On 25 Apr 2002, at 8:13, Phil Daley wrote: > I wish they'd set the reply-to: back . . . > > At 04/25/2002 05:57 AM, Dennis W. Manasco wrote: > > >Think of it this way: Suppose you had a Windows machine with three > >hard disks. On one disk you might have three "Windows" folders: > >Windows 98, Windows XP and Windows 95. On the second disk you might > >have just one "Windows" folder (though for consistency I think I have > >to make this a Linux boot folder...). On disk three you have a > >"Windows" folder for Windows 3.x and yet another "Windows" folder > >which was a copy of Windows 98, but one which no installer had ever > >perverted by modifying its registry and stuffing messed-up DLLs down > >its throat. > > That's almost the way it works. > > There is a limitation for OS before WinNT, that they have to be on the C: > drive. > > So Win3.1, Win95, and Win98 would have to be in subdirectories on the C: drive.
No, not true. Back in 1996 a friend of mine used the OS2 boot manager to set up someone's PC to boot DOS 6.2 or Win95, and Win95 was on the D: partition. > WinNT, Win2000 and WinXP could be on other drives, in other subdirectories. > > >Now imagine that you could choose any one of them as your > >boot system and that, no matter what you installed or messed about > >with while under a particular system, only your boot system would be > >affected -- all of the others would remain as they were. > > Yes, that's how it works on Windows. It always did, as long as you used a boot manager that took care of it for you. And the Mac OS is using a boot manager for that, too. -- David W. Fenton | http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates | http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
