Richard in Va. said:
Hello Jim,
Thank-you for intercepting my post. And also thank-you for your time and
in-depth discussion as to how using a boot manager would be a solution in
achieving my objectives. I've visited the Bootit NG web site and I like
what I see. But I still have a few concerns and questions.
In response to the hardware issue, Installing the hardware devices
one-at-a-time into each OS install is likely part of my mentality that goes
back to Win98 or Win95 wherein it might be safer to install one thing at a
time between boots. Old habits are hard to break I guess. Also, It's my
understanding that installing devices and drivers in a particular order is
important in optimizing my Intel 850 chipset/Socket 478/P4 based PC. I've
read somewhere on Intel's web site (some time ago) what their recommended
order of installation is, but can't seem to locate it anymore. Which is why
I intend to uninstall all PCI and external devices such that I can install
the chipset driver first. Then Application Accelerator, then (I think)
video, then ATA-100 controller card, then network (LAN) card, then sound
card. I guess from there, it really may not matter for the other items. But
please advise if you (or others listening in) feel differently. All
hardware would be installed in each OS install.
Let me try to explain this a little better. Ultimately, this isn't a big
deal AS LONG AS *you* don't mind the hassle of having to install the PCI
cards after initial OS installation. I'm thinking of the situation where
you've removed almost everything, created a base image of the XP
installation, and now start installing and configuring each card, one by
one. For a *single* OS installation, this is NOT a big deal. BUT, if you
want to create 2, 3 or more clones of that base image, the idea of removing
the cards, restoring from the base image to create a second instance, and
then installing each card, one by one AGAIN, well..., I don't know about
you, but this would prove incredibly tedious to me, esp. by the 3rd or 4th
instance
XP is a MUCH better OS than any other consumer OS Microsoft has ever built,
no comparison to Win95/98/ME, which are MS-DOS based operating systems
(their achilles heel). Unless you have really obscure PCI cards, something
really out of the ordinary, I find leaving these cards IN PLACE, most of the
time, works just fine. You'd be surprised how well XP manages installation
of these drivers! For any PCI cards that are not recognized and/or can't be
configured correctly on the initial installation, the device will simply be
listed under Device Manager w/ a yellow exclamation, meaning it needs
attention. For 95% of PCI cards, this approach works fine. Conflicts w/
IRQ interrupts, driver problems, etc., are not nearly as much a problem w/
XP as w/ Win98 and alike. Despite all the complaints about Microsoft, they
do do a VERY good job w/ the XP installation, it's actually works remarkably
well.
But again, it's totally up to you. I just think it's an incredible hassle
to be pulling/installing PCI cards for multiple installations. What I *do*
pull are my USB, parallel, and serial devices (USB external drives, USB pen
drives, wireless devices, printers, USB hubs, digital cameras, etc.),
anything like that. That's because these installations tend to be more
tempermental, and they're really easy to install, heck, you don't even need
to shutdown! If you can build a base image that would only require adding
back these USB devices, I think that's ideal. Also, I strongly recommend
using a "wired" LAN card (or on-board adapter) for the initial install, even
if you eventually go w/ wireless. Wired LAN installations are so trivial,
it makes the installation effortless, and you won't have any issues w/
activation that require getting your wireless configured FIRST. Keep it
simple by using a wired LAN adapter. Activate, image copy the base, install
the wireless adapter, then finally disable the wired adapter. Anytime you
have a wireless problem, all you need do is re-enable the wired LAN
connection.
I've never used a boot manager, nor do I know anyone who does. I know
they've been around for some time, I guess a lack of knowledge has kept me
leery of them. But based on your suggestion and explanation in an effort to
help me achieve what I'd like to do. A boot manager sounds like a good
thing. Basically, All I really want is a maintained healthy OS install to
fall back on, along with an install for everyday family use and then maybe
one where I can pull out the stops.
Boot managers have been around a very long time. I must have tried every
one every made. Spent literally YEARS jumping from one to the next, trying
to find the "perfect" solution that didn't force me to compromise this or
that. About 5-6 years ago, I found BootIt NG, and have never used anything
else since. BootIt NG (like most other boot managers) is as safe as any
other product these days, it's pretty hard to screw up. And if you don't
like it, you simply uninstall it.
To be honest, managing multiple OS installation *can* be complicated if you
mix OS types, like XP, NT, W2K, Win98, etc. Each OS has idiosyncracies that
requires experience to know and understand. For example, older OS's like
Win98 have a "load limit" which means you can only boot it from a maximum
distance from the head of the HD. An obscure but important detail. That's
why experts in this area will tell you, that in general, it's best to place
early version of the OS at the head of the HD, and later versions
progressively farther up the HD. Earlier release have more severe load
limits than later releases, so this minimizes the chance of installing any
given OS in a location from which it can't be booted.
But in the case of XP, I haven't seen nearly as many of these "limits" as
with prior OS releases. So if you're going strictly w/ XP installations, it
simplies things considerably.
One limitation you always have to consider is due to Microsoft's HD
architecture, which ALWAYS limits you to 4 primary partitions, OR, 3
primaries and 1 extended partition (w/ one or more logical partitions).
That means you are limited to 3 OS installations, assuming you place your
DATA within logical partitions of the extended partition (which I generally
recommend). The other choice is to define 4 primary partitions (so you can
install the OS 4 times, of course), then create an extended partition (w/
one or more logical partitions) on a second HD (slave). Either way works
very nicely and minimizes multi-boot installation complications.
Using BootIt NG, you have the choice of installing the boot manager either
in its own partition, OR, the OS partition. If you choose the OS partition,
it must be FAT (FAT or FAT32, NOT NTFS). OTOH, if you install it on its own
partition, you can choose to uses its proprietary partition type (what it
will choose by default), or a FAT16, FAT, or FAT32 partition. Your choice.
Of course, by installing it on its own partition, this consumes a partition
that could otherwise be used for XP! But there's a big benefit as well --
by NOT installing the boot manager within an existing XP partition, you
remove any dependencies between the OS and the boot manager. So you can
CLONE/COPY/MOVE any OS partition, anywhere, at anytime without worrying
whether it will muck up your boot manager. Instead, the boot manager's
partition just stays put, for the life of your HD installation! In fact, I
recommend the boot manager partition be installed at the END of the HD, it
only requires a measly 8-16mb.
Finally (and this is the one that raises the eyebrows of ppl in the NG,
trust me, you'll hear hoots and hollers), you could consider using BootIt NG
"unlimited primaries". An incredibly useful feature, and frankly,
ingenuous. By enabling this BootIt NG exclusive feature, you can have as
many primary partitions as you like! Essentially only limited by available
HD space. How can that be you say?! To understand this feature, you need
to understand how the Microsoft HD architecture works. The reason the HD is
normally limited to 4 primaries (or 3 primaries and 1 extended) is because
of the MBR (Master Boot Record). This is located on the first sector of the
HD, and contains a maximum of FOUR address fields, each of which can point
to the address of a partition. When you enable BootIt NG unlimited
primaries, it doesn't actually change anything on the HD. But what it does
do is change the boot manager's behavior. Once enabled, you can copy/clone
OS installations, create data partitions, etc., as many as you like, on that
HD. Unlike other boot managers that track the address of available
partitions in the MBR, BootIt NG tracks the addresses of these partitions
within its own config files. When you setup boot menu items, you are
telling BootIt NG (and this is a key concept) HOW to construct the MBR for
that OS! IOW, BootIt NG *dynamically* constructs an MBR that contains only
the addresses of those partitions you wish to consider at boot time. This
is unique to BootIt NG. Other boot managers work differently, they change
the OS type indicator field in the MBR to hide partitions, but this
dependence on the MBR is what limits the primaries you can define. BootIt
NG doesn't need to do this. When constructing a boot menu item, it simple
never puts the address of partitions that shouldn't be seen in the MBR at
all!
That's why BootIt NG unlimited primaries works. It's the only boot manager
I know that dynamically creates an MBR for each OS configuration you want to
setup.
Most ppl shy away from using unlimited primaries w/ BootIt NG because they
don't understand it. They get queasy because it goes counter to convention,
and *does* require being careful. For example, you can't use third party
partition managers in this mode because those tools will ASSUME that the
only data partitions on the HD are those currently listed in the MBR. This
is not the case. Remember, BootIt NG is managing all the other defined
partitions in its config file. It only updates the MBR with this
information based on the config for the OS you intend to boot next. So
again, you do have to be careful.
I was leery at first too. But I started using BootIt NG unlimited primaries
one day about 4-5 years ago, and frankly, it's never been a problem. Works
beautifully. And no more primary partition limits. I can literally have
dozens of OS installations on my PC at any given time, if I want to.
Incredibly powerful once you see it in action. And since BootIt NG comes w/
its own imaging solution and partition manager anyway, it's a non issue that
its incompatible (in this mode) w/ third party tools. I stopped using these
others tools (e.g., Partition Manager) years ago. No need.
But you don't have to consider using unlimited primaries, that's just a
taste of what you can do if interested. You can always enable the feature
at any time. Again, doesn't actually do anything except allow you to create
additional primaries. When not enabled, the software will prevent creation
of those additional primaries. And if you have unlimited primaries enabled,
and more than 4 defined, it won't let you disable it until you delete
sufficient primaries to meet the 4 primaries restriction. As I said, this
software is very safe, it goes out of its way to make sure you don't mess
things up.
Each install would have internet access. Which leads to my other main
concern. I own Norton Internet Security 2006, Norton System Works 2006 as
well as System Suite 6 Pro by VCOM and System Mechanic 6 Pro by iolo. About
a month ago, my system crashed and refused to boot, so I ran down to
Wal-Mart and bought the VCOM and iolo products because they both claimed I
could boot from their install disk and they would (might) repair my disk
problems. They didn't help much but did advise me to run chkdsk via the
recovery console to repair drive C: . I got everything running again and
then was hit with a virus. Norton (NIS) got corrupted and would not run a
system virus scan. So I uninstalled NIS and installed the VCOM product.
Between VCOM and Spyware Doctor and Ad-Aware, I was able to locate and
remove allot of security threats. Therefore, if I could have more than one
OS install, maybe I could use NIS for everyday use and install the VCOM
product on the other OS installation and be able to use one to clean up the
OS on the other partition. Seems to me that some of these clean-up
utilities would be safer if used on a OS install that was not active or in
use. With the way you've explained using a boot manager and it's ability to
hide the other partition(s) containing an OS. This would not be possible.
It's a shame NIS/NSW won't let you boot from the install CD and use all of
it's built in features, as long as it had access to updated virus definition
and such.
Well now you're delving into a different area. Frankly, I'm not much of a
believer in all these so-called "tools". As someone who's been a software
developer by trade for some 20 years, and seen virtually everything in the
MS world since the mid 80's, I find most of this stuff to be more trouble
than it's worth
Fact is, the OS installation is so complex and unique to each person, that
the claims made by these products can't possibly be meet. The worst are the
registry cleaners, they are notorious for deleting things they shouldn't
because they can't possible know all the intricacies of every system
sufficiently to avoid making errors. And as far as these "recovery tools",
here again, most can only make a cursory scan of your situation, and guess
what's wrong, and often *are* wrong in their assessment. Some actually make
the situation worse!
The key to having a smooth running system is to avoid getting into a mess in
the first place, trying to FIX the situation afterwards is usually
problematic. In most instances, ppl simply reinstall. One of the things
you HAVE to do these days is NOT install the OS while connected to the
Internet, not unless you have a firewall erected, at a minimum. That's why
having a hardware router is so beneficial. When using a software firewall,
like ICS, even here, there's a brief period when the network is active, but
the firewall is NOT erected yet! Might only be 20-30 seconds, but sometimes
that's enough.
Here's my recommendation, I've followed these basic rules for years, NEVER
had a virus, not one that wasn't caught before it did damage anyway. But I
was hit by plenty of spyware when this problem first hit the 'net, like
everyone else.
First, forget all these useless tools, System Suite, System Works, even NIS
is so bloated these days.
Second, you should get a good HARDWARE firewall, such as that found on any
basic router these days. Get one EVEN if you have no intention of sharing
resources. They're dirt cheap, even FREE after rebate in many cases, and
even wireless as a bonus. This will always keep you protected, even a PC
that has no protection at the moment (e.g., a new OS install).
Third, install an anti-virus program. I don't want to get into a debate
about brand, it almost doesn't matter, but I do use Norton myself. Run a
scheduled scan at least once a week, and update your signatures EVERY night
(this can usually be automated as well).
Finally, install at least two, but no more than three anti-spyware programs
(so it doesn't get overly complex to manage). I recommend Webroot Spy
Sweeper (the best imo), MS AntiSpyware (currently in beta, a close second to
WSS, imo), and SpywareBlaster (free). Ad-aware is good too, but I've found
lately it tends to miss a lot of stuff, can't always remove spyware
successfully, and the interface is way too complex for the average user.
I'm sure it's useful, but the UI is rather confusing at times. I've also
used Spybot Search and Destroy. Anyway, there are a lot of choices. I esp.
recommend those tools that can be scheduled and run in the background, so
you don't have to remember to run them. And have at least one tool that
runs actively (keep it to one too) to catch attempts to install spyware,
hijack your browser, etc., in real time. Spy Sweeper and MS AntiSpyware
work esp. well for this purpose.
Beyond that, I do little else. Never ever bought any of these other tools
for any reason. Wouldn't them trust if I did anyway. Most are pure junk.
KEEP IT SIMPLE! One hardware firewall, one anti-virus program, and 2-3
spyware programs, that's it! Anything more and you're really not providng
significant improvement to your system, if anything, it only adds to the
list of things that can go wrong.
Btw, I have used NIS, as sort of a backup to my hardware router. It also
lets me see which apps are using the Internet, and allow or deny access on a
per app basis. I also think NIS has the absolute best ad popup blocking
I've ever seen. Beats even software designed to only block ads. Not sure
why, but Norton seems to have figured this out better than anyone. So I
have used it from time to time for these purposes. But strictly speaking,
if you use a hardware firewall, you can usually eliminate NIS or similar
software-based firewalls, it's superfluous. Again, the simpler the better.
At the very least, only ADD software when you feel convinced you MUST have
it to solve a specific problem, not just because it "seems" useful.
By the way, would you know if VCOM and NIS/NSW will coexist on the same OS
install? VCOM has allot of features that I really like, some of which might
surpass NIS/NSW. Norton won't seem to install if it finds other virus and
firewall applications. VCOM strongly suggest removing other virus/firewall
apps as well. For many years I've been an avid user of NIS/NSW, it's always
seemed to do the job well, but now VCOM has caught my eye. I could
certainly live with both being installed on the same OS and simply disabling
the virus and firewall app I chose not to use.
Here again, it's best to keep things simple. Once you start getting into
this area of virus, spyware, system maintenance, etc., you get all kinds of
conflicts and problems. And most of it is unnecessary. I see too many ppl
just piling on software. I approach the configuration of my system much
differently. I only add softare AS NEEDED, when I KNOW that it is
addressing a specific problem that I otherwise can not solve without it.
And again, most of these tools like NSW are not necessary. Heck, I haven't
used anything like NSW ever! I strive to keep as few modifications and
additional software as possible on my system. In fact, many ppl would be
surprised how "plain jane" my systems are, and I'm a software developer w/
LOTS of PCs and equipment here. I make it a point NOT to fall in love w/
the system and all these tools. And my systems run squeaky clean and fast,
and have done so for years. Keep it simple.
If using a boot manager is my answer, I assume I would need to run Windows
Security Update as well as the virus definition update from within each OS.
Is receiving multiple updates acceptable?
Yes, of course. Each OS has to be kept up-to-date, which can only occur
when booted. Presumably you will be booting each OS from time to time.
When you do, of course, you'll be prompted for Windows Updates if you have
automatic updates enabled (btw, I always have it enabled, but recommend you
NEVER let it auto-install, you should always KNOW what's being installed,
record what has changed in a log, then TELL it to install the updates).
Updating multiple OS instances is a non-issue to MS, there's no "tracking"
of Windows Updates per se. Each OS installation simples contacts MS from
time to time to see what needs updating. You can theoretically perform
these updates FOREVER if you kept restoring the base image, MS couldn't care
less, doesn't even know.
Btw, speaking of a log, that's another thing I strongly recommend. KEEP A
LOG OF CHANGES! Once I create the base image, I log every change (w/ date)
in a simple log file. This is invaluable in case you need to restore a
prior image copy and reapply changes. It also can be very useful in problem
diagnosis, you can sometimes link a specific problem to a change recorded in
the log. And there's just something about the process that makes you much
more aware of what's changing, whether you're making too many changes, what
effect the order of changes has (if any), etc. It's a great habit to
develop. I keep a seaprate log for every OS installation on every PC I own.
Jim
