Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Win2K Startup

  1. #1
    Uranium Lounger CWBillow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV USA
    Posts
    6,371
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts

    Win2K Startup

    What is it I need to back up so that I can restore the "Recovey Console -- Installing as a Startup Option"?

    I *know* it's not a big deal to re-install it, but I am trying to determine what file(s) etc. are affected...

    Chuck Billow
    -------------------------------------------------
    "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience - well, that comes from poor judgment."

    ~ A(lan) A(lexander) Milne (1882-1956)- "House at Pooh Corner"

  2. #2
    Uranium Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    7,089
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    The BOOT.INI and hidden CMDCONS folder that gets installed in the root partition. These are both "super hidden" items so you will need to tell Windows Explorer to display protected operating system files if you want to see them. Visible or not, it shouldn't affect your backup as long as you specify those items.
    -Mark

  3. #3
    Uranium Lounger CWBillow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV USA
    Posts
    6,371
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    Mark:

    That's it... thanks...

    Chuck
    -------------------------------------------------
    "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience - well, that comes from poor judgment."

    ~ A(lan) A(lexander) Milne (1882-1956)- "House at Pooh Corner"

  4. #4
    Gold Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Wardrobe Malfunction Junction, Derry
    Posts
    2,953
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    Of course Mark is exactly right here and we visited those files in

    Recovery Console Files XP Thread September 20, 2003.

    Recovery Console XP Thread June 13, 2003.

    Just want to make sure you get the benefit of all our hardwork over on the XP thread Chuck.

    SMBP

  5. #5
    Uranium Lounger CWBillow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV USA
    Posts
    6,371
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    SMBP:

    I'm sorry... I guess I'm not real certain as yet how and where the similarities as well as differences betwen XP and W2K reside...

    Chuck
    -------------------------------------------------
    "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience - well, that comes from poor judgment."

    ~ A(lan) A(lexander) Milne (1882-1956)- "House at Pooh Corner"

  6. #6
    Uranium Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    7,089
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    Differences? The GUI, but outside of that, very few, really. Similarities? Windows XP was built on Windows 2000's core, and is a point release to Windows 2000. XP has more multimedia features integrated into it, as well as CD burning, but the primary focus is that it's targeted at the world where Win2000 was marketed as a business operating system. XP was intended to do away with the Windows 9x series of operating systems and end the fork in coding. Many Windows 2000 drivers will work in XP, and nearly every program you can think of will also work. There are of course architectural changes that you don't see, but I would call XP evolutionary and not revolutionary. It's more like Windows 2000.1. <img src=/S/smile.gif border=0 alt=smile width=15 height=15> In fact, if you check the version numbers, 2000 identifies itself as version 5.0, and XP identifies itself as 5.1. The proof is in the pudding (so to speak).

    Incremental changes are what make XP worth the while. System Restore is one great example. I can't tell you how many times it's saved my bacon. The task-oriented shell is great too, if you use it (I don't). Networking is somewhat easier in XP as opposed to 2000, but they are both quite strong in this area. From a usage standpoint, both are excellent OSs and very stable. Is XP a must have? Hard to say, it depends on the individual - but I would not run out and drop the cash on the upgrade unless there was a feature in XP that I just had to have. I still run 2000 on my workhorse machines because it demands less in the way of resources (memory, CPU speed, et al). It's been around longer and is mature, but the focus these days is on XP, because that's what the folks in Redmond want everyone to be using.

    Just my <img src=/S/2cents.gif border=0 alt=2cents width=15 height=15>, hope it helps illuminate things a bit.
    -Mark

  7. #7
    Uranium Lounger CWBillow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV USA
    Posts
    6,371
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    Mark:

    Thanks for helping me get directed...

    That resolves that: I'll spend the time and limited resources learning how to twist 2000 around, and not worry for the time being about XP...

    And, if I'm understanding, I can pretty much switch and swap key info(s) on the system workings, inherent problems, and composite solutions...

    That's good, because I in no way feel comfortable enough yet to switch again... at times, I still miss the simplicity of W98... and I have got to address the NTFS issues at some point...

    Well, it's still just one step at a time...

    Regards,
    Chuck
    -------------------------------------------------
    "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience - well, that comes from poor judgment."

    ~ A(lan) A(lexander) Milne (1882-1956)- "House at Pooh Corner"

  8. #8
    Uranium Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    7,089
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    If you find your steps are confusing, you know where to go. <img src=/S/grin.gif border=0 alt=grin width=15 height=15>

    On a serious note, you will find that nearly all of the tricks and tweaks you learn for Windows 2000 also apply to XP. Those that don't are often annoyances that shouldn't have been an issue to begin with.

    What NTFS issues are you speaking of?
    -Mark

  9. #9
    Uranium Lounger CWBillow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV USA
    Posts
    6,371
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    Mark:

    In layman's terms: my daughter's pictures from Rome are on a drive (NTFS) that "died" -- wouldn't boot, and yet cmso saw it... and I want the files back...

    Now it's a "replaced" drive... I can re-install it as a "dead" second drive if I know how to recover the files...

    Economic conditions preclude options such as outside sevices that charge ((($$$)))...

    So...

    Chuck
    -------------------------------------------------
    "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience - well, that comes from poor judgment."

    ~ A(lan) A(lexander) Milne (1882-1956)- "House at Pooh Corner"

  10. #10
    Uranium Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    7,089
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    Gotcha. If you install the drive into a Windows 2000 system, the file system should be transparent (provided the drive still works). Windows should recognize the added drive and allow you to access it. The vagaries of NTFS will hopefully not affect you in your recovery efforts.

    If there is something physically wrong with the drive, then you're facing data recovery at no small expense, but let's hope that's not the case!
    -Mark

  11. #11
    Uranium Lounger CWBillow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV USA
    Posts
    6,371
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    Mark:

    In all the "back and forth" I've done, I tend to lose track... but I seem to recall that:

    If I have Win2K installed on my machine (on top of a Win98 dos formatted disk), I can/could still access files on a Win2K NTFS partition.(?)

    I seem to remember when I was going through my NTFS debaucle that file manager(s) on a FAT32 partition (used to boot the system/Win2K) could read the NTFS partition, allowing me to copy the files from the drive... 'cause if I can/could, I could install the drive as a second on my primary machine and then pull the files...

    Yes/No?
    -------------------------------------------------
    "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience - well, that comes from poor judgment."

    ~ A(lan) A(lexander) Milne (1882-1956)- "House at Pooh Corner"

  12. #12
    Uranium Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    7,089
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    The operating system is what determines which disk formats you can read. Windows 98 understands only FAT and FAT32. Windows 2000 understands those, as well as NTFS. Thus, if you install the disk into a system which can boot to either 98 or 2000, Windows 98 will not see the NTFS partitions. Windows 2000 will and will add a drive letter for each NTFS partition it finds.

    There is also a tool called NTFSDOS that will allow you read access from within Windows 98. It may be worth checking out. To get read/write access you need to purchase the full version.
    -Mark

  13. #13
    Uranium Lounger CWBillow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV USA
    Posts
    6,371
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts

    Re: Win2K Startup

    Mark:

    Then it might work... thanks.

    Chuck
    -------------------------------------------------
    "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience - well, that comes from poor judgment."

    ~ A(lan) A(lexander) Milne (1882-1956)- "House at Pooh Corner"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •