Ghost 9 has no bearing on the MBR at all. The MBR instructs the system
where, on the hard drive, to go to boot the operating system. It doesn't
come into play when you boot from a CD. So I guess you would be able to say
that there is no compatibility problem with Ghost 9.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

"Timothy Daniels" <TDaniels@NoSpamDot.com> wrote in message
news:G-GdnVFdnMEmKRvenZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "Richard Urban"wrote:
>> System Commander writes to the MBR. That is how you are able
>> to choose which partition/drive to boot into. Because SC gives you
>> much more flexibility than Windows XP dual boot mode, SC must
>> do this.
>>
>> Ghost 2003 will reboot the machine into a special version of DOS
>> for the purposes of running the program when you are working with
>> the Windows partition/drive. The information to do this is also written
>> to the MBR to allow it to happen. Many times Ghost 2003 will not
>> boot up. Sometimes SC gets corrupted and you have to reload it.
>> You can have only one set of entries to the MBR at a time. If that entry
>> does not clear out when no longer needed you will have problems.
>>
>> Ghost 9 does NOT use this method. It images the Windows partition
>> just fine from within Windows. You restore by booting from the recovery
>> CD.
>
>
> Is the OP's purpose to create image files and to restore them?
> Or to create clones?
> Or to make incremental backups?
>
> Maybe we should ask him what it is that he'd be doing.
>
>
>> The MBR is bypassed by the use of the boot CD. The MBR does
>> not come into play, except to boot the computer to System
>> Commander, where you make your operating system choice.
>
>
> So are you saying Ghost 2003 is incompatible with Sys Cmdr
> and that Ghost 9.0 *is* compatible?
>
>
>> I have been using System Commander since 1993-94 with little
>> or no problems. It has always done as advertised.
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Richard Urban
>> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
>>
>>
>> "Timothy Daniels" wrote:
>>> "Peter" wrote:
>>>> I want to have XP pro for my primary OS, and then another OS
>>>> (XP home) for music production/composing where the OS
>>>> footprint is as minimal as possible (maybe even without Antivirus
>>>> and TCP/IP) to leave processing power to the music studio
>>>> applications.
>>>>
>>>> Is such a setup compatible with Norton Ghost 9? I ask because
>>>> support staff for SystemCommander8 advised against using
>>>> SC8 and Ghost on the same machine. They said these were
>>>> incompatible, but I never understood if it was due to the dual boot
>>>> config or something else particular to SC8.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ghost is not a boot manager. It has no effect on WinXP's
>>> multi-booting functions. System Commander *is* a boot-
>>> managing utility. It may not be compatible with WinXP's
>>> built-in boot manager, but there's not reason to expect that
>>> it wouldn't get along with Ghost as they typically wouldn't be
>>> running at the same time. If System Commander changes
>>> the boot sectors or MBRs sufficiently that Ghost would be
>>> confused, I'd stay away from System Commander.
>>>
>>> *TimDaniels*
>>