Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Dream Machine ( Build your own PC ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zeuspaul who wrote (5846)	2/4/1999 7:41:00 AM
From: Clarence Dodge	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 14778

ZP I reread my post and see where the confusion came from. I only referred to an extended partition. Don't feel bad.... for me learning by correcting mistaken concepts seems to stick better. I was just sorting out the whole extended/logical continu um in my mind as it was being discussed so I was rather easily confused. I don't think its humanly possible to be always 100% clear when discussing in writing so many different concepts with so many different people of varying degrees of experience. Although, you do pretty damn good... They are a combo. I believe you have to have both. Thats what I needed to know. I wanted to see if the video card defugalty would go away in Win95..it did not..same problem..arggh I guess I missed your posts about a video card problem. I'm not able to read everything latrely, much to my regret. Sorry to hear that. What card is it? it did not boot on the Mylex bt930 controller Your last NT install. .. months ago.... was that on a scsi disk also? But with the Adaptec controller? I remember you having some kind of recognition problem with NT back then too, but you were able to do the install. Maybe a comparison of the two installs ( then and now) would provide some clues other than a different controller ie how the controllers were configured differently or the same. I am ready to give NT another try. I Like you've always told me....and Spots too (told me that is) with 95/98 available on a different drive via BIOS selection, NT is ripe for exploration. I find it less condesending than w98. Everything is out in the open when security is disabled. Its a much better learning tool than 98 as far as just whats in a Windows OS. Of course that availability can be a detriment too. I 'm of the look but don't touch philosophy much of the time. I wish I knew enough to be supportive of you as you and Spots have been supportive of me. Spots doesn't need support yet, of course, until his memory loss gets worse <gg> setup as described by Spots ie NT/Win9x boot on KOT in FAT partition. Thats is a nice way to do KOT... I think yours and Spots minds came together real nice with this setup. I will clone the Win98 installation to a hidden primary partition on the KOT drive. Another winning colaborative idea. Like you said it hasn't been tossed around to the extent of the backup NT on KOT idea. But also like you said, with 17 gigs, why not. One question starting to form in my mind concerning implementation of cloneing w98 to NT is how to do the clone of just w98 when both w98 and backupNT are in that KOT drive partition. I don't think we want to backup the backup NT <g> How is one OS DI'd off of a dual boot partition? Then I will delete Win98 from IDE1 master and install NT in one large NTFS partition.. Having trouble following.. are you transfering 98 and 95 to IDE2 with DI then deleteing 98 from IDE 1 and installing NT there in its place? Ending setup IDE 1 master = NT, ide slave = w95, ide 2 master = KOTw98/NT backup ide 2 slave = peripheral?? Clarence