2/12    To the person who was trying to install both NT/95:
        You can create two primary partitions, hide the second one,
        install Win95 (by default, it'll install itself on the first
        primary partition), then afterwards, you hide it and set the
        second primary partition Active/Unhide, install NT, and now,
        when you need to boot just set the Active flag on either primary
        partition. If you have PartitionMagic, you'll have the opportunity
        to play with many different possibilities without repartitioning
        your HD all over again.     -kchang
        \_ Boy, that's a lot of hassle. I just dedicated a different OS
           to each SCSI disk and I choose my boot disk in the SCSI
           adapter's BIOS. Multi-boot without any hassle at all! --dim
           \_ Dude, not everyone can afford the cool SCSI drives. They
              cost at least 1.5-2X as much, and that's not even counting
              those expensive SCSI controllers.   -kchang
        \_ More importantly, why would you want to do this at all?
           Multiboot between NT/95 and some unix, yeah, I can see that.
           But multiboot between NT and 95 is sorta like multibooting
           between 95 and 95 or linux and linux, etc.  What for?
           \_ Really Nice Games using Matrox Mystique -> Win95
       Everything else                         -> WinNT
              \_ why would you want to do anything in NT, if you could have
          unix?
         \_ What OS do you use to write your resume??? Unix???
            \_ Yes. Plain ASCII, even (no *roff). --dim
            \_ Yes. With FrameMaker.   --mr2
            \_ Yes. With latex (don't laugh :))
          \_ You think an average user would to use those
             editors.  Microsoft stocks would not have stood as
                           high as it is now.
           \_ You think you can try writing in english
              sentences that make sense?
            \_ NT has game development environment (ie DirectX), good
            Word Processors and spreadsheets, variety of desktop
            database software, and mail clients.
            \_ you can get that crap in 95
          \_ 95 is NOT crash proof.  The point is to answer
             about doing anything in NT.
             \_ Like NT _is_ crash proof. Shyeah, right. --dim
           \_ It's pretty good considering you don't
              to reboot the machine for weeks.
         \_ I've had to reboot several times
            a day just to keep Netscape 4 working.
        \_ It works fine on my machine.
                                   \_ Only if it's sitting there doing mostly
          nothing. I ran 100+ web sites on both
          IIS and Purveyor using SQL Server as a
          back-end and it crashed frequently. --dim
           \_ I had Dos/windows, I hated it.
            I had Linux, I hated it.
              \_ What did you hate about it?
          \_ sometimes crashed at boot or trying to search of
             scsi devices and hang. Took too long to load the
             GUI.  No tech support.
             \_ M$ is not noted for its good tech support. --dim
            I had Windows 95, I hated it.
            I have Windows NT 4.0, I am still using it.
            \_ This says more about you than the OS. --dim
          \_ So, you think most people who moved from dos->95->NT
             have a problem, not the OS?
             \_ No, but his NT over Linux preference says more
         about him than about the operating systems. --dim
         \_ To end all arguments, just look at the OS market share and
            see which OS has higher shares.
          \_ mcdonald's has the highest market share, therefore
             they make the best burgers?
          \_ "eat shit: 100 million flies can't be wrong!"
          \_ Ah.  So you're saying numbers are all that matter,
             and we should all move to communist china, since
             after all, they have the highest "market share" of
             people in the world.