If you check the setup and setup_upgrade groups you'll find that the
majority of win9x upgrades fail for a number of reasons. Never is it a
recommended task. Upgrades in general are mostly undesirable but in the case
of 2000 > XP the successes do out number the failures. If the source of your
install was WinME then you should plan on a clean install as soon as
possible.
As far as the other question; Windows 2000 includes the convert.exe utility
that allows you to convert to NTFS without any loss of data. The downside to
this is you'll end up with 512 byte clusters which is pretty inefficient,
slow, and more prone to fragmentation. The overhead of traversing a greater
number of clusters to retrieve and commit data will result in a degradation
in file system (or disk I/O) performance. Best to choose NTFS at the time of
install. From a command prompt;
chkdsk
to see the cluster size.
--
Regards,
Dave Patrick ....Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
:
| Interesting.
|
| I have forwarded your information to our networking
| department as someone there did the physical install. I
| myself did not "witness" the install. I did the physical
| install of XP over 2000.
|
| I would have to think, however, that even though
| Microsoft may not officially support ME>2K, it does not
| mean it (Win2000) would "work" any differently than had
| it been installed over 95 or 98, which is supported.
|
|
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
| us;232039
|
| And when I indicate "work" I mean the underlying
| technology in addition to the end user experience. I
| observed nothing unusuall or unexpected after ME>2K was
| accomplished.
|
| Furthermore, please allow me to point out that what I
| previously indicated in my last post was that
| the "procedure" of doing an OS install over the top of
| another OS is supported.
|
| Thank you sincerely for your input. I understand you are
| an MS MVP - which I am not.
|
| Hal