Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature: Linux
Windows XP doesn't like to share with Linux
By on
May 28, 2002 (8:00:00 AM)
Share
Print
Comments
- By Robin "Roblimo" Miller -
At first I thought it was just me. I bought my wife a new Compaq laptop (on sale at an insanely low price) with Windows XP pre-installed. We decided it might be nice to keep a Windows partition on it, besides Linux for everyday use, so we could have Microsoft IE and the Windows versions of Navigator, Opera and Mozilla handy for Web site tests. We already had a Mac, so this would let us view sites in all major operating systems, in all major browsers. But I had trouble getting XP to coexist with Linux. It turns out that I am not alone. XP simply doesn't like to share a hard drive with another operating system.
At first I thought it was just me. I bought my wife a new Compaq laptop (on sale at an insanely low price) with Windows XP pre-installed. We decided it might be nice to keep a Windows partition on it, besides Linux for everyday use, so we could have Microsoft IE and the Windows versions of Navigator, Opera and Mozilla handy for Web site tests. We already had a Mac, so this would let us view sites in all major operating systems, in all major browsers. But I had trouble getting XP to coexist with Linux. It turns out that I am not alone. XP simply doesn't like to share a hard drive with another operating system.
I am a simpleminded Linux user, not good with Windows, which is obviously designed for computer geeks, not for end users like me. It had been quite a while since I had dealt with Windows, and that time it was some mutant form called "Mimi" after the Drew Carey show character, I think. Or maybe it was just one "Me." Either way, it was a bad experience I tried to blank out with the help of cheap bourbon. Still, I recall that in the end I gave up on the "Windows Mimi" or whatever it was called, wiped it off the hard drive and stuck to regular, easy-to-use Linux. The laptop that came with "Windows Mimi" is the HP Pavilion 5340 I am using right now. Although I had trouble with the Mimi thing it came with, I have never had any trouble running Linux on it. I swear, HP would have been better off shipping this thing either with Linux pre-installed or no OS at all, but you know how those deals go between Microsoft and the computer manufacturers they have enslaved. Fah!
At least I had no trouble getting Mimi Windows and Linux to work side by side. (My Mimi problems had to do with drivers and other software.) But XP resisted the basic installation. 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. Finally, in disgust, I went to the closest store that sells software -- Staples -- and grabbed a copy of Partition Commander, a program that is neither free nor Free, and used it to partition my hard drive and "hide" the Linux partition from the Redmond-created monstrosity that so aggressively monopolized my computer when left to its own devices.
You'd think that if Microsoft's talk about how its products are so much better than the competition had any truth to it, the company would want people like me to try XP and Linux side by side so we could see how much nicer and more stable its stuff is than that commie home-made patched-together hacker hobbyist Linux junk. But instead Microsoft chose to have XP extend itself to my Linux partition, then embrace it, and finally extinguish it.
The funny thing is, at first I really thought this was a problem I alone was having, that perhaps people who are skilled in the ways of Windows knew some cool trick to make XP behave. But I started noticing other tech journalists mentioning the same problem. 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.
I find Linux plenty easy to install, set up, and use, thank you. It's Windows that's hard, and this latest XP wrinkle makes it even harder. I also find this XP "feature" downright mean, and -- in my mind at least -- anticompetitive.
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.
I wonder if Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly knows or cares about this problem. If so, it might color her ruling. (Or it might not; it's hard to tell with federal judges.)
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.
If not, there's always the Partition Commander trick. And I'm sure new Linux distribution releases will contain XP workarounds of some sort, because part of life in a computer world where one company's software runs over 90% of all desktops is finding ways around the restrictions and defects that company builds into its software, as witnessed by the endless shelves full of "utility" programs in every computer store whose only purpose is to overcome Windows problems.
Comments
on Windows XP doesn't like to share with LinuxNote: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
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.
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.
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
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!
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
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.
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.
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 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.
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).
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$.
for a real install CD, because that's what I got
with the computer. The only restriction is that
it won't install on a non-Dell PC. Fine with me.
So apparently Roblimo's problems are the fault of
Compaq, not M$.
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.
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.
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 !!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
=)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
(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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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 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
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... ;-)
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.
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?
WIndows XP and Linux
Posted by: JohnPWSharp on May 28, 2002 07:50 PM#