Windows Vista Release Candidate 1 is now available for download. If you previously registered for the Windows Vista Beta 2 Customer Preview Program 2 and received a product key (PID), that key will work for the Windows Vista RC1 release as well. You need not re-register. Update: A review of the RC1 version say that Vista is not ready.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-11-21
""only the boot loader which is no different than any other version of Windows."
Simply a lie. "
Thats interesting because I've installed Beta 2 and the pre-rc1 build without it hosing my Linux install. It wiped out grub but after reinstalling grub Linux boots just fine. I can also boot into Vista from grub without any issues.
Member since:2005-07-12
Consider yourself one of the lucky ones. I put Beta 2 on a seperate HDD just to be safe and set that as the first drive to boot in the BIOS. You'd think it would install it's bootloader on the drive on which it's installed - but it didn't. It found my other drive with Windows and Ubuntu on it and put the bootloader there. None of the GRUB fixin' tools seemed to do anything, nor did trying every combination of which-drive-boots-first possible.
A little Googling of Vista, Linux and Dual-boot should provide lots of similar problem examples. My final fix (with lots of advice from the guy who wrote the "vistabootpro" app, was to put grub on a third hard drive just dedicated to data and set that to boot first in the BIOS. Total dirty hack workaround, but better than reinstalling all three OS's just to make Vista happy
That said, I AM going to try this release. This time with all but the dedicated Vista drive completely unplugged. *crossess fingers*
Member since:2005-08-19
"only the boot loader which is no different than any other version of Windows."
Simply a lie.
Reading through the thread history, I think that the clause "which is no different than any other version of Windows" was intended to refer to the hosing of the boot loader, which Vista apparently does have in common with any other version of Windows (and which was the topic of discussion at the time). Calling something a lie without any evidence is flamebait because it says that the poster is not just incorrect but also dishonest. For this reason, your post should have been modded down, not up, even though it included interesting information.
Member since:2005-07-06
Reading through the thread history, I think that the clause "which is no different than any other version of Windows" was intended to refer to the hosing of the boot loader, which Vista apparently does have in common with any other version of Windows (and which was the topic of discussion at the time).
You're right, with that clause I was referring to Vista replacing the boot loader as the commonality with previous versions of Windows, not that Vista's boot loader was the same as the one in previous versions.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2006-03-12
"only the boot loader which is no different than any other version of Windows."
Simply a lie.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/windowsvista/library/85cd5efe-c349...
oh and a fun quote
Windows Vista introduces a new boot loader architecture; a new firmware-independent boot configuration and storage system called Boot Configuration Data (BCD); and a new boot option editing tool, BCDEdit (BCDEdit.exe). These components are designed to load Windows more quickly and more securely.
The traditional Windows NT boot loader, Ntldr, is replaced by Windows Boot Manager (Bootmgr.exe) and a set of system-specific boot loaders. In the new configuration, Windows Boot Manager is generic and unaware of the specific requirements for each operating system, and each system-specific boot loader is optimized for the system that it loads.