Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:42:16 -0600 (GMT+6)
From: john [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
you can just install it. 2000 will set up 98 so you can use it.
john
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, Matt Hanson wrote:
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 05:57:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Hanson
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:26:53 -0800 (PST)
From: David Chien [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Is there no way of installing W98 onto another
partition after installing W2K, and then getting W2K
to dual-boot both? I've put in so many hours setting
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 13:10:08 +0100
From: Philip Nienhuis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Matt Hanson wrote:
start with W98 on drive 1, and do a fresh installation
of W2K on drive 0.
But I do want to have a thinned down copy of W2K on
the system too
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 05:57:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
I just realized that I may not be able to do a new installation of W2K on
the 1st primary partition of this 40GB HDD, and have it dual-boot the copy
of W98 that's
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:31:41 +0100
From: Philip Nienhuis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Matt Hanson wrote:
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 05:57:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
I just
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:47:59 +0100
From: Philip Nienhuis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Matt Hanson wrote:
...snip
(On boot managers:)
Philip Nienhuis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
...snip
But: why do you hide primary partitions? On my
...snip
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:33:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Sounds like the best way to go at this point is to
start with W98 on drive 1, and do a fresh installation
of W2K on drive 0.
But I do want to have a thinned down
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:31:35 +0100
From: Philip Nienhuis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Matt Hanson wrote:
.snip
Philip Nienhuis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
What are you using as a boot manager Philip...
something in W2000?
OS/2 boot manager
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:53:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Hey Philip... I'm going to have to save this, and go
offline and digest it all. I've been having more
problems of all sorts in the past few days, and some
may
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:23:56 -0800 (PST)
From: David Chien [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
I think you've posted that before, haven't you David?
What are you using for a boot loader? I was
PQ's boot program. But that doesn't work with EZ-Drive last
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:30:04 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Philip,
Thank you for your very informative explanation of
how Windows 2000 deals with partitions. It explains a
good deal of the problems I've been experiencing
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 19:48:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Well, I've ended up with W2000 on the 1st primary
partition, W98 on a 1GB primary partition after it,
and the remainder of the drive space on logical
drives.
I had
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:47:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe you have it reversed - W2K will run from a
logical partition, W98
won't.
Hmm... I just read somewhere where someone
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:02:40 +0100
From: Philip Nienhuis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Matt Hanson wrote:
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:46:56 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Question on W2000 partitioning
I want to create
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:23:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Jim Drouillard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
Normally Win98 will run on any partition except that
io.sys, msdos.sys, autoexec.bat, config.sys, etc. must
be on first partition of first hard drive. If Win2k
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:46:56 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Question on W2000 partitioning
I want to create a new partition and restore a W2000
image to it in order to test making it run faster.
Will W2000 run from a logical/extended partition? Or
must it be run
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:00:28 EST
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
In a message dated 11/23/2004 6:48:40 PM Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I want to create a new partition and restore a W2000
image to it in order to test making
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:36:44 -0800 (PST)
From: David Chien [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIB] Question on W2000 partitioning
I believe you have it reversed - W2K will run from a logical partition, W98
won't. But any combination can be accommodated with Boot Magic, or some
other
boot
18 matches
Mail list logo
