Are *MICROSOFT'S* test questions wrong?

[CZroe]

I just got finished taking a horrible Win2K Server test. The teacher is just a US Reserve soldier with no certs who doesn't know a single bit of the material so he promised to go easy on us by pulling out all the questions that can't be quoted in the book and filling up the test with multiple choice stuff that he finds in the definitions. As a result, we were tested on an amazing array of irrelevant junk that no one can be expected to answer correctly.

Two of the questions were quotes from the book and therefore original MS questions.
From the book:

Upgrading is the process of installing Windows 2000 Server in a directory that currently contains certain versions of Windows NT.
...
Installing, in contrast with upgrading, is the process of placing the operating system in a new directory, wiping out the previous operating system.

From the test:

_____ is the process of placing the operating system in a directory that currently contains the previous operating system. [Edited by MS to avoid saying the word "installing" and to make as an alternative to the second question]
(Upgrading)

_____ is the process of placing the operating system in a new directory, wiping out the previous operating system. [Edited by MS to remove mention of upgrading and to conform to first question's wording]
(Installing)

Now, am I wrong, or can you not install over the old OS in the same directory, wiping it out without performing an upgrade installation and without creating a new directory?

Can you not also create a dual-boot system by installing to a different directory (Or drive even) and neither upgrade nor "wipe out" the old OS?

Neither question specifically implies the correct answer. The first implies installing over the old operating system and doesn't specifically state anything to make it relate to upgrading. You'd have to memorize the book to get this one.

The second seems to imply "dual boot" because it explicitly states a second directory is required except it says that it is wiping out the older one's installation. That is a contradictory message that point to both "dual boot" as the answer or "installation."

I told the teacher before leaving that the test and the book were wrong, but he doesn't seem interested. Someone please agree with me before class Monday

 

[LiLithTecH]

The answers are correct.

When UPGRADING, Windows overwrites the old version, keeping
most of previous settings in place. (uses the exsisting Directory)

When INSTALLING, Windows wipes out the previous version of the OS
and installs the NEW version and all previous settings. (uses a NEW Directory)

You cannot DUAL BOOT Windows SERVER on the same partition.
A Seperate partition is required for each OS.

 

[CZroe]

What I'm saying is that you CAN "install" to the same directory and overwrite the previous OS. It does not require a new directory. Dual-booting requires a new directory or drive. In this case, it very well may require a seperate drive, but that doesn't mean that "installing" does.

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: LiLithTecH
You cannot DUAL BOOT Windows SERVER on the same partition.
A Seperate partition is required for each OS.

Yes, you can. I have multiple machines set up this way. You can't do it with Win95/98/ME style OSes but with NT/2K/XP you can.

Quad booting boot.ini on my current machine:
[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partition(1)\WINNT
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partition(1)\W2KAS="Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server on Deathstar" /fastdetect
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partition(1)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional" /fastdetect
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server on WD" /fastdetect
H:\="Windows ME"

The first 2 choices are both on the C:\ partition

 

[CZroe]

I would say the same but I'm thinking that he might be referenceing to some Server-only limitation that I don't know of.

 

[EeyoreX]

Originally posted by: CZroe
What I'm saying is that you CAN "install" to the same directory and overwrite the previous OS. It does not require a new directory. Dual-booting requires a new directory or drive. In this case, it very well may require a seperate drive, but that doesn't mean that "installing" does.

I think we are arguing technicallities and semantics here, and therefore, I would say that even if you install over your current copy of the OS you are technically installing to a "new" directory. The old directory, all it's content/settings/etc are gone, so the destination, is for all intents and purposes "new". You said it yourself, you are overwriting the old version. So it's gone, and a new one takes its place.

\Dan

 

[dawks]

Originally posted by: EeyoreX

Originally posted by: CZroe
What I'm saying is that you CAN "install" to the same directory and overwrite the previous OS. It does not require a new directory. Dual-booting requires a new directory or drive. In this case, it very well may require a seperate drive, but that doesn't mean that "installing" does.

I think we are arguing technicallities and semantics here, and therefore, I would say that even if you install over your current copy of the OS you are technically installing to a "new" directory. The old directory, all it's content/settings/etc are gone, so the destination, is for all intents and purposes "new". You said it yourself, you are overwriting the old version. So it's gone, and a new one takes its place.

\Dan

Yea, when you Install over a current copy of an OS, installed in say, C:\Windows, the installer, deletes the directory, and recreates it, making a NEW directory.. NEW.

I doubt the installer will do a del C:\windows\*.*
More like do a rd C:\Windows md C:\windows\
or even del c:\*.* md c:\windows

 

[CZroe]

But the directory contains more than just the OS.

Also, it's stating that you MUST install it in a "new" directory and that the other must be installed in the old directory and you are supposed to identify the installation technique based on that. If THAT is wrong, the question is invalid.

 

[dawks]

Originally posted by: CZroe
But the directory contains more than just the OS.

Also, it's stating that you MUST install it in a "new" directory and that the other must be installed in the old directory and you are supposed to identify the installation technique based on that. If THAT is wrong, the question is invalid.

Yes, when upgrading you must specify the old directory, and the upgrade MUST be installed in that directory, becuase your are not creating a new registry, and hundreds of registry keys and .ini files point to that install directory. If you upgraded to a new directory, you would 'break' all those programs. Nullifying the point of the upgrade.

Installing new requires you wipe all the files, including the registry. You can install to the SAME directory.. as it is the SAME name to you, but technically, its a NEW directory. The installer wipes the old one, and creates a new one. Regaurdless of whether the name of that directory is new to you or not, its technically and physically a NEW directory.

 

[Abzstrak]

You'll soon learn that there is an answer and then there is Microsofts answer. There are alot of ways of doing things and definitions to words that Microsoft believes is different. You have to learn the MS way to do well on their tests.

 

[yomasterace]

You'll soon learn that there is an answer and then there is Microsofts answer. There are alot of ways of doing things and definitions to words that Microsoft believes is different. You have to learn the MS way to do well on their tests.

just remember this is bills world.we are just living in it.

 

[mboy]

When your server goes down and you have to rebuild/restore it or set up one from scratch, u aint gonna give a rats A$$ about either of the answers!!!!