in getting VMWare working, I can install Microsoft Office System 2003 on it that I just got through unRaring from an ng?

Better get some Z&#39;s. Eyes have blurred out.

[LTJBukem]

benitosan

Is your copy of XP home a legitimate copy? What i mean is, did you pay for it and install it on only one system?

Why do i ask?

Well, if it is a licensed copy of XP home, i do not see any reason to install XP pro. The differences between the Pro and the home versions of XP are unimportant to the average home user; you will probably not notice any difference between the two operating systems.

If, on the other hand, you have an unlicensed version of XP home, and that includes installing on two or more systems, why not just go ahead and install XP pro, if that&#39;s what you want to do? What are you expecting to happen that will make the installation "not worth it"? I can tell you now what you will happen - Windows XP. If you have already successfully installed XP home on your system, then XP Pro will install just the same.

As far as updating is concerned, don&#39;t worry about it. While Microsoft make it as hard as they can for the public to pirate their new OS&#39;s, they do not prosecute the millions of home users that beat this &#39;protection&#39;. While it is a good idea to turn off Windows &#39;auto update&#39;, due to privacy issues, as long as you don&#39;t have a blacklisted key you&#39;ll get all updates from the Windows update site no problem; read the pinned topic on Windows XP for more info.

I&#39;m sorry if my post seems a little dismissive of your question, that is not my intention, we all like messing about with our computers and trying new things out. It&#39;s just that i wanted to make this point to you, being surprised as i was that noone else already had.