Windows 98 doublebooting.

[cannie]

For doublebooting in a single HD I always used until now FAT32.

What if you use NTFS on the main partition for XP only, leaving FAT32 for the Win98 logical units of the extended partition on the same HD? Any of you has done it before?

It would be good to know it to avoid loosing time and effort if the results are bad.

Thanks.

Edited November 19, 2008 by cannie

[Multibooter]

It would be good to know it to avoid loosing time and effort if the results are bad.

Buy System Commander 9 and get yourself PowerQuest PartitionMagic v8.01 (not the version from Symantec). The pdf file (esp. chapter Operating System Limitations, pp127-129) on the System Commander 9 CD is very helpful, they used to have it as an accompanying book.

I am using many operating systems, a good partition plan is essential. In your case (Win98/XP) I would suggest the follwing:

C: 2 GB FAT16, primary, install System Commander there, this is your boot partition, also for old DOS 6 if you need it

D: 2 GB FAT16, logical, for Win98 \Windows\,

E: 20 GB+ FAT32, logical for your Win98 programs + data

F: 30 GB+ NTFS, logical, for WinXP, WinXP programs + data (to be converted later to FAT32)

G: 30 GB+ NTFS, logical, for huge files >4GB

On my desktop I have Vista on a dedicated 2nd internal HDD, booting via System Commander from C:

After the installation of WinXP, go into PartitionMagic and convert partition F: (WinXP) from NTFS ==> FAT32. WinXP under FAT32 is enjoyable, fast, and more under your control, you can make virus checks & backups under Win98. WinXP+applications on FAT32 is noticeably faster/crisper, esp. on older/slower machines.

Edited October 15, 2008 by Multibooter

[herbalist]

Multibooter,

I don't understand the reasoning for some of your choices. Why did you choose FAT16 for the Win98 partition? Why separate the 98 programs to a different drive that's formatted differently than the 98 partition? What is the advantage of doing it this way?

My setup uses 3 internal drives with 4 operating systems. Except for the Linux and encrypted partitions, I made all of them FAT32. Considered using NTFS for 2K but opted for FAT32 so I could access it with 98 if I needed to.

Rick

[Multibooter]

Hi herbalist,

Why did you choose FAT16 for the Win98 partition?

Main reason: so that I can access the partition also under DOS 6. Also, Win98 is possibly faster when running under FAT16. I can also run old DOS 6 tools, like DCF & VGACopy, in a full-size DOS window with SlowDown; I am not sure this works if Win98 is on a FAT32 partition, although it would be interesting to try. If you don't use DOS 6, then the Win98 opsys could be also on a FAT32 partition. FAT16 has worked fine for me during the past 8 years, I had no reason to change.

Why separate the 98 programs to a different drive that's formatted differently than the 98 partition? What is the advantage of doing it this way?

I leave \Windows\ and \Program Files\ together on a FAT16 partition, and try to never install applications/software to \Program Files\. This arrangement allows for very fast opsys backups (or: restores): under a 2nd Win98 or under WinXP I just zip up the about 1.5GB in \Windows\ and \Program files\ (or: delete the previous \Windows\ and \Program Files\, then extract backups from zip file). This directory-based backup allows opsys restores, even if you have resized your partitions, or if you have moved up to a larger HDD with more partitions. The boot stuff is handled by System Commander, System Commander saves/backs up the files necessary for booting & wipes out any boot-sector infections. This directory-based restore allows to restore for example opsys backup #15 (made 5 years ago on laptop A, 30GB internal HDD, different partition structure) on laptop B, 120 GB HDD. Recently I started to use Partition Table Doctor v3.5 (a must-have), to also back up the disk structure.

If \Program Files\ were also to contain my applications, my opsys backups & restores would get huge and slow, too unwieldy to make regular opsys backups. After installing 2-3 new applications, I make a new opsys backup. The install-to directories of applications I usually back up only once, into application backups. My backup strategy consists of opsys backups, application backups & data backups. I have about 50 opsys backups, each between 0.5 and 1.5GB. I can restore the state of my computer to roughly any point in time of the last 8 years. I make on average about 10 opsys restores a month, mainly after trying out new downloads. I also note down chronologically in a text file all installs & uninstalls of software & additions of hardware.

I am currently restoring an opsys backup of 12 months ago and re-installing about 10 applications because a year ago I had installed the Buffalo wireless network card WLI-CB-G54S; after throwing out the card I couldn't get rid of its driver anymore, without the Buffalo driver other wireless network cards would not be able to connect to the Internet anymore. By having a chronological sequence of opsys backups I can also quickly identify when a virus infection started & what caused it.

I have 8 old near-identical laptops (all Dell Inspiron 7500) in different locations, the internal HDDs are easily exchangeable, and I was always able to recover from a disaster with the above backup method, without a major head-ache. When I travel by plane, I usually just take the HDD with me, not the laptop; at the destination I insert the HDD into another laptop there.

So in short: I install Win98 applications to a different partition to allow quick backup of the Win98 opsys. The partition with the Win98 applications was in the first years also FAT16, but then I changed to FAT32 after the applications exceeded 2GB. That's why I have Win98 on FAT16 & the Win98 applications on FAT32.

My setup uses 3 internal drives with 4 operating systems. Except for the Linux and encrypted partitions, I made all of them FAT32. Considered using NTFS for 2K but opted for FAT32 so I could access it with 98 if I needed to.

What separates the worlds of Win98 and WinXP is NTFS. I don't like NTFS, and when you run WinXP under FAT32, WinXP becomes a likeable flavor of Windows, generally superior to Win98, but you shouldn't use it on the Internet for security reasons. BTW, Panasonic etc. don't like NTFS either, their SD/SDHC cards are for FAT/FAT32. NTFS is good for corporate use, to lock out your co-workers, but not for consumer/home use. The only use I have for NTFS is for files > 4GB. Eventually I will try to get Vista running under FAT32... Edited October 15, 2008 by Multibooter

[cannie]

I've learnt a lot.

Well, taking into account your experiences I'll keep using FAT32 whenever possible, and if I really need NTFS at any moment now I know how to do it in a safe way.

Thank you very much, Multibooter and herbalist!

[cannie]

Any more ideas anyone ?

[cannie]

I've found today an excellent old program to restore from scratch a damaged boot sector on doubleboot, both for Windows 98 and XP. Its name is BOOTPART.EXE, freeware, and you can download it from here:

http://www.winimage.com/bootpart.htm

It must be run under DOS, preferably using a Windows 98 boot floppy.

Of course your HD must have a FAT32 structure (partitions below 32 GB, as many as needed), and on the root C:\ you must have all the following doubleboot required elements:

ntdetect.com

ntldr (boot menu loader)

boot.ini (boot menu)

bootsect.dos (Windows 98 boot loader)

bootfont.bin (optative, only for font type during booting process)

Io.sys

Command.com

Msdos.sys

Config.sys

Autoexec.bat

It is very convenient that you keep all these 10 files saved in a DOS boot floppy folder, to restore any of them by xcopying to C:\ in case of need.

In the root of this boot floppy you must copy BOOTPART.EXE

To restore the damaged boot sector loader:

1.- Boot your comp using the floppy.

2.- If you have previously configured XP as default OS in the boot.ini file, you must type:

BOOTPART WINNT BOOT:C:

3.- Else, when Windows 98 is the default OS in boot.ini you must type:

BOOTPART WIN95 BOOT:C:

Don't mind the references to Winnt or Win95. As you know XP is NT and Win98 comes from Windows 95. I've tried it to restore my damaged XP boot sector loader and I've found that it works perfect.

No need to use the recovery console for this purpose!

HTH

[dencorso]

Eventually I will try to get Vista running under FAT32...

The great Dietmar has found the way to do it. Find it here: How to install Windows Vista on a Fat32 partition. Enjoy!

[jaclaz]

I've found today an excellent old program

Just for the record, bootpart is REALLY old, something like 15 years, but it has been updated, though the documentation is a bit scarce.

Valid "System ID's" in current version are (see here):

http://forum.winimage.com/viewtopic.php?t=276

Bootpart was originally developed for people wanting to double boot NT and DOS 6.22, and evolved in the years.

It can produce a standard bootsector:

the syntax is following:

bootpart <OS> <filename>

Where OS can be (case insensitive):

DOS622

MSDOS MS-DOS 6.22 I.D. MSDOS5.0

WIN95 Windows 95 I.D. MSWIN4.0

WIN95OSR2

WIN95SR2

WIN95OEMSR2 Windows 95 OEMSR2 I.D. MSWIN4.1

WIN98

WINME Windows 98 or Windows ME I.D. MSWIN4.1

NT

WINNT

WIN200

WIN2K

WINXP Windows NT/2K/XP and 2003

VISTA

WINVISTA Windows VISTA (BOOTMGR instead of NTLDR)

OPENDOS OpenDos I.D. NWDOS7.0

You should not use a "different" parameter from what your OS actually is, there are slight differences between the bootsectors of different OS, and although using WINNT instead of WINXP may work at booting, it is not recommended "mixing" different bootsectors/OSes.

jaclaz

[cannie]

Just for the record, bootpart is REALLY old, something like 15 years, but it has been updated

The date of the bootpart.exe version update that I downloaded is 01/08/2005.

As you say the program is rather poorly explained. Now I understand much better what I've done: I've only replaced the part of the bootsector that calls the Operating System, which in fact was damaged.

Thank you very much for your documented post, jaclaz!

Edited November 20, 2008 by cannie

[jaclaz]

Just for the record, bootpart is REALLY old, something like 15 years, but it has been updated

The date of the bootpart.exe version update that I downloaded is 01/08/2005.

As you say the program is rather poorly explained. Now I understand much better what I've done: I've only replaced the part of the bootsector that calls the Operating System, which in fact was damaged.

Thank you very much for your documented post, jaclaz!

Yep that's the latest, version 2.6 :

http://www.winimage.com/bootpart.htm

You are welcome.

jaclaz