Inside Vista's Image-Based Install Process 519
KrispyGlider writes "Vista's installation process is dramatically different from any previous version of Windows: rather than being an 'installer,' the install DVD is actually a preinstalled copy of Windows that simply gets decompressed onto your PC. It is hardware agnostic, so it can adjust to different systems, and you can also install your own apps into it so that your Vista install becomes a full system image install. APCMag.com has published an interview with a Microsoft Australia tech specialist on the inner workings of it as well as a story that looks at some of the pros and cons of image-based installs."
dual boot? (Score:5, Interesting)
This reminds me of other Microsoft installs I've done over the years, and it smacks of such disdain for the rest of the OS universe. Nowhere in the article, nor can I find evidence anywhere else is there an accomodation for an install where XP is just another OS. I remember my first experience with this, when I installed a Win98 on a linux box, and not only did Win98 not offer a dual boot, it (seemingly) gladly removed my linux MBR and formatted my partition without asking if it was okay, and without saying it had done so. That was quite a surprise.
Does anyone know if there is a way to do this? (Though, knowing XP can point to more than one OS to boot, I'm guessing Microsoft is more gentle if there is a pre-existing Windows OS there.)
I've googled for dual boot information, it looks to be similar to what I already know -- it's easier to set up a dual boot machine on a pre-existing Windows machine.
Re:dual boot? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:dual boot? (Score:2, Informative)
Gentoo users [like me] just don't run Windows, e.g. not an issue.
tom
Re:dual boot? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:dual boot? (Score:4, Funny)
Mac users [like me] just can't fathom why anyone would want to run anything else; i.e. not an issue.
Grammar fascist time. Now, you didn't make the original mistake, but you perpetuated it, and now you're on my "bad" list. (Snakes in your stocking this year, boy, and I'm not talking about the kind you hang over the fireplace.) "E.g." means "for example," and "i.e." means "in other words." (Translated, of course.) The way I remember is to consider how stupid I'd sound using it wrongly.
Okay, not really. Mentally substitute "for egzample" whenever you use "e.g." to see if it works.
I've also got a great mnemonic device that involves skinning purple hamsters for remembering how to use "who" and "whom" correctly if anyone is interested.
Re:dual boot? (Score:3, Interesting)
I eat live puppies for breakfast.
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
See, Linux has such insider hate between the people involved. I'm Gentoo, I'm better, I do all my own compiling. Fedor is for Windows users... blah blah blah.
Mac fanboi's unite! Except for those 10.3.x users - upgrade to a real OS already. Geeze.
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
Tell me how to get 10.4 on my iMac G3 266 MHz without doing arcane things then. No DVD, no firewire.
Re:dual boot? (Score:5, Funny)
2.: Place Mac Mini on top of iMac.
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
Gentoo is not something the average hardcore Windows users will understand.
And seriously, if you go through the pain of building the 400 packages required to make a decent gentoo workstation, do you want to then throw that away and boot windows at the slightest change of mind?
Tom
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
Presumably if you're using Gentoo you're running a server or development team. Gentoo really isn't an OS you hand your grandmother to install.
Tom
Re:dual boot? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
Gentoo and Windows hit two totally different groups of people and respective tasks.
Gentoo is totally not a commodity desktop. You don't install it just because it looks nice with Windows on a boot screen. And if you do, man you need help, or an xbox or something...
Dual booting is for people who can't really decide why they bought a PC in the first place.
Tom
Re:dual boot? (Score:5, Funny)
And generalizations are for people who can't see uses for things outside of their own realm...
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
I mean I can run GCC or OpenOffice in a dozen OSes... doesn't mean it's smart to use them all [unless you're testing OO.o].
I think often people just like the status of "oh I use Linux, ain't I hippie?" But use Windows for their day to day because they can't figure out the coreutils or desktop.
Tom
Re:dual boot? (Score:2, Funny)
Oh dear. I feel the need to be gentlemanly and reciprocate.
I apologise for my fellow Windows users. I'm really sorry, words really aren't enough are they...
Re:dual boot? (Score:4, Informative)
Installing Windows just nukes the existing MBR and the only thing you can do is run Windows, or start searching for a rescue cd/floppy.
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
Re:dual boot? (Score:3, Informative)
The difference is quite extreme. Using tools like DD to generate copies of boot sectors, and then learning the NT boot.ini conventions is beyond most power users.
Re:dual boot? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would you expect any different, not just from microsoft but from ANY company out to make money? Why make it easier to use your competitors' products?
Does your Ford come with an instructon book to tell you how to fit a Nissan engine? No it doesn't because there's no good business case for them to do that.
Conversely the kit car you built from parts probably can be adapted to take ford or nissan engines.Why? because the reason you get a kit car is the joy of building it, not which company sold it to you
Comparing Microsoft OS and Linux and saying who's is like asking who would win in fight between Darth Vader and Capt Picard.
Essentially pointless because they live in different universes.
Re:dual boot? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would you expect any different, not just from microsoft but from ANY company out to make money?
Because the idea that dual-boot somehow causes them to lose money is a false one. They already sold you a copy of Windows, by making it difficult to use that alongside another OS, what are they expecting to acheive? Selling you two copies of Windows to satisfy your dual-boot urge?
Clearly their only motivation is to be anti-competitive, which is what one expects from a convicted monopolist.
Re:dual boot? (Score:3, Informative)
There's really no debate on the matter. Legally, MS is a convicted monopolist. Additionally, you won't find market analysts who would qualify Microsoft as anything but a monopoly. Furthermore, one can statistically demonstrate Microsoft's collection of monopoly profits. And the courts have repeatedly found (including appeals) that Microsoft abuses its market position.
Once again, I love Microsoft trolls. However, it'll be more
Re:dual boot? (Score:5, Funny)
Same universe, different galaxies, different time periods, actually. Get your sci-fi right! This is slashdot!
Re:dual boot? (Score:3, Informative)
Rule 1 of arguing about sci-fi on the internet: all sci-fi is true. Where there is a seeming contradiction, it must be explained away somehow (other dimensions, etc.). It's a lot like religion, but we don't start wars, and our arguments are at least partially based on reality.
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
there is one built into linux too. however you need to install MS first everything else second.
MS wants to be king of your computer even if you dont want it to be. friends i know used to invest in articon (spelling) drives and just swap out drives whenever they wanted to use linux windows or whatever.
frankly im waiting for someone to give me the ability to "Alt Tab" between OSs. i'd love to run linux primary and just alt tab to windows when i ne
Re:dual boot? (Score:5, Informative)
Have you tried VMWare (or any other virtualization system)?
Re:dual boot? (Score:5, Interesting)
Have you tried VMWare (or any other virtualization system)?
MMM yes but no...
There is something interesting in what GP wrote. Of course virtualization exists but I think it would be quite interesting to have some kind of BIOS program that allowed you to change OS whenever you pressed a predetermined key combo.
How to achieve this?, well I think the "hibernation" faccilities of current Operating systems will do the trick. What should happen is that, when you turn on your computer you boot in whatever OS you had, then when you press the supposed ALT+TAB shortcut the BIOS function sends the current system to hibernate (saves RAM to HD file, etc , etc) and boots the second OS. Then, if you press ALT+TAB again the same process will be done but instead of booting the computer will just restore the state from the hibernation file.
It may seem something difficult but I think that will be way cool and unlike virtualization solutions you will not have any performance loss due to the software overhead (I am proposing some kind of software interrput which the guest OSs will call when the user presses the hotkey).
Now that I think of it, please forget what I said, I am going directly to the USPTO
Re:dual boot? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:dual boot? (Score:5, Informative)
The new duo core CPUs have facilities for this. See Parallels [parallels.com] for the first signs of alt tab'ing between OS'es.
In addition rumor has it that Leopard (the next version of OS X) will have something like this built in.
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
Re:dual boot? Multiple OS's via VM (Score:3, Insightful)
Wait no longer. (Score:2)
- Synergy [wikipedia.org] (more or less a software KVM, minus the V)
- QEMU [wikipedia.org] (processor emulator, similar to VMware, but Free Software)
- Hardware KVM switch [wikipedia.org]
Re:dual boot? (Score:3, Insightful)
Each server runs as if it were an independent machine, if one goes down it doesnt take the whole box with it, each machine bridges to the main interface and has full network connectivity, viruses that affect one guest dont affect the others. I have been running this confi
Re:dual boot? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:dual boot? (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Home users who buy a machine with Windows pre installed. No worries about dual boot here.
2. Corporate users who load a custom Windows image on new machines. No worries about dual boot here either.
ALSO, if it really is just an image it would be a simple matter to just load it onto a partition then setup dual boot using GRUB. Anyone who feels they NEED dual boot probably already knows how to do it. Most modern Linux distros do a pretty good job of it for newbs too.
Very very very few people NEED dual boot. Some do. Most do not. From Microsoft's point of view, why should they facilitate it when the people who really NEED it (i.e. developers) will have no problem either setting up dual boot or using virtualization?
A good house guest. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:A good house guest. (Score:4, Funny)
You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means.
mind you...
After a long boot sequence...
XP: You are wonderful!
Distro in black: Thank you -- I've worked hard to become so.
XP: I admit it you are better than i am...
Distro in black: Then why are you smiling?
XP: because i know something you don't know.
Distro in black: And what is that?
XP: I am not left-handed....
Re:dual boot? (Score:2)
Image.
Microsoft desperately wants Linux to go away. Granted the things Microsoft does to the MBR can interfere with BSD/x86 Solaris, or anything else on the drive, this kind of move is great against linux. The problem is it makes them look desperate. It also annoys those who work in IT departments (the group MS loves the most: corporations).
Microsoft doesn't usually have to to worry about pissing off customers. T
Re:dual boot? (Score:4, Funny)
I think you may have got that backwards...
One word... (Score:2)
-Rick
Re: Appeal to Common Practice? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If Linux distros do (Score:2)
I don't know about that combination, but when I installed Vista Beta 2 (to a spare hard drive) from within XP, it set it up to dual boot just fine.
Re:dual boot? (Score:3, Informative)
I know XP actually offers to NOT format the install partition for you, which is nice if Windows has bricked and you don't do backups as often as you should.
Vista can install to a secondary hard drive (from what I read it's the first MS OS to be able to do so, probably thanks to the new boot loader) and it automatically supports dual booting with older Windows' (NT based at least) and will detect them and automatically set up the boot loader (it can be changed with bcdedit.exe and there are a couple unoffi
At last (Score:5, Interesting)
XP takes a swift nose-dive for me when I upgrade my core components; it makes upgrading an even more painful process. As for Linux, I've yet to test this, but I gather it responds much better than XP to new hardware?
Re:At last (Score:2)
Assuming the new hardware is supported, yes for the most part. Most things seem to get auto-detected at boot, so... only thing I can think off of the top of my head is that X always asks me manually what gfx driver to run, but unless you're swapping manufacturer I think that's cool as well. Ther
Re:At last (Score:2)
Re:At last (Score:5, Informative)
sysprep -nosidgen
You have the choice of running with existing settings or running mini-setup if you're running XP SP2. The only thing I can't recall is what effect that'll have on activation...
Otherwise the only other thing you'll have problems with is changing the underlying HAL from ACPI to non-ACPI.
See: MS sysprep kb article [microsoft.com] and more usefully Killian's sysprep guide [geocities.com]
Re:At last (Score:2, Funny)
Re:At last (Score:2)
1 - mandrake 10. ran an important app server in my old work, Hardware died and the non IT tech at the other end of the phone near the hardware was able to take the hard drive out and slap it in a completely different computer and say yes to all prompts on reboot to get a 100% functional machine back running in 15 minutes.
2 - Wifes Ubuntu PC. Changed motherboard & video. rebooted and it happily chugged along using new drivers.
Re:At last (Score:2, Informative)
Fewer Choices? (Score:4, Interesting)
Still, anything that makes installs easier is probably a good thing, at least to the average user.
Re:Fewer Choices? (Score:2)
What a lot of fun it is, to sit and wait for the next box while it installs. Hopefully we won't have to do that anymore.
Re:Fewer Choices? (Score:5, Insightful)
'Nerd' is not a synonym for 'Linux user'. This may be a surprise to you; for many others it is not.
Autodetect. (Score:3, Funny)
<sarcasm>
Perhaps they will be automatically detected/deduced for you by the same infallable logic engine we have come to know and love from the 'Windows Genuine Advantage' pirate software detector thus rendering manual configuration unnecessary in which case the manual configuration utility may well have been removed from Windows Vista.
</sarcasm>
Re:Fewer Choices? (Score:5, Insightful)
While I agree in principle, generally speaking the average user will not be installing Windows, or any other OS.
Re:Fewer Choices? (Score:2)
Does it install faster? (Score:3, Insightful)
What do other installers do that make them take hours to finish?
Re:Does it install faster? (Score:2)
For XP, 2k and 98, not all files were installed, so it need to extract certain files from an archive, and auto-detect hardware. (which is easier and faster these days)
Re:Does it install faster? (Score:3, Informative)
I'd say it is much different from copying files because it has to test for all kinds of hardware, generate a lot of configs and other file structures.
The alternative to the image based install? Up until recently the betas have used the traditional installer and it was like watching paint dry - literally, it took 2 to 3 hours (with a non-working progress bar to boot). The latest beta took about 20min to install and an extra 10min to do first boot configuration.
Compared to XP's install, Vista takes mayb
Re:Does it install faster? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Does it install faster? (Score:3, Interesting)
Does WinXP or Vista use anything but PIO mode to transfer from CD/DVD to the HD?
I always wondered if that was one of the reasons Windows took so freaking long to install. Not only would they be decompressing the CABs, but this would have to happen while the CPU is running 100% to negotiate the disc ---> HD transfer.
IKEA catelog? (Score:2, Funny)
Anywho, this is a cool idea and it's begging for someone to create a "Vista Live" hack, much like the current *nix live CD's (Knoppix anyone?).
Yeah, it's Monday.
Boot CD (Score:2)
Pros & Cons summarized (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok, so what is a regular install? (Score:2)
File based imaging format?!?! (Score:5, Funny)
However, all this is about to change. Windows Vista is based entirely around Microsoft's Windows Imaging Format (or WIM), a file-based imaging standard rather than a sector-based. this means that the image isn't a bit-for-bit image of your disk layout, and hence you can apply the image to a new system without destroying the contents of the hard drive.
Wow how revolutionary.
Oh, hang on a second while I untar this archive....
Re:File based imaging format?!?! (Score:2)
Re:File based imaging format?!?! (Score:4, Insightful)
They can be. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:File based imaging format?!?! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:File based imaging format?!?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Max NTFS file size is 18 Exabytes or 576 Exabyt (Score:3, Interesting)
By the time... (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe they can put both Vista and Duke Nuke Em 3D on the same HD-DVD/BluRay disc when they're released in a few years.
Hasta La Vista, La Manzana (Score:5, Funny)
Article is stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
The bottom is about to fall out of the market for imaging tools like Symantec Ghost
But then immediately contradicts itself by pointing out:
But this flexibility only extends to the installation of Windows itself. To clone a full system with apps installed, Symantec Ghost or a similar utility must be used to create that image.
People don't use Ghost to make a copy of an unconfigured fresh install of Windows, they configure it first, then Ghost it. This new installer will have no effect whatsoever on sales of Ghost, or any other imaging software. After such a terrible start to the article, I'm not sure it's even worth reading the rest.
Re:Article is stupid (Score:5, Informative)
FTFA:
(bold emphasis = mine)
Is it the same thing that we see on Ubuntu? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is it the same thing that we see on Ubuntu? (Score:2)
The most revolutionary part is giving you a legitimate method of creating other install images. And that's not terribly revolutionary, given nLiteOS.
Knoppix - Kanotix - Ubuntu - Windows (Score:5, Interesting)
The wrong problem (Score:3, Interesting)
Darn, I was looking for a source-based install (Score:3, Funny)
Rootkit (Score:4, Insightful)
Old hat, old news (Score:2, Insightful)
does vista break ghost then? (Score:2, Offtopic)
Haven't had a chance to google this yet, so it may be a known bug.
Re:does vista break ghost then? (Score:3, Funny)
Doubtful, seeing how vista isn't even out yet, and Ghost has been broken for many years.
(couldn't resist)
Re:does vista break ghost then? (Score:3, Interesting)
Regarding the WIM imaging format, has anyone else here attempted to use the operating system deployment feature pack for SMS 2003 to build or deploy a WIM image? WIM is FS Based. Bad sectors on the hard disk, you still need ghos
Smalltalk and Emacs did this. (Score:4, Interesting)
The mother of all windows, Smalltalk, Did just this.
And when you where finished for the day ST did
a sort of core dump to disk. When you want to
start up it restored your workspace just where you left off.
Emacs was so slow to load all of its lisp macros
the authors did the same thing dumping the core
image into an a.out file and starting that each time.
Perhaps You think Imaging a disk is different.
But I propose that its just the same thing as a different
level of the memory hierarchy. You just install into
a 800meg partition and dump to CD. same thing.
Make it bootable, add a start up that rus the installer
and copy it to disk.
Just Plain Wow! (Score:3, Insightful)
I know. I'll just wait for Microsoft to give credit-where-credit-is-due. They'll do that. They're fair. They respect other people's ideas. I'll just wait.
Waiting...
.
.
.
.
.
.
Still waiting.
Sigh!
*bleh* I hated it when it was called RIS (Score:4, Insightful)
This is no different; currently it doesn't support multicasting and so although it's 'revolutionary' (read: RIS) it still doesn't beat the ability to push down and image to a workstation is less than 20 minutes...oops, did I say a workstation, I meant a lab.
It still won't beat Ghost any time soon, IMO.
Re:*bleh* I hated it when it was called RIS (Score:5, Informative)
Windows Deployment Services, the replacement for RIS that will be comming out around the same time Vista ships, does exactly that. RIS only does the OS install well. Once you create your master image, you can place that onto a WDS server and multicast it out to as many computers as you have bandwidth. My current image when run deployed with imageX comes in at 25% less space (both images on max compression) and deploys in aprox 12 min for the image copy, plus the normal mini-setup time.
Ghost aint going away, but it will be eaten away from at the bottom with WDS.
copying a bunch of files is the RIGHT way (Score:5, Insightful)
This is mostly due to their inane and out-dated drive lettering scheme.
In Linux (or any Unix), I can move my installed system to a different drive or partition just by copying it. I can install an entire system within a folder of another system. All I have to do is change my drive mounts, add some symlinks, or use chroot, and I can put the entire system anywhere and it's as if nothing changed.
When my Dad bought a new harddrive because his old one was dying, we tried in vain to copy his old system over to the new drive. First we tried imaging it using "dd" on a liveCD, but that didn't work. Then we tried making a new filesystem and using "cp" to just copy the whole thing. That didn't either. We didn't want to spend money on Norton Ghost, just for a one-time thing.. He ended up having to re-install and re-activate XP, re-install all his MS Office software he'd had some trouble with installing in the first place, and finally setting up a whole new system. Just because he wanted to replace his drive!
That, compared to the number of times I've moved my Linux system without a single hitch... I can't believe people put up with this crap. Now instead of keeping things simple, they're moving even FURTHER away from a file-based approach?
Re:copying a bunch of files is the RIGHT way (Score:3, Informative)
First, copy everything from the old drive to the new drive. Remove the old drive. Boot off of a Windows cd, and tell it to do a repair install. A few minutes later, you're done.
Re:copying a bunch of files is the RIGHT way (Score:3, Insightful)
but still, thanks for the tip.
oh, a disk image based installer... (Score:3, Insightful)
Having seen the beta ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Linux/MacOS loosing advantages (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Linux/MacOS loosing advantages (Score:2, Insightful)
Either MS is really taking their time and putting out a stable, low bug system (for a change), or this is just a sign of trouble to come once the install is available on your Dell custom PC...
Re:Linux/MacOS loosing advantages (Score:2)
When Linux adds functionality that Microsoft has, its being "flexible, agile, compatible, and innovative". Its even funnier coming from the "information wants to be free" crowd.
Re:Linux/MacOS loosing advantages (Score:2)