You are the one that talked about having a fall back, that is why I
suggested having two completely independent booting systems. If you now
don't feel you want that, then just install Vista to F and your Vista will
see XP and set up dual boot. Drawback. Your Vista boot files are going to
be installed on your C drive and if you ever want to get rid of XP you will
have a lot of juggling to do.
> This sounds logical... F: would apparently be the best choice.
> I see no reason to pull either system... but "checking back later" isn't
> exactly comforting.
If you set up both systems completely independently, you will not have a
dual boot setup. You will then have to set your Vista drive as the system
drive (first in boot priority) and booting into Vista, you can download
VistaBootPro from http://www.vistabootpro.org/
install it, set up a legacy
drive pointing to what you are calling your C drive (Vista will see itself
as C). You may or may not have to copy the ntldr ntdetect.com and boot.ini
files to the root of your Vista drive and correct the entry for the proper
drive number in the boot.ini records.
>> Also remember that each time
>> you boot into XP you wipe the Vista Restore Points and backup copies of
>> documents etc.
> Sounds to me like a perfect plan. I'm quite certain that I will not use
> and have no logical reason what-so-ever for needing "copies" of documents
> that I have safely stored AND backed up already.
> WHY would booting XP from a completely seperate drive do damage to VISTA?
Restore points can be more convenient than your backup, and the multiple
copies feature of Vista also lets you restore a file if you make a mistake
and just want that 1 document restored from a very recent version. As to
why there is a problem is has to do with the way Volsnap.sys deals with the
system volume information and unless you hide the Vista partition or encrypt
it you will lose those abilities regardless the drive or partition they are