Vista scoots to new boot, but it's still kinda rooted

Angus Kidman28 September 2006, 12:27 AM

Microsoft has grudgingly given some ground to critics of its 'nuke-first-ask-questions-later' approach to master boot records in Vista, but will it be enough to satisfy users who want to run more than one OS?


While Microsoft would like the world to believe that anyone running Windows has no need of any other operating system, that attitude doesn't cut much mustard with many of its users.

Why settle for one OS when your PC is easily capable of running two or more?

dasbootbillgates200.png Users who want to run Windows alongside (say) a flavour or two of Linux will typically end up with a customised master boot record (MBR). The default MBR on a typical Windows PC automatically passes control to Windows on booting, but a modified MBR can allow you to make your own selection.

PC manufacturers also often alter the MBR to allow their own diagnostic and recovery tools to run in the event of system problems, a process that is often triggered by pressing a specific key during booting.

One of the more questionable tactics that Microsoft has implemented in Vista is to automatically overwrite any existing MBR during the installation process without asking if you mind or giving you an option to back up.

Microsoft says that the Windows installation system can't intelligently interrogate an existing non-MS MBR, although such features are quite common in the install routine for other OSes.

It also argues that an "official" Vista MBR is required for security features -- such as measured boot, which works with Trusted Platform Module (TPM)-enabled chips to check that the OS hasn't been hacked or altered each time it boots -- to work correctly.

While Microsoft is continuing to maintain its nuke-first-ask-questions-later approach to the MBR, it has thrown a small scrap of comfort to software developers who have written diagnostic tools that create their own MBR.

New documentation on Microsoft's Vista site explains how manufacturers can install their own custom diagnostic tools inside the Vista MBR.

"It is clear that manufacturers are making use of custom MBRs to deliver value-added experiences to their customers," the white paper notes. "As a result, Microsoft has developed a feature in Windows Vista that enables OEMs to customise their platforms without having to introduce custom logic in the MBR header."

This shouldn't be mistaken for a full-blown smorgasbord of boot choice options. In the current build of Vista, the only option available to developers is to launch a specific boot application in response to a defined keystroke. Dell could launch a hardware test utility, for example, if you held down "T" on bootup. Microsoft says it may offer other options and input types in future versions of Vista (not one to hold your breath for, we suspect).

Because the Windows Boot Manager still has to load before the new custom boot applications can be detected and launched, this doesn't seem the ideal way to launch a menu system for choosing between OSes. However, a little developer ingenuity might solve that problem in the near future, even if it creates an MBR which, as Microsoft sniffily puts it, "cannot be cleanly integrated with system recovery".


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

peter:

If you install a second OS and change the Vista boot in the MBR, will that affect the ability to Vista to boot?

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Angus Kidman:

The evidence suggests that this is possible, though Microsoft doesn't offically support or condone it, arguing that the system recovery utilities won't work yaddah yaddah yaddah. One obvious disadvantage is that when Vista goes out of beta and you reinstall it, you'll also have to effectively reinstall the other OSes.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

zero:

Yes it will. If you install another OS on a seperate partition/HD vista will not be bootable.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin:

Meh.. Always been the case. MS just don't care about dual booting.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

gary:

Seems to me like Microsoft is trying to take a little too much cake for anyones liking.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

¿Que?:

I'd be curious to hear the thoughts of the Dept of Fair Trading or ACCC as to whether or not this is unreasonable behaviour by MS. It seems rather anti-competitive to me! Does anyone know a lawyer skilled in this area who would be prepared to write an article?

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

rob:

Well, last I heard Apple BootCamp will be able to dual-boot Windows Vista and Mac OSX - so if that works on an Intel Mac, then there seems little reason to doubt Grub or LILO will work on Intel PCs. Dual booting Vista should be just the same as with XP (just always install GRUB/LILO *second* if you can, rather than installing Vista second and losing your whole Linux installation!)

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

David:

I use the Acronis boot manager to switch between Win XP, Vista and Suse Linux Enterprise. I installed Vista after XP and then had to use the Acronis boot CD to repair the MBR to enable switching between the three systems. This is a relatively painless exercise. When selecting Windows, a Vista menu displays two options: Vista or "an earlier edition of Windows".

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Paul Betts:

Vista's bootloader works fine with GRUB, it's the same situation as XP. The only thing that potentially won't work is Bitlocker, but if you Vista and Linux on separate drives, it would probably work too.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Drew Finnie:

I've used Symantec's (formerly Powersoft's) Bootmagic and like Permalink, had XP already installed. When Vista destroyed my MBR, I used Symantec's companion Partition Magic to reactivate the XP partition containing BootMagic, turned it back on, added Vista and can now dual boot with no problems. Been doing this since the early builds and it still works as of Vista Build 5728.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Rees:

Well, I'm triple-booting MEPIS Linux, Windows XP, and Vista. It took some setting up, but it is possible. Hopefully once the Linux guys get their heads around the Vista way of doing things, it'll be a lot easier. Remember, XP always trashed any LILO/GRUB installations you had running in the MBR, too.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anthony:

Windows setup has done this for a long time, and there's good reason for it.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Richard Lloyd:

This article indirectly implies that overwriting the MBR without backup or warning is some sort of change in behaviour for Vista. Er, no, *all* Windows releases have done this (and it's clearly for anti-competitive reasons because Linux distros can handle MBR's correctly - e.g. some now even read your grub.conf too and preserve its entries).

BTW, it's easy to "rescue" the MBR if you have to - boot into a distro CD/DVD and go into their rescue mode (e.g. "linux rescue" on Red Hat-type distros). Run grub and then type "root (hdx,y)" (where hdx = hard disk device, e.g. first is usually hd0, 2nd is hd1 and so on and y = partition you put your grub setup on [numbered from 0 again]). Finally type "setup (hdx)" and you're done - reboot and your grub menu will reappear.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

fusion:

You CAN install Linux (Ubuntu for example) on the same machine as Vista and it will boot fine. I have Vista (RC1), Ubuntu 6.06 and XP Pro all on my Dell 6000 laptop and the play together nicely.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

syst3mcr4sh:

I installed Vista RC1 on a system (Pentium 3) with Ubuntu Dapper Drake and BeOS 5 Personal edition. I use the boot manager coming with BeOS (which I think is a modified version of Lilo back from 2000). When I rebooted my boot manager was trashed by Vista's boot manager. Re-installed BeOS boot manager. Vista would not boot but asked me for install CD to repair things. Insert CD on drive. Repair. Done. They didn't re-installed the boot manager on MBR. I am still using BeOS boot manager. But after repair I can boot to Vista.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Renegade:

15.
Then what do you do watch Vista take three years to respond??? I am amazed you got Vist running on a Pentium 3 machine.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

syst3mcr4sh:

I didn't tell that is doesn'r respond well.
I can use Aero 'cause the PC has a NVIDIA FX5500 PCI 256MB Ram and it is responsive.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Renegade:

So your telling me you have a PCI supporting motherboard yet it also supports a Pentium 3. Is that possible??
I think you are lying to us

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

¿Qué?:

Of course Pentium III supports PCI. I've got three PIII computers sitting in the office beside me and they all have PCI. From memory, PCI came-out around the time of PIIs.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Dano:

PCI came out around the same time as the Pentium I chips (if not a little earlier).

A Pentium III with a PCI graphics card isn't impossible.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Renegade:

yeah 19 I know that but poster 17 said that he had a PCI graphics card with 256mb ram which I find hard to belive if it is paired with a PIII. Thats all

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Timothy Wong:

I've tried running Ubuntu with Vista and it worked fine! :)

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Dessimat0r:

The solution is for the BIOS to support booting from a selected drive, but also from a selected partition on that drive, with the label in brackets on the side.

In the BIOS setup, it should be like

Boot from:
[ ] IBM-CVR45453545 Auto
[ ] IBM-CVR45453545 Partition 0 (WINDOWS)
[x] IBM-CVR45453545 Partition 1 (Linux)

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Xepol:

Considered the fact that the GPL license itself that most alternate bootloders are distributed under are EXPLICITLY designed to prevent MS from having anything to do with them?

MS can't even try to work with the alternate boot loader as that would be a derived product, openning a pile of legal issues all the way down the line.

No, the over zealous MS hating license involved here is the real culprit.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

SpJoRu:

I use BootIt NG. Run Win 2000 then installed vista which rewrote MBR. Performed repair and Vista boots fine along with Win 2000.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

sabo:

24: that is blatantly, hilariously wrong.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anxa:

If you install vista, and then will install grub. If these two software aren't on same harddisk then Vista will not boot. Neither will XP. But Windows 98,95 etc will boot.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user


Tags