R
Rod Speed
Horst Franke said:Rod Speed wrote
Hi Rod, why?
Because it is. Novel concept for you no doubt.
An OS needs an "bootable drive"!
No it doesnt.
Please explain Your objections.
Plenty of boot managers can boot non bootable drives.
The NT/2K/XP family is quite happy to boot
a logical drive inside an extended partition.
This is HW matter!
Wrong, as always. Its actually a file system detail.
Boot-Flag is common knowledge!
Pity you mangled the story completely. Plenty of boot
managers can boot partitions that dont have a Boot-Flag.
No doubt, but only ONE drive can be selected!
Wrong, as always. Most modern bios allow you to specify a boot
order and the bios will go thru the list until it finds a bootable drive.
You are welcome to have more than one bootable drive in the system
and that happens all the time with a bootable CD in the OPTICAL DRIVE.
What should the Bios select on multiple choices?
What has been specified in the boot order list.
Only ONE can be valid! This is a NOGO!
Wrong, as always.
Rubbish. A NEW-Install reflects *no previous selections*!
Depends on what you mean by an reinstall. Many use
that term to refer to what MS calls an install in place.
NO never.
Fraid so,
This is only an OS/BIOS function! A HD never decides this!
I never said that the HD decides anything!!!
Only via BIOS You can select the bootable device!
Wrong again, a boot manager can allow the user to select what to boot.
There's even one that allows a system to
boot the CD when the bios cant do that.
And WHERE is Your opposition/statement?
See above.
And again! What ist Your opposition/statement?
Most obviously when the install cant even see the drive anymore.
How should we discuss, if You don't state any personal ideas?
I do that.
This is slang that I don't understand - sorry.
There isnt a single bit of slang in that particular sentence.
Please repeat in pure English.
That is pure english.