Win98 on 2k - Windows NT

This is a discussion on Win98 on 2k - Windows NT ; "Harry" wrote in message news:qxhMd.99809$Qb.34072@edtnps89... > Pegasus \MVP\ wrote... > > >This thread deals with an existing installation of Win2000 on a > >disk with a single NTFS partition. > > This is what the OP said: > "I have ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: Win98 on 2k

  1. Re: Win98 on 2k


    "Harry" wrote in message
    news:qxhMd.99809$Qb.34072@edtnps89...
    > Pegasus \MVP\ wrote...
    >
    > >This thread deals with an existing installation of Win2000 on a
    > >disk with a single NTFS partition.

    >
    > This is what the OP said:
    > "I have Win2000. How can I put win98 on that windows? "
    >
    > The OP never said he had had a Win2000 with NTFS.
    > And of course W2000 can be on FAT32 or NTFS.
    >
    > Even if it is on NFTS, there are some utils to convert NTFS to
    > FAT32 without destroying the Win2000. Examples are PowerQuest
    > Partition Magic, or Acronis Partition Expert.
    >
    > This is a thread with many possible solutions.
    > Don't say other people's suggestions are not feasible.


    This is true. However, since NTFS is the native file system
    for Windows 2000/XP, I would be reluctant to recommend
    a FAT32 solution. It seems like going backwards. There is
    also a substantial risk that the conversion might fail (due to
    a glitch or a power failure), resulting in a total loss of
    Windows 2000. I have used PowerQuest and Acronis
    products extensively, and I've had my fair share of mishaps.



  2. Re: Win98 on 2k



    Pegasus (MVP) wrote:

    > "Triffid" wrote in message
    > news:caeMd.2679$lw4.628742@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    >
    >>
    >>Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>"Harry" wrote in message
    >>>news:EkYLd.194995$KO5.188218@clgrps13...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Pegasus \MVP\ wrote...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"Harry" wrote in message
    >>>>>news:TGELd.192020$KO5.61007@clgrps13...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Gospodin Sorak wrote...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I have Win2000. How can I put win98 on that windows?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>If you go without any 3rd party boot manager, you need to install
    >>>>>>Win98 first, then Win2000. See this article.
    >>>>>>http://www.duxcw.com/digest/Howto/so.../windows/dual/
    >>>>>
    >>>>>A couple of comments might be appropriate.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>- The OP cannot use the native Windows boot manager,
    >>>>> hence the article you quote is irrelevant.
    >>>>
    >>>>My real intention is ask the OP to do web search on his own.
    >>>>The URL I quoted, is only an example of a result from web search.
    >>>>
    >>>>And why the OP cannot use the native Windows boot manager?
    >>>>if he can install Win98 first and then W2K.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>His current Win2000 installation resides on an NTFS partition,
    >>>which is inaccessible by Win98. On the other hand you do have
    >>>a point: If the OP destroys his Win2000 installation then NTFS
    >>>ceases to be an issue.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>- The article you refer to is misleading. While it is ***recommended***
    >>>>>to install Win98 first, it is not really necessary. When installing
    >>>
    >>>Win98
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>last then the Win2000 boot environment gets disturbed. This can
    >>>>>be fixed in less than five minutes. Unfortunately the article omits
    >>>>>this important piece of information.
    >>>>
    >>>>If you know the solution, just spill your gut.
    >>>>It was a waste of everyone's time just to say it "can be fixed in
    >>>>less than 5 minutes" but didn't say what the solution is.
    >>>>Or asked the OP to use another boot manager if there is a way to
    >>>>fix the Windows boot manager (with W2K first, then Win98) in 5 minutes.
    >>>>
    >>>>Did your 2nd statement (5 min solution) contradict your 1st (OP cannot
    >>>>use Windows native manager)?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Let's just take it easy, shall we?
    >>>
    >>>This thread deals with an existing installation of Win2000 on a
    >>>disk with a single NTFS partition. Installation of Win98 is
    >>>not possible here while using the native Windows boot
    >>>manager, unless he destroys his Win2000 installation. It is

    >>
    >>The OP stated he has 2 hard disks.
    >>
    >>Why not just disconnect the W2K disk, install W98 on the remaining disk,
    >>install and configure the W2K boot manager, then re-connect the W2K disk?

    >
    >
    > Because he won't be able to boot into Win98, since
    > Win98 is unable to read the boot files on the NTFS partition.
    >
    > I strongly recommend that you try this for yourself. It's a very
    > educational exercise!


    I planned to, but all my systems are SCSI and I could only find one IDE
    disk today - although I'm sure there are more buried somewhere :-) Of
    course this sort of thing is *much* easier with SCSI, because you can
    configure any disk as primary in the SCSI BIOS.

    If I had found a second disk, I would have proceeded as follows:

    1. Boot W2K and copy boot.ini, ntldr, and ntdetect.com to removable media.
    2. Shut down, disconnect the NTFS disk, and connect the FAT disk as
    primary master.
    3. Install W98, copy the W2K boot files to C:\, add W98 to boot.ini, and
    change the W2K boot.ini entry to point at the second disk.
    4. Shut down and reconnect the NFTS disk as primary slave.
    5. Finally, I suspect I have to fix the primary disk MBR - not sure
    about this step.

    Am I getting close?

    Triffid




  3. Re: Win98 on 2k


    "Triffid" wrote in message
    news:nXBMd.4106$lw4.841596@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    >
    >
    > Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    >
    > > "Triffid" wrote in message
    > > news:caeMd.2679$lw4.628742@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    > >
    > >>
    > >>Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>"Harry" wrote in message
    > >>>news:EkYLd.194995$KO5.188218@clgrps13...
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>Pegasus \MVP\ wrote...
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>"Harry" wrote in message
    > >>>>>news:TGELd.192020$KO5.61007@clgrps13...
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>>Gospodin Sorak wrote...
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>I have Win2000. How can I put win98 on that windows?
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>If you go without any 3rd party boot manager, you need to install
    > >>>>>>Win98 first, then Win2000. See this article.
    > >>>>>>http://www.duxcw.com/digest/Howto/so.../windows/dual/
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>A couple of comments might be appropriate.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>- The OP cannot use the native Windows boot manager,
    > >>>>> hence the article you quote is irrelevant.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>My real intention is ask the OP to do web search on his own.
    > >>>>The URL I quoted, is only an example of a result from web search.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>And why the OP cannot use the native Windows boot manager?
    > >>>>if he can install Win98 first and then W2K.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>His current Win2000 installation resides on an NTFS partition,
    > >>>which is inaccessible by Win98. On the other hand you do have
    > >>>a point: If the OP destroys his Win2000 installation then NTFS
    > >>>ceases to be an issue.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>- The article you refer to is misleading. While it is

    ***recommended***
    > >>>>>to install Win98 first, it is not really necessary. When installing
    > >>>
    > >>>Win98
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>last then the Win2000 boot environment gets disturbed. This can
    > >>>>>be fixed in less than five minutes. Unfortunately the article omits
    > >>>>>this important piece of information.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>If you know the solution, just spill your gut.
    > >>>>It was a waste of everyone's time just to say it "can be fixed in
    > >>>>less than 5 minutes" but didn't say what the solution is.
    > >>>>Or asked the OP to use another boot manager if there is a way to
    > >>>>fix the Windows boot manager (with W2K first, then Win98) in 5

    minutes.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Did your 2nd statement (5 min solution) contradict your 1st (OP cannot
    > >>>>use Windows native manager)?
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>Let's just take it easy, shall we?
    > >>>
    > >>>This thread deals with an existing installation of Win2000 on a
    > >>>disk with a single NTFS partition. Installation of Win98 is
    > >>>not possible here while using the native Windows boot
    > >>>manager, unless he destroys his Win2000 installation. It is
    > >>
    > >>The OP stated he has 2 hard disks.
    > >>
    > >>Why not just disconnect the W2K disk, install W98 on the remaining disk,
    > >>install and configure the W2K boot manager, then re-connect the W2K

    disk?
    > >
    > >
    > > Because he won't be able to boot into Win98, since
    > > Win98 is unable to read the boot files on the NTFS partition.
    > >
    > > I strongly recommend that you try this for yourself. It's a very
    > > educational exercise!

    >
    > I planned to, but all my systems are SCSI and I could only find one IDE
    > disk today - although I'm sure there are more buried somewhere :-) Of
    > course this sort of thing is *much* easier with SCSI, because you can
    > configure any disk as primary in the SCSI BIOS.
    >
    > If I had found a second disk, I would have proceeded as follows:
    >
    > 1. Boot W2K and copy boot.ini, ntldr, and ntdetect.com to removable media.
    > 2. Shut down, disconnect the NTFS disk, and connect the FAT disk as
    > primary master.
    > 3. Install W98, copy the W2K boot files to C:\, add W98 to boot.ini, and
    > change the W2K boot.ini entry to point at the second disk.
    > 4. Shut down and reconnect the NFTS disk as primary slave.
    > 5. Finally, I suspect I have to fix the primary disk MBR - not sure
    > about this step.
    >
    > Am I getting close?
    >
    > Triffid


    Yes, you're getting very close. Your problem will be that the NTFS
    disk will appear as drive D:, which will upset Windows no end. It
    must appear as drive C:, and the FAT drive must appear as drive D:
    under Windows 2000. With a bit of tweaking it is possible to swap
    them.

    And as you suspect, you will have to fix the MBR and the boot
    sector on the FAT disk.

    All things considered, your method is probably about as labour
    intensive as installing a third-party boot manager. Its advantage
    is that is survives on the native boot manager. The advantage
    of the third-party boot manager is that it offers a completely
    modular solution. It lets you plug in or plug out any OS, with
    no interdependence at all.



  4. Re: Win98 on 2k



    Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    > "Triffid" wrote in message
    > news:nXBMd.4106$lw4.841596@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    >
    >>
    >>Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>"Triffid" wrote in message
    >>>news:caeMd.2679$lw4.628742@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"Harry" wrote in message
    >>>>>news:EkYLd.194995$KO5.188218@clgrps13...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Pegasus \MVP\ wrote...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>"Harry" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>news:TGELd.192020$KO5.61007@clgrps13...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Gospodin Sorak wrote...
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>I have Win2000. How can I put win98 on that windows?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>If you go without any 3rd party boot manager, you need to install
    >>>>>>>>Win98 first, then Win2000. See this article.
    >>>>>>>>http://www.duxcw.com/digest/Howto/so.../windows/dual/
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>A couple of comments might be appropriate.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>- The OP cannot use the native Windows boot manager,
    >>>>>>>hence the article you quote is irrelevant.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>My real intention is ask the OP to do web search on his own.
    >>>>>>The URL I quoted, is only an example of a result from web search.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>And why the OP cannot use the native Windows boot manager?
    >>>>>>if he can install Win98 first and then W2K.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>His current Win2000 installation resides on an NTFS partition,
    >>>>>which is inaccessible by Win98. On the other hand you do have
    >>>>>a point: If the OP destroys his Win2000 installation then NTFS
    >>>>>ceases to be an issue.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>- The article you refer to is misleading. While it is

    >
    > ***recommended***
    >
    >>>>>>>to install Win98 first, it is not really necessary. When installing
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Win98
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>last then the Win2000 boot environment gets disturbed. This can
    >>>>>>>be fixed in less than five minutes. Unfortunately the article omits
    >>>>>>>this important piece of information.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>If you know the solution, just spill your gut.
    >>>>>>It was a waste of everyone's time just to say it "can be fixed in
    >>>>>>less than 5 minutes" but didn't say what the solution is.
    >>>>>>Or asked the OP to use another boot manager if there is a way to
    >>>>>>fix the Windows boot manager (with W2K first, then Win98) in 5

    >
    > minutes.
    >
    >>>>>>Did your 2nd statement (5 min solution) contradict your 1st (OP cannot
    >>>>>>use Windows native manager)?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Let's just take it easy, shall we?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>This thread deals with an existing installation of Win2000 on a
    >>>>>disk with a single NTFS partition. Installation of Win98 is
    >>>>>not possible here while using the native Windows boot
    >>>>>manager, unless he destroys his Win2000 installation. It is
    >>>>
    >>>>The OP stated he has 2 hard disks.
    >>>>
    >>>>Why not just disconnect the W2K disk, install W98 on the remaining disk,
    >>>>install and configure the W2K boot manager, then re-connect the W2K

    >
    > disk?
    >
    >>>
    >>>Because he won't be able to boot into Win98, since
    >>>Win98 is unable to read the boot files on the NTFS partition.
    >>>
    >>>I strongly recommend that you try this for yourself. It's a very
    >>>educational exercise!

    >>
    >>I planned to, but all my systems are SCSI and I could only find one IDE
    >>disk today - although I'm sure there are more buried somewhere :-) Of
    >>course this sort of thing is *much* easier with SCSI, because you can
    >>configure any disk as primary in the SCSI BIOS.
    >>
    >>If I had found a second disk, I would have proceeded as follows:
    >>
    >>1. Boot W2K and copy boot.ini, ntldr, and ntdetect.com to removable media.
    >>2. Shut down, disconnect the NTFS disk, and connect the FAT disk as
    >>primary master.
    >>3. Install W98, copy the W2K boot files to C:\, add W98 to boot.ini, and
    >>change the W2K boot.ini entry to point at the second disk.
    >>4. Shut down and reconnect the NFTS disk as primary slave.
    >>5. Finally, I suspect I have to fix the primary disk MBR - not sure
    >>about this step.
    >>
    >>Am I getting close?
    >>
    >>Triffid

    >
    >
    > Yes, you're getting very close. Your problem will be that the NTFS
    > disk will appear as drive D:, which will upset Windows no end. It
    > must appear as drive C:, and the FAT drive must appear as drive D:
    > under Windows 2000. With a bit of tweaking it is possible to swap
    > them.


    Hmm... sounds like a job for BartPE - or can I boot W2K (albeit upset)
    and use disk management?

    > And as you suspect, you will have to fix the MBR and the boot
    > sector on the FAT disk.


    How?

    > All things considered, your method is probably about as labour
    > intensive as installing a third-party boot manager. Its advantage
    > is that is survives on the native boot manager. The advantage
    > of the third-party boot manager is that it offers a completely
    > modular solution. It lets you plug in or plug out any OS, with
    > no interdependence at all.


    Yes, I see your point now - but perhaps you will concede that your
    initial statement (i.e. "not possible") was inaccurate ;-)

    Also, the third party boot manager solution is not *entirely* free of
    interdependence - if you can't boot the boot manager, you can't boot
    anything. Seems to me there's no reason IDE BIOSes couldn't offer boot
    drive selection - standard for SCSI - but none I've seen do so.

    Triffid

  5. Re: Win98 on 2k


    "Triffid" wrote in message
    news:NQXMd.4683$lw4.999452@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    >
    >
    > Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    > > "Triffid" wrote in message
    > > news:nXBMd.4106$lw4.841596@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    > >
    > >>
    > >>Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>"Triffid" wrote in message
    > >>>news:caeMd.2679$lw4.628742@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>"Harry" wrote in message
    > >>>>>news:EkYLd.194995$KO5.188218@clgrps13...
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>>Pegasus \MVP\ wrote...
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>"Harry" wrote in message
    > >>>>>>>news:TGELd.192020$KO5.61007@clgrps13...
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>Gospodin Sorak wrote...
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>>I have Win2000. How can I put win98 on that windows?
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>If you go without any 3rd party boot manager, you need to install
    > >>>>>>>>Win98 first, then Win2000. See this article.
    > >>>>>>>>http://www.duxcw.com/digest/Howto/so.../windows/dual/
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>A couple of comments might be appropriate.
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>- The OP cannot use the native Windows boot manager,
    > >>>>>>>hence the article you quote is irrelevant.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>My real intention is ask the OP to do web search on his own.
    > >>>>>>The URL I quoted, is only an example of a result from web search.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>And why the OP cannot use the native Windows boot manager?
    > >>>>>>if he can install Win98 first and then W2K.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>His current Win2000 installation resides on an NTFS partition,
    > >>>>>which is inaccessible by Win98. On the other hand you do have
    > >>>>>a point: If the OP destroys his Win2000 installation then NTFS
    > >>>>>ceases to be an issue.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>>>- The article you refer to is misleading. While it is

    > >
    > > ***recommended***
    > >
    > >>>>>>>to install Win98 first, it is not really necessary. When installing
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>Win98
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>>>last then the Win2000 boot environment gets disturbed. This can
    > >>>>>>>be fixed in less than five minutes. Unfortunately the article omits
    > >>>>>>>this important piece of information.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>If you know the solution, just spill your gut.
    > >>>>>>It was a waste of everyone's time just to say it "can be fixed in
    > >>>>>>less than 5 minutes" but didn't say what the solution is.
    > >>>>>>Or asked the OP to use another boot manager if there is a way to
    > >>>>>>fix the Windows boot manager (with W2K first, then Win98) in 5

    > >
    > > minutes.
    > >
    > >>>>>>Did your 2nd statement (5 min solution) contradict your 1st (OP

    cannot
    > >>>>>>use Windows native manager)?
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>Let's just take it easy, shall we?
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>This thread deals with an existing installation of Win2000 on a
    > >>>>>disk with a single NTFS partition. Installation of Win98 is
    > >>>>>not possible here while using the native Windows boot
    > >>>>>manager, unless he destroys his Win2000 installation. It is
    > >>>>
    > >>>>The OP stated he has 2 hard disks.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Why not just disconnect the W2K disk, install W98 on the remaining

    disk,
    > >>>>install and configure the W2K boot manager, then re-connect the W2K

    > >
    > > disk?
    > >
    > >>>
    > >>>Because he won't be able to boot into Win98, since
    > >>>Win98 is unable to read the boot files on the NTFS partition.
    > >>>
    > >>>I strongly recommend that you try this for yourself. It's a very
    > >>>educational exercise!
    > >>
    > >>I planned to, but all my systems are SCSI and I could only find one IDE
    > >>disk today - although I'm sure there are more buried somewhere :-) Of
    > >>course this sort of thing is *much* easier with SCSI, because you can
    > >>configure any disk as primary in the SCSI BIOS.
    > >>
    > >>If I had found a second disk, I would have proceeded as follows:
    > >>
    > >>1. Boot W2K and copy boot.ini, ntldr, and ntdetect.com to removable

    media.
    > >>2. Shut down, disconnect the NTFS disk, and connect the FAT disk as
    > >>primary master.
    > >>3. Install W98, copy the W2K boot files to C:\, add W98 to boot.ini, and
    > >>change the W2K boot.ini entry to point at the second disk.
    > >>4. Shut down and reconnect the NFTS disk as primary slave.
    > >>5. Finally, I suspect I have to fix the primary disk MBR - not sure
    > >>about this step.
    > >>
    > >>Am I getting close?
    > >>
    > >>Triffid

    > >
    > >
    > > Yes, you're getting very close. Your problem will be that the NTFS
    > > disk will appear as drive D:, which will upset Windows no end. It
    > > must appear as drive C:, and the FAT drive must appear as drive D:
    > > under Windows 2000. With a bit of tweaking it is possible to swap
    > > them.

    >
    > Hmm... sounds like a job for BartPE - or can I boot W2K (albeit upset)
    > and use disk management?


    Sounds like an interesting idea, using a Bart CD. I'd like to try
    your recipe - not just an educated guess but a proven step by
    step instruction that anyone can duplicate.

    > > And as you suspect, you will have to fix the MBR and the boot
    > > sector on the FAT disk.

    >
    > How?


    - Boot with a Win2000 CD.
    - Select Repair when prompted.
    - Select Recovery Console when prompted.
    - Run fixmbr and fixboot.

    > > All things considered, your method is probably about as labour
    > > intensive as installing a third-party boot manager. Its advantage
    > > is that is survives on the native boot manager. The advantage
    > > of the third-party boot manager is that it offers a completely
    > > modular solution. It lets you plug in or plug out any OS, with
    > > no interdependence at all.

    >
    > Yes, I see your point now - but perhaps you will concede that your
    > initial statement (i.e. "not possible") was inaccurate ;-)


    Cheerfully conceded.

    > Also, the third party boot manager solution is not *entirely* free of
    > interdependence - if you can't boot the boot manager, you can't boot
    > anything. Seems to me there's no reason IDE BIOSes couldn't offer boot
    > drive selection - standard for SCSI - but none I've seen do so.


    If you use XOSL then you can easily boot into either OS like so:
    - Boot with a Win98 boot disk and run fdisk /mbr. This will
    knock out XOSL.
    - Make the partition active that you wish to boot off.
    - Reboot.



  6. Re: Win98 on 2k



    Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    > "Triffid" wrote in message
    > news:NQXMd.4683$lw4.999452@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    >
    >>
    >>Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    >>
    >>>"Triffid" wrote in message
    >>>news:nXBMd.4106$lw4.841596@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"Triffid" wrote in message
    >>>>>news:caeMd.2679$lw4.628742@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>"Harry" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>news:EkYLd.194995$KO5.188218@clgrps13...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Pegasus \MVP\ wrote...
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>"Harry" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>>news:TGELd.192020$KO5.61007@clgrps13...
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>Gospodin Sorak wrote...
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>I have Win2000. How can I put win98 on that windows?
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>If you go without any 3rd party boot manager, you need to install
    >>>>>>>>>>Win98 first, then Win2000. See this article.
    >>>>>>>>>>http://www.duxcw.com/digest/Howto/so.../windows/dual/
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>A couple of comments might be appropriate.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>- The OP cannot use the native Windows boot manager,
    >>>>>>>>>hence the article you quote is irrelevant.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>My real intention is ask the OP to do web search on his own.
    >>>>>>>>The URL I quoted, is only an example of a result from web search.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>And why the OP cannot use the native Windows boot manager?
    >>>>>>>>if he can install Win98 first and then W2K.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>His current Win2000 installation resides on an NTFS partition,
    >>>>>>>which is inaccessible by Win98. On the other hand you do have
    >>>>>>>a point: If the OP destroys his Win2000 installation then NTFS
    >>>>>>>ceases to be an issue.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>- The article you refer to is misleading. While it is
    >>>
    >>>***recommended***
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>>>to install Win98 first, it is not really necessary. When installing
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Win98
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>last then the Win2000 boot environment gets disturbed. This can
    >>>>>>>>>be fixed in less than five minutes. Unfortunately the article omits
    >>>>>>>>>this important piece of information.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>If you know the solution, just spill your gut.
    >>>>>>>>It was a waste of everyone's time just to say it "can be fixed in
    >>>>>>>>less than 5 minutes" but didn't say what the solution is.
    >>>>>>>>Or asked the OP to use another boot manager if there is a way to
    >>>>>>>>fix the Windows boot manager (with W2K first, then Win98) in 5
    >>>
    >>>minutes.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>>Did your 2nd statement (5 min solution) contradict your 1st (OP

    >
    > cannot
    >
    >>>>>>>>use Windows native manager)?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Let's just take it easy, shall we?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>This thread deals with an existing installation of Win2000 on a
    >>>>>>>disk with a single NTFS partition. Installation of Win98 is
    >>>>>>>not possible here while using the native Windows boot
    >>>>>>>manager, unless he destroys his Win2000 installation. It is
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>The OP stated he has 2 hard disks.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Why not just disconnect the W2K disk, install W98 on the remaining

    >
    > disk,
    >
    >>>>>>install and configure the W2K boot manager, then re-connect the W2K
    >>>
    >>>disk?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>Because he won't be able to boot into Win98, since
    >>>>>Win98 is unable to read the boot files on the NTFS partition.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I strongly recommend that you try this for yourself. It's a very
    >>>>>educational exercise!
    >>>>
    >>>>I planned to, but all my systems are SCSI and I could only find one IDE
    >>>>disk today - although I'm sure there are more buried somewhere :-) Of
    >>>>course this sort of thing is *much* easier with SCSI, because you can
    >>>>configure any disk as primary in the SCSI BIOS.
    >>>>
    >>>>If I had found a second disk, I would have proceeded as follows:
    >>>>
    >>>>1. Boot W2K and copy boot.ini, ntldr, and ntdetect.com to removable

    >
    > media.
    >
    >>>>2. Shut down, disconnect the NTFS disk, and connect the FAT disk as
    >>>>primary master.
    >>>>3. Install W98, copy the W2K boot files to C:\, add W98 to boot.ini, and
    >>>>change the W2K boot.ini entry to point at the second disk.
    >>>>4. Shut down and reconnect the NFTS disk as primary slave.
    >>>>5. Finally, I suspect I have to fix the primary disk MBR - not sure
    >>>>about this step.
    >>>>
    >>>>Am I getting close?
    >>>>
    >>>>Triffid
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Yes, you're getting very close. Your problem will be that the NTFS
    >>>disk will appear as drive D:, which will upset Windows no end. It
    >>>must appear as drive C:, and the FAT drive must appear as drive D:
    >>>under Windows 2000. With a bit of tweaking it is possible to swap
    >>>them.

    >>
    >>Hmm... sounds like a job for BartPE - or can I boot W2K (albeit upset)
    >>and use disk management?

    >
    >
    > Sounds like an interesting idea, using a Bart CD. I'd like to try
    > your recipe - not just an educated guess but a proven step by
    > step instruction that anyone can duplicate.


    It doesn't qualify as a recipe unless anyone can cook it :-)

    I've added this to my projects list as I'd like to learn more,
    especially about IDE - but for the moment I need a break from messing
    with computers.

    I spent most of last week preparing and testing backup and recovery
    scenarios in preparation for upgrading my home file server, but it
    turned out I didn't need any of them! I expected the original RAID 5
    array to be trashed after I cut it back from 3 SCSI channels to one and
    changed all the disk IDs, but darned if it didn't boot right up! All I
    had to do was build the new array and copy the data over. Oh well,
    preparing for disaster was certainly educational ;-)

    >>>And as you suspect, you will have to fix the MBR and the boot
    >>>sector on the FAT disk.

    >>
    >>How?

    >
    >
    > - Boot with a Win2000 CD.
    > - Select Repair when prompted.
    > - Select Recovery Console when prompted.
    > - Run fixmbr and fixboot.
    >
    >
    >>>All things considered, your method is probably about as labour
    >>>intensive as installing a third-party boot manager. Its advantage
    >>>is that is survives on the native boot manager. The advantage
    >>>of the third-party boot manager is that it offers a completely
    >>>modular solution. It lets you plug in or plug out any OS, with
    >>>no interdependence at all.

    >>
    >>Yes, I see your point now - but perhaps you will concede that your
    >>initial statement (i.e. "not possible") was inaccurate ;-)

    >
    >
    > Cheerfully conceded.
    >
    >
    >>Also, the third party boot manager solution is not *entirely* free of
    >>interdependence - if you can't boot the boot manager, you can't boot
    >>anything. Seems to me there's no reason IDE BIOSes couldn't offer boot
    >>drive selection - standard for SCSI - but none I've seen do so.

    >
    >
    > If you use XOSL then you can easily boot into either OS like so:
    > - Boot with a Win98 boot disk and run fdisk /mbr. This will
    > knock out XOSL.
    > - Make the partition active that you wish to boot off.
    > - Reboot.
    >
    >


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2