Windows 11 Not playing nice with Manjaro dual booting

After one of my computers failed I still wanted to have both Windows and Manjaro online. so increasing the hard drive to 1TB SSD I have room to duo boot both systems. Microsoft is insisting on having AI included in their system and I do not care for it. So I will use Manjaro more often. When I said it is not playing nice, I got an Error saying to check my C: Drive for errors. They do not like to share I guess, LOL. Anyone else have problems with duo booting? Sorry if this is long but needed to explain my problem. Ran CHKDSK on C: and it said it fixed whatever problem it had, Did not touch Manjaro Half of the SSD.

I have in the past tried having both windows and a linux installation on the same physical drive. Every time windows does something funky and either bricks itself or both. Not sure why it does this, but it seems to like to go out of bounds from its partition or just doesn’t like having a neighbor.

I would recommend having separate physical drives, not just partitions. This was the only way I was able to keep both ‘co-existing’.

What you are describing happened to me as well at one point before windows decided to stop working and I was with only a linux installation. Sounds like the problems I was having haven’t changed.

1 Like

Switching OS is like getting a new car.

But if you keep using the old car for work and new car for leisure you will not get used to the new car - you will not learn where the switches and knobs are and you will get frustrated everytime you use the new car.

Give the old car away or sell it - then you can concentrate on the new car.

Been there done that. When I got retired in 2014 - I skipped Windows completely and concentrated on Linux. The days were Windows were my primary operating system are gone.

Despite beeing retired - I have a paid parttime job as developer for an old friends business.

As part of this I still use a Windows Virtual Machine and Visual Studio 2022.

1 Like

Even when I was employed full time programming on Windows, I used Windows in a Virtual Machine, except occasionally, when I was forced to use the in house computers, even then I used my Linux Laptop for testing Web applications.

As mentioned I had a separate computer before it failed. Cannot see the price of another unit when newer machines will have AI built in. Had a stint with Apple, that is out of my price range now. Thanks for the comments.

This seems less of an issue, and more the need for regular maintenance; you know, that thing that everyone knows about, but never wants to do. :wink:

Related: I recently wrote [Primer] NTFS on Linux which might be a useful reference when dealing with NTFS volumes. It also includes several notes that are relevant to a multibooting scenario.

This is always my recommendation; use separate disks; rather than attempting to squeeze every OS onto the same disk. Keeping each OS isolated from others (as much as possible) both minimises the associated risks and makes for easier removal (or replacement) of an OS, should it ever be necessary.

That said, sometimes a separate disk is out of the question (most Laptops), and one sole, solitary disk is the only game in town. A one-disk-multiboot is manageable, however, only if careful thought is given from the onset and each OS is setup to not interfere with the other.

Unfortunately, the majority seem to setup a multiboot with an ad-hoc ‘Each OS is installed, they should just work, right?!’ attitude. :man_shrugging: - There is a right way (and a wrong way) to do most everything.

Many people do indeed seem to treat an OS (and a computer just like their cars: they know all the knobs and switches; how to kick the tyres; light the fires; they know how to drive (mostly); but when it comes to changing a tyre they throw their hands up in the air and run about like a headless :chicken: until someone else does it for them.

I know several people like that. I’d just tell them… ‘Catch a bus!’. :oncoming_bus:

I consider myself OS-agnostic; but with ongoing reservations.

I’m part way toward completing a Guide for multibooting Linux and Windows on the same disk, if that might be of use for you. It will be a few days (or so), before it’s published.

Thanks, but thinking along the line of removing WinBlows completely by reinstalling Manjaro alone on this machine. Also see Apple going to AI also, terrible Idea!

There’s nothing wrong with that thinking.

However, I’ll drop this thought as well. I have one of my systems set up to run several operating systems - but it isn’t a multiboot system

Instead, I have BSD, Linux and Windows (each on their own 1TB SSD) but each is on a removable caddy that is inserted and booted when needed (the same concept as a floppy disk).

So, effectively, three computers in one; without the maintenance overhead associated with having it as a true multiboot system. This is mainly intended for passers-by, but you might also see some value in the idea.


If you have not disabled fast boot in windows and you try to access the drive from linux, it will damage it with such symptoms, for example.

Pssst… it’s… Fast Startup

  • But the name doesn’t detract from the importance of disabling it!

Just a note for others who habitually refer to Fast Boot instead of using the actual name adopted by Microsoft:

Fast Boot is a BIOS option which (if present, and enabled) allows certain self-tests to be skipped during pre-boot (before handoff to a bootloader). Fast Boot settings may exist in varying locations, or not exist at all; as every BIOS or mainboard manufacturer has different ideas.

It’s generally recommended (but not compulsory) to disable Fast Boot when using Linux either standalone or in a multiboot scenario.

Fast Startup is not Fast Boot.

So calling them both Fast Boot just adds to the confusion, I think. Use the official Microsoft name (even if it seems counter-intuitive for a hibernation variant) to avoid confusion.


A small clarification from the vaults.

1 Like

Windows doesn’t play nice with other operating systems. For example , It thinks it is the ONLY operating system, So during some updates it will ignore that GRUB exists and install it’s own boot loader as the default. This is unfortunate and can be fixed but with some difficulty to do.
You have to have a boot usb with Manjaro on it and reinstall GRUB. There are other posts here that can give instructions for this. I created a script to use when this happens.

Almost every OS wants that pride of placing; some Linux distributions even do the same (Debian, for example). The fundamental issue is that most every OS is designed to be the one operating system. It’s only in recent years that multibooting has begun to be acknowledged as a valid user choice. No OS is guilt-free. :slight_smile:

True but at least Most Linux OS’s use GRUB and you can have a setting that rebuilds the config file and have it recognize the other Linux and Windows OS’s

Yes, os-prober indeed does just that (when enabled). There is a long-standing recommendation to leave that disabled due to a security concern; and yet, for multibooting, it’s indispensable. Windows does have similar methods to detect foreign bootloaders, but they are never really mentioned much. In any case, GRUB (with os-prober), or even rEFInd is much better suited to the task.

Microsoft’s main error was that installing Manjaro changed Secure Boot to Disabled someway. I don’t care, actually. I use a password to boot up Manjaro, that is safe enough. Windows has a pin number to startup. I’m getting a lot of replies from this subject it must be widely known.

You need secure boot off to use manjaro.
(unless you roll your own auth, but I’m guessing no)

Yes, I know, Grub does not work with Secure Boot.

Actually, I’m fairly sure it would; it’s only the licensing and M$ that gets in the way. They don’t like sharing their toys, but they’ll gladly sell them to you.

1 Like

Not really.
Though thats a fairly common, but erroneous, statement.
There is no license or fee stopping you from configuring Secure Boot.
There just isnt a pre-rolled auth planted by the manufacturer for your -random software- like there is for m$oft.

You’re right, of course.

However, to use Microsoft’s system; from the M$ perspective; there would be both. Mainly because they refuse to sign binaries subject to GPLv3, while the Linux Kernel is generally fine (GPLv2).

It’s certainly not the first time M$ has tried to artificially introduce a condition to their own potential benefit. Though, at the end of the day, it’s business as usual in many respects.