In comp.os.linux.advocacy, miroco
<whodie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Tue, 22 Aug 2006 14:23:11 -0500
<uoadnWLPcIcCxHbZnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 14:10:27 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:44:53 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> __/ [ miroco ] on Tuesday 22 August 2006 18:15 \__
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:39:41 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> | Vista will continue to
>>>>> | wipe your master boot record on install. And so begins "The case
>>>>> | against installing Windows Vista (volume 658, 943)".
>>>>
>>>> Why are they such assholes?
>>>
>>> It's the mantra. They will make it look like it's an innocent mistake. Just
>>> as they have been doing with Web standards for so many years.
>>
>> It's not an innocent mistake, it's very deliberate. And there's a damn
>> good reason for it too. Microsoft has no responsibility to maintain the
>> proper boot sector for other OS's. Period.
>>
>>> Erasing the MBR is the same as erasing a file (purging a pointer to it), The
>>> average computer user will never be able to recover it.
>>
>> Yet you suppose they'll be able to decide to keep their old boot loader,
>> and configure it to boot windows as well?
>>
>> Right.
>
> If windows is going to be a full featured OS then it should include a good
> bootloader and offer the option of being configured to boot any other OS's
> that the user might have on the system.Anything less is uncivilised.
It has NTLDR. That's good enough. :-) Part of this is also the fact
that the bootloader was also the province of the occasional virus.
One might file that tidbit under "be careful what one wishes for". :-)
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
|
|
