Installing XP Pro upgrade directly?

[JMF]

I'm about to get an "empty" computer with a dual core processor and 4 Gb
RAM. I own Win2K. They tell me it probably won't even be possible to install
Win2K on that system. So I'm going to order an upgrade to XP Pro.

So I was wondering: normally I would expect that to install an upgrade, you
take your computer with the "old" system (in my case Win2K), start up the
upgrade CD-ROM, it takes a look at your old system, confirms that it's legal
and yours, and proceeds, installing the upgrade over your old system.

In this new case, there will be no "old" system -- the computer will be
empty, with no system at all installed. So when I launch the upgrade CD-ROM,
what will it do? Ask me for the Product Key of the Win2K system or something
like that?

John

 

[Gordon]

I'm about to get an "empty" computer with a dual core processor and 4 Gb
RAM. I own Win2K. They tell me it probably won't even be possible to
install Win2K on that system. So I'm going to order an upgrade to XP Pro.

So I was wondering: normally I would expect that to install an upgrade,
you take your computer with the "old" system (in my case Win2K), start up
the upgrade CD-ROM, it takes a look at your old system, confirms that it's
legal and yours, and proceeds, installing the upgrade over your old
system.

In this new case, there will be no "old" system -- the computer will be
empty, with no system at all installed. So when I launch the upgrade
CD-ROM, what will it do? Ask me for the Product Key of the Win2K system or
something like that?

It will just ask you to put your W2K CD in the drive for a couple of minutes
and then remove it.

 

[JMF]

It will just ask you to put your W2K CD in the drive for a couple of
minutes and then remove it.

Well, that sounds simple enough. Thanks, Gordon!

John

 

[Bruce Chambers]

I'm about to get an "empty" computer with a dual core processor and 4 Gb
RAM. I own Win2K. They tell me it probably won't even be possible to install
Win2K on that system. So I'm going to order an upgrade to XP Pro.

So I was wondering: normally I would expect that to install an upgrade, you
take your computer with the "old" system (in my case Win2K), start up the
upgrade CD-ROM, it takes a look at your old system, confirms that it's legal
and yours, and proceeds, installing the upgrade over your old system.

In this new case, there will be no "old" system -- the computer will be
empty, with no system at all installed. So when I launch the upgrade CD-ROM,
what will it do? Ask me for the Product Key of the Win2K system or something
like that?

John

It's quite possible to perform a clean installation using the WinXP
Upgrade CD, provided you have the true installation CD for the earlier OS.

Simply boot from the WinXP Upgrade CD. You'll be offered the
opportunity to delete, create, and format partitions as part of the
installation process. The Upgrade CD checks to see if a qualifying OS
is installed, and, if it finds none, it asks you to insert the
installation media (CD) of that OS. Unfortunately, an OEM
"Recovery/Restore" CD will not work for this purpose; you must have a
true installation CD, complete with the "\Win98" folder and *.cab
files, or the "\i386" folder of WinNT/2K, as applicable.

Bear in mind that Win2K can be upgraded only to WinXP Pro, not WinXP
Home, so this technique will work only for an upgrade to WinXP Pro.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

 

[JMF]

Bruce,

It's quite possible to perform a clean installation using the WinXP
Upgrade CD, provided you have the true installation CD for the earlier OS.

Simply boot from the WinXP Upgrade CD. You'll be offered the
opportunity to delete, create, and format partitions as part of the
installation process.

If you care to comment, do you have any opinion or advice on creating
partitions? It's going to be a 250 Gb disk. I was thinking of simply having
one big partition, the whole thing. That's partly because I'll have two
other physical disks of 115 Gb each. But if there's some special reason to
have more partitions on the main system disk, I'd certainly appreciate
knowing and understanding it.

The Upgrade CD checks to see if a qualifying OS is installed, and, if it
finds none, it asks you to insert the installation media (CD) of that OS.
Unfortunately, an OEM "Recovery/Restore" CD will not work for this
purpose; you must have a true installation CD, complete with the "\Win98"
folder and *.cab files, or the "\i386" folder of WinNT/2K, as applicable.

Fortunately, it is exactly that. A full retail, original, true installation
Win2K CD, not a recovery/restore, not OEM.

Bear in mind that Win2K can be upgraded only to WinXP Pro, not WinXP Home,
so this technique will work only for an upgrade to WinXP Pro.

In fact I only discovered this yesterday, just in time! I was about to order
an upgrade to WinXP Home, when I checked on the Microsoft upgrade site and
discovered what you wrote above. Just as well, I'm probably better off with
WinXP Pro in the end.

Thanks, Bruce.

John

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

I'm about to get an "empty" computer with a dual core processor and 4
Gb RAM. I own Win2K. They tell me it probably won't even be possible
to install Win2K on that system.

Who is "they," and why not. Sure you can run Windows 2000.

So I'm going to order an upgrade to
XP Pro.

You should get the upgrade if you want Windows XP, but if you're happy with
Windows 2000, there's no reason not to stick with it.

So I was wondering: normally I would expect that to install an
upgrade, you take your computer with the "old" system (in my case
Win2K), start up the upgrade CD-ROM, it takes a look at your old
system, confirms that it's legal and yours, and proceeds, installing
the upgrade over your old system.

Yes, that's one way. See below for the other.

In this new case, there will be no "old" system -- the computer will
be empty, with no system at all installed. So when I launch the
upgrade CD-ROM, what will it do? Ask me for the Product Key of the
Win2K system or something like that?

No. The requirement to use an upgrade version is to *own* a previous
qualifying version's installation CD, not to have it installed. Just boot
from the XP CD.When setup doesn't find a previous qualifying version
installed, it will prompt you to insert its CD as proof of ownership. Just
insert the previous version's CD, and follow the prompts. Everything
proceeds quite normally and quite legitimately.

 

[Rock]

I'm about to get an "empty" computer with a dual core processor and 4 Gb
RAM. I own Win2K. They tell me it probably won't even be possible to
install Win2K on that system. So I'm going to order an upgrade to XP Pro.

So I was wondering: normally I would expect that to install an upgrade,
you take your computer with the "old" system (in my case Win2K), start up
the upgrade CD-ROM, it takes a look at your old system, confirms that it's
legal and yours, and proceeds, installing the upgrade over your old
system.

In this new case, there will be no "old" system -- the computer will be
empty, with no system at all installed. So when I launch the upgrade
CD-ROM, what will it do? Ask me for the Product Key of the Win2K system or
something like that?

Have you thought about getting an upgrade to Vista? It was released to the
public at midnight this morning. That will work with Windows 2000 as the
qualifying OS. There is a difference between the upgrade process to XP Pro
vs. to Vista, though. With XP Pro, Windows 2000 does not have to be
installed, insert the CD when asked. For the Vista upgrade the qualifying
OS has to be installed. If upgrading to an x86 version of Vista the upgrade
is started from the qualifying OS desktop. Depending on the version of
Vista, you can do either an in place upgrade or a custom install. For an
upgrade to an x64 version of Vista , the upgrade would be started by booting
the Vista DVD. Only the custom install is available.

Vista would run very well on that system.

There are Vista newsgroups such as microsoft.public.windows.vista.general

 

[JMF]

Who is "they," and why not. Sure you can run Windows 2000.

The people at the computer store. They just made some vague statements about
the newer hardware making it harder to run it. I didn't quite get it either,
so I understand your skepticism.

You should get the upgrade if you want Windows XP, but if you're happy
with Windows 2000, there's no reason not to stick with it.

Oh, I did notice that Microsoft is starting to scale down support for
Win2K -- like no IE7 on Win2K, no Windows Defender -- and more and more
types of applications seem to be asking for XP only .. so I don't have a
problem just moving over to XP.

Yes, that's one way. See below for the other.




No. The requirement to use an upgrade version is to *own* a previous
qualifying version's installation CD, not to have it installed. Just boot
from the XP CD.When setup doesn't find a previous qualifying version
installed, it will prompt you to insert its CD as proof of ownership. Just
insert the previous version's CD, and follow the prompts. Everything
proceeds quite normally and quite legitimately.

Great. Sounds like it'll work fine. The upgrade should be here in a couple
of days and I'm ready to roll.

Thanks, Ken,

John

 

[JMF]

Have you thought about getting an upgrade to Vista? It was released to
the public at midnight this morning. That will work with Windows 2000 as
the qualifying OS. There is a difference between the upgrade process to
XP Pro vs. to Vista, though. With XP Pro, Windows 2000 does not have to
be installed, insert the CD when asked. For the Vista upgrade the
qualifying OS has to be installed. If upgrading to an x86 version of
Vista the upgrade is started from the qualifying OS desktop. Depending on
the version of Vista, you can do either an in place upgrade or a custom
install. For an upgrade to an x64 version of Vista , the upgrade would be
started by booting the Vista DVD. Only the custom install is available.

Vista would run very well on that system.

There are Vista newsgroups such as microsoft.public.windows.vista.general

Thanks, Rock. Yes, I've thought about it a bit. And the irony is not lost on
me. Funny, too: I got Win2K back in 2001 just when they released XP! This
time it's the same rationale, which may or may not be justified: waiting a
year or two to make sure the applications have all caught up and stabilized
their support for Vista before jumping in. As I said, this may not be
justified, maybe the applications would run perfectly on Vista from the
start. In any case, though, if I hear that Vista is working fine for
everybody, then in a year or so I'll probably upgrade to Vista. Microsoft
will win, too, in that case, getting another purchase from me!

John

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

The people at the computer store. They just made some vague
statements about the newer hardware making it harder to run it. I
didn't quite get it either, so I understand your skepticism.

If by "the computer store," you mean a branch of one of the big nationwide
chains like CompUSA, Circuit City, or Best Buy, these are perhaps the least
releable source of any computer information at all. Most of these people are
chosen, not for their computer skills, but for their willingness to accept
something close to minimum wage. Most people with real skills are capable of
getting much better jobs than selling in such stores.

Oh, I did notice that Microsoft is starting to scale down support for
Win2K -- like no IE7 on Win2K, no Windows Defender -- and more and
more types of applications seem to be asking for XP only .. so I
don't have a problem just moving over to XP.

OK, that's fine. If you want it, go for it. I just didn't want to see you
pressed into a decision like that for the wrong reason.

Great. Sounds like it'll work fine. The upgrade should be here in a
couple of days and I'm ready to roll.

Thanks, Ken,

You're welcome. Glad to help.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Thanks, Rock. Yes, I've thought about it a bit. And the irony is not
lost on me. Funny, too: I got Win2K back in 2001 just when they
released XP! This time it's the same rationale, which may or may not
be justified: waiting a year or two to make sure the applications
have all caught up and stabilized their support for Vista before
jumping in. As I said, this may not be justified, maybe the
applications would run perfectly on Vista from the start. In any
case, though, if I hear that Vista is working fine for everybody,
then in a year or so I'll probably upgrade to Vista. Microsoft will
win, too, in that case, getting another purchase from me!

Let me tell you about my experience with Vista. I've been running the RTM
version of Vista Ultimate for 2.5 months now. It's been extremely stable,
and I've had no problems at all with it. All my applications run without a
problem. The only minor issues have been with a couple of Utility programs
that don't run, and Vista versions haven't been released yet. I'm sure those
will be available very soon, though.

If you want to wait a year, it's your choice, of course, but personally I
don't see any reason to do so.

 

[Gordon]

Let me tell you about my experience with Vista. I've been running the RTM
version of Vista Ultimate for 2.5 months now. It's been extremely stable,
and I've had no problems at all with it. All my applications run without a
problem. The only minor issues have been with a couple of Utility programs
that don't run, and Vista versions haven't been released yet. I'm sure
those will be available very soon, though.

What machine specs are you running it on Ken?

 

[Rock]

Thanks, Rock. Yes, I've thought about it a bit. And the irony is not lost
on me. Funny, too: I got Win2K back in 2001 just when they released XP!
This time it's the same rationale, which may or may not be justified:
waiting a year or two to make sure the applications have all caught up and
stabilized their support for Vista before jumping in. As I said, this may
not be justified, maybe the applications would run perfectly on Vista from
the start. In any case, though, if I hear that Vista is working fine for
everybody, then in a year or so I'll probably upgrade to Vista. Microsoft
will win, too, in that case, getting another purchase from me!

I'll add to what Ken said. Of course it's your choice, but Vista has been
very stable on my system which is almost 5 years old, P4 2.53 GHZ with 1 GB
PC 800 RAM. Certainly not state of the art. The only programs that didn't
migrate were utility programs and those that hook drivers into the system
like AV, Partition Magic, Drive Image, etc. For all these needs there are
Vista compatible programs or updates available, and for some features Vista
has the capability in it. There are good free AV programs for Vista, the
partition manager capability is better in Vista, and with the Business,
Enterprise and Ultimate versions there is Complete PC Backup which is an
imaging backup system. There are some issues with drivers for some
hardware. But overall it runs well.

If you buy XP now then buy the upgrade to Vista in a year you'll be throwing
away the price of XP. If you get a full version of Vista you can dual boot
Windows 2000 and Vista or if you just want Vista, a full edition will also
remove the need to do have 2000 installed to get.

Spend some time in microsoft.public.windows.vista.general. Post your
machine specs and hardware. Ask for input from anyone who is using those
components. Also specify what programs you want to use.

Vista should run great on your system.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

What machine specs are you running it on Ken?

It's a pretty hefty machine. Athlon 3.5 with 2GB of RAM. Two 250GB drives in
a RAID 0 array.

I certainly wouldn't recommend Vista to someone with a low-powered machine,
but for him I thought it might be a good choice.

Personally, if I were in his shoes, I'd either stay with Windows 2000, which
he knows and is probably comfortable with, or go to Vista. The intermediate
step of Windows XP doesn't make much sense to me today.

 

[Rock]

It's a pretty hefty machine. Athlon 3.5 with 2GB of RAM. Two 250GB drives
in a RAID 0 array.

I certainly wouldn't recommend Vista to someone with a low-powered
machine, but for him I thought it might be a good choice.

Personally, if I were in his shoes, I'd either stay with Windows 2000,
which he knows and is probably comfortable with, or go to Vista. The
intermediate step of Windows XP doesn't make much sense to me today.

This system is anemic compared to your monster, but Visa stills runs fine on
it.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Bruce,

If you care to comment, do you have any opinion or advice on creating
partitions? It's going to be a 250 Gb disk. I was thinking of simply having
one big partition, the whole thing. That's partly because I'll have two
other physical disks of 115 Gb each. But if there's some special reason to
have more partitions on the main system disk, I'd certainly appreciate
knowing and understanding it.

Placing data files on a partition or physical hard drive separate
from the operating system and applications can greatly simplify system
repairs/recoveries and data back-up. Since you have two additional
physical drives, already, I don't see any particular need for more than
the one partition (all drives must have at least one partition, even if
it occupies the entire hard drive) on the system drive.

However, for a clearer outlook on hard drive partitioning, you might
want to take a look at this:

Planning Your Partitions
http://www.aumha.org/a/parts.htm

Thanks, Bruce.

You're welcome.

--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

 

[JMF]

....

If you buy XP now then buy the upgrade to Vista in a year you'll be
throwing away the price of XP. If you get a full version of Vista you can
dual boot Windows 2000 and Vista or if you just want Vista, a full edition
will also remove the need to do have 2000 installed to get.

Spend some time in microsoft.public.windows.vista.general. Post your
machine specs and hardware. Ask for input from anyone who is using those
components. Also specify what programs you want to use.

Vista should run great on your system.

Thanks, Rock, that sounds like good advice, I'll start looking into it.

John

 

[JMF]

Placing data files on a partition or physical hard drive separate from
the operating system and applications can greatly simplify system
repairs/recoveries and data back-up. Since you have two additional
physical drives, already, I don't see any particular need for more than
the one partition (all drives must have at least one partition, even if it
occupies the entire hard drive) on the system drive.

However, for a clearer outlook on hard drive partitioning, you might want
to take a look at this:

Planning Your Partitions
http://www.aumha.org/a/parts.htm

Thanks again, Bruce, that will definitely help.

John

 

[JMF]

If by "the computer store," you mean a branch of one of the big nationwide
chains like CompUSA, Circuit City, or Best Buy, these are perhaps the
least releable source of any computer information at all. Most of these
people are chosen, not for their computer skills, but for their
willingness to accept something close to minimum wage. Most people with
real skills are capable of getting much better jobs than selling in such
stores.

:-DD It isn't one of those branches, but it's the same idea, and I suspect
you're right on there.

John

 

[Rock]

Thanks, Rock, that sounds like good advice, I'll start looking into it.

It has really ramped up in vista.general since midnight when Vista
officially went on sale. Lost of excitement, lots of happy folks, a few
unhappy, but that's normal too.