Talk:System partition and boot partition

Redirect or Merge?

I recommend that this short article be merged into or simply redirected to either Booting or Windows NT Startup Process or some similar page. I feel that the information should be consolidated, not scattered through a myriad of short, specific articles. The creature of this page disagrees with me. I leave the discussion here for consensus. The article System partition carries my same recommendation. Ryanjunk 19:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

• Strongly agree. I've provisionally merged the two articles, but I feel they should be merged to a larger article. --Muchness 19:32, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
• The consensus on both Talk:Booting and Talk:Windows NT Startup Process is not to merge. The former discussion gives some especially good reasons why this should not be merged into a Windows-specific article or into an article on booting in general. Uncle G 13:15, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Clarification of terms

It seems that the "system partition" actually does the booting and is what linux calls the "boot partition". In other words, Windows and Linux name these things in opposite ways. It would be useful if an expert could clarify that in the article. 15.203.249.124 (talk) 10:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

MBR location

According to the Master boot record article, MBR, quote, "is not located in a partition, it is located at a Main Boot Record area in front of the first partition". This article, however, says that "the system partition is a disk partition that contains the master boot record, ..." etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.161.94.9 (talk) 05:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

You're right, the article is wrong. Appears that the MBR has been confused with the boot sector. Socrates2008 (Talk) 05:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Disambig?

Seems this topic is precisely reversed in terms of terminology? If so, doesn't that warrant a disambiguation page for these terms? 70.247.175.126 (talk) 13:01, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect Attacks on Microsoft

This page is really Biased and angrily written in regards to Microsoft.

But what is really irritating is that it's wrong, and contradictary to claims elsewhere on Wikipedia. For all the claims that the Boot/System dichotomy used by Microsoft is not "common", at the very top of the page there is a link to the "EFI System Partition". Following this we find that the EFI (An intel-led development, not Microsoft) "system" partition "contains the boot loader programs for all installed operating systems".

The "common" terminology is actually a relatively recent way of looking at the way x86 PC's, which have little firmware support for Boot Loaders boot. The "Microsoft" way is common on nearly every system will a firmware that recognises a Boot Loader as more than a fixed location, and has been used on firmware such as the ARC and others, especially in high-end servers, which influenced the development of EFI that also uses the system.

Unfortunately all the references are Books I don't currently have access to, all written from a PC view, and which I can't confirm actually support the way this article is written. The best I can find in terms of conflicting evidence is probably a poor reference, however, given the incorrectness of this article, references must be found. The article I found, even gets itself a little confused and makes the same claims about this being a Microsoft-only system, but clearly also contradicts that.

- Jimmi Hugh (talk) 12:25, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Jimmi

All I see is that you have replaced sourced statements with original research. For all I know, it is you who is confused and mistaken. Be that as it may, please either cite a source or refrain from framing what you think is correct as the truth.

By the way, you might want to proofread your contributions more than once or twice.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 14:34, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

References