Do you mean a PHYSICALLY separate hard drive? (In the past we would have said "disk", not "drive".) That's what I'd been led to believe in the past.
Openurmind's post above is referring to what I guess would be called "virtual" drives on the same SSD. I'm assuming the Linux installation would also modify it's partition(s) to EXT4 file format?
“Openurmind’s post above is referring to what I guess would be called “virtual” drives on the same SSD. I’m assuming the Linux installation would also modify it’s partition(s) to EXT4 file format?”
Exactly right. But EXT4 only for it’s own partitions. I think what fireman15 is sharing is that it is a common practice to create two separate physical drives instead of putting both Operating Systems on one physical drive. That way if one OS becomes corrupted from the os it doesn’t physically affect the other OS and it’s own physical drive.
And I agree, it is a good practice do that also if you want. The dual boot option is mainly for when you have only one drive like on a Laptop or if you want that one drive to be a master for both Operating systems. You fortunately have the advantage of having plenty of physical drives to do this also if you want.
I use a Laptop but actually have an external 2 Tb USB drive that is portable. So I can always have two totally independent physical drives in case one becomes corrupted, I can still boot up and use the machine from the working external physical drive. And sometimes even use it to go rescue data from the corrupted internal drive.
Honestly, because Linux is so small at just over 2 Gb, I have a dozen whole operating systems of different flavors on external USB sticks I can boot into and use from off the sticks. If I am going to do something I am worried about damaging my Laptop I just boot from one of the stick OS systems that are expendable if need be. It is something that I’m not sure Windows will let you do?
The terms hard drive and hard disk have been interchangeable for as long as I have been using computers. I have preferred the term hard drive because floppy drive refers to the mechanical device not the media. To me hard disk more accurately describes the platters and not the complete assembly. But that is a personal preference.
Yes, the safest option is putting separate operating systems on separate physical drives, disks, SSDs, or NVMEs or whatever your preference for calling them is. I have successfully added numerous operating systems to the same physical drives by using numerous partitions. Windows creates 3 or 4 partitions when it is installed, and most Linux builds create 2 to 4 partitions when they are installed usually the primary partition is EXT4. This is why things can get complicated when you are installing multiple operating systems on the same physical drive.
The other thing that you can do is create bootable “to-go” disks preferably on NVME drives in a USB3 or higher enclosure. There are numerous ways of doing this with both Linux and Windows. You can even choose to have this operating system not recognize the other drives installed in your computer. This avoids the complications that can arise when you are installing multiple operating systems on the same physical drive. You just set your BIOS or UEFI to look at your USB port before it looks at the primary hard drive or in most cases today an NVME. When you have an NVME in a USB3 enclosure the decrease in performance is barely noticeable during most operations.
“(In the past we would have said “disk”, not “drive”.)”
Actually both are correct... Either is short for “Disk Drive” because we are a lazy species we are too lazy to say two words... lol
We abbreviate before we will even add one extra character... :)