|
|
||
Multi Booting Nonsense© Copyright Darrell Anderson. I have owned several computers through the years but only two remain in my possession: my current K6-III+ system and an older 486 box. I already know that unless I want to deal with a minimal version of Linux — a doable project, that my experimenting on the 486 probably would be unfruitful. Hard-core command line users would disagree, of course, but I use computers as tools; they are not hobbies or pastimes for me. I also choose to not spend funds on new hardware. That leaves me with one choice: playing the multiple boot game. I spent a lot of time studying and experimenting with multiple booting and partitioning. I learned more than I care to know. Furthermore, multiple booting is not an ideal way of learning a new operating system (OS) because an individual can use only one OS at any one time. Being able to play side-by-side compare-and-learn is a much better way to learn. Thus, multiple boot is already a disadvantage to migrating. The better route is a second box. I have thought about buying a second box, a used system, something with a little more muscle than my K6-III+ but nonetheless now considered “obsolete.” Maybe I eventually will, but that depends upon how I adapt to Linux. For a while I groped somewhat in the dark trying to learn the correct way to boot multiple systems on one hard drive. The trick is to install each OS so they are truly independent. If I use the Windows NT boot loader, then everything becomes dependent upon the NT boot loader. I wanted true OS independence, including the Windows 2000 (W2K) partition that I thought I was going to maintain. So the proper way to configure multiple boot is challenging, but doable. Unfortunately for me, living in a remote area, I did not have the luxury of having anybody close by who could show me the things I didn’t immediately understand; and living in a rural area with a slow modem internet connection means on-line research is slow too. Multi-booting is far from ideal. If I had newer power hardware I’d opt for VMWare. That is one slick product, but my older mid-range hardware doesn’t have the muscle for VMWare, and VMWare is an additional $300. Besides, my current hardware works fine for what I need to do. Yes, I want to migrate to Linux, but when all is said and done, I’ll be using Linux for the same basic tasks I use NT4 — writing, email, and some surfing. So other than placing that kind of desire in the “I want it as a toy” category, I can’t and won’t justify the costs. I’m not so sure why we make such a big deal about computers anyway — I have often contemplated my life would be so much simpler if I trashed the thing! This multiple boot process delayed any Linux migration efforts for a long time. At least, until I decided to not have a W2K partition. That solved several configuration issues and more importantly avoided the automatic NT4-to-NT5 file conversion problem. My NT4 system is stable and I will not have Bill’s “newer and better” technology disrupt that stability. One thing became clear to me as I surfed boards and forums for more information about multi-booting. Just about every individual who ventured that path became frustrated. Windows 95/98, Me, W2K, XP — none of those systems play nice with Linux. Many people are not NT4 users, although NT4 is rather benign compared to how other Windows versions operated. I like NT4. NT4 was the last decent M$ OS that was not blatantly intrusive or belligerent. Unlike W2K or XP, stripping NT4 of non-essential components is a rather straightforward process. Yes, NT4 never did well support DirectX technology, but I was never into games or videos and the like. Thus, NT4 has always worked well for me. As I have written previously, I don’t need to migrate, I want to for philosophical and ideological reasons. However, I did not underestimate the multi-boot challenges faced by so many people. I decided I wanted to avoid most of that turmoil as much as possible. Eliminating W2K from the equations simplified my path. By eliminating W2K, I was left with my old docile DOS/WFWG 3.11 partition, my NT4 partitions, and my eventual Linux partitions. I could simply choose a standard boot loader and keep going. I could even use the NT4 boot loader if I wanted. Yet, although multi-boot is doable my recommendation is buy a second box. Then learn with the boxes side-by-side. Or, save the costs of a second monitor, keyboard, and mouse, and install VNC (virtual network computing) and for the same price as VMWare you can have PIP — picture-in-a-picture. Although I have not yet bought any new hardware, I am still tempted to do so and go with VNC. Finis. |
||