Shouldn’t the EU force M$ to allow other OS’s to their bootloading procedure? If I think about all the other measures they have taken towards M$, this should be one too. Or is it already there and is M$ simply ignoring it, like they’ve done before.
What’s so annoying is that it does everything without asking you
I can tell you all this:
Windows couldn’t complete the update, regardless of what it did to the MBR and boot flag.
On a previous occasion with Vista a couple of years ago, I had exactly the same behaviour - Only when I did a complete fixmbr with the Vista dvd would it install the update (service pack 1 in fact)
I’m not bothering on a fix with this install of win7 - I’m flushing it down the toilet.
This thread might be a heads up for some, I don’t know.
> MS should be forced to cohabit with other OS wrt boot loader,
> otherwise one is left with a sudden-death type of migration!
and, the EU is just the bad boy with the guts to do it…all you
euroCitizens need to send kindly worded, factual, non-emotional,
non-flaming notes to your country’ representatives…
it is time someone stopped MS from poisoning other systems…i think
was about '96 or so when NT was first released and it was claimed by
the MS-fan boys that it was required that NT cripple the dual booting
feature of OS/2’s MBR…
When it comes to chocolate, resistance is futile.
CAVEAT: http://is.gd/bpoMD [posted via NNTP w/openSUSE 10.3]
> consused wrote:
>> MS should be forced to cohabit with other OS wrt boot loader,
>> otherwise one is left with a sudden-death type of migration!
> and, the EU is just the bad boy with the guts to do it…all you
> euroCitizens need to send kindly worded, factual, non-emotional,
> non-flaming notes to your country’ representatives…
> it is time someone stopped MS from poisoning other systems…i think
> was about '96 or so when NT was first released and it was claimed by
> the MS-fan boys that it was required that NT cripple the dual booting
> feature of OS/2’s MBR…
Actually, NT4 got along pretty well. It was W2000 that really screwed the
pooch. Doing anything with W2K pretty much required a song-and-dance act to
get the multi-boot back - and the whole problem was that Win found a
partition it didn’t use but also hadn’t formatted so it re-wrote the MBR,
even if it was not necessary as simply clearing the flag made it happy.
If you have not wiped Windows 7, I would be curious as to the contents of
# The scan log is located at: C:\Windows\Debug\mrt.log
# The event log is located at: C:\Windows\Debug\mrteng.log
These logs are produced by the Windows MRT (Malicious Software Removal Tool). The Windows 7 version had a critical update circa Sept 2009. I wonder whether the MRT considered GRUB as an infection in the MBR. The normal procedure is to display the findings and ask direction.
I am not making any excuses for MS or Windows. I had an older dual-boot test box zapped the same way about a year ago. Although it was XP and not Windows 7, the MRT tended to cut a broad swath across platforms.
There shall be no Microsoft unsanctioned OS & or Partitions on hardware running a Microsoft product.
The EULA states M$ OS’s have the right to modify the mbr and partition tables as it see’s fit to satisfy requirements at solely their discretion for installing the OS.
Renters (for simplicity of explanation only) of a Microsoft OS will not try to circumvent the installation methods used to install the OS. Technically, even users who use windows to create data partitions as primary or extended ones are breaking this rule. However, I do recall M$ being hauled over the carpet for unfair restrictions in EULA that changed what they can and cannot do to partitions just before XP came out.
I have had clients that lost Non-M$ OS partitions, data partitions, and even other M$ partitions like Windows 98, windows2k when XP came out. I even had a client sue M$ and lost because the EULA does say there is no guarantee that data pre-existing, software pre-existing, or setting will functional or be accessible after adding or updating a M$ OS or product (presumably I take this to mean MS-office and the like as product although I note I needed to replace Visual Studio with a newer version after Vista).
I doubt your facts. A more likely candidate is that Grub modified the partition information. Think about it kernel updates, grub updates, new releases, etc. and all that time Windows was never booted to mysteriously move the boot flag? Nope, too many times a kernel or YaST update changed my grub for me to blame Windows for an unexpected change.
No doubt at all !!! Just shoved a customer out of the door. He came in for an openSUSE install on his ASUS laptop (identical to mine, except SSD). After install we logged on to Windows to see if all was working properly. Logged out, it started updating. Then the customer told me he hadn’t used the laptop for more than 6 months, I even showed him this thread. And yes, indeed, no GRUB !!!. Somehow Windows’ own bootloader got updated/reinstalled !!. Used the KDE-Reloaded LiveCD to fix it. If all is well, the guy comes back in 2 weeks to have Windows removed, the space made available.
His facts are correct. Windows upon boot will try to do an update especially after not being active for so long. It is not uncommon for the update to include making changes to the mbr &/or partition marked for booting. Think about it. A simple shift of the bootflag from a non-M$ OS partition to the windows partition as a means to make life difficult for users of other OS’s.
Thanks, but I wasn’t disputing the EULA and their right to mess with boot sector. My issue is the online update starting without my confirmation, especially as it would be the first ever update to W7! Are you saying that will happen?
BTW it didn’t happen on the two occasions, some months ago, that I accidentally booted W7 when connected to the internet. It did tell me with a message that I had updates, and IIRC some notifier appeared in the bottom panel (or whatever they call it :D).