Can Win2K partitions be hidden with Drive Image 5.0?
For the life of me, I can't seem to hide one of my partitions (haven't tried any of the others). I'm using Win2K Pro but with FAT32 partitions. Okay, I go into DriveImage DOS and I can highlight and set the partition to Hide.
For the life of me, I can't seem to hide one of my partitions (haven't tried any of the others). I'm using Win2K Pro but with FAT32 partitions.
Okay, I go into DriveImage DOS and I can highlight and set the partition to Hide. The Drive Image DOS window labels the partition as hidden. I then exit and reboot but when I look in Windows Explorer, the partition's still there!
An e-mail contact of mine regularly hides/unhides partitions on a variety of machines (Win98/ME/XP), where the partitions are FAT32s. He uses Drive Image 4.0 and he says he has no problem at all, regardless of whether they're Primaries or Logicals.
Are there any administrative restrictions for this kind of thing, in Win2K? Or restrictions on partition size? The logical partition I'm trying to hide is a 7.6GB one.
Any suggestions about what might be wrong would be most welcomed.
Okay, I go into DriveImage DOS and I can highlight and set the partition to Hide. The Drive Image DOS window labels the partition as hidden. I then exit and reboot but when I look in Windows Explorer, the partition's still there!
An e-mail contact of mine regularly hides/unhides partitions on a variety of machines (Win98/ME/XP), where the partitions are FAT32s. He uses Drive Image 4.0 and he says he has no problem at all, regardless of whether they're Primaries or Logicals.
Are there any administrative restrictions for this kind of thing, in Win2K? Or restrictions on partition size? The logical partition I'm trying to hide is a 7.6GB one.
Any suggestions about what might be wrong would be most welcomed.
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Hi Gang,
Ranish Partition Manager can do this, but I agree what do you need to hide it for anyways? Is this part of a half-baked multi-boot strategy.
-Christian
Ranish Partition Manager can do this, but I agree what do you need to hide it for anyways? Is this part of a half-baked multi-boot strategy.
-Christian
No, this is not a half-baked multiboot setup. I'm not running a multiboot arrangement; I've no need for that. I do run three partitions, though - one the primary bootable and two logicals. One of the logicals is reserved for an image of the primary, the other one is for safekeep of drivers, utilities, etc.
The principal reason I'm wanting to hide one (in fact, both) of the logical partitions is to protect it from being written to by Windows (Win2K, in my bootable primary partition), except when it's supposed to. Believe it or not, mere partitioning does NOT prevent the erroneous writing by Windows to other partitions under error conditions, but hiding the partitions should get around that problem. Over the past couple of years, I've had instances of where visits to what-have-turned-out-to-be badly-designed websites have resulted in strange code being executed (no, not a virus) and causing Windows to corrupt both the primary and logical partitions. This is a situation that should concern ALL serious users.
Drive Image (as well as Partition Magic) should certainly allow partitions to be hidden. At least, that's what it states in the DI handbook, and it gives the procedure for it in detail. However, I can't get it to work. DI itself indicates that it's hidden the partition but when I subsequently look in Windows Explorer, the partition's still there! I'm wondering if there's something special about Win2K that prevents it, or possibly you can't hide logical partitions, only primaries. However, a distant contact of mine is adamant that you can, and he says he's done exactly what I want to do, using DI, on Win98, WinME and WinXP machines, all using FAT32.
I have a personal preference for FAT32 for several reasons - being a single-machine, single-person user, I don't need the file encryption and extra security of NTFS. I concede that NTFS has better recovery from error conditions but I specifically want access to DOS-proper. Also, FAT32 works faster than NTFS, for all but the largest of partition sizes. Still, this is not a discussion of FAT32 v NTFS, it's a discussion about hiding partitions in Win2K. I'm wondering whether perhaps Permissions has something to do with it?
The principal reason I'm wanting to hide one (in fact, both) of the logical partitions is to protect it from being written to by Windows (Win2K, in my bootable primary partition), except when it's supposed to. Believe it or not, mere partitioning does NOT prevent the erroneous writing by Windows to other partitions under error conditions, but hiding the partitions should get around that problem. Over the past couple of years, I've had instances of where visits to what-have-turned-out-to-be badly-designed websites have resulted in strange code being executed (no, not a virus) and causing Windows to corrupt both the primary and logical partitions. This is a situation that should concern ALL serious users.
Drive Image (as well as Partition Magic) should certainly allow partitions to be hidden. At least, that's what it states in the DI handbook, and it gives the procedure for it in detail. However, I can't get it to work. DI itself indicates that it's hidden the partition but when I subsequently look in Windows Explorer, the partition's still there! I'm wondering if there's something special about Win2K that prevents it, or possibly you can't hide logical partitions, only primaries. However, a distant contact of mine is adamant that you can, and he says he's done exactly what I want to do, using DI, on Win98, WinME and WinXP machines, all using FAT32.
I have a personal preference for FAT32 for several reasons - being a single-machine, single-person user, I don't need the file encryption and extra security of NTFS. I concede that NTFS has better recovery from error conditions but I specifically want access to DOS-proper. Also, FAT32 works faster than NTFS, for all but the largest of partition sizes. Still, this is not a discussion of FAT32 v NTFS, it's a discussion about hiding partitions in Win2K. I'm wondering whether perhaps Permissions has something to do with it?
Well, thanks for the idea, AlecStaar but I'd rather confine myself to Drive Image. It's a real bummer that Powerquest won't provide support any more.
I'm familiar with partitioning and drive-letter assignment in Win2K's Disk Management but I'm not aware that you can hide a partition by simply not giving it a letter. Given that my partitions already exist and have data in them anyway, my guess is that Win2K would prevent non-assignment of a drive letter. I'm not willing to mess around with that, quite frankly, because if something goes wrong, I'll lose the very data I'm trying to secure.
I'm hoping that someone who's a Win2K user and who's used Drive Image for both imaging and hiding will see this query and enlighten me - and us all. Like I say, either I'm missing a special configuration setting in Win2K or Powerquest has singularly failed to say that hiding partitions won't actually work for Win2K (they state quite clearly in their handbook that DI is compatible with Win2K/WinXP but, of course, that can mean anything you like). Or perhaps, with products like Drive Image and Partition Magic, only PRIMARY partitions can be hidden?
I'm familiar with partitioning and drive-letter assignment in Win2K's Disk Management but I'm not aware that you can hide a partition by simply not giving it a letter. Given that my partitions already exist and have data in them anyway, my guess is that Win2K would prevent non-assignment of a drive letter. I'm not willing to mess around with that, quite frankly, because if something goes wrong, I'll lose the very data I'm trying to secure.
I'm hoping that someone who's a Win2K user and who's used Drive Image for both imaging and hiding will see this query and enlighten me - and us all. Like I say, either I'm missing a special configuration setting in Win2K or Powerquest has singularly failed to say that hiding partitions won't actually work for Win2K (they state quite clearly in their handbook that DI is compatible with Win2K/WinXP but, of course, that can mean anything you like). Or perhaps, with products like Drive Image and Partition Magic, only PRIMARY partitions can be hidden?
Bear in mind, AlecStaar, that once hidden (by Drive Image), my partitions
need to be recoverable both from inside Windows and from the DOS-type environment that Drive Image provides (because there's always the potential for the primary partition to fail and the machine to become unbootable) . There's no guarantee that if I were to hide my partitions using the method you've suggested, Drive Image DOS would still work as it should, allowing me to recover the good partition(s) and restoring a good bootable primary partition. In effect, you're guessing at the way Drive Image works (and you freely admit that you've never used Drive Image!).
No, I'll hang on in the hope that somebody versed in the usage of Drive Image replies.
need to be recoverable both from inside Windows and from the DOS-type environment that Drive Image provides (because there's always the potential for the primary partition to fail and the machine to become unbootable) . There's no guarantee that if I were to hide my partitions using the method you've suggested, Drive Image DOS would still work as it should, allowing me to recover the good partition(s) and restoring a good bootable primary partition. In effect, you're guessing at the way Drive Image works (and you freely admit that you've never used Drive Image!).
No, I'll hang on in the hope that somebody versed in the usage of Drive Image replies.
AlecStaar, take a look at:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;231289
You'll see there the approved way of hiding partitions, if you wish to do it in Windows. I discovered that KB article several days ago. I actually went into MMC, to see if I could open the sections User Configuration, Windows Explorer, etc, but they simply weren't in the list to add. And, like I say, this is "in-house" hiding; it's a diversion; it doesn't answer my basic question about Drive Image.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;231289
You'll see there the approved way of hiding partitions, if you wish to do it in Windows. I discovered that KB article several days ago. I actually went into MMC, to see if I could open the sections User Configuration, Windows Explorer, etc, but they simply weren't in the list to add. And, like I say, this is "in-house" hiding; it's a diversion; it doesn't answer my basic question about Drive Image.
Another contact of mine has sent me files sufficient to make a bootable DOS version of Partition Magic 6.0, to try. Well, I've done the business and tried it, and that doesn't hide the partitions, either!
I reckon that you can't hide logical partitions, therefore. You can only hide primary partitions. Either that, or there's something really weird about Win2K with regard to hiding.
I reckon that you can't hide logical partitions, therefore. You can only hide primary partitions. Either that, or there's something really weird about Win2K with regard to hiding.
Quote:Another contact of mine has sent me files sufficient to make a bootable DOS version of Partition Magic 6.0, to try. Well, I've done the business and tried it, and that doesn't hide the partitions, either!
Probably not the best thing to be talking about, as that could be considered piracy...
Quote:I reckon that you can't hide logical partitions, therefore. You can only hide primary partitions. Either that, or there's something really weird about Win2K with regard to hiding.
Also, you're using an older version of PowerQuest PartitionMagic, you should really read the documentation to ensure that it is compatible with the larger FAT32 partitions.
Also, PartitionMagic is an exceptional program... Definately worth the $60-70 to have in one's toolkit.
Probably not the best thing to be talking about, as that could be considered piracy...
Quote:I reckon that you can't hide logical partitions, therefore. You can only hide primary partitions. Either that, or there's something really weird about Win2K with regard to hiding.
Also, you're using an older version of PowerQuest PartitionMagic, you should really read the documentation to ensure that it is compatible with the larger FAT32 partitions.
Also, PartitionMagic is an exceptional program... Definately worth the $60-70 to have in one's toolkit.
Hmm. It's been a long day for me today, Alecstaar. A real brown trousers job, in fact, as I put my imaging to the ultimate test! By the way, to answer Adam, that program was only a trial DOS version, to see if it'd work as regards hiding, and it didn't, so I've removed it now and am just using Drive Image. BTW, a year ago I paid full whack for DI and now Powerquest won't give any support. Nice one, Powerquest.
Anyway, to cut a long story short, today I experimented at length with the hide function in DI but it still wouldn't hide either of my two logical partitions. In the end, I left that and decided to image C on to one of the logicals (this was the first ever attempt). It would only work in the Windows version of DI and I got some stupid error messages en route. I then retried hiding but still no joy.
Someone else I know suggested using Win2K's Disk Mngt for hiding partitions, like you did, AlecStaar, so I investigated that and it worked. It hid the partitions in W. Explorer but didn't alter the drive-letter assignment, which is great. It's simple to unhide them, as well.
Leaving them hid, I then started a Restore, just to see if DI would even see the Win2K-hidden partition (as I had doubts about that). Unfortunately, it immediately started the full-blooded restore and I panicked and somehow aborted. When the PC rebooted, it stopped, saying BOOT DISK FAILURE. PLEASE INSERT SYSTEM DISK. **** I'd corrupted the boot sector (NTLDR was missing).
I started to use my Win2K backup floppies to try to repair Windows but in the end aborted that and switched to the newly-made DI recovery floppies. All or nothing, I reckoned. But it worked! I was able to restore 99.9% of C.
I'm not very impressed with DI, though. It's clearly imperfect. It's also taken a while to get Windows back up to speed again. Internet access was sluggish after that, and I also found I was locked out of these forums or to e-mailing a moderator for help. But now it seems to have sorted itself out.
Anyway, to cut a long story short, today I experimented at length with the hide function in DI but it still wouldn't hide either of my two logical partitions. In the end, I left that and decided to image C on to one of the logicals (this was the first ever attempt). It would only work in the Windows version of DI and I got some stupid error messages en route. I then retried hiding but still no joy.
Someone else I know suggested using Win2K's Disk Mngt for hiding partitions, like you did, AlecStaar, so I investigated that and it worked. It hid the partitions in W. Explorer but didn't alter the drive-letter assignment, which is great. It's simple to unhide them, as well.
Leaving them hid, I then started a Restore, just to see if DI would even see the Win2K-hidden partition (as I had doubts about that). Unfortunately, it immediately started the full-blooded restore and I panicked and somehow aborted. When the PC rebooted, it stopped, saying BOOT DISK FAILURE. PLEASE INSERT SYSTEM DISK. **** I'd corrupted the boot sector (NTLDR was missing).
I started to use my Win2K backup floppies to try to repair Windows but in the end aborted that and switched to the newly-made DI recovery floppies. All or nothing, I reckoned. But it worked! I was able to restore 99.9% of C.
I'm not very impressed with DI, though. It's clearly imperfect. It's also taken a while to get Windows back up to speed again. Internet access was sluggish after that, and I also found I was locked out of these forums or to e-mailing a moderator for help. But now it seems to have sorted itself out.
Yes, like I say, it was browntrousersville, especially this afternoon, when I realised I couldn't boot into Windows and had corrupted the boot sector.
I'm still very suspicious of DI, though. What seems so hard to believe is that Powerquest ever tested out DI 5.0 on either Win2K or WinXP for real. I mean, it's FULL of bugs. It reported things like telling me that my destination path/filename was invalid and inaccessible when, quite clearly, it wasn't. For some unknown reasons, imaging will only work in the Windows version (called QuickImage) and restoring would only work in the Caldera DOS version. Then there's hiding the partitions - that wouldn't work at all, despite DI saying to the contrary. How on earth can a company like Powerquest ever put out a product like that with so many obvious bugs in it? No wonder they won't offer any support on it any more; they're probably too embarassed about it!
No, I have to admit that, whilst in this instance I managed to restore my C partition, I'm not at all happy with ANY of the so-called ghosting programs that are on the market. They all claim to be the last word but they sure ain't. You'll probably know that Powerquest has just released Drive Image 2002, which apparently is an all-Windows version.
I'm still very suspicious of DI, though. What seems so hard to believe is that Powerquest ever tested out DI 5.0 on either Win2K or WinXP for real. I mean, it's FULL of bugs. It reported things like telling me that my destination path/filename was invalid and inaccessible when, quite clearly, it wasn't. For some unknown reasons, imaging will only work in the Windows version (called QuickImage) and restoring would only work in the Caldera DOS version. Then there's hiding the partitions - that wouldn't work at all, despite DI saying to the contrary. How on earth can a company like Powerquest ever put out a product like that with so many obvious bugs in it? No wonder they won't offer any support on it any more; they're probably too embarassed about it!
No, I have to admit that, whilst in this instance I managed to restore my C partition, I'm not at all happy with ANY of the so-called ghosting programs that are on the market. They all claim to be the last word but they sure ain't. You'll probably know that Powerquest has just released Drive Image 2002, which apparently is an all-Windows version.
Norton Ghost has been quite popular with Win2K users over the last few years. I was given to understand, though, that Drive Image had a slight edge on it. Still, these reviewers never seem to find the bugs that I IMMEDIATELY find.
I'm not in the mood for shelling out more money on what might turn out to be yet another incomplete design of software (quite apart from the fact that I'm early-retired due to ill-health and have to live on next to nothing), but I'll look into Norton Ghost a bit more perhaps. I know that a couple of my Win2K contacts use it.
My original topic remains basically unanswered, as you'll no doubt realise. It seems that Drive Image 5.0 (and probably other versions around that) simply can't hide logical partitions and, in fact, gives erroneous indications in this respect. It's just as easy, if not more so, to use Win2K's Disk Mngt to hide partitions instead.
I'm not in the mood for shelling out more money on what might turn out to be yet another incomplete design of software (quite apart from the fact that I'm early-retired due to ill-health and have to live on next to nothing), but I'll look into Norton Ghost a bit more perhaps. I know that a couple of my Win2K contacts use it.
My original topic remains basically unanswered, as you'll no doubt realise. It seems that Drive Image 5.0 (and probably other versions around that) simply can't hide logical partitions and, in fact, gives erroneous indications in this respect. It's just as easy, if not more so, to use Win2K's Disk Mngt to hide partitions instead.
1) Removing the drive letter in win2k will work fine to hide the partition in windows.
It wont stop access from dos in any way, dos will find the parition the same way it normally would. WIndows mounting of the drive letters is in windows only.
What this doe mean thiough is that its not really hidden if someone goes in in dos on your machine.
They could also reassign the drive letter in disk management if they are poweruser or better too.
I have personally maintained data on a disk with no drive letter using disk management. (I mounted it as an empty ntfs folder,(**Side note, that's neat to do**) forgot I had done that, then I pulled the drive it was pinted to to put in another machine, and i had me a disk with no letter then.)
Driveimage hiding I believe is done at a much lower level, in the partiiton table level, I believe.
If all you want to do is generally keep prying eyes out of your data while windows is running, then pull the drive letter using disk management and then keep the machine active with a normal user account, one that cant reassign a letter.
It wont stop access from dos in any way, dos will find the parition the same way it normally would. WIndows mounting of the drive letters is in windows only.
What this doe mean thiough is that its not really hidden if someone goes in in dos on your machine.
They could also reassign the drive letter in disk management if they are poweruser or better too.
I have personally maintained data on a disk with no drive letter using disk management. (I mounted it as an empty ntfs folder,(**Side note, that's neat to do**) forgot I had done that, then I pulled the drive it was pinted to to put in another machine, and i had me a disk with no letter then.)
Driveimage hiding I believe is done at a much lower level, in the partiiton table level, I believe.
If all you want to do is generally keep prying eyes out of your data while windows is running, then pull the drive letter using disk management and then keep the machine active with a normal user account, one that cant reassign a letter.
Yeah...
I'm going to apoligise for going OT now... But...
I really spend too much time here!
>1000 posts in what, 5 months?!
Am I that much of a spammer?
I'm going to apoligise for going OT now... But...
I really spend too much time here!
>1000 posts in what, 5 months?!
Am I that much of a spammer?
the reason that I think drive image will not hide the partition is because if it s a logical partition it is on an extended one. So technically the logical partitions don't really exist, thus the word logical. So since the extended partition is not being hidden it might not do it. I have Deploy Center 5.0 and Drive Image 2002 (6.0) i will mess around with my partitions and see what i can't come up with.
The reason for me wanting to hide certain of my partitions is to prevent inter-partition interaction and thus corruption of partitions. It's possible for DOS to cause this. I've certainly had a number of instances of it.
In order to fully hide a partition with something like Drive Image or Partition Magic, it turns out that, with Win2K, you need to both remove the appropriate driveletter in Disk Management AND hide the partition in Drive Image. It's misleading that Drive Image, by itself, gives no positive indication of hiding the partition, outside the application.
I've confirmed that this is the case by booting with a floppy (it's a FAT32 set of partitions) and testing to see if DOS can access the hidden partition.
I hope this helps others who are users of Drive Image, and especially those who are Win2K users.
In order to fully hide a partition with something like Drive Image or Partition Magic, it turns out that, with Win2K, you need to both remove the appropriate driveletter in Disk Management AND hide the partition in Drive Image. It's misleading that Drive Image, by itself, gives no positive indication of hiding the partition, outside the application.
I've confirmed that this is the case by booting with a floppy (it's a FAT32 set of partitions) and testing to see if DOS can access the hidden partition.
I hope this helps others who are users of Drive Image, and especially those who are Win2K users.
Ignore....Sorry I responded to page 2 (where my e-mail linked me to) and didn't see that Packman had finished his quest , because that bit of info was on page 3.
-Christian
-Christian
