Search Results

Search found 4360 results on 175 pages for 'dual licensing'.

Page 17/175 | < Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >

• Don't Forget About Software Licensing

  Is your company developing software for sale or distribution? If yes, your company needs a sales policy and a flexible, commercially feasible licensing model.

  Read the article

• Server Systems for SQL Server 2012 per core licensing

  - by jchang

  Until recently, the SQL Server Enterprise Edition per processor (socket) licensing model resulted in only 2 or 3 server system configurations being the preferred choice. Determine the number of sockets: 2, 4 or 8. Then select the processor with the most compute capability at that socket count level. Finally, fill the DIMM sockets with the largest capacity ECC memory module at reasonable cost per GB. Currently this is the 16GB DIMM with a price of $365 on the Dell website, and $240 from Crucial. The...(read more)

  Read the article

• Microsoft To Discontinue 'Select' Licensing

  Microsoft will no longer sell its Select software licensing after July 1, 2011, with Select Plus taking its place....Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

  Read the article

• MIT vs. BSD vs. Dual License

  - by ryanve

  My understanding is that: MIT-licensed projects can be used/redistributed in BSD-licensed projects. BSD-licensed projects can be used/redistributed in MIT-licensed projects. The MIT and the BSD 2-clause licenses are essentially identical. BSD 3-clause = BSD 2-clause + the "no endorsement" clause Issuing a dual license allows users to choose from those licenses—not be bound to both. If all of the above is correct, then what is the point of using a dual MIT/BSD license? Even if the BSD refers to the 3-clause version, then can't a user legally choose to only abide by the MIT license? It seems that if you really want the "no endorsement" clause to apply then you have to license it as just BSD (not dual). If you don't care about the "no endorsement" clause, then MIT alone is sufficient and MIT/BSD is redundant. Similarly, since the MIT and BSD licenses are both "GPL-compatible" and can be redistributed in GPL-licensed projects, then dual licensing MIT/GPL also seems redundant.

  Read the article

• Development/runtime Licensing mechanism for a C# class library?

  - by Darryl

  I'm developing a .Net class library (a data provider) and I'm starting to think about how I would handle licensing the library to prospective purchasers. By licensing, I mean the mechanics of trying to prevent my library from being used by those who haven't purchased it, not the software license (i.e., Apache, Gnu, etc). I've never dealt with licensing, and in the past, I've always developed apps, not libraries. I don't want to make things difficult for my customers; know it is not possible to make it ironclad. Just some mechanism that gives me decent protection without making the customer jump through hoops or gnash their teeth. I think the mechanism would check for a valid license when the class is being used in development mode, and not in runtime mode (when the customer's software is released to their customers). I think libraries are typically sold per developer, but I'm not sure how that could be accomplished without making the mechanism odious for my customers; maybe that gets left to the honor system. I Googled this and found many approaches. Ideally, I'd like to do something that is generally accepted and common, the "right" way class libraries are licensed, if that exists, rather than making my customers deal with yet another license mechanism. A firm push in the right direction will be greatly appreciated!

  Read the article

• Can I re-license Academic Free License code under 2-Clause BSD / ITC?

  - by Stefano Palazzo

  I want to fork a piece of code licensed under the Academic Free License. For the project, it would be preferable to re-license it under the ISC License or the 2-Clause BSD license, which are equivalent. I understand that the AFL grants me things such as limitation of liability, but licensing consistency is much more important to the project, especially since we're talking about just 800 lines of code, a quarter of which I've modified in some way. And it's very important for me to give these changes back to the community, given the fact that this is software relevant to security - I need the public scrutiny that I'll get by creating a public fork. In short: At the top of the file I want to say this, or something like it: # Licensed under the Academic Free License, version 3 # Copyright (C) 2009 Original Author # Licensed under the ISC License # Copyright (C) 2012 Stefano Palazzo # Copyright (C) 2012 Company Am I allowed to do this? My research so far indicates that it's not clear whether the AFL is GPL-Compatible, and I can't really understand any of the stuff concerning re-licensing to other permissive licenses. As a stop gap, I would also be okay with re-licensing under the GPL, however: I can find no consensus (though I can find disagreement) on whether this is allowed at all, and I don't want to risk it, of course. Wikipedia: ISC License Wikipedia: Academic Free License

  Read the article

• How does one escape the GPL?

  - by tehtros

  DISCLAIMER I don't pretend to know anything about licensing. In fact, everything I say below may be completely false! Backstory: Recently, I've been looking for a decent game engine, and I think I've found one that I really like, Cafu Engine. However, they have a dual licensing plan, where everything you make with the engine is forced under GPL, unless you pay for a commercial license. I'm not saying that it's a bad engine, they even say that they are very relaxed about the licensing fees. However, the fact that it even involves the GPL scares me. So my question is basicly, how does one escape the GPL. Here's an example: The id Tech engine, also known as the Quake engine, or the Doom engine, was the base for the popular Source engine. However, the id Tech engine has been released under the GPL, and the Source engine is proprietary. Did Valve get a different license? Or did they do something to escape the GPL? Is there a way to escape the GPL? Or, if you use GPL'd source code as a base for another project, are you forced to use the GPL, and make your source code available to the world. Could some random person take the id Tech engine, modify it past the point of recognition, then use it as a proprietary engine for commercial products? Or are they required to make it open source. One last thing, I generally have no problem what-so-ever with open source. However I feel that open source has it's place, but that is not in the bushiness world.

  Read the article

• Help me choose an Open-Source license

  - by Spartan-117A

  So I've done lots of open-source work. I have released many projects, most of which have fallen under GPL, LGPL, or BSD licensing. Now I have a new project (an implementation library), and I can't find a license that meets my needs (although I believe one may exist, hence this question). This is the list of things I'm looking for in the license. Appropriate credit given for ALL usage or derivative works. No warranty expressed or implied. The library may be freely used in ANY other open-source/free-software product (regardless of license, GPL, BSD, EPL, etc). The library may be used in closed-source/commercial products ONLY WITH WRITTEN PERMISSION. GPL - Useless to me, obviously, as it completely precludes any and all closed-source use, violating requirement (4). BSD/LGPL/MIT - Won't work, because they wouldn't require closed-source developers to get my permission, violating requirement (4). If it wasn't for that, BSD (FreeBSD in particular) would look like a good choice here. EPL/MPL - Won't work either, as the code couldn't be combined with GPL-code, therefore violating requirement (3). Also I'm pretty sure they allow commercial works without asking permission, so they don't meet (4) either. Dual-licensing is an option, but in that case, what combination would hold to all four requirements? Basically, I want BSD minus the commercial use, plus an option to use in commercial/closed-source as long as the developer has my written permission. EDIT: At the moment, thinking something like multiple-licensing under GPL/LGPL plus something else for commercial?

  Read the article

• Choosing an open source license such that maximum value is added to a startup

  - by echo-flow

  There are many companies that produce open source software products, and many business models that these companies can use. I'm particularly interested in companies like 280 North, the company behind Objective-J and Cappucino frameworks. My understanding of this organization's business model is that they: worked to develop a tool which added significant value to developers, released the tool under an open source license, built a community around the tool (which was helped by the project's open source licensing), created interesting demos illustrating the project's value All of these things added value to the project, and the company that owned it. Finally, 280 North was sold to Motorola. My question has to do with the role of software licensing in this particular business model. 280 North licensed their software projects under the LGPL, which gave them some proprietary control over how the project could be used. I believe that the LGPL is what's known as a "weak copyleft" license, meaning that the project can be linked to, without the linking code also being licensed under the LGPL; but software derived directly from the project would need to be licensed under the LGPL. For web-oriented libraries in particular, weak copyleft, or non-copyleft licensing seems to be quite common; I can't think of a single example of a popular or well-known web-oriented library that is licensed under the GPL (or AGPL). The question then, is, how much value would a weak copyleft license like the LGPL add to a software venture like 280 North, versus a non-copyleft license, such as the BSD license or the Apache Software License? I'd really appreciate any insight anyone can offer into this, but I'd be most interested in answers that can cite other companies as case studies or examples.

  Read the article

• SQL - Rank() on a table

  - by Abhi

  create table v (mydate,value) as select to_date('20/03/2010 00','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),98 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 01','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),124 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 02','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),140 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 03','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),138 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 04','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),416 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 05','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),196 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 06','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),246 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 07','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),176 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 08','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),124 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 09','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),128 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 10','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),32010 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 11','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),384 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 12','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),368 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 13','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),392 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 14','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),374 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 15','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),350 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 16','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),248 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 17','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),396 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 18','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),388 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 19','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),360 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 20','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),194 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 21','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),234 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 22','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),328 from dual union all select to_date('20/03/2010 23','dd/mm/yyyy HH24'),216 from dual From this table, how to rank() over 'value', partitioning by each hour of the day? and select only the 1st ranked result?

  Read the article

• How to encrypt dual boot windows 7 and xp (bitlocker, truecrypt combo?) on sdd (recommended?)

  - by therobyouknow

  I would like to setup a dual boot Windows 7 and Windows XP laptop/notebook computer where each operation system's partition is fully encrypted. I would like to do this on a SSD - a 128Gb Crucial M4. My research Dual boot of truecrypt encrypted OSs on one drive (not possible - in Truecript 7.x at time of writing) This cannot be done on a standard Truecrypt setup - it will only support encrypting one of the operating systems. I have tried this and also read about it here on superuser.com However, I did see a solution here that uses grub4dos as the initial bootloader to chain to separate truecrypt encrypted OSs, in my case Windows 7 and Windows XP: http://yyzyyz.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/truecrypt-how-to-encrypt-multiple.html I am not going to consider this solution as it relies upon some custom code for use in the bootloader that is provided by the author. I would prefer a solution that can be fully understood so that I can be sure that there is nothing undesirable occuring (i.e. malware or just simply bugs in the code). I would like to believe such a solution doesn't have those risks but I can't be sure. BitLocker and Truecrypt combination - possible solution? So I am now considering a combination of encryption programs: I now aim to encrypt Windows XP with Truecrypt and Windows 7 with BitLocker. Assuming Truecrypt bootloader can boot into non-Truecrypt OSs (e.g. via hitting Escape to go to another menu), then this solution may be viable. SSDs and Encryption (use fastest possible spinning hard disk instead (?)) I read on various superuser.com posts and elsewhere that current SSDs are not suited to whole drive encryption for various reasons: impact of performance algorithms that give SSDs advantage over spinning harddisks. Algorithms used in compression of data for example. Wear on the SSD, shortening its life Security issues whereby data is repeated, as indicated in some Truecrypt documentation So I am now considering not using SSD. But with the aim to have the fastest drive possible, I am considering using the Western Digital Scorpion black 2.5" 7200rpm harddisk as this appears to be top rated among spinning platter-based harddrives (don't work for Western Digital). Summary So to achieve whole drive encrypted dual boot Windows 7 and Windows XP with minimal performance impact I intend to use a combination of Truecrypt and Bitlocker on a top-rated conventional spinning platter-based harddisk. Questions Will my summary: achieve whole disk encryption of the dual-boot Windows XP, Windows 7? OR an you suggest a simpler solution, including one that only requires only Truecrypt (BitLocker not available on XP). Or another encryption tool, including paid-for? provide the highest performance. Am I correct to avoid using SDD with encryption for the reasons I discovered? Are the concerns about SSDs and encryption still very real (some articles I read go back to 2010) Thanks for your input!

  Read the article

• Make Windows Position Your Dual Monitors Correctly

  - by Mysticgeek

  If you have a dual monitor setup and each monitor is a different size or height, it can be annoying trying to move the mouse pointer between them. Here is a quick tip that will help make the process easier. Align Monitors In our example, we’re using Windows 7, but the process is essentially the same in all versions, but getting to Display Settings is different. In Windows 7 open the Start menu and type display settings into the search box and hit Enter. In Vista right-click the desktop and click Personalize. Then from the Personalize appearance and sounds menu click on Display Settings. In XP right-click on the desktop and select Properties then in Display Properties click the Settings tab. Now here is where you can change the appearance of your monitors. In this example we have a larger 22” LCD and a smaller 19” and it can be annoying getting the mouse pointer from one to another depending where you are on each monitor. So what you want to do is simply move each display around to a particular height so it’s easier to get the pointer over. For example with this setting we know we’ll have no problem moving the pointer to the other screen at the top of each display.   Of course here you can flip your monitors around, change the display resolution, orientation, etc. If you have dual monitors where one might be larger or set up higher than the other, then this is a great way to get them finely tuned. You will have to play around with the settings a bit to settle on what works best for you. Similar Articles Productive Geek Tips GeekNewb: Get to Know These Windows 7 HotkeysDual Monitors: Use a Different Wallpaper on Each DesktopSet Windows as Default OS when Dual Booting UbuntuEasily Set Default OS in a Windows 7 / Vista and XP Dual-boot SetupSet XP as the Default OS in a Windows Vista Dual-Boot Setup TouchFreeze Alternative in AutoHotkey The Icy Undertow Desktop Windows Home Server – Backup to LAN The Clear & Clean Desktop Use This Bookmarklet to Easily Get Albums Use AutoHotkey to Assign a Hotkey to a Specific Window Latest Software Reviews Tinyhacker Random Tips DVDFab 6 Revo Uninstaller Pro Registry Mechanic 9 for Windows PC Tools Internet Security Suite 2010 Download Wallpapers From National Geographic Site Spyware Blaster v4.3 Yes, it’s Patch Tuesday Generate Stunning Tag Clouds With Tagxedo Install, Remove and HIDE Fonts in Windows 7 Need Help with Your Home Network?

  Read the article

• Windows 7/Ubuntu 12 dual boot deleted for Windows 8 installation. How to make grub rescue go away?

  - by dimious

  I had a Windows 7/Ubuntu 12 dual boot and I decided to clean install Windows 8 over them. The problem is that after I deleted all partitions and installed windows I was getting an "Operation system not found", however after an "enter" the system will normally boot into Windows 8. I realized that Windows did their trick and put the system (not partition anymore?!?) "tag" (Disk Management) on my media hard drive. After trying to fix the boot/mbr to be able to boot from my main drive the "Operation system not found" changed to the "grub rescue" prompt. I know that I cannot use that because I have killed the grub files. Windows can still boot as long as I choose to boot from the media drive. The question is, is there any way to move the "system", whatever it is now, to the main drive and have the PC boot from there, while making grub disappear? And if that is possible after that, can I just make the Media drive inactive or I will have to somehow remove the "system" tag?

  Read the article

• Kubunutu/Windows 7 dual-boot and git

  - by Andu

  I've been using Kubuntu and Windows 7 on my laptop for some time. Recently I also started using git to keep track of a project I'm working on. At first I thought I'd use the same git repo for editing from both Kubuntu and Win, but I soon discovered that committing changes on Win would make git on Kubuntu think all the files have changed since the last commit, although the change doesn't seem to be content related. The exactly same thing happens if I do a commit on Kubuntu and right after that do a git status on Win. I know I could use different repos for Kubuntu and Win and just merge them together when I'm done, but if anyone knows how I could use the same repo I would really appreciate the help.

  Read the article

• Any Microsoft SQL Server 2008 licensing restrictions on usage?

  - by ryrobes

  Does Microsoft have any problems with HOW I USE SQL Server Standard Edition 2008? I plan on using it to aggregate my clients various data sources and report on them (using the whole stack - SSIS, DB, Analysis Services and Reporting Services) via the web. I don't want to run into any issues with being accused of "re-selling" services / features when I'm not allowed to, etc. In essence, I'm charging people to build them solutions based on / using MY licensed copy and then giving them access to the final products. (reports, etc) It seems straightforward enough - but who knows with MS... (BTW, Licensed by processor / not CAL)

  Read the article

• Ubuntu 12.04 (dual boot with Windows 7), doesn't boot after I deleted some files from Windows. What can I do?

  - by sacha

  The Ubuntu 12.04 I have installed (in Dual-Boot with Windows 7) using WUBI worked perfectly for over a month. Then it informed me that I ran out of space on the hard drive and I assumed it was because my hard drive on Windows was full. I logged into Windows and deleted the whole New Volume D. But now the problem is that it is not possible to log into Ubuntu but in Windows it's possible. I really paid attention about not deleting important files in Windows. When i try to log into Ubuntu : _either it does not go far and i have to restart the computer _or it goes until the loading time and a message says something like "[...] Graphics could not be detected [...]" and they ask to choose between 4 options including "Start with poor Graphics", "Reconfigure Graphics", "Troubleshoot" and "Restart the computer". But none of the options run and i also have to restart the computer manually from that point I have plenty of useful files in Ubuntu so i want to find another way to solve the problem instead of Uninstall/Reinstall Ubuntu. I want to know what happened ? And how to make it work ?

  Read the article

• What criteria would I use SQL Stream Insight vs TPL Dataflow [closed]

  - by makerofthings7

  There is an add-in to the Task Parallel Library (TPL) called TPL Dataflow that allows a variety of data processing scenarios. It seems that there are some parallels to the SQL Stream Insight product, however since SQL's Stream Insight has some interesting licensing around it, and it has a better performance depending on what license I get... I found myself asking myself should I use TPL Dataflow and not have any licensing issues, and possibly better performance. Can anyone tell me if performance is a valid criteria for comparing SQL Stream Insight vs TPL Dataflow? What other criteria should I be looking at when comparing the two?

  Read the article

• Are there any changes in the licensing of Visual Studio 2013 Express editions?

  - by Ramón García-Pérez

  As was going through reading the license.htm file provided as part of the VS2013_RTM_WebExp_ENU.iso offline installation media for the Visual Studio 2013 Express for Web, section 6 reads as follows: 6. PACKAGE MANAGER AND THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE INSTALLATION FEATURES. The software includes the following features (each a “Feature”), each of which enables you to obtain software applications or packages through the Internet from other sources: Extension Manager, New Project Dialog, Web Platform Installer, and Microsoft NuGet-Based Package Manager. Those software applications and packages are offered and distributed in some cases by third parties and in some cases by Microsoft, but each such application or package is under its own license terms. Microsoft is not developing, distributing or licensing any of the third-party applications or packages to you, but instead, as a convenience, enables you to use the Features to access or obtain those applications or packages directly from the third-party application or package providers. By using the Features, you acknowledge and agree that: you are obtaining the applications or packages from such third parties and under separate license terms applicable to each application or package (including, with respect to the package-manager Features, any terms applicable to software dependencies that may be included in the package); MICROSOFT MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES OR GUARANTEES AS TO THE FEED OR GALLERY URL, ANY FEEDS OR GALLERIES FROM SUCH URL, THE INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREIN, OR ANY SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS OR PACKAGES REFERENCED IN OR ACCESSED BY YOU THROUGH SUCH FEEDS OR GALLERIES. MICROSOFT GRANTS YOU NO LICENSE RIGHTS FOR THIRD-PARTY SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS OR PACKAGES THAT ARE OBTAINED USING THE FEATURES. Are there any changes in the licensing of Visual Studio 2013 Express editions? If so, does this means that Visual Studio extensions installation in Express Editions is now allowed? PS: Previous versions of the Express editions did not allow the installation of extensions as per "EULA/TOS" discussed here: Limitations of Visual Studio 2012 Express Desktop

  Read the article

• Does the Win XP/7 dual boot "missing restore points" problem apply to systems with separate hard disks for each O/S?

  - by Robert Oschler

  I'm in the process of installing Windows 7/64 on a system with Windows XP/32 on it. During my research, I read about a problem that occurs in the dual boot scenario where Windows XP deletes Windows 7's restore points when it accesses the Windows 7 volume: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926185 I found a workaround but it seems pretty painful since it appears to involve using the registry to make the Windows 7 volume appear invisible or "offline" to Windows XP, making sharing disk data between the two O/S annoying since you have to use something like an external storage device to get it done: http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/127417-system-restore-points-stop-xp-dual-boot-delete.html I was wondering if this problem only occurs with systems that have both O/S installed on the same physical hard drive (in different partitions)? In my case, I will have each O/S on a completely separate physical hard drive. Any other tips would be appreciated. -- roschler

  Read the article

• Is dual-booting an OS more or less secure than running a virtual machine?

  - by Mark

  I run two operating systems on two separate disk partitions on the same physical machine (a modern MacBook Pro). In order to isolate them from each other, I've taken the following steps: Configured /etc/fstab with ro,noauto (read-only, no auto-mount) Fully encrypted each partition with a separate encryption key (committed to memory) Let's assume that a virus infects my first partition unbeknownst to me. I log out of the first partition (which encrypts the volume), and then turn off the machine to clear the RAM. I then un-encrypt and boot into the second partition. Can I be reasonably confident that the virus has not / cannot infect both partitions, or am I playing with fire here? I realize that MBPs don't ship with a TPM, so a boot-loader infection going unnoticed is still a theoretical possibility. However, this risk seems about equal to the risk of the VMWare/VirtualBox Hypervisor being exploited when running a guest OS, especially since the MBP line uses UEFI instead of BIOS. This leads to my question: is the dual-partitioning approach outlined above more or less secure than using a Virtual Machine for isolation of services? Would that change if my computer had a TPM installed? Background: Note that I am of course taking all the usual additional precautions, such as checking for OS software updates daily, not logging in as an Admin user unless absolutely necessary, running real-time antivirus programs on both partitions, running a host-based firewall, monitoring outgoing network connections, etc. My question is really a public check to see if I'm overlooking anything here and try to figure out if my dual-boot scheme actually is more secure than the Virtual Machine route. Most importantly, I'm just looking to learn more about security issues. EDIT #1: As pointed out in the comments, the scenario is a bit on the paranoid side for my particular use-case. But think about people who may be in corporate or government settings and are considering using a Virtual Machine to run services or applications that are considered "high risk". Are they better off using a VM or a dual-boot scenario as I outlined? An answer that effectively weighs any pros/cons to that trade-off is what I'm really looking for in an answer to this post. EDIT #2: This question was partially fueled by debate about whether a Virtual Machine actually protects a host OS at all. Personally, I think it does, but consider this quote from Theo de Raadt on the OpenBSD mailing list: x86 virtualization is about basically placing another nearly full kernel, full of new bugs, on top of a nasty x86 architecture which barely has correct page protection. Then running your operating system on the other side of this brand new pile of shit. You are absolutely deluded, if not stupid, if you think that a worldwide collection of software engineers who can't write operating systems or applications without security holes, can then turn around and suddenly write virtualization layers without security holes. -http://kerneltrap.org/OpenBSD/Virtualization_Security By quoting Theo's argument, I'm not endorsing it. I'm simply pointing out that there are multiple perspectives here, so I'm trying to find out more about the issue.

  Read the article

• Is it possible to "stealth" dual boot a machine?

  - by BrianH

  I have a loaner laptop that has MS Windows with locked down permissions. It works okay for what I need to do, but I started wondering if there was a way to install a separate Windows OS on a separate hard drive to do what I want to do on it. Virtual I wish I could use VirtualBox or VMWare, but that is not an option (I even tried VBox portable). External Drive My next trial was see if it was possible to install Windows on an external drive, and then plug that drive in and boot from it whenever I wanted my own OS. After a few Google searches, I see that is not really a possibility. Swap Primary Drive Another option, would be to get a second internal hard drive, take the existing HD out, and install a new Windows OS on the secondary HD. This would mean swapping the internal hard drive each time I want to switch OSs - doable, but not very convenient. Dual Boot The laptop has an expansion slot where a second hard drive can be plugged in quickly. I thought about Dual booting, but I don't want to mess with the MBR on the primary hard drive. When I have to give the laptop back, I don't want a dual-boot screen to popup. Summary Is there a way to have 2 hard-drives on a machine, each with it's own OS, and maybe use BIOS settings to have only 1 hard drive active at a time? That way both hard drives could be physically connected, but only one would actually be active at a time. I basically want a second OS that does not (can not) affect the existing OS in any way, and can be removed at any time without affecting the existing OS. The secondary OS does not need any of the files on the main hard drive - it's basically like having 2 separate computers using the same hard ware... Is this possible, or would it be easier just to go out and buy a different laptop? Thanks in advance! EDIT I just discovered that my BIOS allows me to pick (at startup) which hard drive I want to boot from. I poked around in the BIOS and there is not a place to disable certain devices, like the primary hard drive. My only concern about plugging in a second hard drive and installing Windows to the second hard drive is that it will mess with the primary hard drive, or add a bootloader screen to pick which windows install to use. My thought would be to physically unplug the primary, plug in the secondary and install windows to the secondary. After the install is working properly, I can plug the primary back in and use the BIOS feature to determine which drive to boot to. Is there any way after I have 2 separate installs on 2 separate hard drives that one of the installs could mess with the MBR on the other drive?

  Read the article

• On dual-boot iMac, after fixing "EFI Boot" issue, will booting Windows cause the same issue again?

  - by Shane

  On my dual-boot iMac, after fixing the well-known "EFI Boot" issue, will booting Windows cause the same issue again? I'm hesitant to try booting Windows until I hear from others. Details: It all started when I had been working in Windows and then re-booted into Mac OSX Snow Leopard. Any attempt to boot into OSX would result in two giveaway symptoms: 1) The MAC HD was re-named "EFI Boot", and 2) a gray progress bar stopped at 10% and the spinning wheel kept spinning - no joy. Many articles on Mac Forums describe the same thing, including the fix, which is to erasing the damaged partition and either: a) re-install the OS from DVD, or b) perform a Time Machine RESTORE (which I did). Is there anything I can do to keep enjoying the benefits of a dual-boot iMac without fear of a repeat problem and associated 2-hour restore from Time Machine?

  Read the article

• Ubuntu on an XPS 14 Ultrabook with mSATA cache and 500GB HD - how to partition for dual boot?

  - by JDS

  I am getting an XPS 14 ( http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-14-l421x/pd ) and I want to dual-boot Windows and Ubuntu. This thing has a 500GB standard HD and a 32GB mSATA that can be used as cache. Does anyone know how this thing is partitioned? Is the OS installed on the mSATA drive and data is on the big HD? Is there a BIOS controller or maybe even a Windows driver that makes the mSATA drive and 500GB HD appear contiguous? I get the impression that something makes the mSATA be used invisibly as cache, but I can't find any technical documentation how that works. My primary concern here is wrt dual-booting Ubuntu. I want to know if I need to partition the mSATA separately, or the big HD, or just partition the "magic" contiguous disk space that appears available to the OS.

  Read the article

• Why are there so few Wireless N Dual Band adapter PCI cards, only USB adapters instead?

  - by daiphoenix

  There has been several Wireless N Dual Band routers/APs out in the market for quite some time now, and there are several Wireless N Dual Band USB adapters out there. But as for PCI/PCI-X card adapters, there seems to be only one (the Linksys WMP600N). Why is that? I find it very strange. Is it because the USB adapters are easier to install, and can be used on multiple computers? But if so, why isn't it the same case with single band (2.4 Ghz) wireless N adapters? Because for these ones there as many PCI card adapters as there are USB adapters. Also, can the USB adapters, despite the lack of external antenna, offer the same level of performance as a card with external antennas?

  Read the article

• 64 bit Windows 7 + 32 bit windows XP dual boot?

  - by Mick

  I have purchased an i7 based PC pre-installed with 64 bit windows 7 (home premium). Unfortunately some third party 32 bit software that I need to use is not working properly (see stackoverflow.com for details). I am now torn between the plan of installing windows XP 32 bit or making it dual boot. Which option do you think will give me the least problems? And if the answer is dual boot, then can you point me to a good guide for how to do it, preferably a guide specifically for my two OS's created in this order (i.e. 7x64 first). EDIT: the performance of my 32bit programs is critical so am concerned about any kind of 32bit XP "emulation".

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >