If geeks love it, we’re on it
You found the friendliest gaming & tech geeks around. Say hello!
Gyro Gearloose wrote:
Some Command Line Interpreters
"aattrib -r -s -h" (without the quotes)
"attrib -rsh" (without the quotes)
to clear all the flags. This is true in Windows 2000. YMMV
Mr TRiot wrote:
As far as a "multiboot environment" that's going to be pretty rare considering any PC, no matter what it is will always run better with a single OS rather then 2 or more...
Ehhh I dont know how valid this is. Maybe partially true, as in the "inner" OSs, those farther in on the disk, will be "slower" but that is only marginally so and if you are using a SSD, I would think that there would be zero performance degradation.
Mr TRiot wrote:
I don't see the point in running multi OS's on one system unless it's a server. Such as one linux based OS for placing product orders and one OS for a work station environment. Even still that's just lazy on the part of the company for not wanting to dish out more $$ for a workstation
I ran Vista/Ubuntu on my comp for awhile and it just slowed up my boot speed to minutes (typical is 20 seconds or so) and was just generally not as fast as it should of been. I rearranged all files to be as close to the center of the disc to try to improve boot speed and the time it takes for switching OS's. I got maybe a 5% speed increase? Barely worth the effort...
My opinion stands. Unless you're in a work environment or wanting to "try" a new OS (such as Ubuntu) it's always better to use a single OS rather then two. It'll also save you gigs of space to boot...
That's not really true, I'm afraid. A boot sector is a boot sector. Adding another OS shouldn't slow down the OS in the slightest.
Also, the center of the disk is not the fastest.
sfc /offbootdir=c:\ /offwindir=c:\windows /scannow
Icrontic — Home of the Big Beef Burrito since 8-8-2000, fool.
A Short-Media community © 2003–2014.
Powered with <3 from Vanilla & WordPress.