Upgrade from ME to XP

[Joan A]

I've upgraded from ME to XP and now I can't find any of my programs. Not on
desk top, hidden in Program files and if I click to run them, they say I have
to re-install. What do I do to fix this?

Thanks.

 

[philo]

I've upgraded from ME to XP and now I can't find any of my programs. Not on
desk top, hidden in Program files and if I click to run them, they say I have
to re-install. What do I do to fix this?

You did not actually upgrade...
you actually installed Windows in a seperate folder...
don't fret though..There is a good chance the upgrade would not have worked
anyway.

You will need to dig out the CD's your apps came on...then reinstall them

 

[M.I.5¾]

You did not actually upgrade...
you actually installed Windows in a seperate folder...
don't fret though..There is a good chance the upgrade would not have
worked
anyway.

Why? Windows upgrades are the one feature that usually works well. And in
the event that it doesn't, the uninstall is one thing that Microsoft have
got really right.

You will need to dig out the CD's your apps came on...then reinstall them

Better still would be to restore the backup of the original windows ME and
then do the upgrade correctly.

The OP *does have* a backup, doesn't he?

 

[philo]

Why? Windows upgrades are the one feature that usually works well. And in
the event that it doesn't, the uninstall is one thing that Microsoft have
got really right.


Better still would be to restore the backup of the original windows ME and
then do the upgrade correctly.

The OP *does have* a backup, doesn't he?

You know he does not have a backup<G>


As to upgrades... I work on literally hundreds upon hundreds of machines
each year.
and no longer even bother with the upgrade option.

The worst possible scenario is an attempt to upgrade a dos-based os (win9x)
to an NT-based os (Win2k, XP)

One upgrade that will probably work out OK is Win2k===> XP
as they are essentially the same operating system.


A properly prepped Win9x might be upgradable with no problems...
but the amount of work needed to properly prep. a win9x system...
is probably going to be more work than simply backing up the data
and performing a clean install.(Then re-installing the apps and copying back
the data)

The biggest reason for not doing an upgrade is that fairly often , though
the upgrade seems to work...
there are a number of idiosyncrasies. One not thoroughly familiar with how
win2k/XP is supposed to work
may simply plod on unaware...and think of the problems as bugs in the OS.


I don't recall ever having a problem with a clean install.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

I have to agree on the practical side of this. While the upgrade process
itself works fine, the result from upgrading Win9x/ME to XP has usually
disappointed me. In extreme cases (involving ME) the upgraded system became
unstable in only a few hours.

 

[philo]

I have to agree on the practical side of this. While the upgrade process
itself works fine, the result from upgrading Win9x/ME to XP has usually
disappointed me. In extreme cases (involving ME) the upgraded system became
unstable in only a few hours.

Yes...I'd say that WindowsME is perhaps the worst candidate for an upgrade.
My guess is that a pristine version of ME could be upgraded OK...
but I don't think anything like that exists in the real world <G>

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

At the risk of offending someone, I'll share my name for WinME;
"Windtendo."

 

[John John]

Don't laugh too hard, it was the testing ground for "System Restore"!
It also did away with the autoexec file, all autoexec entries were moved
to the registry. I wasn't much of an ME fan, but then I wasn't much of
a W98 fan either, at the risk of offending W98 fans, both were about
equally mediocre!

John

 

[philo]

Don't laugh too hard, it was the testing ground for "System Restore"!
It also did away with the autoexec file, all autoexec entries were moved
to the registry. I wasn't much of an ME fan, but then I wasn't much of
a W98 fan either, at the risk of offending W98 fans, both were about
equally mediocre!

But WinME was "more" equally mediocre <G>


(sorry George )

 

[cornedbeef007-groups]

But WinME was "more" equally mediocre <G>

(sorry George )

My WinME worked very well for a number of years, after I ditched the
Win98 version of the Anti-Virus I was using.
I then upgraded successfully to WinXP Pro.
I think the key to the upgrade succeeding was starting with a good
WinME system. Upgrade a dud sytem, you'll end up with an upgraded dud
system.
There were several experts in the WinME discussion groups who helped
me get my machine running like a Swiss watch, and keep it that way.
It works for me.(ME)

Good Luck.

 

[M.I.5¾]

But WinME was "more" equally mediocre <G>

(sorry George )

My WinME worked very well for a number of years, after I ditched the
Win98 version of the Anti-Virus I was using.
I then upgraded successfully to WinXP Pro.
I think the key to the upgrade succeeding was starting with a good
WinME system. Upgrade a dud sytem, you'll end up with an upgraded dud
system.
There were several experts in the WinME discussion groups who helped
me get my machine running like a Swiss watch, and keep it that way.
It works for me.(ME)

-------

.... but most users wanted WinME to do a bit more than tell them the time.

I never had (and still don't have) any problems with WinME. The only reason
I retain it on my PC today is to support those applications that I have got
that won't run under XP.

 

[Bill in Co.]

My WinME worked very well for a number of years, after I ditched the
Win98 version of the Anti-Virus I was using.
I then upgraded successfully to WinXP Pro.
I think the key to the upgrade succeeding was starting with a good
WinME system. Upgrade a dud sytem, you'll end up with an upgraded dud
system.
There were several experts in the WinME discussion groups who helped
me get my machine running like a Swiss watch, and keep it that way.
It works for me.(ME)

-------

... but most users wanted WinME to do a bit more than tell them the time.

I never had (and still don't have) any problems with WinME. The only
reason
I retain it on my PC today is to support those applications that I have
got
that won't run under XP.

Like what? (out of curiosity)

 

[M.I.5¾]

Like what? (out of curiosity)

I have a test instrument that can upload and print the data it gathers via a
PC based utility. The utility won't run under XP. In spite of the fact the
manufacturers are still selling it, they have never produced an XP version.

 

[philo]

I have a test instrument that can upload and print the data it gathers via a
PC based utility. The utility won't run under XP. In spite of the fact the
manufacturers are still selling it, they have never produced an XP version.

It probaly needs "real mode" access to the H/W I bet.

 

[John John]

It probaly needs "real mode" access to the H/W I bet.

If it needs Real Mode access then it wouldn't run on ME as installed,
Real Mode DOS was removed from Windows ME. However, Real Mode can be
hacked back in if needed, there are all kinds of web sites with the
hacks and instructions.

John

 

[philo]

If it needs Real Mode access then it wouldn't run on ME as installed,
Real Mode DOS was removed from Windows ME. However, Real Mode can be
hacked back in if needed, there are all kinds of web sites with the
hacks and instructions.

John

That's right...
I was thinking of Win98 and Win95 I guess