NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #30/NN_1992_30.iso/spool/comp/os/os2/misc/39247

Text File | 1992-12-13 | 3.6 KB | 75 lines

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Path: sparky!uunet!utcsri!cdf.toronto.edu!g1nickut
From: [e-mail] (Nick Zahariadis)
Subject: OS/2 Boot Manager and NT incompatibility; Read on!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: sass.cdf
Organization: University of Toronto Computing Disciplines Facility
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 03:47:49 GMT
Lines: 62

In article <[e-mail]> jburns@pdxgp1 (John Justin Burns Jr.) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Luzynski) writes:
>>
>>The NT beta has code included that makes it absolutely refuse to install if
>>it detects the OS/2 boot manager on your hard drive. Pretty rude of MS if
>>you ask me (OS/2 does no such check for NT).
>>
>Does NT have a boot manager or something like it?
>
>I have just been given an article which describes how to install NT using
>the OS/2 boot manager (Douglas Hamilton, Windows Magazine, OCT. 92).  I
>have not tryed the procedure.  It is very specific and the biggest catch
>for me is that NT must be the first thing put on the disk, something I can
>not tolerate (Boot Manager must be first, then os/2 v2 on E:).  NT must be
>put on C: (OK with me).  I assume this article is for the beta version just
>previous to the one now out.
>
>OK, so it will not install with the boot manager.  Another post on this
>news group mentioned that there is a bit in the boot record that may be toggled
>so that the boot manager would not be visible during NT installation.
>Would this work?

 Yes, I've mentioned it and it is possible. There are ways of bypassing
 checks like this that install programs make (and shouldn't really make, if
 the reason is other than incompatibility).

 If someone is interested in working on this, go ahead. I may be a little
 too busy over the holiday season to do this. Of course, the usefulness of
 such a utility is left up to the user, i.e. I can't see why someone
 would want to have both OS/2 and NT installed on the same machine. Hard
 disk real estate and a lot of money is my only explanation of why.

 Also note, that sneaky little checks like that don't serve any purpose
 other than marketing strategies (or lack thereof). Software programs
 that run on a system along with other programs, don't have to fiddle
 around with other programs or system-wide configurations, operating
 systems included. Again, only incompatibility reasons should warrant
 such behaviour. It seems like certain vendors want to grab a hold of
 their buyer's system in a monopolistic way. Well, they will just have
 to learn - the hard way - that that's not things are done anymore.
 The industry has been talking about cross-platform integration for,
 oh say, the last five, maybe six years.

 End users are going to look at who offers them the ability to run
 software from two operating systems (DOS, OS/2) and one operating
 environment (Windows), under a single GUI. Did I mention the plan
 to allow OS/2 as an operating system to run *alongside* AIX on
 RS/6000 systems?

 Of course, NT is still vapourware. So until we see it, I think the
 marketing hype only serves the purpose of accumulating market share.

 Some issues I've touched upon may be more appropriate to other
 newsgroups, i.e. 'comp.os.os2.advocacy'. Please follow up accordingly.

 Nick.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Always put off until tomorrow what you are sure
 to mess up beyond repair today."
Nick Zahariadis    e-mail: [e-mail]