Dynamic disks - what tools for boot management and partition management?

I like the idea of combining space on more than one Win 2000/XP drive
into one logical volume using dynamic disks. But after checking the
Symantec, V-COM, and Acronis web sites, their consumer-priced
utilities for boot management and partition management do not support
dynamic disks.

Are there any programs, low-cost or open source, that do support these
functions? I can't see spending $699 for Acronis True Image Server
for Windows.

Doesn't anyone in this group have answers to these questions?


I like the idea of combining space on more than one Win 2000/XP drive
into one logical volume using dynamic disks. But after checking the
Symantec, V-COM, and Acronis web sites, their consumer-priced
utilities for boot management and partition management do not support
dynamic disks.

Are there any programs, low-cost or open source, that do support these
functions? I can't see spending $699 for Acronis True Image Server
for Windows.

Norton Ghost 9.0 is supposed to support dynamic disks. It is the same
as the old Powerquest V2i Protector.

Winey wrote:

Doesn't anyone in this group have answers to these questions?


I like the idea of combining space on more than one Win 2000/XP drive
into one logical volume using dynamic disks. But after checking the
Symantec, V-COM, and Acronis web sites, their consumer-priced
utilities for boot management and partition management do not support
dynamic disks.

Are there any programs, low-cost or open source, that do support these
functions? I can't see spending $699 for Acronis True Image Server
for Windows.

_______________________________________________
Colin Sewell
Vancouver, BC

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 07:24:14 -0700, SloPoke
wrote:

Norton Ghost 9.0 is supposed to support dynamic disks. It is the same
as the old Powerquest V2i Protector.

Really? So the old "DOSish" interface is gone? Can you still run G 9
from just a floppy? (Drive Image is gone?)

As much as i appreciate SloPoke's answer (and I'll drink a glass of
fine Cabernet to him), it doesn't cover all my concerns. A "complete"
solution also includes a partition manager like Partition Magic and a
boot manager/OS install support aid like System Commander. I've
already checked. Neither supports dynamic disks.

--W--

Winey wrote:

Doesn't anyone in this group have answers to these questions?


I like the idea of combining space on more than one Win 2000/XP drive
into one logical volume using dynamic disks. But after checking the
Symantec, V-COM, and Acronis web sites, their consumer-priced
utilities for boot management and partition management do not support
dynamic disks.

Are there any programs, low-cost or open source, that do support these
functions? I can't see spending $699 for Acronis True Image Server
for Windows.

_______________________________________________
Colin Sewell
Vancouver, BC

Winey wrote:

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 07:24:14 -0700, SloPoke
wrote:

Norton Ghost 9.0 is supposed to support dynamic disks. It is the same
as the old Powerquest V2i Protector.

Really? So the old "DOSish" interface is gone? Can you still run G 9
from just a floppy? (Drive Image is gone?)

As much as i appreciate SloPoke's answer (and I'll drink a glass of
fine Cabernet to him), it doesn't cover all my concerns. A "complete"
solution also includes a partition manager like Partition Magic and a
boot manager/OS install support aid like System Commander. I've
already checked. Neither supports dynamic disks.


Why is there the need for these 3rd party applications? Are you the
sort of person who used to use all sorts of memory management programs
under DOS?

Try a purist's approach.

It's not always necessary to use PM and its ilk. Mostly used by people
who seek to complicate something that is already fairly basic by an
advanced user's (which is what I assume you are) standards.


Odie

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:26:14 +0100, Odie Ferrous
wrote:

Winey wrote:


As much as i appreciate SloPoke's answer (and I'll drink a glass of
fine Cabernet to him), it doesn't cover all my concerns. A "complete"
solution also includes a partition manager like Partition Magic and a
boot manager/OS install support aid like System Commander. I've
already checked. Neither supports dynamic disks.


Why is there the need for these 3rd party applications? Are you the
sort of person who used to use all sorts of memory management programs
under DOS?

Yes, and I take your question as a compliment to my power-user
status. Yes, and I used to have DOS-enhancers for things like history
also.

Try a purist's approach.

I ain't no masochist.

It's not always necessary to use PM and its ilk. Mostly used by people

Well, how else can I change partition sizes without backing up and
restoring data? If the built-in Windows administrative tools can do
that, I would be more than happy to use them. As someone else in some
news group said, "edumacate me."

Also, I want to be able to multi-boot, but not rely on the relatively
primitive facilities in Win 2000/XP. How about linux, etc. Also, a
good boot manager can conceal non-active boot partitions from the
active-parittion OS. With Windows multiple-boot, that is not
possible, and you also get drive letter assignment tsuris. (highly
technical word meaning headaches you don't wish on anybody you like.
Your worst enemy, maybe ...) Imagine the tsuris with 3 primary
partitions on one hard drive, plus an extended partition for data
partitions.

So, again, edumacate me.

who seek to complicate something that is already fairly basic by an
advanced user's (which is what I assume you are) standards.

Well, using a boot manager or a partition manager with normal disks is
pretty basic today. All is that I want to do is combine those
facilities with dynamic disks. And only to have logical disk
partitions that can span physical disks.

Now, as you were saying ...


Odie

--W--

"Winey" wrote in message
...

Also, I want to be able to multi-boot, but not rely on the relatively
primitive facilities in Win 2000/XP. How about linux, etc. Also, a
good boot manager can conceal non-active boot partitions from the
active-parittion OS. With Windows multiple-boot, that is not
possible, and you also get drive letter assignment tsuris. (highly
technical word meaning headaches you don't wish on anybody you like.
Your worst enemy, maybe ...) Imagine the tsuris with 3 primary
partitions on one hard drive, plus an extended partition for data
partitions.

I hate boot managers because they all seem to overwrite the NT disk signature,
causing major boot problems for me.

You do not need to hide primary partitions. Make sure you OS disk is first
(Int13 order), and active the partition you are installing to. It will always
become C if you run setup from CD. Other drive letters are configured in Disk
Manager.

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 09:52:14 -0700, "Eric Gisin"
wrote:

"Winey" wrote in message
.. .

Also, I want to be able to multi-boot, but not rely on the relatively
primitive facilities in Win 2000/XP. How about linux, etc. Also, a
good boot manager can conceal non-active boot partitions from the
active-parittion OS. With Windows multiple-boot, that is not
possible, and you also get drive letter assignment tsuris. (highly
technical word meaning headaches you don't wish on anybody you like.
Your worst enemy, maybe ...) Imagine the tsuris with 3 primary
partitions on one hard drive, plus an extended partition for data
partitions.

I hate boot managers because they all seem to overwrite the NT disk signature,
causing major boot problems for me.

You do not need to hide primary partitions. Make sure you OS disk is first

Not so. Back in the day when I had a laptop with Win 98 and NT, I
also had a third partition for my data. When I booted Win 98, the
data partition was D:, which is what you would expect.

But when I booted NT, the D Drive was assigned to the Win 98 program,
and the data partition was assigned to Drive E: Not good.

Now imagine that you have a system with 3 primary partitions for let's
say Win XP, Win XP SP 2, and Win XP for "scratching around." I can
almost guarantee that the presence of 3 installs, one on each primary
partition, of MS Office, MS this-and-that, and other programs, will
confuse the bejabbers out of most of that software. Not to mention
possible confusion when installing Win XP into each partition.

I think the boot managers have it right. A given installation of
Windows doesn't see any other Windows (or Linux) installations unless
you want to set it up that way.

(Int13 order), and active the partition you are installing to. It will always
become C if you run setup from CD. Other drive letters are configured in Disk
Manager.

"Winey" wrote in message
...

I hate boot managers because they all seem to overwrite the NT disk
signature,
causing major boot problems for me.

You do not need to hide primary partitions. Make sure you OS disk is first

Not so. Back in the day when I had a laptop with Win 98 and NT, I
also had a third partition for my data. When I booted Win 98, the
data partition was D:, which is what you would expect.

But when I booted NT, the D Drive was assigned to the Win 98 program,
and the data partition was assigned to Drive E: Not good.

If you cannot change drive letters in NT you are pretty stupid.

Now imagine that you have a system with 3 primary partitions for let's
say Win XP, Win XP SP 2, and Win XP for "scratching around." I can
almost guarantee that the presence of 3 installs, one on each primary
partition, of MS Office, MS this-and-that, and other programs, will
confuse the bejabbers out of most of that software. Not to mention
possible confusion when installing Win XP into each partition.

Simply not an issue if the OS is C:.

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 08:15:36 -0700, "Eric Gisin"
wrote:


If you cannot change drive letters in NT you are pretty stupid.

Eric (you related to that Ron whats-his-name guy whose every other
utterance is 'clueless?')

Of course I can.
control panel
administrative tools
computer management
select disk management icon

That still doesn't minimize my point. You still run the very real
risk of "something doesn't work as expected" because of multiple
visible primary partitions. Not to mention the possibility of
operator error.



Now imagine that you have a system with 3 primary partitions for let's
say Win XP, Win XP SP 2, and Win XP for "scratching around." I can
almost guarantee that the presence of 3 installs, one on each primary
partition, of MS Office, MS this-and-that, and other programs, will
confuse the bejabbers out of most of that software. Not to mention
possible confusion when installing Win XP into each partition.

Simply not an issue if the OS is C:.