Downgrading

[John Barnes]

I tried an upgrade install of beta 2 and it was a disaster. After a clean
install over half of the programs that remained after the 'whatever you want
to call it install' would not install again after the clean install. The
system finally worked. Based on my experience I won't be doing an 'upgrade'
when I install the final, no matter how wonderful you tell me it will work.
I have also read many horror stories of others here with the same
experience. Propaganda doesn't cut it.

 

[John Barnes]

You read it any way you want to Colin. The fact is that it SAYS that '
These earlier versions of Windows require you to install a full
copy of Windows Vista.
NOT an UPGRADE copy BUT a FULL copy.

 

[John Barnes]

You read it any way you want to Colin. The fact is that it SAYS that '
These earlier versions of Windows require you to install a full
copy of Windows Vista.
NOT an UPGRADE copy BUT a FULL copy.

 

[John Barnes]

You read it any way you want to Colin. The fact is that it SAYS that '
These earlier versions of Windows require you to install a full
copy of Windows Vista.
NOT an UPGRADE copy BUT a FULL copy.
Says NOTHING about being able to clean install from an UPGRADE copy.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

That's not a Vista problem as much as it is a software incompatiblility
issue. But I like the fresh start approach on most of my machines. Please
report your upgrade experience to MS because that is exactly what they are
looking for right now.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

You are still thinking of upgrading as in upgrading the software. I am not.
I am talking about leveraging upgrade pricing by using the media for earlier
editions of Windows to qualify for the upgrade pricing and saving some
bucks.

 

[John Barnes]

As I have noted elsewhere the link I provided says all earlier versions than
XP require a FULL edition. Nothing is said about being able to do a clean
install from an UPDATE version. Unless you have Colins interpretation of
what FULL means, I would hang onto my XP cd and not count on a discount with
98. Just my opinion, but you can read the footnotes for yourself.

 

[Mark D. VandenBerg]

I don't know if you remember my diatribe of failed attempts about a month
ago, but I did report my findings and received a wonderful email from a Greg
with Connect thanking me for the information.

Norton and Adobe need to get their respective "rears in gear" although with
the impending legal wranglings, this may not be possible. It's too bad,
really, since they have a large part of the third-party market.

 

[John Barnes]

I did report it when I did it initially. My biggest problem was everytime I
opened explorer the system would BSOD. Worked ok if I left explorer alone,
except that most of the programs on the installed programs list didn't
function or only partially worked.

 

[John Barnes]

You are hopeless, and aparently think you can read my mind. You think
anything you want. Everyone else can read and if it says that the earlier
versions require a FULL version and they are stupid enough to buy an UPGRADE
version and try to do a clean install with it, then they will be out the
money.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

You don't have to have a full version of any edition of Windows to do a
clean install. That's leads exactly to the point.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

An Upgrade edition can do a clean install. That may be the point of
confusion. Nowhere does it say a full edition is required, only that a
clean install is required.

 

[John Barnes]

Apparently you still cannot read. It states very clearly that a FULL
edition is required and that an UPGRADE version is NOT available. I copy
the statement again for you to try to read.
For versions of Windows earlier than Windows 2000, upgrade copies are not
available. These earlier versions of Windows require you to install a full
copy of Windows Vista.

 

[John Barnes]

Apparently you still cannot read. It states very clearly that a FULL
edition is required and that an UPGRADE version is NOT available. I copy
the statement again for you to try to read.
For versions of Windows earlier than Windows 2000, upgrade copies are not
available. These earlier versions of Windows require you to install a full
copy of Windows Vista.

 

[John Barnes]

Apparently you still cannot read. It states very clearly that a FULL
edition is required and that an UPGRADE version is NOT available. There is
not one word in this footnote about CLEAN. I copy
the statement again for you to try to read.
For versions of Windows earlier than Windows 2000, upgrade copies are not
available. These earlier versions of Windows require you to install a full
copy of Windows Vista.

 

[John Barnes]

In any case, since everyone else on this site is capable of understanding
the sentence means that Windows98 and WindowsME owners are not eligible to
install from an UPGRADE version and must purchase a FULL version, this is my
last post on the subject. Have a nice holiday weekend. Adios.
Site
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/upgradeinfo.mspx
Skip the top part and read the NOTES and interpret for yourselves.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Erik_Wikstr=F6m?=]

I am curious why someone would want to downgrade a version of Vista to a
lesser one. I am sure there are reasons such as lack of hard drive volume,
graphics card ability or insufficient RAM, but those concerns should be
addressed before a version of Vista is installed, not after.

I was thinking mostly along the lines of less bloat. Depending on what
you want to do with your computer it's questionable whether you need all
services running that comes with Ultimate.
Say that I have a computer, slightly old but not too old, and I buy
Ultimate to run on it. Later I buy a new computer and a copy of Vista
comes with it. Since the new one is much faster the old one is degraded
to some menial task such as file-server or whatever. Since it's not the
fastest guy in town I decide that its resources could be used much
better than running the Media Center Service Launcher service.
Sure I can go around and disable everything that I don't need but it's
much easier to just reinstall as a "lesser" version, and I'll probably
free up some disk space that can be used for other things, remember
Vista is a disk-hog.

 

[Will Schuitman]

With all versions of windows you can always do a clean install from an
upgrade version
otherwise it would mean if you bought a new hdd you would have to install
the old OS first

Thats never been the case
I remember having windows 3.1 on a 1.2GB hdd I bought an upgrade version of
win95 at the time and did a clean install on a new 6Gb Hdd Windows 95 asked
me for the 3.1 disks during setup from memory I believe I had to insert disk
1 and 2
And I'm sure upgrade versions of vista would work the same

 

[Will Schuitman]

I'm sure because of the advancements in Vista it probably would be
technically impossible to install it over the top of (upgrade instalation)
anything less than XP
However a clean install is a different matter. Setup would just ask for a CD
from a previous version of windows (any version after win 95) in order to
qualify.

 

[Mark D. VandenBerg]

I was thinking mostly along the lines of less bloat. Depending on what you
want to do with your computer it's questionable whether you need all
services running that comes with Ultimate.
Say that I have a computer, slightly old but not too old, and I buy
Ultimate to run on it. Later I buy a new computer and a copy of Vista
comes with it. Since the new one is much faster the old one is degraded to
some menial task such as file-server or whatever. Since it's not the
fastest guy in town I decide that its resources could be used much better
than running the Media Center Service Launcher service.
Sure I can go around and disable everything that I don't need but it's
much easier to just reinstall as a "lesser" version, and I'll probably
free up some disk space that can be used for other things, remember Vista
is a disk-hog.

Interesting, but not necessary.

If I recall, you can in Vista through the "Programs" applet in the Control
Panel, uninstall Windows features. You are also able to turn many of the
graphics intensive features, which I certainly would if I were to use a
computer as a file server.

As far as disk space required by Vista, it seems that a minimum of 10 GB, or
so, will be in use by the operating system, so even if you save a GB by
installing Home Basic as opposed to Ultimate, it's only 10%.