advice, dual boot

I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to prepare
for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been the best
move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead and install
on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it was and let
Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .

--
Domey
------------------

I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff is
all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
know if it is bootable and if it is empty.

I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
behind.

As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
option to boot into the first system.

If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
whatever.


Hope this helps!


Tony. . .

"Domey" <> wrote in message
news:...
>I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
>prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been
>the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead
>and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it
>was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
>
> --
> Domey
> ------------------
>
>

Perhaps, to not make you think that this is so trivial that you have
cart-blanche and nothing matters, I should tell you that there was nothing
wrong in using PM, you may in fact be pleased that you did.

If you have a disk where the windows installer automatically uses all space
(the default) then you will want a way to re-size the partition in order to
create new partitions. The Windows Installers do not do any re-sizing while
PM does (as well as most Linux installers).

So, if you start out with a new un-partitioned disk it will be a good thing
to have a clear mind how to use the space, and do the partitioning
accordingly. This is then difficult to change later without loosing data or
re-using a partition by installing clean, meaning you'll lose whatever was
there before.

At least, now you have the partition and you don't have to think about
re-sizing.

Tony Sperling wrote:
> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff is
> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>
> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
> behind.
>
> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
> option to boot into the first system.
>
> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
> whatever.

You're talking about creating "logical partitions" inside extended
partitions. You do mean to say "logical DRIVES" inside extended
partitions, don't you. Vista hasn't come out with something new in the
form of a "logical partition," has it?

Ron

I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on both
an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.

I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon as I
did that, things went smoothly.

R.

"Tony Sperling" wrote:

> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff is
> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>
> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
> behind.
>
> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
> option to boot into the first system.
>
> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
> whatever.
>
>
> Hope this helps!
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
> "Domey" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been
> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead
> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it
> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
> >
> > --
> > Domey
> > ------------------
> >
> >
>
>
>

On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:30:01 -0700, Rob
<> wrote:

>I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on both
>an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.
>
>I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon as I
>did that, things went smoothly.
>
>R.

I'm not sure what a "logical partition" is. I'm aware of Primary and
Extended partitions; primary partitions may be active or inactive. On
either type of partition, you can place logical drives (the number of
logical drives per partition is different on each). An operating
system can be placed only on a primary partition, but I don't know
what a "logical partition" is.
Please explain. Thanks.


>
>"Tony Sperling" wrote:
>
>> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff is
>> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
>> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
>> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
>> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
>> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
>> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>>
>> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
>> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
>> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
>> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
>> behind.
>>
>> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
>> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
>> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
>> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
>> option to boot into the first system.
>>
>> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
>> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
>> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
>> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
>> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
>> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
>> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
>> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
>> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
>> whatever.
>>
>>
>> Hope this helps!
>>
>>
>> Tony. . .
>>
>> "Domey" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
>> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been
>> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead
>> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it
>> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
>> >
>> > --
>> > Domey
>> > ------------------
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>

A logical partition is a partition within an extended partition.

So I know there's a limit to the # of primary partiions you can have on a
disk (but don't remember exactly how many - 2 or 4 maybe), but I believe you
can create a much larger # of logical partitions within an extended partition
(but only 1 extended partition per disk.

I'm pretty sure that's how it goes. I've never had any trouble installing
XP, Server2003, Linux, etc on an logical partition until Vista. That said,
installing Vista on a Primary partition solved the problem I was having.
That's the key point I'm trying to offer.

R.

"milleron" wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:30:01 -0700, Rob
> <> wrote:
>
> >I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on both
> >an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.
> >
> >I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon as I
> >did that, things went smoothly.
> >
> >R.
>
> I'm not sure what a "logical partition" is. I'm aware of Primary and
> Extended partitions; primary partitions may be active or inactive. On
> either type of partition, you can place logical drives (the number of
> logical drives per partition is different on each). An operating
> system can be placed only on a primary partition, but I don't know
> what a "logical partition" is.
> Please explain. Thanks.
>
>
> >
> >"Tony Sperling" wrote:
> >
> >> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff is
> >> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
> >> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
> >> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
> >> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
> >> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
> >> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
> >>
> >> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
> >> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
> >> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
> >> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
> >> behind.
> >>
> >> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
> >> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
> >> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
> >> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
> >> option to boot into the first system.
> >>
> >> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
> >> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
> >> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
> >> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
> >> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
> >> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
> >> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
> >> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
> >> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
> >> whatever.
> >>
> >>
> >> Hope this helps!
> >>
> >>
> >> Tony. . .
> >>
> >> "Domey" <> wrote in message
> >> news:...
> >> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
> >> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been
> >> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead
> >> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it
> >> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Domey
> >> > ------------------
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
>

What you create in Extended partitions are logical drives. You can't
actually create a partition within a partition, can you? Perhaps
"logical partion" is a synonym for "logical drive" that I just haven't
heard of before.

On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 11:41:02 -0700, Rob
<> wrote:

>A logical partition is a partition within an extended partition.
>
>So I know there's a limit to the # of primary partiions you can have on a
>disk (but don't remember exactly how many - 2 or 4 maybe), but I believe you
>can create a much larger # of logical partitions within an extended partition
>(but only 1 extended partition per disk.
>
>I'm pretty sure that's how it goes. I've never had any trouble installing
>XP, Server2003, Linux, etc on an logical partition until Vista. That said,
>installing Vista on a Primary partition solved the problem I was having.
>That's the key point I'm trying to offer.
>
>R.
>
>"milleron" wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:30:01 -0700, Rob
>> <> wrote:
>>
>> >I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on both
>> >an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.
>> >
>> >I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon as I
>> >did that, things went smoothly.
>> >
>> >R.
>>
>> I'm not sure what a "logical partition" is. I'm aware of Primary and
>> Extended partitions; primary partitions may be active or inactive. On
>> either type of partition, you can place logical drives (the number of
>> logical drives per partition is different on each). An operating
>> system can be placed only on a primary partition, but I don't know
>> what a "logical partition" is.
>> Please explain. Thanks.
>>
>>
>> >
>> >"Tony Sperling" wrote:
>> >
>> >> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff is
>> >> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
>> >> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
>> >> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't throw a
>> >> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
>> >> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it will
>> >> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>> >>
>> >> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name or
>> >> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
>> >> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
>> >> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
>> >> behind.
>> >>
>> >> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't matter
>> >> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead and
>> >> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at the
>> >> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
>> >> option to boot into the first system.
>> >>
>> >> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
>> >> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
>> >> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a drive
>> >> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
>> >> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
>> >> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
>> >> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this space
>> >> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition, the
>> >> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot into
>> >> whatever.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hope this helps!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Tony. . .
>> >>
>> >> "Domey" <> wrote in message
>> >> news:...
>> >> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
>> >> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have been
>> >> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go ahead
>> >> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as it
>> >> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Domey
>> >> > ------------------
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>

Of course, technically speeking, you are absolutely correct, but for most of
us humble amateurs it makes sense to separate HD related activity to
concepts that is relating to how things are looking, as seen from inside the
OS - as opposed to how it looks as seen from the BIOS or an installation
routine.

When seen from inside the OS no-one but no-one thinks of what is underneath
their drive letters as partitions. And for the untrained it does not make
any sense to think of drives within drives more than partitions within
partitions remains an abstract concept to you. We are concerned, here, with
the ironing-out-of-wrinkles and faking not to understand the concept of a
logical partition is not helpful to a lot.

Tony. . .


"milleron" <> wrote in message
news:...
> What you create in Extended partitions are logical drives. You can't
> actually create a partition within a partition, can you? Perhaps
> "logical partion" is a synonym for "logical drive" that I just haven't
> heard of before.
>
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 11:41:02 -0700, Rob
> <> wrote:
>
>>A logical partition is a partition within an extended partition.
>>
>>So I know there's a limit to the # of primary partiions you can have on a
>>disk (but don't remember exactly how many - 2 or 4 maybe), but I believe
>>you
>>can create a much larger # of logical partitions within an extended
>>partition
>>(but only 1 extended partition per disk.
>>
>>I'm pretty sure that's how it goes. I've never had any trouble installing
>>XP, Server2003, Linux, etc on an logical partition until Vista. That
>>said,
>>installing Vista on a Primary partition solved the problem I was having.
>>That's the key point I'm trying to offer.
>>
>>R.
>>
>>"milleron" wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:30:01 -0700, Rob
>>> <> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on
>>> >both
>>> >an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.
>>> >
>>> >I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon
>>> >as I
>>> >did that, things went smoothly.
>>> >
>>> >R.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what a "logical partition" is. I'm aware of Primary and
>>> Extended partitions; primary partitions may be active or inactive. On
>>> either type of partition, you can place logical drives (the number of
>>> logical drives per partition is different on each). An operating
>>> system can be placed only on a primary partition, but I don't know
>>> what a "logical partition" is.
>>> Please explain. Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> >"Tony Sperling" wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista
>>> >> stuff is
>>> >> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer
>>> >> will
>>> >> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
>>> >> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't
>>> >> throw a
>>> >> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure
>>> >> to
>>> >> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it
>>> >> will
>>> >> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>>> >>
>>> >> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a
>>> >> name or
>>> >> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and
>>> >> the
>>> >> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions
>>> >> by
>>> >> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to
>>> >> leave
>>> >> behind.
>>> >>
>>> >> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't
>>> >> matter
>>> >> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go
>>> >> ahead and
>>> >> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain
>>> >> at the
>>> >> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose
>>> >> the
>>> >> option to boot into the first system.
>>> >>
>>> >> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the
>>> >> Vista
>>> >> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
>>> >> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a
>>> >> drive
>>> >> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
>>> >> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space
>>> >> you
>>> >> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way
>>> >> of
>>> >> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this
>>> >> space
>>> >> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition,
>>> >> the
>>> >> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to
>>> >> boot into
>>> >> whatever.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Hope this helps!
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Tony. . .
>>> >>
>>> >> "Domey" <> wrote in message
>>> >> news:...
>>> >> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
>>> >> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have
>>> >> >been
>>> >> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go
>>> >> >ahead
>>> >> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition
>>> >> >as it
>>> >> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > Domey
>>> >> > ------------------
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>

I think these touch on what is meant by the term "logical partition." as Rob
explained and as you said that "Perhaps
"logical partion" is a synonym for "logical drive" as milleron has said is
the way it gets used. This discussion has been good for me--I find these
terms plenty confusing the more I try to read on them and the more MSKBs
ect. I pound on them. I also am not sure right now how well PM works
*within or On Vista* or if Vista will have problems with drives, ect.
created by PM right now until they update it.

Millerons point on installing on a primary partition was a good one for me
to remember.

Primary, Extended and Logical Partitions
http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/file/...titions-c.html

How to use the Disk Management Snap-in to manage Basic and Dynamic Disks in
Windows Server 2003
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/323442/en-us

CH


"milleron" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:30:01 -0700, Rob
> <> wrote:
>
>>I've had NO success installing Vista Beta 2 to a logical partition, on
>>both
>>an Nvidia nForce 4 chipset and an ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset.
>>
>>I recommend creating a primary partition to install Vista on. As soon as I
>>did that, things went smoothly.
>>
>>R.
>
> I'm not sure what a "logical partition" is. I'm aware of Primary and
> Extended partitions; primary partitions may be active or inactive. On
> either type of partition, you can place logical drives (the number of
> logical drives per partition is different on each). An operating
> system can be placed only on a primary partition, but I don't know
> what a "logical partition" is.
> Please explain. Thanks.
>
>
>>
>>"Tony Sperling" wrote:
>>
>>> I may have been responsible for one of those remarks, this Vista stuff
>>> is
>>> all new to me too, so can't tell to what extent the Vista installer will
>>> react or even care. But in more general terms, when installing, the
>>> installer is well equiped to handle whatever - as long as you don't
>>> throw a
>>> Linux installation at it, but then the Linux installers would be sure to
>>> handle it. The installer will not care what created the partition, it
>>> will
>>> know if it is bootable and if it is empty.
>>>
>>> I was surprised to see the Vista Partitioning routine did not tag a name
>>> or
>>> any designation to the partitions - only the type and the size and the
>>> partition number, so you have to be able to recognize your partitions by
>>> these designators in order to know what to install on and what to leave
>>> behind.
>>>
>>> As long as you can point the installer to the partition, it doesn't
>>> matter
>>> if you delete it first or if it was PM that created it. If you go ahead
>>> and
>>> point the installer to the PM partition however, I cannot be certain at
>>> the
>>> moment that it would set up a boot menu for you, so you might loose the
>>> option to boot into the first system.
>>>
>>> If I have Andre correct, your best option now would be to use the Vista
>>> installer and delete the PM partition there, then create an extended
>>> partition, and create a logical partition inside that (to give you a
>>> drive
>>> letter) inside the extended partition you can create more logical
>>> partitions - if you divide up the space between them, but any space you
>>> leave behind will not be visible to the OS, and you will have no way of
>>> getting at it from inside the OS, so however way you want to put this
>>> space
>>> to use, is determined at this point. But using the logical partition,
>>> the
>>> system should set up a boot menu for you and give you an option to boot
>>> into
>>> whatever.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hope this helps!
>>>
>>>
>>> Tony. . .
>>>
>>> "Domey" <> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>> >I used Partition Magic to partition the drive I have Vista x64 on to
>>> >prepare for x86 dual boot. It was stated that use of PM may not have
>>> >been
>>> >the best move and I understand that. So the question is. . .do I go
>>> >ahead
>>> >and install on the PM partition, or use PM to remove the partition as
>>> >it
>>> >was and let Vista x86 handle it? or does it even matter. . .
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Domey
>>> > ------------------
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>