Linux.com

I have had some success with XP and Linux. However, I installed XP first - creating two partitions and installing XP on the first, leaving the second unformatted. I then installed Linux on the second partition. I installed LILO on the second partition as well, and made the second partition active. When I boot my machine, LILO kicks in and allows me to boot XP and Linux.

#

I never really had any problems, other than XP piss poor disk numbering system that makes the primary partition on my first hard drive DRIVE F:! I have to say I had mixed emotions about XP, personally I thought my 12 year old sister designed that ugly GUI. But it is the quickest booting version of Windows I have seen. However, it will not perform a warm reboot. Also, why not steal a copy of windows of some ftp and get the real version, since apparently you already have a legitimate license with the restore CD, you should be able to download the whole thing. Last but not least the VMware my school bought me solves this problem nicely as you do not have to reboot.

#

Windows XP is based on Technology from Windows NT.

In my experience - install XP first - then create partitions to install Linux.

WHen Linux is installed you need to make an image file that can be installed on the Windows C: drive.

The Windows NT/XP boot manager can then be set to run this image when Linux is to be ran. (this way LILO is not needed and prior to XP you couldn't run Linux any other way with NT.

This method of installation is well documented in the linux community on "How to install NT and Linux". It works for me - I no longer need LILO. I boot Linux using the XP boot manager.

#

Not true, I choose to boot Win2k with GRUB (and have previously used LILO). I don't know if it was possible with NT 4 (probably is), but I like using LILO or GRUB to boot. It allows me to change kernels, etc and not have to create another image to transfer to the NTFS boot partition.

Just my two bucks.

#

I'm typing this from a dual boot NT4/Linux box, and aside from the usual NT installation nightmares (I know, I know - if you are wise in the ways of Windows it's a piece of cake, I'm sure), I didn't run into any problems. I've used both LILO and GRUB. Just install NT first and at the front, leaving an unformatted partition for your favorite flavour.

- eddy the lip

#

I use to be a WinXP user. I had a dual boot system until ... one day WinXP froze twice and crashed once. That was it! NO MORE WINDOWS, I WANTED TO BE FREE

#

I hit the wrong button ugh! I wanted to be free So I went completely Linux over the wekend, no more Windows.

#

IM STUPID
BUT XP PRO HAS NONE OF THESE PROBLEMS
LIMEWIRE KAZAA(LITE) IRC HOTLINE
get it free while its hot

Never in my life Have i spent a penny on MS software, but do remember to support the GOOD programs you enjoy eveyday sans Windows

#

OK, I got your's ideea. I haven't tryied XP because I feel good with my 2k and Me who lives beside my LINUK, all three on the same system. It's insane that XP takes over all computer resources and let you no choice of install (partitioning your drive and choose where to install it like the user friendly 2k, or the components you want to install). In this case it's better to drop their product and I think that they are not as dumb to do that (it's horrible). Microsoft is doing lots of stupid things but not as stupid. Anyway, here is how to install a multiboot system, as simple as never before:
1. make the first partition of your drive about 50 Mb, primary, to mount there /boot (using partition magc or linux's fdisk)
2. make with a windoze 98/Me a second primary partition (3-5Gb are enough) and format it with fat32
3. use partition magic or other tool to create the third primary partition, ntfs, you make it active, and install there windows 2k
4. make active the windoze 98/Me active, boot that os's CD and install there windoze 98/Me
5. make the first partition active and boot the with the linux CD to install it and mount that partition /boot (this works to the most of the distros today, like Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSE or Caldera)
6. then within the linux, once you've already created the first 3 primary partitions, you can create the fourht primary partition as extended where you can create all the other partitions, swap, root, /usr, /home and fat32 or NTFS for your windows data.

Brefing, you make the partitions 1. Linux, 2. win9x, 3. win2k, and install in reverse, 1. win2k, 2. win9x and finally 3. Linux.

It's well known that 2k and XP want to knock out other partitions, but once you've installed you remove from disk manager the acces to the other partitions and after that you may install quaietly the other OSes. This worked allways so far for me, but still haven't tested on XP (by the way, what good XP?)

Good lock!

#

Actually, the point is that Compaq (and Toshiba for that matter) have given him OEM rescue disks instead of an actual working copy of XP. When you go to install XP on your laptop, it formats your entire disk and reloads XP as the manufacturer had originally set it up (crappy x-tras and all). No questions, no prompts, just format, install , reboot. That's all you can do. Basically, it forces you you buy a full copy of XP or a windows partition program that can handle NTFS. ANd it sucks.

#

your a dumb nut

#

It's not so much that XP takes over as it is that Compaq's restore disc takes over. Restore discs are designed to restore the computer back to the condition it was in when it left the factory, not as a means to reinstall Windows next to another OS. It's designed for those who don't know what partitions are.

#

if someone doesn't know what a partition is, that someone shoudn't be using a computer at all.

#

Why? Yeah that's right- there's no reason.

#

Acording to your logic, if you don't know what an electron is, you shouldn't be using electricity. If you don't know what the G spot is, you shouldn't be having sex.

#

You are right:

If you do not know the dangers of electricity, you shouldn't use electricity at all . Y'all know about the basic rules in electricity usage:

- do not mix electricity AND water,
- do not insert stuff in electricity outlets,
- do not let children play with electricity,
- take caution when accessing the inside of electric machinery...

And, about sex... you should better know a few things before engaging into (good) sex.

- sexual transmited diseases
- erogenous areas,
- contraception
- foreplay,
- human libido
- your partner's sexual interests

And for computers, same thing:

- learn how a computer works (partitions and all)
- understand what an OS is
- know what a filesystem, files and directories are
- ...

My 2 cents

#

Computers aren't the ends but the means to doing useful work. Most people can't afford to waste their time learning the details of how their computer works expecially when they've shelled out around a grand for one after being told it was going to save them time and work. Of course, if they're gulible enough to believe a sales person that tells them that...

#

Yes, so this means that if you have XP installed, you can resize its partition and install Linux on the remaining space. This should work fine....until your XP installation gets corrupted, in which case you will need to use your restore CD, which will wipe out your Linux partition(s) and leave you with the XP setup you started with initially. Nice, huh?

I believe the only way around this is to have the full installation disk for XP. Good luck getting it from your computer OEM. You would think that since you paid for the OS, that you are entitled to it, but I have heard of people having a lot of trouble getting the full install CD.

#

Well you already own a license so couldn't you just get a copy from say a frield, or ebay?? i'm sure MS wouldn't see it that way, but that's how it seems it should be.

#

Unfortunately, because the kernel developers were too shortsighted to work enough on write support for NTFS, there is no way to do this in any distribution. You must buy a partition manager program.

If Linus et. al had planned ahead there wouldn't be this problem since your Linux installer could simply resize the NTFS partition for you.

#

No, when your XP corrupts itself, you restore from backups. WHAT? You have no backups and have to reinstall from factory CD? You dumass. That will teach you. Backups are NOT a new concept.

#

This comment is absolutely correct. Newsforge should be ashamed for printing such nonsense. Almost every OEM restore disc I have ever seen does the exact same thing. Manufacturers used to provide multiple discs. One that was a complete system restore and one that was an application restore, usually with an option to install Windows only.
I am an advid Linux user and the local advocate within my company, but I can not understand why someone would blame Microsoft for this when it is clearly the OEM doing it. Is it an official Microsft cd? No. That should be your first clue that Microsoft is not resposible for this.
Blaming Microsoft for this that and the other at the drop of a hat, is really going to hurt Linux based OS's in the long run.
Newsforge should be more responsible in reviewing what is submitted to be posted.

#

I concurr (ack i hate spelling is that right). This is classic anti microsoft dribble, I mean dont get me wrong you can bash microsoft all the f*** you want but frankly I dont care. Maybe the author should have made a call into his laptop distributor, but from what Ive read I bet it's written for kicks (I mean common what did you expect from a disk that has a description of resetting your computer back to factory defaults?) geez wtf am reading newsforge in the first place. word of note (in case this article isn't just a plug by a linux zealot), dont go blaming everything on microsoft all the fricken time thats the one god damn thing that i hate about the linux/open source community and maybe you should use some common sense and phone your god damn tech support asking them what the disc really does.

Sorry for any harsh comments I may have written, but... ohwell.

#

It was MS that instigated this practice, dude. The alleged cut in tech-support time (through not walking you through OS installs) is a front; by not supplying you with a real OS install dis[k/c/q], they're supposedly cutting down on 'casual piracy' (i.e. kids won't run off a copy of XP/whatever for their schoolfriends if they know it'll zap the entire hard disk. This hasn't stopped any number of illegal copies of WinXP being passed around, so has been an all-but-total failure). Try asking your OEM for an *real* install disk and you'll be told they can't give you one: this is because their OEM deal with MS *explicitly prohibits them doing so*.
If the OS goes boom after a couple of months and you have to use this restore disk, what happens to all the crap you've created/downloaded since you bought the machine ? That's right, it gets overwritten, and do you know *any* non-technical users who make backups ?
Admittedly this isn't made clear in the article, but the root cause of this problem is MS's business tactics. Any solution would require either a legal slapping-down (now highly unlikely) or the combined resistance of the larger PC builders (just as unlikely given any manager's total inability to actually see the 'bigger picture' the waffle on about).

#

I got a Dell notebook. I didn't have to ask them
for a real install CD, because that's what I got
with the computer. The only restriction is that
it won't install on a non-Dell PC. Fine with me.

So apparently Roblimo's problems are the fault of
Compaq, not M$.

#

I have Compaq Evo at work that came with Windows XP. It came with a set of 2 Compaq restore discs. The first was the boot disc, the second was the OS disc. When I tried to boot from the OS disc (out of curiosity, more than anything), I found that it was bootable, just like the XP retail install disc. I installed it along side Linux and it behaved itself nicely.

#

Or at least didn't a year or so ago...I wiped the HD of a Gateway box, installed Linux (leaving a nice FAT32 partition on hda1), and then put Win98 on with no problems; I only had to remember to leave hda1 for Windows because it won't install to any other location...

#

Yes it is Microsoft! They do not permit OEMs who license directly from them to distribute full install media, just the "recovery partition" or recovery CDs. The rationale being reduced piracy. It was covered in articles/columns on several sites (Infoworld, PC-World, etc.) around 5/1/2000. One example column,

http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/05/01/ 000501opfoster.xml

Don't believe me? Google "Medialess OS Policy" yourself.

#

Why do all OEM versions have these kinds of differences from the retail version then? Not only Compaq but also Packard Bell/Dell/HP/IBM/Gateway?

It probably is somehow in the reference version they get from Microsoft.

#

The restore CD partitions the hard drive and then copies over an image of a fresh "install" of the operating system, be it 98, ME, NT, etc. I would be interested to know if Partition Commander worked. The last I heard it didn't work to well on NTFS.

#

Why don't you just get to the point that you are an avid Linux user.

It is obvious to me as it was from the previous two replies that you need to load Windows XP first, leaving yourself an adequate partition for Linux.

It's like the old sayiing:
"You have to learn to crawl (Windows) before you can walk (Linux)..."

Adios Muchacho !!

#

Hi, hows things in Redmond. If XP was more friendly it wouldn't touch other partitions on a drive. To bad you guys don't know how to write software very well. You have some nice interfaces, but the underlying programs are just not very good.

#

While I agree that "recover CDs" should be able to do more than vapourize your entire disk drive (whatabout just reinstalling Windows and its components? whatabout leaving alone MyDocs and already installed software? you know, the smarter technology that you would expect from a company that invests US$ billions in development), I strongly disagree about their interfaces being "nice".

Some are functional, some are bad. But nice? Get real, buy an advanced machine with *BSD (say MacOS X) for a nice interface.

Windows nice... bah. Next week, they'll say that McDonalds is a luxury restaurant. Insane.

#

Recovery CD's CAN do more. The disks that came with my Thinkpad allow me to leave partitions as is OR repartition (this is win2K, not XP, but the fact remains.)

It's up to the computer mfr to do things right.

#

That's a very good idea. Too bad you can't "upgrade" Windows without having to reinstall your primary OS. (I actually got Windows 98 to install without destroying my data - I only have to hide the first hard drive with the BIOS to boot it).

#

Look.

In today's day and age it is necessary to install and use both Windows and Linux Operating systems/software apps.

I use and boot into both OS's when needed.

I would point out though, that Linux does not get those annoying STOP messages, crashes or anything else like that related to Windows OS's.

Linux is one of the most reliable and stable OS's known to man.

It is however still necessary to boot into Windows when needed - I am not prejudice or biased towards or against any OS - but I have pointed out a few comments that others might hold.

#

if linux, unix, BSD or any Os apart from windows overwrote other OS's when installed, all you avid windows users would complain heavily that this was a bug and it should be fixed, but when windows does this , then it is not a problem with windows, but a problem with the way we are installing our dual boot system. Do you know what double standards are?

#

I guess the article was meant to highlight what happens when you try and install Windows 2nd after Linux.

I have XP and Gentoo running on a laptop but I install WinXP first using it's own partition manager then create the Linux partitions after.

I have to agree that Windows should not behave in this way and I am amazed the prosecution never complained about this in the anti-trust trial. However, I beleive BeOS is taking MS to court over this and other misdeeds. The only problem is Palm are only going to allow BeOS to exist for 2 years to fight this and MS have a knack of making litigation last considerably longer than this.

#

..although it could be either.

You sure that you had a full copy of XP? Many of those 'restore cd's' are just images... the behavior they mention is all they can do.

#

Well, gosh! It says on all the literature that this computer comes with "Windows XP," so if what I got isn't something that behaves like a retail copy of Windows XP, someone is pulling a fast one not only on me but on the many other journalists who have exprienced the same problem while trying to install Linux alongside XP.

Hmmm....

- Robin

#

Well, gosh! It says on all the literature that this computer comes with "Windows XP," so if what I got isn't something that behaves like a retail copy of Windows XP, someone is pulling a fast one not only on me but on the many other journalists who have exprienced the same problem while trying to install Linux alongside XP.

Dude. Where the hell have you been? This isn't something new. Manufacturers were including these 'restore' CD's when I worked at Best Buy in 1995. You might as well replace Linux with OS/2, and sign it's Roblimo - TeamOS/2. To anyone with half a wit, you come off sounding like a fanatic who refuses to see what's right in front of you.

NOW, having basically said, "You're a Moron", I WILL give you that Microsoft restricts some OEM's from handing out full CD's. Then again, if you were resourceful, and somewhat knowledgable, you would not only KNOW that this practice exists, but also researched who you could get full install CD's from.

What I don't understand is, if XP was already installed, why didn't you just chop off the empty space into a new partition, and install Linux there? You would never have known that the 'Recovery CD' actually returns you computer to it's purchased state. (Wiping everything, including any Windows Updates)

You're article is false and misleading. Did you get turned down for a job at MS?

-Havokmon

#

What I don't understand is, if XP was already installed, why didn't you just chop off the empty space into a new partition, and install Linux there?

I had the same problem when trying to make XP live with Linux on the Advent laptop bought from PC World. It is not simply a case of chopping off the empty space because there is no empty space to chop off; XP's filesystem hijacks the whole drive.

Utilities such as Partition Magic 7 claim to be able to resize these partitions, but I never tried them out, I simply wiped the drive and installed Win98 for the times when I had to use Windows software.

#

I have both working on a Dell Inspiron 4100. Here's what I did to set it up.

1. I installed XP. I just let it do it's thing, what ever it felt like doing.
2. I installed partition magic 7.0 and used it to shrink the size of my ntfs partition to half it's size.
3. I then installed linux (Red Hat 7.3). Used the Disk Druid to handle my linux partitioning. I told Linux to have Grub be my os loader. (although I have used lilo with quite a bit of success)

4. Then I enjoyed a smoothe operating dual-booting laptop.

#

Well, here's your problem -- you were using a restored CD, which is designed to return the machine to its state when it shipped from the manufacturer. Of course it's going to wipe the disk and turn it into one big XP partition -- that's its job. Save yourself the headaches & use PartitionMagic or something to carve out space for Linux after XP is installed.

I honestly don't think you'd have any evidence relevant to the antitrust trial unless you used a fresh XP box set and it did the same thing.

#

This is correct. This has been a common practice of many OEM's for a while now. My Dell Laptop's restore CD for Win2K does the same. It's actually advantageous for most end-users who don't want to do the dual-boot thingie; automatically sets up the machine with all the drivers and such. For power-users like us.

And Roblimo, don't give me the "I'm not a power user 'cause I use Mandrake" crap. You are a power user because:

1) You care enough about the OS you are running to change it.
2) You are aware of the fact that Windows OS's need to be on the first partition.
3) You knew enough to solve that problem (there are other ways as well).

In reality, a system shouldn't have to be dual boot. If it is, the OS you have chosen does not meet your needs. I use Linux on ALL of my servers, my laptop, and one of my desktops. I run Windows on one desktop for games -- it's basically a game console with a keyboard and mouse. Some power users dual boot because they want to be able to use the applications of both. I'd love to have a better office suite for Linux (OpenOffice/StarOffice is OK, but lacks polish, KOffice lacks in features.) I'd love to have more games for Linux (like StarCraft). When a lot more games come out for Linux, I will dump Windows completely.

#

Just a question. If you really want starcraft in linux, why not get winex from transgaming? It runs starcraft, as indicated on this page:

http://www.transgaming.com/gamepage.php?gameid=6

Ofcourse, the full version of winex costs money, but it's a lot cheaper than a windows license. And if games are truly the only reason you're keeping a windows box around, then maybe you could save some money by using winex instead of the 'doze. Obviously, that's all while assuming that you ARE paying for your windows copy ;)

Same for office. If it's word, excel or powerpoint you need, then crossover office works reasonably well.

Why is it that linux users are willing to pay for software while using windows, but suddenly become unable to do so the moment they're on linux?

#

I want native games and apps. I've seen stuff run under WineX on more powerful machines than my own, and it just feels clunky. Native ports are what I'm interested in. Plus, it really doesn't let me vote with my dollars to gaming companies -- it tells them that they can keep making games Windows only, and people will use emulation to run them.

My copy of Windows came with my Laptop. I'm no longer using it on my laptop, so I installed it on my Desktop. That is fair use, even though it is not permitted by the liscence.

As far as purchasing Linux software, I've purchased 6 Linux games so far, and that's going to be 7 when Neverwinter Nights hits the shelf. The last games I've purchased for Windows were Starcraft and Baldur's gate, both of which were released 3 or more years ago. Now I refuse to purchase games that are not either Linux native or for a console system. I vote with my dollars.

#

The problem isn't the Restore CD. The problem is the absense of an XP distribution.

HE PAID FOR XP. It was part of the cost of the expensive laptop. But now, if he wants to dual-boot, he'll have to PAY FOR A RETAIL COPY as well!

The fact that MS has orchestrated this with Dell, Compaq, and others is just more monopoly power at work. Yes, it's win-win for the computer manufacturer and for MS. But it's a big lose situation for the customer. Only a monopoly could get away with it.

#

Nope... he did not pay for the boxed retail version. If you read the liscence agreement carefully, the copy of Windows that came with the PC is forever attatched to that PC. It is a special OEM liscence that Microsoft gives out at a greatly discounted rate (do you really think Dell, Compaq, etc. would be willing to fork over $250 per Windows liscence, and $500 for office?)

This sucks, but it's how OEM's can afford Windows. No point flaming... build your own PC. Eventually, Windows will cost too much, and hardware will cost very little, and someone will provide a low-cost alternative.

#

While this is a restore-cd issue, it is a problem caused by Microsoft. Remember when you used to get an OEM copy of the Microsoft OS that came with you machine IN ADDITION to the restore disk?

Why has that disk disappeared? Could it be that the computer manufacturing business has gotten so competitive that all vendors are cutting costs by leaving out the extra $0.35 cd? Or has Microsoft "encouraged" vendors to ony include the restore cd?

The official Microsoft story about the missing OS disk is that it is part of their master plan to eliminate Windows piracy from the universe.

So, it's not anticompetitive, it's antipiracy. And the DOJ's settlement is full of nice big holes that allow Microsoft to contiute to implement anticompetitive actions, as long as they rename them first.

#

"Remember when you used to get an OEM copy of the Microsoft OS that came with you machine IN ADDITION to the restore disk?"


  In a small number of cases the "Widnows disk" that came with those machines had the setup files removed so they were useless for anything but accessing the cab files when you do somethig that requires the Windows disk.

#

I have to disagree with this article. I have a triple boot machine with Linux,xp and win98se and have had no troble installing any one of the operating systems.I can only say win98 needs to be installed first. as for winXP and Linux it doesnt seem to matter as i have done it both ways and re-installed different versions of linux to boot.
Its certainly possible
=)

#

Did you do it with a Restore CD or with a full XP distribution?

People who get these laptops get them with a Restore CD alone. If they want a distribution that allows them to dual boot, they need to buy XP AGAIN to do so.

#

As others have posted, this is the OEM's restore disc at fault rather than Microsoft. I have a Toshiba laptop; their restore discs use an OEM version of Ghost which can restore the Windows system partition without destroying the pre-existing partition table (assuming enough disc space - about 2-3G should do).

#

I have a Toshiba Sattelite Pro 4600 which comes with restore CDs that allows no such thing! You put the CD in and sit back. You never get the oportunity to suggest partitioning...

#

I have been running WXP, W2K, and Linus, happily together on the same hard drive for weeks, no problems at all.

You just need to make sure u partition the hard drive while installing XP, to have as many partitions as OS'es, and install Linus last.

#

"I also wonder if the upcoming Service Pack for XP that will supposedly make it easier for users to choose non-Microsoft email, Web browsing, instant messaging, and multimedia software will address the dual-boot problem. Supposedly Microsoft is releasing this Service Pack specifically to address antitrust concerns, so one would hope so."

You would think so, however if you read the proposed EULA for the service pack it only confirms that MS is still trying to make life difficult for those that want choice. Installing non-Microsoft software negates any hope of support for XP. Hopefully this will change once the service pack is officially published.

#

Could you provide a link to this proposed EULA?

#

I've got to agree with the people who say it is the restore disk. Those cd's are designed to put the entire computer back into the state that the OEM sent it out. Although I disagree with the poster who said that if you don't know what a partition is, you shouldn't be using a computer. You don't need to know, nor should you, what an electron gun is in order to watch tv. You don't need to know how an alternator works to drive a car. BUT if you are going to dual boot your computer or customize your car, you should be familiar with the componenets.

I've been using XP Professional (I assume you are using Home, but you don't say) with Linux quite nicely.

In fact, I was impressed by the fact that XP Professional was the first version of win nt that didn't obliterate an existing grub or lilo. Both NT4 and W2K would wipe out lilo. Didn't have that happen with XP.

#

Why would you expect a restore CDto do nothing more than restore windows Xp and wipe rest of the system..thats its job!

Please befoe opening mouth ..think a little it will not hurt your body!

#

The issue here is that the Restore CD is the ONLY version of WIndows XP that comes with these laptops. If you want to install XP and Linux, you can:

(1) Install XP, shrink the partitions, install Linux, and pray that it never breaks because the restore CD will wipe out the entire disk.

(2) Try to hack the Restore CD to install XP like someone else in one of the comments says is possible by going to the Compaq website. (I hope it's true; I don't know)

or (3) BUY YET ANOTHER COPY OF XP (a real retail copy)!

The author has every right to complain. He has been dealt a piece of crap designed to hem him in. And the design of this crap comes from Redmond, as well as from Compaq (and other OEMs).

He is using the ONLY CD that is provided. He shouldn't need to buy XP AGAIN just because he'd like to dual boot!

Maybe you should learn a few things before opening your mouth, yourself.

#

BUt the guy who wrote this article blamed Windows XP on this. when it was the OEM who did it. Microsoft just makes the OS and produces the actual OS CD's. but these are REstore CD's designed to restore the hd back to an original state

#

You're dumb, dude.

#

"Many of them, of course, blamed Linux for it, and used this as another chance to pontificate about how Linux might be okay for ordinary people, someday, if it were only easier to install, set up, and use. "

This attitude that linux is hard to install really bothers me. How many of those people who have had problems installing linux have actually tried to install Windows? Usually it comes with the PC. The average user never has to install windows, so they have no clue how difficult it can be. I've installed many operating systems on a number of machines and more often than not, it's Windows that has the issues. I just wish people would use a fair comparison.

#

Well, I also got a number of OS:s to co-exist. Although all MS-products after W98SE allways required SPECIAL treatment and thats probably what I would call monopolistic behaviour... Who wouldn't?

#

Amen. I've done many Windows reinstalls. WinME takes at least three times as long to install as RedHat, with a few reboots thrown in as well. Then after the install is done, it's driver time. One for the Radeon. One for the Soundblaster. One for the NIC. And so on, and so on... each requiring a reboot after install. On the other hand, I can throw RedHat in, go mow the lawn (with a break every 10 minutes or so to come in and swap CDs), and it's good to go. Distros like Mandrake, RedHat, and others pass the "mom" test (I have no doubt my mom could install them, because she knows how to swap a CD), but a Windows install would be out of her league.

#

Although all MS-products after W98SE allways required SPECIAL treatment and thats probably what I would call monopolistic behaviour... Who wouldn't?

#

For all of those people pointing out that the problem is with the OEM restore disc, I think it should be noted that a full version of MSWindows will add several hundred dollars to the price of a notebook. Concerns about dualbooting with the OEM version of XP kept me from buying a Fujitsu Lifebook. With the increased price for Windows 2k, there was no reason not to buy an ibook. OSX is nowhere near as hostile as MSXP.

I hope those bozos over at Forbes are reading this article. They should seriously head over to <A HREF="http://www.emperorlinux.com/">Emperor</a emperorlinux.com> or somesuch and try installing Windows on one of those machines, and then write up their comparative review.

#

Well from what I am reading here I glad I never buy PC's with windows preinstalled if this the sort of service you get!

#

As most people have noted, the problem is with the OEM restore CDs. By default they delete all partitions on the hard disk and then install winxp. If you had done some research on the internet first you would have found a simple solution. Now I don;t know what model compaq laptop you have but there are instructions on the following web site to install winxp from the restore cds without removing all existing partitions.

http://www.cs.mun.ca/~michael/compaq-710.html

#

It's great that you found someone's unsupported instructions on hacking the Restore CD to do something useful with it.

However, there is no way in hell that ANYONE should have to do this. Customers shouldn't need to look for archane ways to install software on the machines they bought. This is another case of Microsoft deciding what the customer can and cannot do.

In any almost any other field, customers who are treated with such disdain by a supplier can simply go to another supplier. But, up until now, the MS monopoly power has made that impossible.

The world is changing, though. Open Source is beginning to show up as an alternative in the mainstream of computing. It's time to put an end to the arrogance from Redmond.

#

I have installed a SUSE 7.3 on a WindowXP and it work. Starting from lilo you select windows XP or SUSE 7.3. The only trouble, I miss the window XP DVD driver

#

IT'S THE OEM RESTORE CD!!!!
I have a linux/XP Pro dual boot. I have installed XP first, 2nd, either way without issue.

f there is an i386 folder on the restore CD, copy that to your FAT32 partition and run the XP setup from there, that's what I do to install Dell XP Pro on non-Dell's. ;) There's definitely a partition tool built into the standard versipoon of WinXP.

#

This my advise to OEM. Sell your computers with two hard-drives, which having different OS - Linux and M$win. Than it woold be just a BIOS option to swith the boot between systems. As you can understand, the advise work not only for OEM, but it works generally.

I have two hard-drives at one of my computers and I've never had any problem on it. I can re-install OS on each drive separately and I can do any partiioning I want. Today hard-drives are much cheaper than time I would spend to solve such partition compatibility problems.

What if I want more than 2 systems? Well, some of systems are more compatible to each other than others. Sometimes I mix different Linuxes and BSDs on the same drive (on different partitions). Sometimes I mix winME with win2k with winXP on the same drive (again, on different partitions). But I hate to put "enimies" on one partition map :)

So, that's the advise for everyone who wants to mix "unmixable". And that's the advise to OEM. Remember: two hard-drives.

#

I have tried it both ways, I have had no problem making my SuSE Linux 8 and WinXP coexist. Boot XP from the CD, use it to create two partitions on your /hda and leave the second partition empty (do not format!) XP installs itself on the first partition OK, then install Linux on the second partition. For some reason Win XP wants to be default in the LILO list, once you go into Linux and do that you'll have no problem.
With two drives its basically the same process, I have XP installed in /hda and Linux on /hdb.

Manuel

#

How did you do this? I installed XP on my hdc and have Linux on my hda. When I installed XP, I did so with the power cord removed from my hda so that XP would have absolutely no way to mess with Linux. XP runs and boots fine, as long as the BIOS does not detect hda. Linux runs and boots fine. However, I have been unable to get lilo to boot XP. Is is possible to boot XP off the second hard drive? Do I just have some error in how I set up my lilo.config?

#

I have not had problems installing Linux and Windows XP before.. although I did it in reverse order that you insist of doing it, I install windows first and leave a nice, large, empty partition for me to deal with later in the linux setup. Or it is basically that windows hates not being on the first partition of the hdd, so you could probably create the fat32 partition first, and then create all of the linux parts, and that may work.

#

If my "restore" CDs are in any way like yours, the only thing they contain are disk images that restore the HD to the "exact" state it shipped from the factory. I had WinME on one partition, and Mandrake on another. ME died, so I had to "recover" using the CDs. The CD verified that I wanted to do so, then fdisked, repartitioned, and reinstalled exactly as the drive came from the factory, with one HUGE ME partition, and one 2 gig "Sys_restore" partition. THAT, not the behaviour of XP, could be the problem. (The "recover" CDs were even made using PowerQuest disk imaging software.)

#

Installng XP after Linux is a pain but can be done. I was already dual booting 98 and slackware, I was able to fool it into "upgrading" my 98, even though it didn't transfer any setting ove it did add the 98 to the XP boot menu. XP also rearranged my partitions as well, took me a while to figure out why my Linux was trashed, but changing the fstab to match the new layout fixed that. What happened is, for example, /home moved from /dev/hda9 to /dev/hda5. This would have been OK if it had not also swapped the swap partition with another partition, so the disk check at startup got LOTS of errors. Maybe thats what happened in this case ?

Golden rule though, is if you can, install the Windows OS first.

Also, make sure you have a decent boot disk, so that you can boot up into LInux and rerun LILO to get the boot menu back.

Andy

#

You are assuming he has an actual XP distribution. He does not.

He has a Restore CD, not a real installation kit. Compaq laptops don't come with real installation kits.

Restore CDs obliterate the whole damn machine. That's what they are designed to do. It's great for OEMs, but it sucks for customers.

#

I have a gateway that is dual booting with XP and redhat 7.3. I also had a compaq which is noe in the recylce bin that was also dual boot. Are you using the COmpaq restore disk? If so you will wont be able to load xp by itsself. Try this load XP on the first PArtion, the install Linux afterwards. Install Grub in the Master boot record, it should work. You will then need to add a lable to Winxp partion using grub.conf. There is a how-to it worked for me.

#

I was able to boot XP/Linux/Win98SE at the same time with no problem whatsoever. I just installed Win98SE on the primary HD all by it's lonesome, that was easy. Then I slapped WinXP onto my second harddrive, similarly easy. Then I just used Mandrake 8.2's DiskDrake to partition the second harddrive so it's 50/50 XP and Linux (Both HD's 10gb each).

I would say the only problem is that the person was using "restore" discs. Not a good idea if you ask me. Note to all, I'm a complete n00b, I've only been toying w/Linux for about 3-4 months. Anyways, it just seems a lot, no a ton easier to just use the partition tool during Linux installation to partition the XP harddrive (provided the distro even comes with one... the ones that I use do). I don't think you can fault M$ for this one, and I don't particularly like them at all.

First post here, too bad I'm at school and can't create an account.

#

I also bought my wife a new computer running XP. After playing with it for awhile, I never got it to share my network drivers or printers very well. (OK, I didn't try _real_ hard ... I didn't think I should have to, win98 had been sharing just fine. why does MS do this? ).

I was genuinely interested in allowing XP to keep running at home, but it just wouldn't play nicely with Linux.

so after a 30minute MDK8.2 format & install, everything is working on my network.

and my wife is pleased with her new computer (openoffice, mozilla, evolution).

-m

#

...but only if it's based on a well-founded argument. This guy's complaining because his laptop's restore CDs restore it to its original state, and blames it on MS? What a muppet!

Remember that paper thing that came with the laptop? The thing with the Compaq logo and all those words in it? You know, the thing you didn't read? That might give you a clue what the Restore disks are for... ;-)

#

The problem is not the Restore CD. The problem is that the operating system HE PAID FOR -- XP -- is only available by doing the restore operation.

If they included a real XP distribution, he wouldn't have this problem. But the OEMs save on support costs this way and MS gets to extend its monopoly by preventing users from loading other OS's.

He has every right to bitch! He spent LOTS of good money only to have his vendor prevent him from doing what he needs to do.

He should receive an OEM copy of XP. But, now he'll have to pay for it again if he wants a copy.

#

The problem is that he's expecting a restore CD to work for this situation. Yes, you should get an actual copy of the OS with the computer since you payed for it, but it's that topic is completely unrelated to what the news story is supposed to be about. This guy is supposed to be complaining about Windows XP not playing nicely with Linux. The fault lies within his assumption that a restore CD is just as good as an actual copy of the OS. It's not M$'s fault in any way other than the stupid idea of not giving people an actual OS CD with their system. Or is that just the manufacturer's great idea?

#

Stupid idea? No. Smart idea, from MS's viewpoint.

The smart idea is to lock people in to Windows. Microsoft LIKES THIS.

It's not an unrelated topic. Microsoft and the big OEMs have developed a scheme that keeps people locked into Windows, while reducing the OEM support cost. It's a win-win solution -- unless your the customer.

Yes, you can BUY -- for even more money -- a version of XP that will coexist with Linux. But then you get to pay the Microsoft tax twice.

The problem isn't XP itself, it's the packaging of it. And that's Microsoft's fault. If they didn't want the OEMs to do this, they would order them not to. But they haven't.

Why? Because screwing the customer is good for business when you are a monopoly.

#

Of course Windows XP(or any version for that matter) is going to cause problems with an existing Linux installation. You have to install Linux second (as many have posted before me).

... and if you can use Linux, but can't figure out Windows, you need psychological help. This whole article just seemed like a Microsoft Windows bashing fest to me.

#

It's more than "install Linux second". What happens if XP gets tubed later? He has two choices:

1. Either wipe out THE ENTIRE PC and start over (recover CD).

or

2. Buy a RETAIL VERSION of XP and install from there.

Sorry, that's monopoly power at work. Few other vendors could get away with such arrogant behavior.

Compaq shares the blame for not providing an XP install CD, but they are doing it with Microsoft's cooperation.

#

Nobody KNOWS that M$ meant for it to be this way. Of course, one can't rule out that idea.

#

... and if you can use Linux, but can't figure out Windows, you need psychological help. This whole article just seemed like a Microsoft Windows bashing fest to me.

Not necessarily! I've had laptops where I had no trouble at all getting Linux installed and running. Windows 98 was a completely different story, and required a huge amount of work (going out to the web, trying to find drivers, etc) to get working. Windows is not the epitome of user-friendliness that everyone seems to assume. It can be downright illogical in it's user interface sometimes.... though I think that sometimes that's just due to moving menu items around so that people think they are buying different software.

#

Windows has always behaved like this: from 95 upwards. Im doubtful if it is deliberate merely an inept installation process (but Micro$oft ebing Micro$oft its also plausible). I always put duhs on first and then linux not the othr way round as you did.

#

I order to get read/write access to all Windows files from Linux, I first created a FAT32 partition using a Win ME boot floppy.

Using a Win ME floppy was the only way I could get my 80 GB IDE drive FAT32 formatted properly.

I then installed Mandrake Linux on the remaining disk space.

It works fine.

/Kenneth

#

I havent bought a name-brand PC in over 5 years since 1996. I buy whitebox from the local computer shop. Complete Open Architectute, and completely upgradeable. I don't have to mail my PC and be out of a PC for 3 weeks when the vid card gives up the ghost. I buy a $200 computer from the local computer shop, which is JUST as good as the $1,000 PC from Dell. Just doesnt have the pretty Dell label. And I can do what the hell I want with it. The sheer joy of not being locked into ANY vendor (be it Microsoft of the hellish Hardware OEMS).

#

A hacker will fix his problems and not say a word. A writer will create his own problems and write a story saying that he is not at fault.

#

1) install MS OS
2) if the MS OS insists on taking the whole disk, partition/resize the MS OS size
3) install Linux

Works great. I even use Lilo to start up.

#

Well done Mr Miller, you've gone up in my estimation considerably.

Why?

Because over the last few years Linux has been represented as "the choice of the geek elite" - hard to install and use and backed by a community that doesn't suffer fools lightly - and treats all outsiders as fools.

A good recent example of this mindset was the Forbes article and the inevitable responses, where the Windows using journalist attempts to install a dual boot Linux and grumbles that it doesn't come with Windows software etc....

In this article Rob has turned the tables - the article is written from the same type of closed mindset - but in this case Linux is the "norm" and it is Windows that is the geeky-hard-to-master, unfriendly-if-you-don't-know-it system.

OK, that is fairly obvious. But what is brilliant is in the tone and manner of the responses. In these, the mindset is again reversed - with the "clueless" journalist being castigated for his ignorance. Terms like "muppet" and so on being used. But where Rob was consciously turning the tables, all these responses are entirely unaware of the irony.

Of course how was the Windows neophyte to know that using the recovery disks would damage his system.... nothing in the documentation tells you that - and as a Linux user he is used to the ease of setting up a dual boot system with the Windows Media. But the "community" gives hin a good savaging for his ignorance.

What does this tell us? Possibly not a lot really. "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose" or something like that. But maybe it is something of a milestone for Linux - in that it has reached the point where it really is interchangable with Windows - not only technically, but in the kinds of communities of users that each has and those communities' attitudes to each other!

Bravo!!

P.S.

Of course it could be that Geeks just hate clueless journalists full stop. And I'm turning into Jon Katz.

#

I suspect that geeks don't like anyone they perceive as less knowledgeable than they are who dares open their mouth.

Hey, everyone has to screw up sometime. Mr. Miller's error was in assuming that the posters here were open-minded and/or kind.

#

Really, I think most geeks just hate clueless people all round, not just journalists, or is it that most geeks just hate people in general. I can't remember, so I just hate everybody and everything. Makes life simpler.

#

Yes I think you are spot on with your analysis.

But I guess also he was genuinely pissed off with his 'Recovery CD' !

#

There is one thing that might appear strange, but it's true. Windows is more inconvenient to use in some instances. The problem is that with windows and 99% of the software that runs on it, you get what other people give you. In linux, you have the sources, plus most of the linux software is made with flexibility in mind (which may or may not be a good thing). In windows, it's either not there, or you have to know some magical, undocumented registry entry that does the job. Needless to say that the default windows installation lacks the tools to do even the most basic stuff. Most of the problems in linux can be solved by piping some of the existing programs or wrinting simple scripts. In windows you have to write your own programs (supposing you have a compiler).
Plus, hey, windows is the thing where you have to write 2 pages of C code for the "Hello world" thing, and it eats 256K of memory when running.

Just a CS student's perspective...

#

Nope, you're full of shit. You did something real stupid to get Windows XP to do all that, pal. Not a smart person.

#

one of the /. guys would surely know a bit more about computers than the typical induhvidual.

I did what I had done successfully in the past: I wiped the hard drive and installed Linux, leaving a nice big FAT32 partition to hold Windows, right up front (because Windows doesn't like to be number two to another operating system, you know), then tried to reinstall XP from the "restore" CDs, which are all Microsoft and its slave companies feel you deserve these days instead of a complete, transferrable operating system.

XP automatically formatted my Linux partitions and installed itself right over them. I tried again. Same thing. I did another Linux install, but left the front half of the hard drive unformatted. Again, total takeover.

Er, yeah. Restore CDs have always wiped out the existing hard drive and restored a full drive to a specific state.

If you want dual boot: restore XP, shrink the XP partition, and then install Linux.

#

Well, you looked for it. Compaq does weird stuff. I had a friend who wanted NT and 98 on the same machine. He had a brand new Compaq and was surprized to see two partitions on his HD from the beginning, which he wiped out (since Me was installed). It turns out that the second one contained the data for the restore, while the restore CD only contained a program to copy the data between partitions.

And XP works fine with linux. The only thing is that you have to have windows on the first partition. I had ME and linux, upgraded to XP (with a clean install over the windows partition), booted with a floppy, ran LILO with the existing configuration, and it worked fine. XP may rewrite the MBR, but you can always reinstall LILO by booting from a floppy/CD.

#

Sure, it is possible to get XP and linux to coexist on this laptop, but the quesion is:

Would a normal user be able to do this?

Would a normal user be able to get linux up and running (on it's own) on this laptop? Yes

Would a normal user be able to get XP going on the laptop (assuming they had nuked th whole disk because they wanted different partitions)? Debateable (they would probably need to return it to get the images back).

How easy is it to put linux on afterwards? Simple, as usual.

How easy is it to put XP on afterwards? Impossible. Note of course, that normally it is possible (you might just have to reinstall LILO, but that's pretty easy, even if you just have your distro's CD).

But, here are some useful links (since Rob doesn't tell us what model it is, we can't be sure):
<A HREF="http://www.cs.mun.ca/~michael/compaq-710.html">http://www.cs.mun.ca/~michael/compaq-710.html</a cs.mun.ca>
<A HREF="http://www.cs.mun.ca/~michael/compaq-let-004.html">http://www.cs.mun.ca/~michael/compaq-let-004.html</a cs.mun.ca>

And yes, I know more or less what I am doing, I have 6 OSs (3 versions of windows, 3 different linux distros) on one disk on my home machine. And I have reinstalled XP and 2k a few times, never nuking my linux partitions.

#

As has _always_ been recommended when setting up a dual boot system, _always_ install the Microsoft OS _first_ then the other. Do that and you'll have no probs!

#

It's no problem to install Linux first for me as long as I have a grub boot disk handy.

#

I run two machines, both running XP and LM8.2. They play perfectly nicely with each other. As both XP installs (Pro & Home) are using NTFS, linux can't 'see' XP, and XP can't 'see' linux. They are both happy that way.
One machine is a home built athlon desktop partitioned as follows:
HDA1 : Fat32 - win98
HDA5 : NTFS - WinXPPro Upgrade
HDA6 : /BOOT
HDA7 : /
HDA8 : SWAP
HDA9 : Fat32 - No OS, used to store files accessible from all 3 OS's.
The boot loaders used are: LILO first, which then calls the XPLoader

The other machine is a Compaq Presario 700AP Laptop which came with XP Home OEM. Luckily they had already partitioned the drive into 2 parts. An NTFS with XP and a 5gig FAT32 for 'Restore'. I formatted this second partition into a 3gig linux area and a 2 gig Fat32 partition. Then installed LILO into HDA5. This allows the XPLoader (need to copy HDA5's bootsector to a file on HDA1) to call LILO which then loads linux.
Again they play happily together. The only hardware which I haven't got working on either machine is the Laptops sound system. I have been running both machines like this for over 6 months.

#

Why don't you just install windows first. Then run a partitioning progrma such as fips to shring the windows partition. Then install Linux. That is how it is usually done.

#

Why do people cry when they're given restore disks. Everyone knows that they are a cheap way for the manufacturers to hose you. When windoze dies (notice I say "when" and not "if") you MUST wipe everything, regardless of any data you may have on your machine. The problem is that people buy this crap. If people wouldn't buy PCs with this crap, then manufacturers would change their practices. Remember, YOU are in control. Manufacturers depend on your $. Don't buy manufactured PCs if they want to be pricks. Go to your local computer shop and get a housebrand PC. Usually, service is good since they depend on your dollar more than say Compaq, or IBM. They will give you full versions of software. Even if it's more, you're actually getting what you pay for. Reminds me of the automibile manufacturers that want to cheat you out of a $40 tire when you buy a $25,000 car. To hell with donut spares, pre-installed software, and restore CDs!!!!!!

#

Rob, you are not enough of an expert to use a bleeding edge product like eXtra pooPy, stick to tried and true technology like linux and W2K, which are very well behaved on my Dell. I only went from NT4 to W2K because when NT4 blue screened and had to be reinstalled, the NT4 CD was too primitive to understand a modern, large disk with more than 4 partitions.

#

I don't know what the heck you expect to happen if you're using a restore disk. You'd have no problems getting XP and Linux to coexist if you had a real copy of XP.

#

He expected that he would not need to buy another
copy of XP just to be able to dual-boot his machine.
He expected that he would have received a working
operating system, not some brain-damaged customized image.
He expected to be treated like a valued customer.
But monopolies don't value customers, they own them.

#

I have been successful with XP and Linux on the same hard drive at work. I did this by installing XP first leaving enough space to create some Linux partitions later. After XP was properly installed, I went back and installed Linux on the backend (RH 7.2). I even put Grub on the boot partition rather than in the MBR. I copy over a bootsect.lnx file to the root of my C: partition and hack the boot.ini file so that I have an option to boot Linux from NT Loader. This setup works very well.

#

What the hell is "Mimi"??

I sometimes install windows first and then put Linux on, it's easier, since windows overwrites the boot loader.

My cousin is going to install Linux. He's installed Windows XP and is going to put Linux on tomorrow. When he installed XP he chose not to allocate all the space, leaving 5gb unallocated which I will later use with fdisk to allocate to Linux.

Hope it works

#

Well I'm not sure about this but i think it's because u are using the restore cd. U see my friend has a hp pc and when u install win98 it wipes out the enteire hdd no matter there is linux or any other partition. it's like the restore cd has an image of the hdd including the partition info. so usually he installs the 'restore cd' first and the resizes the partiton and installs linux.

#

"But I started noticing other tech journalists mentioning the same problem."

very sad state of affairs when tech journalists dont know what the heck a restore disc is. or dual boot their computer....

#

Absolutely no problems with coexistance. None at all. *shrug*

Resizing and sliding the NTFS partition was a pain in the arse, but hey.

I should also note, perhaps, that GRUB barfed quite handily with the setup.

Lilo works like a charm. Viva lilo. ;)

#

Shurley by now every linux user who is trying to dual boot with some form of windows knows. Take a unpartitioned hard drive create a whatever size partition and install windows FIRST and only FIRST. Then take your linux distro and install it. I have been dual booting windows this way for years. I currently run my dell latitude laptop with win2k prof and mandrake 8.2, never once had a problem. My home machine has winXP and mandrake 8.2. About a month ago at home I was running win98, win2k Prof, winXP and mandrake 8.1. I have never had a problem with grub or lilo this way and have only ever used the standard partitioning utilities that come with the instalation packages. But then I have also planned exactly what I want on my hdd before I start.

#

Why did he want to use Windows XP anyway? Ugg!

#

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb; EN-US;q314458

"NOTE : Windows XP and Linux can coexist on the same computer. For additional information, refer to your Linux documentation."

#

Quote

Not once, in reading many articles about the Microsoft antitrust trial's penalty phase, nor in reading many days' worth of the actual trial transcripts, have I seen XP's "take over your whole hard drive" behavior mentioned. There's been a little talk about how Microsoft has made it hard in a busines sense for computer manufacturers to offer BeOS alongside Windows, and a lot about how Microsoft has made it hard for companies like Real and AOL to offer software on a Windows XP computer that competes with anything Microsoft makes, but nothing about XP's bullying behavior toward other operating systems.

BeOS is an operating system. You just said how Microsoft bullied Be which cause another antitrust case. Then you say nothing have been said about Microsoft bulying other OS competitors. Oh well :p

#

Try installing XP first and then boot linux and using fdisk repartition the drive leaving the frount half entirely alone. I have used this trick to install linux on systems that I do not have any windows disks for. A clean install of older windows tends to stack every thing close together at the frount of the drive. If XP does not try using defrag. Good luck.

#

i'm typing this from a windowsXP machine also running linux on the same hard drive. it's a laptop. it dual boots with redhat 7.2. also, i have VMware on either OS to run the other OS so that i can use both regardless of which OS i initially boot into.

from what i can tell, the problem you're having is with the filesystem you have made available for XP. i'm not a windows expert by any means. i use windows just to test the webpages as our clients would see it. try HPFS or NTFS (not fat32) for windows. (like i said, i'm no windows expert and can't tell you what's HPFS or NTFS except for the fact that it's not fat32 but a notch above it -- whatever that means.) with up to win2k, you could use fat32 -- not so with XP (from what i understand.)

anyhow, i might be wrong since i'm not a windows expert -- i agree, windows is very hard to install and use for me too -- but XP and linux can live together. the laptop i'm currently using to type this is a living proof.

#

I had a similar problem with my friends Toshiba Satelite laptop. XP just kept wiping the nix partition, but my Sony VAIO runs both fine, in fact, the software that came with this computer offered me partition options for XP, 5 gig, 10 gig, 15 gig, or the full 40. I dont know about other companies, but I've always known Sony laptops to be best for linux as they are almost always compatible. Maybe trying buying a Sony? :P

#

As pretty much everybody noted previously, the problem comes from the restore CD. However, since most people seem to think that it's normal that your image overwrites your hard drive completely, note that your restore CD does not have to do that. When you create an image, you can backup only a single partition, or your entire drive. If an image on the entire drive was taken, then of course once you restore it, it will overwrite everything you had on it. Not only Linux, but other versions of Windows as well. If, on the other hand, it was an image of the system partition only, then you could partition your drive before, then restore the image on a single partition without overwritting, for example, your Linux installation.

#

It's called a restore CD for a reason. It does not 'install' the system, it restores it from an image on the CD.

Your issue is not with XP this time, but with the maker of your laptop.

#

Hello
I hope this helps as I load these types of setups all the time and this works everytime.

First of all the restore disks that you are using are designed to return the system to a new load status which is a single operating system. That is why it keeps overwriting your linux partition.

Second I have loaded many dual boot system including XP and several version of SUSE on the same system. The key is to load XP first then let linux or a partition magic type tool resize the M$ partition and the load linux 2nd. The main reason for doing this is M$ always overwrites the MBR and Linux needs that with LILO or Grub both of which can handle all of M$ OS natively.

P.S.
I had XP and Suse on the same machine for several months with no problems till I got mad at M$ and removed it completely.

#

I have XP running with Lycoris LX on a dual boot. Lycoris is set up on its own 6.4GB hard disk. I didn't use the boot loader; I am using a boot disk instead. Since XP requites activation, I didn't want to deal with the possibility of having the Linux boot loader mess up XP.

No Problems!

#

I dual-boooted a friend's Dell with XP (preloaded) and RedHat. Since it was pre-loaded and I didn't feel like screwing with it, I used Partition Magic to shrink the XP partition, and the RedHat installed without a hitch.

Of course, now 3 months later, the XP partition no longer exists. I think Chromium was the motivator ;-)

#

Please correct the numbers on Redhat!

78.9 M

http://money.cnn.com/MGI/snap/A1FA6.htm

#

Hey I love to Blame Uncle Bill on every problem too, but I am pretty sure that the problem is with the "recovery CDs". I am not familar with that particular set of CDs but every other ones I have seen, repartition the drive, re-formart the new partitions, and relay the original OS/apps. Just like it came out of the box. All data on the HD will be gone. long gone. At least Sony gave you the option of not reformatting/repartitioning the drive when relaying the OS/apps down. Most dont. Try borrowing a install CD from a friend that is a full install of what came on the laptop (I am guessing XP Home). Then when it asks for Serial Number/Activation Key, use the one that came with your laptop. You should be able to do the install like you want then.

Take my advice with a grain of salt. I have only used XP once for about a week then I got rid of the damn computer (XP drove me to drink).

#

Windows XP will install first or second or third. It doesn't matter. If you install it second you will need to reinstall the bootloader.

The guy in the article is complaining about a problem that doesn't exist.

#

I have a compaq presario desktop that came with Window ME installed but I upgraded to Windows XP. I then decided to load my Mandrake 8.0 linux distro onto it. It installed fine, LILO installed fine I have since switched back and forth between the two operating systems several times with no problems whatsoever. The trick is to put Windows on first and then load linux. Windows by nature is predatory and likes to be the only os on a system with total control of the boot record but you can trick it and put something on after windows is installed and it's fine. I've been running linux and windows xp together now for about a month and I have had no problems between the two.

Just my two cents.
DrakeCode

#

Yes, the restore cd is the cause of this problem. However it isn't the OEM that decides that they can only offer a restore cd. Microsoft dictates this policy. Infoworld ran a series of articles on this situation awhile back.

<A HREF="http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/05/01/000501opfoster.xml">http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/05/01/ 000501opfoster.xml</a infoworld.com>

<A HREF="http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/05/29/000529opfoster.xml">http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/05/29/ 000529opfoster.xml</a infoworld.com>

<A HREF="http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/06/05/000605opfoster.xml">http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/06/05/ 000605opfoster.xml</a infoworld.com>

#

Microsoft will blame all on the OEM, and
say its retail products works fine.

Somehow, all OEM restore versions have this kind of problems (though Packard Bells and older Compaqs are particularly annoying), IOW this must be somehwere in
the reference implementation of the OEM Windows.

The OEMs also don't have much choice. A retail version of XP is at least 4 times as expensive.
(though Dell here in the NL was exchanging ME restore CDs for 98SE retail copies if you complained for a while. They were aware of the ME
problems, which were largely network/dhcp related)

#

Folks, don't hate Linux or Windows or the open source community or Microsoft or anything else just because 'da other dudes say it sucks'. I have both Linux Mandrake 8.1 and Windows XP at one HDD and they co-exist well and everything is fine. Linux is cool for networking (fast!), WinXP rules in gaming, programming and such. Not to mention, I test my OpenGL programs in both OS's!

#

Look! Compaq is great and Windsows XP doesnt interfere at all!
consider what brand of LINUX you are getting! Mandrake Linux on my COMPAQ with my Windows XP had no problems what so ever! Infact it set up the boot manager perfectly! My compaq (a little outdated a presario 5220) came with 98 at first. 98 isnt 100% compatable with that compaq pc. So I got windows 2000 wich stabalized my system and then upgraded to windows xp home. YES! HOME you dont need pro to upgrade to xp from 2k. Its a simple backdoor. Now. I put the linux cd in, it began the easy installation (a baby could do it) and when it starts the builtin hard drive manager in the installtion you select 'use an existing partition' you select (in my case the D drive) the D drive, it seperates it innto a cach partition and a linux partition and formats them the linux way. you then select your install packages..........install...... and then there you have it the nice boot screen that askes windows nt (linux thinks that xp is nt becuase of the kernel) or linux! its EASY!!!!
There you see, it wasn't Windows's fault or Compaq's fault. It was only your choice in Linux. Take my advice, get your hands on Mandrake Linux standard 8.2, and experience real gnu/linux.
P.S. : Redhat's stock is plumiting, sell your redhat and get some mandrakesoft stock instead.
Do it the mandrake way, the smart way.

Sincerly- a Windows/Compaq/Mandrake/Apple Fan and advanced user
arb1099@aol.com

#