| Author | Messages | |
AD000001396
Posts:0
 | | 01/01/2006 11:02 AM |
| | Thank you | | | |
| listmail
Posts:822
| | 01/01/2006 4:41 AM |
| I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you to have different
names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same time, I have done this
often. You did use different directories for the installations right?
Any
more dual booting is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to
virtualization software so you have both instances up and running at once. Look
at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen
naserSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01 AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning
if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and
disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account is
not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?)
Thank you | | | |
| AD00000928
Posts:0
| | 01/01/2006 4:57 AM |
| Did you originally use different names, or the same name for each computer?
And I agree with Joe: Dual-booting is becoming obsolete.
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/?File=BootMgr.TXT
-ASB
FAST, CHEAP, SECURE: Pick Any TWO
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/
On 1/1/06, shereen naser wrote:
> Hi list,
> I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
> installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
> hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
> login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain,
> meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows
> xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the
> domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and
> disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
> login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that
> the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and both
> OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to
> different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do
> that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
> Thank you
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| rkingsla@xxxx.yyy
| | 01/01/2006 6:06 AM |
| Hehe¦. Let me know how that
full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal
method to running different OS™s, but if you want the OS to have the full
machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed “
I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing / learning
environment.
And, make no mistake “ this is
coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with nothing BUT
VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love virtualization¦.
It™s just not the right thing for all situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
10:40 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you
to have different names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same
time, I have done this often. You did use different directories for the
installations right?
Any more dual booting is going the way of
the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so you have
both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen naser
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
6:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning
if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and
disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account
is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?)
Thank you | | | |
| rkingsla@xxxx.yyy
| | 01/01/2006 6:15 AM |
| Re: My message to joe. Maybe 50% of the time - I'd agree. However, if you
want to test that snazzy new Fibre HBA or would like to see what the impact
for the user is going to be with CAD with the newest High End InterGraph
workstation video card - VMs aren't going to work.
The hardware selection in VMs is intended to be generic. Which for testing
or learning BizTalk and SQL interaction with ADAM and ADFS - it rocks
because the hardware doesn't matter.
Again - be sure of this - I love VMs. I just can't test Vista on it because
Aero Glass is the target, and I can't quite put an LDDM driver on the
generic graphics coded in, for example.
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ASB
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:51 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
Did you originally use different names, or the same name for each computer?
And I agree with Joe: Dual-booting is becoming obsolete.
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/?File=BootMgr.TXT
-ASB
FAST, CHEAP, SECURE: Pick Any TWO
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/
On 1/1/06, shereen naser wrote:
> Hi list,
> I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
> installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine
same
> hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can
only
> login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain,
> meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows
> xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the
> domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003
and
> disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
> login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that
> the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and
both
> OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to
> different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do
> that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
> Thank you
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| listmail
Posts:822
| | 01/01/2006 7:48 AM |
| I am not a big workstation OS type of person, I use XP only
when I must. Longhorn seems to work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it isn't the right thing for all
situations, but half the people setting up dual booting blow it anyway. VM is a
much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy if you are doing perf or
physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck even if you want USB you
can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to test 64 bit you are kind
of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick
KingslanSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 1:05 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me
know how that full-out testing of Vista and
Aero Glass is going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting
is not the optimal method to running different OS™s, but if you want the OS to
have the full machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs
are allowed “ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing
/ learning environment.
And, make no mistake “
this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with
nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization¦. It™s just not the right thing for all
situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40
AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it
wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS and then both can be
joined at the same time, I have done this often. You did use different
directories for the installations right?
Any more dual booting
is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so
you have both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of shereen
naserSent: Sunday, January 01,
2006 6:01 AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test
something so I installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same
machine same hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I
can only login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain,
meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp
and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account is
not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?)
Thank
you | | | |
| listmail
Posts:822
| | 01/01/2006 8:05 AM |
| I would think software level testing would result in more than 50% of the
cases for most people. I run about 30 machines in my home (I have probably a
hundred on CDs) on a regular basis, nearly all are virtual. The only
physical limitation I have run into in my VMs so far was the lack of USB
support in VPC which I solved by using VMWARE. My next major hurdle is 64
bit guests for a piece of software that decided would only be available in
64 bit, which I will again solve with VMWARE. I haven't dual booted a
machine nor had a need to dual boot a machine since vmware 2 which was about
2000/2001 or so.
If you start doing hardware integration testing or production perf testing,
you have no choice but to use physical hardware obviously. In every test lab
for business I have been involved in the last few years, the virtualized
instances have far outstripped the number of physical instances.
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 1:14 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
Re: My message to joe. Maybe 50% of the time - I'd agree. However, if you
want to test that snazzy new Fibre HBA or would like to see what the impact
for the user is going to be with CAD with the newest High End InterGraph
workstation video card - VMs aren't going to work.
The hardware selection in VMs is intended to be generic. Which for testing
or learning BizTalk and SQL interaction with ADAM and ADFS - it rocks
because the hardware doesn't matter.
Again - be sure of this - I love VMs. I just can't test Vista on it because
Aero Glass is the target, and I can't quite put an LDDM driver on the
generic graphics coded in, for example.
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ASB
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:51 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
Did you originally use different names, or the same name for each computer?
And I agree with Joe: Dual-booting is becoming obsolete.
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/?File=BootMgr.TXT
-ASB
FAST, CHEAP, SECURE: Pick Any TWO
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/
On 1/1/06, shereen naser wrote:
> Hi list,
> I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
> installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same
> machine
same
> hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can
only
> login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the
> domain, meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to
> the windows xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart
> and login to the domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I
> go to windows 2003
and
> disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain
> and login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error
> is that the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to
> login and
both
> OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to
> different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to
> do that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
> Thank you
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| AD000001153
Posts:0
| | 01/01/2006 8:11 AM |
| I would have to agree¦;-) At
work I run completely on VMs using ESX. All my testing is done on a Dell
PE1800 with about 8VMs including AD, Exchange (clustered), SQL, etc.
For those looking to do simple testing of
apps check out VM Player http://www.vmware.com/vmplayer
You can™t create VMs but you can run
any pre-built VM, including MS VPC VMs.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
11:46 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I am not a big workstation OS type of
person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it isn't the right thing
for all situations, but half the people setting up dual booting blow it anyway.
VM is a much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy if you are doing perf
or physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck even if you want USB you
can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to test 64 bit you are kind
of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
1:05 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me know how that
full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal
method to running different OS™s, but if you want the OS to have the full
machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed
“ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing /
learning environment.
And, make no mistake “ this is
coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with nothing BUT
VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization¦. It™s just not the right thing for all
situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
10:40 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you
to have different names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same
time, I have done this often. You did use different directories for the
installations right?
Any more dual booting is going the way of
the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so you have
both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen naser
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
6:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning
if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and
disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account
is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?)
Thank you | | | |
| AD00000928
Posts:0
| | 01/01/2006 8:42 AM |
| On 1/1/06, Rick Kingslan wrote:
>
>
> Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
> going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
>
>
>
> I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal method to running different OS's,
> but if you want the OS to have the full machine, rather than the limited
> virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed “ I think dual booting still
> has a very strong place in the testing / learning environment.
>
>
>
> And, make no mistake “ this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has
> a 250GB external with nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop.
> I love virtualization¦. It's just not the right thing for all situations.
>
>
>
> Rick
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> joe
> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40 AM
> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
>
>
>
>
> I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS
> and then both can be joined at the same time, I have done this often. You
> did use different directories for the installations right?
>
>
>
>
>
> Any more dual booting is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to
> virtualization software so you have both instances up and running at once.
> Look at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> shereen naser
> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01 AM
> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
>
>
> Hi list,
>
>
> I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
> installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
> hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
> login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain,
> meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows
> xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the
> domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and
> disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
> login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that
> the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and both
> OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to
> different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do
> that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
>
>
> Thank you
--
Cheap, Fast, Secure -- Pick Any TWO.
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/
.+-Å wè Ûiÿü0ç-Š÷?Å º+ƒòâ²Ã–¬§Ã¢²Ã‘@Bm§Ã¿Ã°ÃƒÅ“¶+Þv*è®Ã‹Å ËE¬§Ã¢²Ã–«r¯zm§Ã¿Ã°Ãƒ Å¡Å V«r¯yÊ&ý§-Š÷?Å ¾4„¢¨¥iËb½Ã§b®Å à | | | |
| AD00000928
Posts:0
| | 01/01/2006 8:43 AM |
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass
is going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's what dedicated systems are for. :)
Sure, a VM is not the best option here, depending on what aspect of
the OS is being tested, but in that case, using a totally separate
hard drive or some other separation technology will still likely prove
to be more viable than dual-booting.
-ASB
FAST, CHEAP, SECURE: Pick Any TWO
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/
On 1/1/06, Rick Kingslan wrote:
>
>
> Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
> going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
>
>
>
> I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal method to running different OS's,
> but if you want the OS to have the full machine, rather than the limited
> virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed “ I think dual booting still
> has a very strong place in the testing / learning environment.
>
>
>
> And, make no mistake “ this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has
> a 250GB external with nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop.
> I love virtualization¦. It's just not the right thing for all situations.
>
>
>
> Rick
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> joe
> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40 AM
> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
>
>
>
>
> I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS
> and then both can be joined at the same time, I have done this often. You
> did use different directories for the installations right?
>
>
>
>
>
> Any more dual booting is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to
> virtualization software so you have both instances up and running at once.
> Look at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> shereen naser
> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01 AM
> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
>
>
> Hi list,
>
>
> I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
> installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
> hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
> login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain,
> meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows
> xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the
> domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and
> disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
> login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that
> the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and both
> OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to
> different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do
> that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
>
>
> Thank you | | | |
| AD000001396
Posts:0
| | 01/02/2006 1:45 AM |
| Its not enough am stucked now with 5 minutes of switching between the 2 OSes and joinining/disjoining domains and loosing my tools from one boot to the other, I have to explain why am in deep shit on top of that!
Back to the people who tried to help :) originally I used the same name, when I realized the problem I tried 2 different names, but it didn't work, are you saying that I should use different names to beging with? if so will re-installing the W2k3 be enough without having to mess the xp? :(
thank you guys
On 1/1/06, ASB wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass
is going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~That's what dedicated systems are for. :)Sure, a VM is not the best option here, depending on what aspect of
the OS is being tested, but in that case, using a totally separatehard drive or some other separation technology will still likely proveto be more viable than dual-booting.-ASBFAST, CHEAP, SECURE: Pick Any TWO
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/On 1/1/06, Rick Kingslan wrote:>>> Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
> going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.>>>> I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal method to running different OS's,> but if you want the OS to have the full machine, rather than the limited
> virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed “ I think dual booting still> has a very strong place in the testing / learning environment.>>>> And, make no mistake “ this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has
> a 250GB external with nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop.> I love virtualization¦. It's just not the right thing for all situations.>>>> Rick>>
> ________________________________>>> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of> joe> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40 AM> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
>>>>> I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS> and then both can be joined at the same time, I have done this often. You> did use different directories for the installations right?
>>>>>> Any more dual booting is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to> virtualization software so you have both instances up and running at once.> Look at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.
>>>>>>> ________________________________>>> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of> shereen naser> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01 AM> To:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003>>> Hi list,>>> I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I> installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
> hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only> login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain,> meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows
> xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the> domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and> disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
> login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that> the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and both> OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to
> different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do> that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)>>> Thank you | | | |
| amulnick
Posts:163
| | 01/02/2006 2:38 AM |
| Depending on that above information, if that doesn't help set you straight, then give us the error code you see that causes you to remove from the domain. Likely more related to DNS, but let's be thorough.
Else send you a bigger shovel :)
On 1/2/06, shereen naser wrote:
men...men....men.... they can't answer a simple question, they need to know the how's and the why's and the where's and the when's, I couldn't even go through all of your answers cause apparently its not within my scope of interest :), I need to do this damned testing specifically this way, end of story.
Its not enough am stucked now with 5 minutes of switching between the 2 OSes and joinining/disjoining domains and loosing my tools from one boot to the other, I have to explain why am in deep shit on top of that!
Back to the people who tried to help :) originally I used the same name, when I realized the problem I tried 2 different names, but it didn't work, are you saying that I should use different names to beging with? if so will re-installing the W2k3 be enough without having to mess the xp? :(
thank you guys
On 1/1/06, ASB wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass
is going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~That's what dedicated systems are for. :)Sure, a VM is not the best option here, depending on what aspect of
the OS is being tested, but in that case, using a totally separatehard drive or some other separation technology will still likely proveto be more viable than dual-booting.-ASBFAST, CHEAP, SECURE: Pick Any TWO
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/On 1/1/06, Rick Kingslan wrote:>>> Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is > going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.>>>> I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal method to running different OS's,
> but if you want the OS to have the full machine, rather than the limited > virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed “ I think dual booting still> has a very strong place in the testing / learning environment.
>>>> And, make no mistake “ this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has > a 250GB external with nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop.> I love virtualization¦. It's just not the right thing for all situations.
>>>> Rick>> > ________________________________>>> From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> joe> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40 AM> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 >>>>> I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS> and then both can be joined at the same time, I have done this often. You
> did use different directories for the installations right? >>>>>> Any more dual booting is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to> virtualization software so you have both instances up and running at once.
> Look at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation. >>>>>>> ________________________________>>> From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> shereen naser> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01 AM> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003>>> Hi list,>>> I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I> installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
> hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only> login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain,> meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows
> xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the> domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and> disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
> login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that> the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and both> OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to
> different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do> that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)>>> Thank you | | | |
| listmail
Posts:822
| | 01/02/2006 4:20 AM |
| If you are going to dual boot.
1. Use different hard drives for the installation
(logical partitions or physical drives). If you
can't be bothered to build different partitions, then you better use entirely
different directory paths for all aspects of the install and expect to
STILL possibly run into some issues especially if any non-builtin groups or any
local users are used in any file system ACLs.
2. Use entirely different machine names,
this is your one and only issue related to AD and in fact, isn't an AD issue, it
is an installation booboo.
3. Use different IPs (I would hard set at least one,
possibly both of the machines), I would also consider using different MAC
addresses as I have seen weird issues with some older switches (Bay switches) which don't reset
their IP/MAC translation tables
enough.
The 5 minutes of switching
between OSes would all be gone with virtuals which is yet another reason why it
is recommended. Since you don't want to use virtuals or separate machines, you
need to make sure you isolate the instances properly.
Not sure why you are losing
your tools from one boot to the next, sounds like yet another issue with how you
have installed the products.
The reason there was so much discussion about about the
hows/whys is because when someone is messing up something fairly well known we tend to find out on this list
later that they really didn't know what they were looking for in the first place
or the OP finds out there were easier ways to do things later and wished someone had mentioned it.
Basically you will get someone asking why they can't seem to properly build a
life size titanium eiffel tower in their basement when in fact all
they need is a 3 inch diameter mud bowl
with a stick.
This list has a
history of really trying to teach people not being the list called AD for
dummies. People who do things quick without thinking or without understanding
are often the ones doing a lot of the posting saying things aren't right. Often
times, there aren't any simple answers that fit everyone, you need to understand
the who's, why's, what for's, and intents to come up with some answer
approximating what should be done. The most popular answer on this list over the
years has been "it depends" or "you need to explain your situation better"
because not only could an answer that is perfect for you and how you
do things be wrong for someone else, it could really screw them up bad. Someone
who is asking the question in the first place probably isn't in a good position
to try and judge which short answer out of several real quick posts is good for
them. The quick simple answer for someone having an issue dual booting is....
don't dual boot. It should quickly and easily solve all of your
stated issues.
If you really come down to
brass tacks, this issue isn't an AD issue at all. As I indicated above, it is
a Windows installation issue. You have two machines trying to use the same
machine account in AD. Only one machine knows the AD computer account password
at any given time. There is no AD issue there, it is perfectly happy and working
exactly as designed. If you had two separate machines being used by two separate
people trying to use an AD account would you consider that an AD issue or
someone dorked up their machine name issue? If you are running in VM(s) or
separate physical machines, you generally make that connection much better, "oh
yeah, we can't have two machines with the same name in the same domain at the
same time".
I am now of the opinion that
just changing the machine name of one installation may not solve all of your
issues. It
sounds like you may also have binary confusion as it is possible you have
all of the files slammed together in the same directory structures (Windows and
Docs&Settings and InetPub and ProgFiles and not to mention ACL issues), yet
again, something you won't run into using VM(s) or separate physical machines as
it simplifies it all.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen
naserSent: Monday, January 02, 2006 8:43 AMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [ActiveDir]
WinXP and Win2003
men...men....men.... they can't answer a simple question, they need to know
the how's and the why's and the where's and the when's, I couldn't even go
through all of your answers cause apparently its not within my scope of interest
:), I need to do this damned testing specifically this way, end of story.
Its not enough am stucked now with 5 minutes of switching between the 2
OSes and joinining/disjoining domains and loosing my tools from one boot to the
other, I have to explain why am in deep shit on top of that!
Back to the people who tried to help :) originally I used the same name,
when I realized the problem I tried 2 different names, but it didn't work, are
you saying that I should use different names to beging with? if so will
re-installing the W2k3 be enough without having to mess the xp? :(
thank you guys
On 1/1/06, ASB abaker@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Hehe¦. Let
me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is going for you
in a VPC or a VMWare virtual
machine.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~That's what dedicated
systems are for. :)Sure, a VM is not the best option here,
depending on what aspect ofthe OS is being tested, but in that case, using
a totally separatehard drive or some other separation technology will
still likely proveto be more viable than
dual-booting.-ASBFAST, CHEAP, SECURE: Pick Any TWO http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/On
1/1/06, Rick Kingslan rkingsla@xxxxxxx>
wrote:>>> Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out
testing of Vista and Aero Glass is > going for you in a VPC or a VMWare
virtual machine.>>>> I agree, dual-booting is not
the optimal method to running different OS's,> but if you want the OS
to have the full machine, rather than the limited > virtualized
hardware that the VMs are allowed “ I think dual booting still> has a
very strong place in the testing / learning
environment.>>>> And, make no mistake “ this is
coming from a guy that when on the road, has > a 250GB external with
nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop.> I
love virtualization¦. It's just not the right thing for all
situations.>>>> Rick>> >
________________________________>>> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of> joe> Sent:
Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40 AM> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
>>>>> I have no clue why it wouldn't allow
you to have different names for the OS> and then both can be joined at
the same time, I have done this often. You> did use different
directories for the installations right?
>>>>>> Any more dual booting is
going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to> virtualization
software so you have both instances up and running at once.> Look at
Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.
>>>>>>>
________________________________>>> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of> shereen naser> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01
AM> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003>>> Hi
list,>>> I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to
test something so I> installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition
R2 on the same machine same > hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen
and choose the OS, but I can only> login to the domain if one of the
OS's is disconnected from the domain,> meaning if I want to login to
the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows > xp and disjoin the
machine from the domain then restart and login to the> domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and>
disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
> login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is
that> the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to
login and both> OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the
machine name to > different names in each OS but same thing happens. is
there a way to do> that? (login to domain using both OS's without
having to disjoin?)>>> Thank
you | | | |
| rkingsla@xxxx.yyy
| | 01/02/2006 5:26 AM |
| My point exactly.... However, use of a separate hard drive in a system that is already running something else or 'separation technology (not 100% sure what that is) usually means 'dual boot' to some degree.
And, I would really suggest that if you're not learning HOW to manage the BCD in Vista - it might be an idea. Dual booting is a way to do this.
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ASB
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 2:43 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass
is going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's what dedicated systems are for. :)
Sure, a VM is not the best option here, depending on what aspect of
the OS is being tested, but in that case, using a totally separate
hard drive or some other separation technology will still likely prove
to be more viable than dual-booting.
-ASB
FAST, CHEAP, SECURE: Pick Any TWO
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/
On 1/1/06, Rick Kingslan wrote:
>
>
> Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
> going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
>
>
>
> I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal method to running different OS's,
> but if you want the OS to have the full machine, rather than the limited
> virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed “ I think dual booting still
> has a very strong place in the testing / learning environment.
>
>
>
> And, make no mistake “ this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has
> a 250GB external with nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop.
> I love virtualization¦. It's just not the right thing for all situations.
>
>
>
> Rick
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> joe
> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40 AM
> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
>
>
>
>
> I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS
> and then both can be joined at the same time, I have done this often. You
> did use different directories for the installations right?
>
>
>
>
>
> Any more dual booting is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to
> virtualization software so you have both instances up and running at once.
> Look at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> shereen naser
> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01 AM
> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
>
>
> Hi list,
>
>
> I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
> installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
> hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
> login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain,
> meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows
> xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the
> domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and
> disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
> login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that
> the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and both
> OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to
> different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do
> that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
>
>
> Thank you
.ŠÿÃÅ Å Æ’²§²B§Ãƒ¶v®Å §²rz§ÃƒÅ ryýŠŠ„¢i½®
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| rkingsla@xxxx.yyy
| | 01/02/2006 5:42 AM |
| If you want to test 64 bit you are
kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
Just don™t like VPC, do you?
:o) What about USB are you looking for? What does VMWare do with
USB that is this vital? I doubt it™s the USB coffee warmer¦
As to the 64-bit support, I guess that
would concern me if my laptop had an x64 chip. But, then I could use VS
2005 R2.
But, I™m not going to argue the
virtues of VMWare vs. VPC. I Use VPC because it™s what 100% of the
material that I get from internal is supplied on. And, I get about 100 or
so DVD™s with all types of imaginable configurations. I™m
glad that you™ve got the time to put together all of these disks, joe.
I wish I had that kind of time.
Rick
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
1:46 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I am not a big workstation OS type of
person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it isn't the right thing
for all situations, but half the people setting up dual booting blow it anyway.
VM is a much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy if you are doing perf
or physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck even if you want USB you
can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to test 64 bit you are kind
of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
1:05 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me know how that
full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal
method to running different OS™s, but if you want the OS to have the full
machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed
“ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing /
learning environment.
And, make no mistake “ this is
coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with nothing BUT
VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization¦. It™s just not the right thing for all
situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
10:40 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you
to have different names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same
time, I have done this often. You did use different directories for the
installations right?
Any more dual booting is going the way of
the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so you have
both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen naser
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
6:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning
if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and
disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account
is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?)
Thank you | | | |
| rkingsla@xxxx.yyy
| | 01/02/2006 5:45 AM |
| One question “ is all of your
validation testing done on VM™s or is the final sign off done on ˜production
deployable™ hardware?
I™m a big advocate of VM testing,
just to set the record straight.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alex Fontana
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
2:07 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I would have to agree¦;-) At
work I run completely on VMs using ESX. All my testing is done on a Dell
PE1800 with about 8VMs including AD, Exchange (clustered), SQL, etc.
For those looking to do simple testing of
apps check out VM Player http://www.vmware.com/vmplayer
You can™t create VMs but you can run
any pre-built VM, including MS VPC VMs.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
11:46 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I am not a big workstation OS type of
person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it isn't the right thing
for all situations, but half the people setting up dual booting blow it anyway.
VM is a much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy if you are doing perf or
physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck even if you want USB you
can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to test 64 bit you are kind
of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
1:05 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me know how that
full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal
method to running different OS™s, but if you want the OS to have the full
machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed
“ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing /
learning environment.
And, make no mistake “ this is
coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with nothing BUT
VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization¦. It™s just not the right thing for all
situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
10:40 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you
to have different names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same
time, I have done this often. You did use different directories for the installations
right?
Any more dual booting is going the way of
the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so you have
both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen naser
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
6:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning
if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and
disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account
is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?)
Thank you | | | |
| amulnick
Posts:163
| | 01/02/2006 7:15 AM |
| Having used both ESX, and VS 2005 I can honestly say there is at least one difference maybe more often related to performance; that's not by accident either. I would in no way advocate running Mac-on-Int^^^^Vista in a VM, but then again I wouldn't advocate running Vista at all and especially not on a 32bit platform at this time.
I think the original posters configuration is possible and has some benefits, especially since it sounded like the original poster wants to keep a job. Hopefully she realizes where the error was and is busily fixing it and using the corrected configuration. I think the answer is somewhere in the 30+ posts, but I'm curious about the VM comments you made and I'm hoping to learn something here.
Cheers,
Al
On 1/2/06, Rick Kingslan wrote:
One question “ is all of your validation testing done on VM's or is the final sign off done on 'production deployable' hardware?
I'm a big advocate of VM testing, just to set the record straight.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Alex FontanaSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 2:07 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
I would have to agree¦;-) At work I run completely on VMs using ESX. All my testing is done on a Dell PE1800 with about 8VMs including AD, Exchange (clustered), SQL, etc.
For those looking to do simple testing of apps check out VM Player
http://www.vmware.com/vmplayer
You can't create VMs but you can run any pre-built VM, including MS VPC VMs.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 11:46 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
I am not a big workstation OS type of person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it isn't the right thing for all situations, but half the people setting up dual booting blow it anyway. VM is a much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy if you are doing perf or physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck even if you want USB you can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to test 64 bit you are kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick KingslanSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 1:05 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject:
RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal method to running different OS's, but if you want the OS to have the full machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed “ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing / learning environment.
And, make no mistake “ this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love virtualization¦. It's just not the right thing for all situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40 AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same time, I have done this often. You did use different directories for the installations right?
Any more dual booting is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so you have both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen naserSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject:
[ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
Thank you | | | |
| aricbernard
Posts:4
| | 01/02/2006 7:54 AM |
| Just to be clear, VS2005R2 does not support
64-bit guests¦.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006
9:40 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
If you want to test 64 bit you are
kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
Just don™t like VPC, do you?
:o) What about USB are you looking for? What does VMWare do with
USB that is this vital? I doubt it™s the USB coffee warmer¦
As to the 64-bit support, I guess that
would concern me if my laptop had an x64 chip. But, then I could use VS
2005 R2.
But, I™m not going to argue the
virtues of VMWare vs. VPC. I Use VPC because it™s what 100% of the
material that I get from internal is supplied on. And, I get about 100 or
so DVD™s with all types of imaginable configurations. I™m
glad that you™ve got the time to put together all of these disks,
joe. I wish I had that kind of time.
Rick
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
1:46 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I am not a big workstation OS type of
person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it isn't the right thing
for all situations, but half the people setting up dual booting blow it anyway.
VM is a much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy if you are doing perf
or physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck even if you want USB you
can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to test 64 bit you are kind
of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
1:05 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me know how that
full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal
method to running different OS™s, but if you want the OS to have the full
machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed
“ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing /
learning environment.
And, make no mistake “ this is
coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with nothing BUT
VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization¦. It™s just not the right thing for all
situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
10:40 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you
to have different names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same
time, I have done this often. You did use different directories for the
installations right?
Any more dual booting is going the way of
the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so you have
both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen naser
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
6:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning
if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and
disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account
is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?)
Thank you | | | |
| AD000001153
Posts:0
| | 01/02/2006 10:06 AM |
| Depends; for simple changes such as
rolling out a new GPO, testing an import to AD, or changing a logon/startup
script the VM works perfect and gives the expected result. Also, the fact
that most of my environment is virtual means my results in test should be dead
on what they will be in production.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006
9:42 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
One question “ is all of your
validation testing done on VM™s or is the final sign off done on
˜production deployable™ hardware?
I™m a big advocate of VM testing,
just to set the record straight.
Rick
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Alex Fontana
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
2:07 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I would have to agree¦;-) At
work I run completely on VMs using ESX. All my testing is done on a Dell
PE1800 with about 8VMs including AD, Exchange (clustered), SQL, etc.
For those looking to do simple testing of
apps check out VM Player http://www.vmware.com/vmplayer
You can™t create VMs but you can run
any pre-built VM, including MS VPC VMs.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
11:46 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I am not a big workstation OS type of
person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it isn't the right thing
for all situations, but half the people setting up dual booting blow it anyway.
VM is a much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy if you are doing perf
or physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck even if you want USB you
can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to test 64 bit you are kind
of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
1:05 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me know how that
full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal
method to running different OS™s, but if you want the OS to have the full
machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed
“ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing /
learning environment.
And, make no mistake “ this is
coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with nothing BUT
VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization¦. It™s just not the right thing for all
situations.
Rick
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
10:40 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you
to have different names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same
time, I have done this often. You did use different directories for the
installations right?
Any more dual booting is going the way of
the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so you have
both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen naser
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01
AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning
if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and
disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account
is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?)
Thank you | | | |
| AD000001396
Posts:0
| | 01/03/2006 1:35 AM |
| I will give this renaming thing and IPs another shot and see how it goes as far as you guys say it should, or else am not doing that da... testing!
I know this is AD list and I know that u can answer me thats y I asked here,
On 1/2/06, joe wrote:
If you are going to dual boot.
1. Use different hard drives for the installation (logical partitions or physical drives). If you can't be bothered to build different partitions, then you better use entirely different directory paths for all aspects of the install and expect to STILL possibly run into some issues especially if any non-builtin groups or any local users are used in any file system ACLs.
2. Use entirely different machine names, this is your one and only issue related to AD and in fact, isn't an AD issue, it is an installation booboo.
3. Use different IPs (I would hard set at least one, possibly both of the machines), I would also consider using different MAC addresses as I have seen weird issues with some older switches
(Bay switches) which don't reset their IP/MAC translation tables enough.
The 5 minutes of switching between OSes would all be gone with virtuals which is yet another reason why it is recommended. Since you don't want to use virtuals or separate machines, you need to make sure you isolate the instances properly.
Not sure why you are losing your tools from one boot to the next, sounds like yet another issue with how you have installed the products.
The reason there was so much discussion about about the hows/whys is because when someone is messing up something fairly well known
we tend to find out on this list later that they really didn't know what they were looking for in the first place or the OP finds out there were easier ways to do things later and wished someone had mentioned it
. Basically you will get someone asking why they can't seem to properly build a life size titanium eiffel tower in their basement when in fact all they need is a 3 inch diameter mud bowl with a stick.
This list has a history of really trying to teach people not being the list called AD for dummies. People who do things quick without thinking or without understanding are often the ones doing a lot of the posting saying things aren't right. Often times, there aren't any simple answers that fit everyone, you need to understand the who's, why's, what for's, and intents to come up with some answer approximating what should be done. The most popular answer on this list over the years has been "it depends" or "you need to explain your situation better" because not only could an answer that is perfect for you and how you do things be wrong for someone else, it could really screw them up bad. Someone who is asking the question in the first place probably isn't in a good position to try and judge which short answer out of several real quick posts is good for them. The quick simple answer for someone having an issue dual booting is.... don't dual boot. It should quickly and easily solve all of your stated issues.
If you really come down to brass tacks, this issue isn't an AD issue at all. As I indicated above, it is a Windows installation issue. You have two machines trying to use the same machine account in AD. Only one machine knows the AD computer account password at any given time. There is no AD issue there, it is perfectly happy and working exactly as designed. If you had two separate machines being used by two separate people trying to use an AD account would you consider that an AD issue or someone dorked up their machine name issue? If you are running in VM(s) or separate physical machines, you generally make that connection much better, "oh yeah, we can't have two machines with the same name in the same domain at the same time".
I am now of the opinion that just changing the machine name of one installation may not solve all of your issues.
It sounds like you may also have binary confusion as it is possible you have all of the files slammed together in the same directory structures (Windows and Docs&Settings and InetPub and ProgFiles and not to mention ACL issues), yet again, something you won't run into using VM(s) or separate physical machines as it simplifies it all.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen naserSent: Monday, January 02, 2006 8:43 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
men...men....men.... they can't answer a simple question, they need to know the how's and the why's and the where's and the when's, I couldn't even go through all of your answers cause apparently its not within my scope of interest :), I need to do this damned testing specifically this way, end of story.
Its not enough am stucked now with 5 minutes of switching between the 2 OSes and joinining/disjoining domains and loosing my tools from one boot to the other, I have to explain why am in deep shit on top of that!
Back to the people who tried to help :) originally I used the same name, when I realized the problem I tried 2 different names, but it didn't work, are you saying that I should use different names to beging with? if so will re-installing the W2k3 be enough without having to mess the xp? :(
thank you guys
On 1/1/06, ASB wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass
is going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~That's what dedicated systems are for. :)Sure, a VM is not the best option here, depending on what aspect of
the OS is being tested, but in that case, using a totally separatehard drive or some other separation technology will still likely proveto be more viable than dual-booting.-ASBFAST, CHEAP, SECURE: Pick Any TWO
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/On 1/1/06, Rick Kingslan wrote:>>> Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is > going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.>>>> I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal method to running different OS's,
> but if you want the OS to have the full machine, rather than the limited > virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed “ I think dual booting still> has a very strong place in the testing / learning environment.
>>>> And, make no mistake “ this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has > a 250GB external with nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop.> I love virtualization¦. It's just not the right thing for all situations.
>>>> Rick>> > ________________________________>>> From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> joe> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40 AM> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 >>>>> I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS> and then both can be joined at the same time, I have done this often. You
> did use different directories for the installations right? >>>>>> Any more dual booting is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to> virtualization software so you have both instances up and running at once.
> Look at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation. >>>>>>> ________________________________>>> From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> shereen naser> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01 AM> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003>>> Hi list,>>> I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I> installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
> hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only> login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain,> meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows
> xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the> domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and> disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
> login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that> the computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and both> OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to
> different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do> that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)>>> Thank you | | | |
|
|