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.
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 $$ for a workstation
I ran Vista/Ubuntu on my comp for awhile and it just slowed up my boot speed to minutes (typical is 20 seconds or so) and was just generally not as fast as it should of been. I rearranged all files to be as close to the center of the disc to try to improve boot speed and the time it takes for switching OS's. I got maybe a 5% speed increase? Barely worth the effort...
My opinion stands. Unless you're in a work environment or wanting to "try" a new OS (such as Ubuntu) it's always better to use a single OS rather then two. It'll also save you gigs of space to boot...
I don't see the point in running multi OS's on one system unless it's a server. Such as one linux based OS for placing product orders and one OS for a work station environment. Even still that's just lazy on the part of the company for not wanting to dish out more $$ 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.
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.
While adding a second OS won't slow down the operation of the OS at all, it can slow boot times down, especially if you wait for the timeout on your bootloader screen instead of hitting enter. Of course this is just being nitpicky (which I excel at).
> CHKDSK /? does not list a /F as a valid parameter
there is no F switch. what is the reason behind this? I am on XP SP3 Home Premium
//combined:
Okay, after due diligence, I must report that outside sources indicate that the switch F is implied with the R switch, and that F is only applicable in a DOS shell within an active Windows session.
Dave
//combined:
Okay, after due diligence, I must report that outside sources indicate that the switch <b>F</b> is implied with the <b>R</b> switch, and that <b>/F</b> is only applicable in a DOS shell within an active Windows session.
I changed two exe files as instructed by microsoft tech and after that my computer would not restart it was looking for those two files. I used my operating system cd to get it to started back. It came back on but it partition my hard drive. I have a back up file on my C drive. Can I change those two files back and restore it or is there anything else I can do to restore my computer back the way it was?
If chkdsk is reporting irrecoverable problems you probably have a hard drive that is physically dying. I'd suggest hooking you disk up to another system (using a USB enclosure is the easiest way to do it), back up any data you can pull off it and replace the disk.
These instructions didn't do anything for me, except give me multiple load identifiers.
However, FIXMBR did help.
I'm not posting this to slam the article - I loved it! It sent me looking in the right direction and taught me way more about Recovery Console than I ever knew.
I just wanted to mention what worked for me, to offer hope to any who enter here & leave despairing (at least temporarily).
Great article and i don't mean to slam it but as posted above, a lot of inconsistences. I love the part where it states "Neither of these procedures are cheap in the realm of commercial PC repair, nor do they inspire a tremendous level of confidence in the technician or the hopeful client.", well all I can say is unless you are 100% computer illiterate you would never have taken it to GeekSquad in the first place and pay over-priced service charges from under qualified "technicians", and as Melinda said above, you you truely know the error and what you are doing, FIXMBR has worked perfectly for the errors that need it more times in my career (which is probably twice as long as the average aged tech at Geeksquad) than I care to mention. Also as already stated and a BIG MUST, BACK UP ANY FILE FIRST BEFORE YOU DELETE IT. But thanks geeksquad, because if it wasn't for you guys i wouldn't be so busy fixing the problems you either couldn't or caused.
Thanks-a-million! I've spent three maddened days without access to my PC changing ribbon cables, testing different drives and all sorts of crap. Now I'm back online and typing this comment. But I wished someone would have told us newbbies the Windows disk may not be boot-able until you run it from the "safe mode" screen and press any key within 4 seconds! I started checking for problems with my cd drive because it wasn't auto running. Sheesh.
Long story short, the FREE SystemRescueCD always saved my ass when Windows decided to stop working for no reason. And in a less painful way. As the techniques given here perfectly illustrate, Windows' recovery options are nothing but a bad joke.
So i tried this on my cousins computer all except the "•C: CHKDSK /R /F", because the computer said that wasnt a valid function or whatever. OK so the computer boots back up, but i have a problem mentioned earlier by STRETCH. before Windows logs on it give us the option to boot two different, yet identically named versions of "Microsoft Windows XP Professional. How do we eliminate one of those options? please help!
You have saved both my wallet and my butt from being kicked today, somehow I managed to install ubuntu on my wifes Windows-partiton, so XP wouldn't boot.
Comments
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...
If you're using XP Pro and you have forgotten your admin password, you could reset it. Simply google for "Offline NT Password & Registry Editor"
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.
I think he had the right motive, wrong idea.
While adding a second OS won't slow down the operation of the OS at all, it can slow boot times down, especially if you wait for the timeout on your bootloader screen instead of hitting enter. Of course this is just being nitpicky (which I excel at).
God Bless .
LOUISE
> CHKDSK /? does not list a /F as a valid parameter
there is no F switch. what is the reason behind this? I am on XP SP3 Home Premium
//combined:
Okay, after due diligence, I must report that outside sources indicate that the switch F is implied with the R switch, and that F is only applicable in a DOS shell within an active Windows session.
Dave
//combined:
Okay, after due diligence, I must report that outside sources indicate that the switch <b>F</b> is implied with the <b>R</b> switch, and that <b>/F</b> is only applicable in a DOS shell within an active Windows session.
Dave
from the repair console (you boot from the CD and press r for repair mode [XP] or choose command prompt [vista or later]
Saved on of my client's Production server on Windows NT.
this solved my problem
It is clear and easy to learn.
You deserved a 10 !
However, FIXMBR did help.
I'm not posting this to slam the article - I loved it! It sent me looking in the right direction and taught me way more about Recovery Console than I ever knew.
I just wanted to mention what worked for me, to offer hope to any who enter here & leave despairing (at least temporarily).
Much better than saving all data first and then formatting and reinstalling Windows.
Free at last, free at last - and THANK YOU! :-)