Will this support two Hard Drives?

Status
Not open for further replies.
yes, but in order to make a dual-os system, you need to install XP first, and then Vista on the SAME (unless you like swapping drives physically).

Almost every motherboard will support at least TWO HDs.
 
Why can't vista's bootloader be put on drive 0, and xp on drive 0, and vista on drive 1?

Honest question. Because surely you can boot XP and Vista on different drives without physically swapping or forcing the boot order with the Boot Menu option on a lot of newer motherboards.
 
good question im curious too, is there a way to install the different OS on 2 diff drives and somehow get an options menu when your system boots to select which hd to boot?

OR

in BIOS can you select a specific drive to boot from? then if u wanted to boot from the other just open up BIOS and change the drive? or does bios only have the "DISK DRIVE" option for boot sequence?
 
Well, 2000 and XP both had bootloaders that would load, and then you could choose the OS you wanted, and as long as the OS didn't have to be on a specific drive, the bootloader didn't care, nor did the hardware. So for example, you could have 2000 on your first drive, and XP on another drive, and still boot into XP. XP's bootloader would be on that drive that 2k is on though. Linux's bootloaders are much the same in that respect. That is why I wondered if something different happened with Vista.

As for choosing in the BIOS, you can do that with sata drives no prob. But better yet is pressing whatever key you see around POST that mentions Boot Menu or something similar, that way you don't have to physically change anything. There just is a menu that comes up, independent of the OS that you then choose what drive you want the system to boot from.
 
I had xp pro on one sata drive and vista on another. Un attended it would alwyas boot into Vista. But if i wanted XP i just pressed F12 on startup to get the boot menu up and chose the relevent hdd.
Simple as that really. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back